Personally I struggle to accept the cries of “constitutional outrage” from MPs that they are being restricted in the time they are having to debate and shape/prevent Brexit before Oct 31st, given that they have expressed no equivalent outrage that they have recently failed to “debate” Brexit over a lengthy Summer holiday, were expected to fail to “debate” Brexit over the coming 3 week period for party conferences, and have so far spent 3 years failing to show any evidence that “debating” has got us any closer to satisfactory Brexit outcomes anyway.
And am also quite relieved that the prospect of Johnson failing to get any changes from Brussels and subsequently proroguing Parliament over the period of October 31st to ensure no deal Brexit has now been ruled out.
* A VONC that succeeds without an alternative PM lined up leads directly to the Shambolic Rebels vs Heroic PM election that Johnson wants
If a VONC passes next week without parliament indicating a successor, does the prorogation evaporate while the clock ticks down to the election or can parliament keep sitting for a couple of weeks while it gets its shit together?
Apparently the propagation superseded the 14 day rule, so there would be less than a week to organise an alternative.
Johnson has told us - and I quote directly here - that No Deal will be “easily manageable”. We will see. If it isn’t, voters will remember that he did say it and that he shut down the Parliament they elected to secure it.
What I want to know is why the VONC wasn't tabled immediately? Surely it'd have a fair chance of passing.
There wasn't a majority for it before the recess. It can't be tabled during a recess. The suspension means we're heading for another recess. So the question is whether there's a majority next week.
Issues are:
* It needs Tory rebels * Tory rebels would prefer to legislate to instruct Johnson to seek an extension. But it's not clear there's time next week to pass that, especially as Government loyalists can filibuster it in the Lords. After prorogation, the Bill falls and would have to start again. * A VONC that fails will strengthen Johnson. * A VONC that succeeds without an alternative PM lined up leads directly to the Shambolic Rebels vs Heroic PM election that Johnson wants
The way through is therefore:
1. Try to seize the agenda for legislation next week. 2. If it doesn't pass, consider a VONC on Thursday (but worry about point 4) 3. More probably, introduce a VONC in mid-October AND agree with a budding caretaker PM to seek an extension to Oct 31 while a referendum or an election is held.
Agreeing the caretaker and agreeing whether his job is to call a referendum or an election first is the tricky bit. I think next week is too soon for that, but it might well work in mid-October.
Parliament was heading for another recess anyway for the conference season, proroguing it made very little difference in that respect.
The rebel’s were considering voting against the conference recess the prorogation has removed that possibility producing the challenge NP lays out, it is a five week shutdown and cleverly played by the Tory media that it’s only five days, don’t forget one day for queens speech and five days of debate also eat into the available time.
A Queens speech setting out the program of a PM without a mandate, and quite likely to be voted down.
After which I know not I assume FTPA no confidence 14 days unless new pm identified and given confidence?
And the timing of all this relative to the no deal deadline ?
If the opposition are to do anything, it needs to be done now.
* A VONC that succeeds without an alternative PM lined up leads directly to the Shambolic Rebels vs Heroic PM election that Johnson wants
If a VONC passes next week without parliament indicating a successor, does the prorogation evaporate while the clock ticks down to the election or can parliament keep sitting for a couple of weeks while it gets its shit together?
Apparently the propagation superseded the 14 day rule, so there would be less than a week to organise an alternative.
VONC on day one imo.
If they seriously think they could VoNC without an election, why not wait until October when it will be clear whether Johnson has any new deal with the EU or not?
Personally I struggle to accept the cries of “constitutional outrage” from MPs that they are being restricted in the time they are having to debate and shape/prevent Brexit before Oct 31st, given that they have expressed no equivalent outrage that they have recently failed to “debate” Brexit over a lengthy Summer holiday, were expected to fail to “debate” Brexit over the coming 3 week period for party conferences, and have so far spent 3 years failing to show any evidence that “debating” has got us any closer to satisfactory Brexit outcomes anyway.
And am also quite relieved that the prospect of Johnson failing to get any changes from Brussels and subsequently proroguing Parliament over the period of October 31st to ensure no deal Brexit has now been ruled out.
May used all her tricks to keep Parliament from debating Brexit, from the Meaningful Votes onwards. This suspension of a democratic parliament is just the latest and most blatant way to shove through a policy without scrutiny.
* A VONC that succeeds without an alternative PM lined up leads directly to the Shambolic Rebels vs Heroic PM election that Johnson wants
If a VONC passes next week without parliament indicating a successor, does the prorogation evaporate while the clock ticks down to the election or can parliament keep sitting for a couple of weeks while it gets its shit together?
Apparently the propagation superseded the 14 day rule, so there would be less than a week to organise an alternative.
VONC on day one imo.
If they seriously think they could VoNC without an election, why not wait until October when it will be clear whether Johnson has any new deal with the EU or not?
Not enough time in October. Bozo will have other delaying tactics in October.
Out of this morass you would expect a leader to appear though It's difficult to see where from. Johnson has cleaved out for himself an ungovernable country. A factory closes an airline goes bust a sudden influx of immigrants, It's all Johnson's fault. Playing the tough guy might impress the Sun and Express or work in 'Dirty Harry but this is real life and there are some very angry people out there.
A leader arising out of socioeconomic chaos is the recipe for fascism, which I now think is where we might end up. The chances of that happening may be only 5%, but even this time last year I would have said that they were exactly 0% and would never ever rise above 0%, at least in my lifetime.
It will be Bercow who takes control next week. He is now the most important person in all of this and we know where his loyalties lie. I expect he will allow Standing orders to be suspended so that parliament can sit all night and even on Saturday to pass legislation. There is nothing the govt can do about that...Rees Mogg will try but be put back in his box by Mr Speaker.
* A VONC that succeeds without an alternative PM lined up leads directly to the Shambolic Rebels vs Heroic PM election that Johnson wants
If a VONC passes next week without parliament indicating a successor, does the prorogation evaporate while the clock ticks down to the election or can parliament keep sitting for a couple of weeks while it gets its shit together?
Apparently the propagation superseded the 14 day rule, so there would be less than a week to organise an alternative.
VONC on day one imo.
If they seriously think they could VoNC without an election, why not wait until October when it will be clear whether Johnson has any new deal with the EU or not?
Not enough time in October. Bozo will have other delaying tactics in October.
He will almost certainly have other delaying tactics before then.
There is, for example, a plan to arrange refusal of royal assent for any legislation Parliament might come up with to constrain his freedom of manoeuvre.
How much of a squeeze do we think Boris can apply to that 13% Brexit party number now that he's clearly pivioted towards no deal ?
Knowing where that 13% is lcoated is vital to understanding how the election plays out.
Does anyone think we're not going to have an election this year ?
UNS on that YouGov has the Tories taking seats from the SNP in Scotland :-D That goes to show just how pointless it is to apply UNS to the current polling. I don’t know what the solution is, but anyone relying on polls as being anything more than broadly indicative right now is a fool. For me the key number is what the anti/pro No Deal blocs are getting. What’s interesting is that it’s broadly the same among all pollsters: the anti one is in a 53%-55% band. What I don’t think the polling is able to tell us is how that might translate into tactical votes once we do get to election time. I suspect that yesterday’s events have made such voting more likely and that the more the anti-No Deal parties work together, the more likely it will become.
The key is how much more Labour votes switch to Lib Dems than Tory ones are lost to the Brexit Party, all relative to 2017, in Labour marginals. That's where Conservatives will pick up seats. If it's a smallish difference, Conservative gains will be balanced by losses to Lib Dems and SNP. If it's a big difference, Labour will collapse and the Conservatives will get a good majority.
What's not happening right now is any move between Labour and the Conservatives, which is the normal pattern of a GE
Do erstwhile Labour voters in England and Wales who backed Leave see a PM who is finally going to deliver the Brexit they crave or an entitled Tory toff riding roughshod over democracy to get the Brexit he craves? The next general election hinges on the answer to that question.
It will be Bercow who takes control next week. He is now the most important person in all of this and we know where his loyalties lie. I expect he will allow Standing orders to be suspended so that parliament can sit all night and even on Saturday to pass legislation. There is nothing the govt can do about that...Rees Mogg will try but be put back in his box by Mr Speaker.
That is in the Commons. No doubt the current administration of rogues and liars will attempt all manner of filibusters in the Lords.
Yesterday's actions must make for some fascinating tactical discussions on that cross party WhatsApp group. I know that the 14 day trap door worries them - winning a no confidence vote isn't enough, they need to know they can win a subsequent confidence vote or else Johnson simply calls an election in November.
Is a one line bill to repeal the FTPA a sensible first step next week? Would therefore remove the trap door and make it beholden on the government to resign if they lost a confidence vote.
The other weapon that could be deployed is the humble address to scrap prorogation. Is this even needed? The speaker and a large swathe of MPs are outraged, so what if the Commons refuses to go? The Crown losing its authority over Parliament would be a grave crisis, so I suspect that even the "I'm sorry ma'am but we really are serious" threat would be enough
* A VONC that succeeds without an alternative PM lined up leads directly to the Shambolic Rebels vs Heroic PM election that Johnson wants
If a VONC passes next week without parliament indicating a successor, does the prorogation evaporate while the clock ticks down to the election or can parliament keep sitting for a couple of weeks while it gets its shit together?
Apparently the propagation superseded the 14 day rule, so there would be less than a week to organise an alternative.
VONC on day one imo.
If they seriously think they could VoNC without an election, why not wait until October when it will be clear whether Johnson has any new deal with the EU or not?
Not enough time in October. Bozo will have other delaying tactics in October.
The most annoying thing in all of this is that a vonc should be put forward on monday and without it I cannot see a GE before november, indeed not even this year
This situation should not have arisen and a large part of responsibility falls at the feet of Corbyn who is quite the most unsuitable labour leader we have ever seen. If labour had been led by a sensible collegiate leader we would have had a deal by now or more likely an overwhelming HOC in favour of revoke
It will be Bercow who takes control next week. He is now the most important person in all of this and we know where his loyalties lie. I expect he will allow Standing orders to be suspended so that parliament can sit all night and even on Saturday to pass legislation. There is nothing the govt can do about that...Rees Mogg will try but be put back in his box by Mr Speaker.
That is in the Commons. No doubt the current administration of rogues and liars will attempt all manner of filibusters in the Lords.
Removing the FTPA gives Boris control over when an election is called and they aren't going to give him that option.
How much of a squeeze do we think Boris can apply to that 13% Brexit party number now that he's clearly pivioted towards no deal ?
Knowing where that 13% is lcoated is vital to understanding how the election plays out.
Does anyone think we're not going to have an election this year ?
UNS on that YouGov has the Tories taking seats from the SNP in Scotland :-D That goes to show just how pointless it is to apply UNS to the current polling. I don’t know what the solution is, but anyone relying on polls as being anything more than broadly indicative right now is a fool. For me the key number is what the anti/pro No Deal blocs are getting. What’s interesting is that it’s broadly the same among all pollsters: the anti one is in a 53%-55% band. What I don’t think the polling is able to tell us is how that might translate into tactical votes once we do get to election time. I suspect that yesterday’s events have made such voting more likely and that the more the anti-No Deal parties work together, the more likely it will become.
The key is how much more Labour votes switch to Lib Dems than Tory ones are lost to the Brexit Party, all relative to 2017, in Labour marginals. That's where Conservatives will pick up seats. If it's a smallish difference, Conservative gains will be balanced by losses to Lib Dems and SNP. If it's a big difference, Labour will collapse and the Conservatives will get a good majority.
What's not happening right now is any move between Labour and the Conservatives, which is the normal pattern of a GE
Do erstwhile Labour voters in England and Wales who backed Leave see a PM who is finally going to deliver the Brexit they crave or an entitled Tory toff riding roughshod over democracy to get the Brexit he craves? The next general election hinges on the answer to that question.
I think it's a bit more complicated than that. Labour to Conservative switchers already made the journey by 2017. Partly it's a question of whether they stick with Conservatives or switch to the Brexit Party that illogically is seen as less toffish. Partly a question of whether other Labour voters now prefer the Lib Dems. And most importantly the numbers difference between the two groups.
Johnson's election strategy depends not just on squeezing the Brexit Party but also on Labour not doing the same towards Lib Dems in the seats they hold.
Yep, we’ll be less free, have less control and we’ll be poorer. Boris Johnson is shutting down the Parliament the people elected to ensure this happens. It looks clever now. It may seem less smart come January and February 2020.
1. Perogation is quite within the gift of the government. If the Members of Parliament don't want to be perogued, it's very easy, they have time to VoNC the government. They can kick the current government out, but they can't direct it.
Where I would have a problem would be if the government was VoNCed at the beginning of September, and Boris Johnson used his powers to ensure that the election was pushed to October 31st or into November.
2. 3. It probably .
1) is hardly convincing - what if a PM decided to prorogue for twelve months ?
Would be contrary to the Septennial Act and the Triennial Act as parliament has to meet at least annually and pass at least one bill into legislation.
Parliament always passes a token piece of legislation - the Outlaws & Vestries Bill - at each opening of Parliament. So a dictator could recall Parliament for 1 day a year and then re-prorogue for another 12 months.
There would have to be elections at some point. Even without the FTPA the length of a parliament was limited.
* A VONC that succeeds without an alternative PM lined up leads directly to the Shambolic Rebels vs Heroic PM election that Johnson wants
I the clock ticks down to the election or can parliament keep sitting for a couple of weeks while it gets its shit together?
Apparently the propagation superseded the 14 day rule, so there would be less than a week to organise an alternative.
VONC on day one imo.
If they seriously think they could VoNC without an election, why not wait until October when it will be clear whether Johnson has any new deal with the EU or not?
Not enough time in October. Bozo will have other delaying tactics in October.
He will almost certainly have other delaying tactics before then.
There is, for example, a plan to arrange refusal of royal assent for any legislation Parliament might come up with to constrain his freedom of manoeuvre.
Surely refusing Royal assent would be a step too far for HMQ?
It will be Bercow who takes control next week. He is now the most important person in all of this and we know where his loyalties lie. I expect he will allow Standing orders to be suspended so that parliament can sit all night and even on Saturday to pass legislation. There is nothing the govt can do about that...Rees Mogg will try but be put back in his box by Mr Speaker.
That is in the Commons. No doubt the current administration of rogues and liars will attempt all manner of filibusters in the Lords.
Removing the FTPA gives Boris control over when an election is called and they aren't going to give him that option.
There is that, but my comment applies to any legislation the opposition might come up with. Whatever they are going to do they need to get on with it, as it will take longer than they think.
Funny how an arch-Leaver who is otherwise fully subscribed to the death cult turns soft when his own family might be personally affected.
The serious point is that people projected all sorts of wishes onto Brexit that was deliberately kept a blank canvas so the Leave vote would win. In fact, the opposite of these projections will happen due to the grinding crappiness of a failed project.
Human nature kicks at this point. Almost none of these people have the awareness to think, I got that wrong. Instead they blame others for not doing what was only implied and never planned for.
1. Perogation is quite within the gift of the government. If the Members of Parliament don't want to be perogued, it's very easy, they have time to VoNC the government. They can kick the current government out, but they can't direct it.
Where I would have a problem would be if the government was VoNCed at the beginning of September, and Boris Johnson used his powers to ensure that the election was pushed to October 31st or into November.
2. 3. It probably .
1) is hardly convincing - what if a PM decided to prorogue for twelve months ?
Would be contrary to the Septennial Act and the Triennial Act as parliament has to meet at least annually and pass at least one bill into legislation.
Parliament always passes a token piece of legislation - the Outlaws & Vestries Bill - at each opening of Parliament. So a dictator could recall Parliament for 1 day a year and then re-prorogue for another 12 months.
There would have to be elections at some point. Even without the FTPA the length of a parliament was limited.
* A VONC that succeeds without an alternative PM lined up leads directly to the Shambolic Rebels vs Heroic PM election that Johnson wants
I the clock ticks down to the election or can parliament keep sitting for a couple of weeks while it gets its shit together?
Apparently the propagation superseded the 14 day rule, so there would be less than a week to organise an alternative.
VONC on day one imo.
If they seriously think they could VoNC without an election, why not wait until October when it will be clear whether Johnson has any new deal with the EU or not?
Not enough time in October. Bozo will have other delaying tactics in October.
He will almost certainly have other delaying tactics before then.
There is, for example, a plan to arrange refusal of royal assent for any legislation Parliament might come up with to constrain his freedom of manoeuvre.
Surely refusing Royal assent would be a step too far for HMQ?
Who can say ? They will try this, and any other available wheezes.
How much of a squeeze do we think Boris can apply to that 13% Brexit party number now that he's clearly pivioted towards no deal ?
Knowing where that 13% is lcoated is vital to understanding how the election plays out.
Does anyone think we're not going to have an election this year ?
UNS on that YouGovthe polling is able to tell us is how that might translate into tactical votes once we do get to election time. I suspect that yesterday’s events have made such voting more likely and that the more the anti-No Deal parties work together, the more likely it will become.
The key is how much more Labour votes switch to Lib Dems than Tory ones are lost to the Brexit Party, all relative to 2017, in Labour marginals. That's where Conservatives will pick up seats. If it's a smallish difference, Conservative gains will be balanced by losses to Lib Dems and SNP. If it's a big difference, Labour will collapse and the Conservatives will get a good majority.
What's not happening right now is any move between Labour and the Conservatives, which is the normal pattern of a GE
Do erstwhile Labour voters in England and Wales who backed Leave see a PM who is finally going to deliver the Brexit they crave or an entitled Tory toff riding roughshod over democracy to get the Brexit he craves? The next general election hinges on the answer to that question.
I think it's a bit more complicated than that. Labour to Conservative switchers already made the journey by 2017. Partly it's a question of whether they stick with Conservatives or switch to the Brexit Party that illogically is seen as less toffish. Partly a question of whether other Labour voters now prefer the Lib Dems. And most importantly the numbers difference between the two groups.
Johnson's election strategy depends not just on squeezing the Brexit Party but also on Labour not doing the same towards Lib Dems in the seats they hold.
Erstwhile is the key word here. I can’t see many 2017 Labour voters choosing the Tories next time. Labour is not going to squeeze the LDs. Johnson needs 2017 Labour voters in Labour constituencies to move to the LDs and Greens at the next GE. I think yesterday’s events - and what plays out over the next few weeks - will mean fewer will do this than had been likely before.
Funny how an arch-Leaver who is otherwise fully subscribed to the death cult turns soft when his own family might be personally affected.
The serious point is that people projected all sorts of wishes onto Brexit that was deliberately kept a blank canvas so the Leave vote would win. In fact, the opposite of these projections will happen due to the grinding crappiness of a failed project.
Human nature kicks at this point. Almost none of these people have the awareness to think, I got that wrong. Instead they blame others for not doing what was only implied and never planned for.
And yet the mandate of 17.4m is, and will continue to be rolled out to justify all of it.
Funny how an arch-Leaver who is otherwise fully subscribed to the death cult turns soft when his own family might be personally affected.
The serious point is that people projected all sorts of wishes onto Brexit that was deliberately kept a blank canvas so the Leave vote would win. In fact, the opposite of these projections will happen due to the grinding crappiness of a failed project.
Human nature kicks at this point. Almost none of these people have the awareness to think, I got that wrong. Instead they blame others for not doing what was only implied and never planned for.
I have no sympathy for Fraser Nelson. None. He’s supposed to be an opinion-former. Instead he runs a supermarket tabloid for golf club bores and is shocked to find out that the audience he panders to will throw him aside the moment it suits them.
This has been a really curious move. Parliament is to be prorogued some time between the 9th and 12th of September and to reconvene for the Queens Speech on 14th October. The prorogation is therefore for between 32 and 35 days. Had Parliament merely been adjourned for the Conference season, as usual, it would have been adjourned for a minimum of 21 days, probably 28.
The amount of additional time lost to Parliament is therefore quite small. Why has No. 10 taken all this flak for such a marginal gain? The only answer that makes any sense to me is that it is only a part of a larger strategy which is designed to prevent the Opposition from taking control of Parliament or at least gives that impression.
What I think it is designed to do is to force Corbyn to submit his VoNC on the first day that Parliament is back. If he intimates such a motion on Monday it will be debated on Tuesday, superseding the spending review. If it is passed the 14 days will run to the 17th by which time Parliament is not sitting. The result, in terms of the FTPA is that there would be an election but if that election was fixed for 7th November there would be nothing Parliament could do about it because it would be dissolved.
If the VoNC is intimated on 14th October then Parliament is not dissolved until the 28th or 29th, far too late to do anything about a leave date of the 31st.
The result is that to stop Boris the opposition need to not only pass a VoNC but also have an alternative government in which confidence can be expressed as required by the Act by 9th or 12th September. I wonder if that is going to be possible. It would require some Tory MPs (or the DUP) to vote for Corbyn as PM. I think that is pretty inconceivable but we live in extraordinary times.
Funny how an arch-Leaver who is otherwise fully subscribed to the death cult turns soft when his own family might be personally affected.
The serious point is that people projected all sorts of wishes onto Brexit that was deliberately kept a blank canvas so the Leave vote would win. In fact, the opposite of these projections will happen due to the grinding crappiness of a failed project.
Human nature kicks at this point. Almost none of these people have the awareness to think, I got that wrong. Instead they blame others for not doing what was only implied and never planned for.
Yep - and it's what Boris has completed failed to grasp. Boris (and the Tory party) is going to own Brexit and anything that goes wrong will be blamed on Brexit and so Boris.
Boris is right that he could win an election prior to us leaving, once we've left I doubt the Tories could win an election ever again.
He’s just doing his job, pointing out crap administration by the Home Office
Not everything needs to be an opportunity to try and score political points
Um. I think the fact EU citizens are denied residence in the country they have made their home - now rather than before - has a lot to do with a Leave EU referendum substantially predicated on less immigration from Europe
This has been a really curious move. Parliament is to be prorogued some time between the 9th and 12th of September and to reconvene for the Queens Speech on 14th October. The prorogation is therefore for between 32 and 35 days. Had Parliament merely been adjourned for the Conference season, as usual, it would have been adjourned for a minimum of 21 days, probably 28.
The amount of additional time lost to Parliament is therefore quite small. Why has No. 10 taken all this flak for such a marginal gain? The only answer that makes any sense to me is that it is only a part of a larger strategy which is designed to prevent the Opposition from taking control of Parliament or at least gives that impression.
What I think it is designed to do is to force Corbyn to submit his VoNC on the first day that Parliament is back. If he intimates such a motion on Monday it will be debated on Tuesday, superseding the spending review. If it is passed the 14 days will run to the 17th by which time Parliament is not sitting. The result, in terms of the FTPA is that there would be an election but if that election was fixed for 7th November there would be nothing Parliament could do about it because it would be dissolved.
If the VoNC is intimated on 14th October then Parliament is not dissolved until the 28th or 29th, far too late to do anything about a leave date of the 31st.
The result is that to stop Boris the opposition need to not only pass a VoNC but also have an alternative government in which confidence can be expressed as required by the Act by 9th or 12th September. I wonder if that is going to be possible. It would require some Tory MPs (or the DUP) to vote for Corbyn as PM. I think that is pretty inconceivable but we live in extraordinary times.
It’s not a marginal gain. Parliament could and likely would have chosen to sit during the conference season. Proroguing takes that out of their hands.
He’s just doing his job, pointing out crap administration by the Home Office
Not everything needs to be an opportunity to try and score political points
She could call a meeting of the privy council consisting of three arch tories who can advise her that she shouldn’t sign it. You have to laugh that people actually believed they were going to have a real meeting of the privy council which would take a day or two to organize whilst The Privy council flew up and told her maj what to do. And we complain about undemocratic countries.
‘My issue is not so much whether I’m allowed to stay, it’s more why should I have this threat hanging over me,’ Ms Amato tells me. ‘I’ve gone from being a citizen in this country with equal rights to being a second-class citizen, with the same treatment as an immigrant. My parents were immigrants, but I don’t see myself as one, having lived here all my life.’
I'm confused here. If she has equal rights, presumably she has the right to vote in general elections, but then doesn't she need to be a British Citizen?
This has been a really curious move. Parliament is to be prorogued some time between the 9th and 12th of September and to reconvene for the Queens Speech on 14th October. The prorogation is therefore for between 32 and 35 days. Had Parliament merely been adjourned for the Conference season, as usual, it would have been adjourned for a minimum of 21 days, probably 28.
The amount of additional time lost to Parliament is therefore quite small. Why has No. 10 taken all this flak for such a marginal gain? The only answer that makes any sense to me is that it is only a part of a larger strategy which is designed to prevent the Opposition from taking control of Parliament or at least gives that impression.
What I think it is designed to do is to force Corbyn to submit his VoNC on the first day that Parliament is back. If he intimates such a motion on Monday it will be debated on Tuesday, superseding the spending review. If it is passed the 14 days will run to the 17th by which time Parliament is not sitting. The result, in terms of the FTPA is that there would be an election but if that election was fixed for 7th November there would be nothing Parliament could do about it because it would be dissolved.
If the VoNC is intimated on 14th October then Parliament is not dissolved until the 28th or 29th, far too late to do anything about a leave date of the 31st.
The result is that to stop Boris the opposition need to not only pass a VoNC but also have an alternative government in which confidence can be expressed as required by the Act by 9th or 12th September. I wonder if that is going to be possible. It would require some Tory MPs (or the DUP) to vote for Corbyn as PM. I think that is pretty inconceivable but we live in extraordinary times.
Remember, if Boris fixes a GE for after 31st October following a VONC then it HAS to be no-deal, because Parliament will have been dissolved so can not approve a deal. Surely a GE a week after the initial chaos of no deal is too risky for Boris?
‘My issue is not so much whether I’m allowed to stay, it’s more why should I have this threat hanging over me,’ Ms Amato tells me. ‘I’ve gone from being a citizen in this country with equal rights to being a second-class citizen, with the same treatment as an immigrant. My parents were immigrants, but I don’t see myself as one, having lived here all my life.’
I'm confused here. If she has equal rights, presumably she has the right to vote in general elections, but then doesn't she need to be a British Citizen?
Funny how an arch-Leaver who is otherwise fully subscribed to the death cult turns soft when his own family might be personally affected.
The serious point is that people projected all sorts of wishes onto Brexit that was deliberately kept a blank canvas so the Leave vote would win. In fact, the opposite of these projections will happen due to the grinding crappiness of a failed project.
Human nature kicks at this point. Almost none of these people have the awareness to think, I got that wrong. Instead they blame others for not doing what was only implied and never planned for.
I have no sympathy for Fraser Nelson. None. He’s supposed to be an opinion-former. Instead he runs a supermarket tabloid for golf club bores and is shocked to find out that the audience he panders to will throw him aside the moment it suits them.
Agreed. It wasn't difficult to see that Brexit was going to fail on its own terms.
This has been a really curious move. Parliament is to be prorogued some time between the 9th and 12th of September and to reconvene for the Queens Speech on 14th October. The prorogation is therefore for between 32 and 35 days. Had Parliament merely been adjourned for the Conference season, as usual, it would have been adjourned for a minimum of 21 days, probably 28.
The amount of additional time lost to Parliament is therefore quite small. Why has No. 10 taken all this flak for such a marginal gain? The only answer that makes any sense to me is that it is only a part of a larger strategy which is designed to prevent the Opposition from taking control of Parliament or at least gives that impression.
What I think it is designed to do is to force Corbyn to submit his VoNC on the first day that Parliament is back. If he intimates such a motion on Monday it will be debated on Tuesday, superseding the spending review. If it is passed the 14 days will run to the 17th by which time Parliament is not sitting. The result, in terms of the FTPA is that there would be an election but if that election was fixed for 7th November there would be nothing Parliament could do about it because it would be dissolved.
If the VoNC is intimated on 14th October then Parliament is not dissolved until the 28th or 29th, far too late to do anything about a leave date of the 31st.
The result is that to stop Boris the opposition need to not only pass a VoNC but also have an alternative government in which confidence can be expressed as required by the Act by 9th or 12th September. I wonder if that is going to be possible. It would require some Tory MPs (or the DUP) to vote for Corbyn as PM. I think that is pretty inconceivable but we live in extraordinary times.
This has been a really curious move. Parliament is to be prorogued some time between the 9th and 12th of September and to reconvene for the Queens Speech on 14th October. The prorogation is therefore for between 32 and 35 days. Had Parliament merely been adjourned for the Conference season, as usual, it would have been adjourned for a minimum of 21 days, probably 28.
The amount of additional time lost to Parliament is therefore quite small. Why has No. 10 taken all this flak for such a marginal gain? The only answer that makes any sense to me is that it is only a part of a larger strategy which is designed to prevent the Opposition from taking control of Parliament or at least gives that impression.
What I think it is designed to do is to force Corbyn to submit his VoNC on the first day that Parliament is back. If he intimates such a motion on Monday it will be debated on Tuesday, superseding the spending review. If it is passed the 14 days will run to the 17th by which time Parliament is not sitting. The result, in terms of the FTPA is that there would be an election but if that election was fixed for 7th November there would be nothing Parliament could do about it because it would be dissolved.
If the VoNC is intimated on 14th October then Parliament is not dissolved until the 28th or 29th, far too late to do anything about a leave date of the 31st.
The result is that to stop Boris the opposition need to not only pass a VoNC but also have an alternative government in which confidence can be expressed as required by the Act by 9th or 12th September. I wonder if that is going to be possible. It would require some Tory MPs (or the DUP) to vote for Corbyn as PM. I think that is pretty inconceivable but we live in extraordinary times.
It’s not a marginal gain. Parliament could and likely would have chosen to sit during the conference season. Proroguing takes that out of their hands.
Exactly. Proroguing also closes Parliament down completely. Johnson has done all he can to avoid scrutiny throughout his political career. This is just the latest episode. It will not be the last.
This has been a really curious move. Parliament is to be prorogued some time between the 9th and 12th of September and to reconvene for the Queens Speech on 14th October. The prorogation is therefore for between 32 and 35 days. Had Parliament merely been adjourned for the Conference season, as usual, it would have been adjourned for a minimum of 21 days, probably 28.
The amount of additional time lost to Parliament is therefore quite small. Why has No. 10 taken all this flak for such a marginal gain? The only answer that makes any sense to me is that it is only a part of a larger strategy which is designed to prevent the Opposition from taking control of Parliament or at least gives that impression.
What I think it is designed to do is to force Corbyn to submit his VoNC on the first day that Parliament is back. If he intimates such a motion on Monday it will be debated on Tuesday, superseding the spending review. If it is passed the 14 days will run to the 17th by which time Parliament is not sitting. The result, in terms of the FTPA is that there would be an election but if that election was fixed for 7th November there would be nothing Parliament could do about it because it would be dissolved.
If the VoNC is intimated on 14th October then Parliament is not dissolved until the 28th or 29th, far too late to do anything about a leave date of the 31st.
The result is that to stop Boris the opposition need to not only pass a VoNC but also have an alternative government in which confidence can be expressed as required by the Act by 9th or 12th September. I wonder if that is going to be possible. It would require some Tory MPs (or the DUP) to vote for Corbyn as PM. I think that is pretty inconceivable but we live in extraordinary times.
It’s not a marginal gain. Parliament could and likely would have chosen to sit during the conference season. Proroguing takes that out of their hands.
True, but David's point about the FTPA is an interesting one. As it happens I don't think there will be a VoNC next week, but if there was, I wonder if the government being no confidenced could overturn the prorogation (I guess this wasn't considered in the FTPA).
This has been a really curious move. Parliament is to be prorogued some time between the 9th and 12th of September and to reconvene for the Queens Speech on 14th October. The prorogation is therefore for between 32 and 35 days. Had Parliament merely been adjourned for the Conference season, as usual, it would have been adjourned for a minimum of 21 days, probably 28.
The amount of additional time lost to Parliament is therefore quite small. Why has No. 10 taken all this flak for such a marginal gain? The only answer that makes any sense to me is that it is only a part of a larger strategy which is designed to prevent the Opposition from taking control of Parliament or at least gives that impression.
What I think it is designed to do is to force Corbyn to submit his VoNC on the first day that Parliament is back. If he intimates such a motion on Monday it will be debated on Tuesday, superseding the spending review. If it is passed the 14 days will run to the 17th by which time Parliament is not sitting. The result, in terms of the FTPA is that there would be an election but if that election was fixed for 7th November there would be nothing Parliament could do about it because it would be dissolved.
If the VoNC is intimated on 14th October then Parliament is not dissolved until the 28th or 29th, far too late to do anything about a leave date of the 31st.
The result is that to stop Boris the opposition need to not only pass a VoNC but also have an alternative government in which confidence can be expressed as required by the Act by 9th or 12th September. I wonder if that is going to be possible. It would require some Tory MPs (or the DUP) to vote for Corbyn as PM. I think that is pretty inconceivable but we live in extraordinary times.
Remember, if Boris fixes a GE for after 31st October following a VONC then it HAS to be no-deal, because Parliament will have been dissolved so can not approve a deal. Surely a GE a week after the initial chaos of no deal is too risky for Boris?
You would think so, especially as I find it hard to believe that leave with no deal is not going to require further secondary legislation which needs to be put before Parliament for approval. But is the threat of this enough?
Rees Mogg pretty disparaging of the Speaker on R4 just now. He said his remarks were the most unconstitutional thingbthat happened yesterday. The fuse is lit..
I have never really given much thought to the monarchy as an institution - and am a firm fan of the Queen. But today I’m thinking that maybe an elected president would have more scope to refuse a request by an unelected Prime Minister with no mandate to close Parliament down.
I have never really given much thought to the monarchy as an institution - and am a firm fan of the Queen. But today I’m thinking that maybe an elected president would have more scope to refuse a request by an unelected Prime Minister with no mandate to close Parliament down.
This has been a really curious move. Parliament is to be prorogued some time between the 9th and 12th of September and to reconvene for the Queens Speech on 14th October. The prorogation is therefore for between 32 and 35 days. Had Parliament merely been adjourned for the Conference season, as usual, it would have been adjourned for a minimum of 21 days, probably 28.
The amount of additional time lost to Parliament is therefore quite small. Why has No. 10 taken all this flak for such a marginal gain? The only answer that makes any sense to me is that it is only a part of a larger strategy which is designed to prevent the Opposition from taking control of Parliament or at least gives that impression.
What I think it is designed to do is to force Corbyn to submit his VoNC on the first day that Parliament is back. If he intimates such a motion on Monday it will be debated on Tuesday, superseding the spending review. If it is passed the 14 days will run to the 17th by which time Parliament is not sitting. The result, in terms of the FTPA is that there would be an election but if that election was fixed for 7th November there would be nothing Parliament could do about it because it would be dissolved.
If the VoNC is intimated on 14th October then Parliament is not dissolved until the 28th or 29th, far too late to do anything about a leave date of the 31st.
The result is that to stop Boris the opposition need to not only pass a VoNC but also have an alternative government in which confidence can be expressed as required by the Act by 9th or 12th September. I wonder if that is going to be possible. It would require some Tory MPs (or the DUP) to vote for Corbyn as PM. I think that is pretty inconceivable but we live in extraordinary times.
It’s not a marginal gain. Parliament could and likely would have chosen to sit during the conference season. Proroguing takes that out of their hands.
To do what? If they can't pass their bill requiring the Government to seek a further extension next week you have to wonder if they can pass it at all.
I have never really given much thought to the monarchy as an institution - and am a firm fan of the Queen. But today I’m thinking that maybe an elected president would have more scope to refuse a request by an unelected Prime Minister with no mandate to close Parliament down.
The time to change the monarchs influence is on the passing of the queen
This has been a really curious move. Parliament is to be prorogued some time between the 9th and 12th of September and to reconvene for the Queens Speech on 14th October. The prorogation is therefore for between 32 and 35 days. Had Parliament merely been adjourned for the Conference season, as usual, it would have been adjourned for a minimum of 21 days, probably 28.
The amount of additional time lost to Parliament is therefore quite small. Why has No. 10 taken all this flak for such a marginal gain? The only answer that makes any sense to me is that it is only a part of a larger strategy which is designed to prevent the Opposition from taking control of Parliament or at least gives that impression.
What I think it is designed to do is to force Corbyn to submit his VoNC on the first day that Parliament is back. If he intimates such a motion on Monday it will be debated on Tuesday, superseding the spending review. If it is passed the 14 days will run to the 17th by which time Parliament is not sitting. The result, in terms of the FTPA is that there would be an election but if that election was fixed for 7th November there would be nothing Parliament could do about it because it would be dissolved.
If the VoNC is intimated on 14th October then Parliament is not dissolved until the 28th or 29th, far too late to do anything about a leave date of the 31st.
The result is that to stop Boris the opposition need to not only pass a VoNC but also have an alternative government in which confidence can be expressed as required by the Act by 9th or 12th September. I wonder if that is going to be possible. It would require some Tory MPs (or the DUP) to vote for Corbyn as PM. I think that is pretty inconceivable but we live in extraordinary times.
Remember, if Boris fixes a GE for after 31st October following a VONC then it HAS to be no-deal, because Parliament will have been dissolved so can not approve a deal. Surely a GE a week after the initial chaos of no deal is too risky for Boris?
You would think so, especially as I find it hard to believe that leave with no deal is not going to require further secondary legislation which needs to be put before Parliament for approval. But is the threat of this enough?
It does require I believe seven bills to pass to reduce the impact of no deal but you’ll have to google it as I can’t remember what they are but it seems these are no longer important or less important than a queens speech set against a background of who knows what.
Rees Mogg pretty disparaging of the Speaker on R4 just now. He said his remarks were the most unconstitutional thingbthat happened yesterday. The fuse is lit..
It is going to be some show next week in the HOC and JRM v Bercow will be top of the bill
If the VoNC is intimated on 14th October then Parliament is not dissolved until the 28th or 29th, far too late to do anything about a leave date of the 31st.
The result is that to stop Boris the opposition need to not only pass a VoNC but also have an alternative government in which confidence can be expressed as required by the Act by 9th or 12th September. I wonder if that is going to be possible. It would require some Tory MPs (or the DUP) to vote for Corbyn as PM. I think that is pretty inconceivable but we live in extraordinary times.
Why can't they pass the VONC on October 14th, vote through a humble address or whatever expressing their support for $CARETAKER on October 15th, and have their new guy in place on October 16th?
Personally I struggle to accept the cries of “constitutional outrage” from MPs that they are being restricted in the time they are having to debate and shape/prevent Brexit before Oct 31st, given that they have expressed no equivalent outrage that they have recently failed to “debate” Brexit over a lengthy Summer holiday, were expected to fail to “debate” Brexit over the coming 3 week period for party conferences, and have so far spent 3 years failing to show any evidence that “debating” has got us any closer to satisfactory Brexit outcomes anyway.
And am also quite relieved that the prospect of Johnson failing to get any changes from Brussels and subsequently proroguing Parliament over the period of October 31st to ensure no deal Brexit has now been ruled out.
It’s not
An analogy: Remainers in Parliament are like a toddler who came up with a cunning plan to creep downstairs in the middle of the night to eat all the cookies
At midnight they get downstairs to find their big brother has got there before them and there’s barely a crumb left
Their resection isn’t to reflect on the rights and wrongs of what they were planning. It’s to scream that they didn’t get any cookies
38% of Scots voted to Leave the EU, more even the 28% who voted Tory in 2017. Not one poll has the SNP polling over 50%, the biggest gainers since 2017 in Scotland have been the LDs and the Brexit Party NOT the SNP
An hour ago you told me that it was untrue that the front pages in Scotland a dream for the SNP. I await your apology expectantly. Or have you now given up on any kind of pretence that the truth matters?
They aren't, as I said the Daily Record is a pro Labour, anti Tory paper and prefers the SNP to the Tories and all the Scottish only papers are pro Remain despite 38% of Scots voting Leave
In what way are these headlines not a dream for the SNP? They are a direct assault on the idea of the union, illustrated by the poster child of unionism.
They are a direct assault on the union by diehard Remainers who dream of breaking up the Union as punishment for the Leave vote, what is new?
Yet still the SNP is polling below the 50% it got in 2015 BEFORE the Brexit vote
Funny how when it comes to Brexit HY always adds Brexit Party and UKIP to the Con vote, but when it comes to Scottish sovereignty, HY pretends that the SNP stand alone. We don’t. We have the Greens, various small left-wing groups, 40% of SLab voters and a small, but significant, number of SCon and SLD voters behind us.
Remember, support for independence was at 28% before the last referendum, and ended up at 45%. So, we are quite happy to be going into the next referendum starting at 50%.
You aren't starting at 50%, you are starting at 46% including Don't Knows, only 1% more than 2014
If the VoNC is intimated on 14th October then Parliament is not dissolved until the 28th or 29th, far too late to do anything about a leave date of the 31st.
The result is that to stop Boris the opposition need to not only pass a VoNC but also have an alternative government in which confidence can be expressed as required by the Act by 9th or 12th September. I wonder if that is going to be possible. It would require some Tory MPs (or the DUP) to vote for Corbyn as PM. I think that is pretty inconceivable but we live in extraordinary times.
Why can't they pass the VONC on October 14th, vote through a humble address or whatever expressing their support for $CARETAKER on October 15th, and have their new guy in place on October 16th?
This has been a really curious move. Parliament is to be prorogued some time between the 9th and 12th of September and to reconvene for the Queens Speech on 14th October. The prorogation is therefore for between 32 and 35 days. Had Parliament merely been adjourned for the Conference season, as usual, it would have been adjourned for a minimum of 21 days, probably 28.
The amount of additional time lost to Parliament is therefore quite small. Why has No. 10 taken all this flak for such a marginal gain? The only answer that makes any sense to me is that it is only a part of a larger strategy which is designed to prevent the Opposition from taking control of Parliament or at least gives that impression.
What I think it is designed to do is to force Corbyn to submit his VoNC on the first day that Parliament is back. If he intimates such a motion on Monday it will be debated on Tuesday, superseding the spending review. If it is passed the 14 days will run to the 17th by which time Parliament is not sitting. The result, in terms of the FTPA is that there would be an election but if that election was fixed for 7th November there would be nothing Parliament could do about it because it would be dissolved.
If the VoNC is intimated on 14th October then Parliament is not dissolved until the 28th or 29th, far too late to do anything about a leave date of the 31st.
The result is that to stop Boris the opposition need to not only pass a VoNC but also have an alternative government in which confidence can be expressed as required by the Act by 9th or 12th September. I wonder if that is going to be possible. It would require some Tory MPs (or the DUP) to vote for Corbyn as PM. I think that is pretty inconceivable but we live in extraordinary times.
It’s not a marginal gain. Parliament could and likely would have chosen to sit during the conference season. Proroguing takes that out of their hands.
True, but David's point about the FTPA is an interesting one. As it happens I don't think there will be a VoNC next week, but if there was, I wonder if the government being no confidenced could overturn the prorogation (I guess this wasn't considered in the FTPA).
No it wasn't. I think it can be inferred that the presumption was that Parliament would be sitting (the reference to a vote of confidence makes little sense otherwise) but it is not express.
If the VoNC is intimated on 14th October then Parliament is not dissolved until the 28th or 29th, far too late to do anything about a leave date of the 31st.
The result is that to stop Boris the opposition need to not only pass a VoNC but also have an alternative government in which confidence can be expressed as required by the Act by 9th or 12th September. I wonder if that is going to be possible. It would require some Tory MPs (or the DUP) to vote for Corbyn as PM. I think that is pretty inconceivable but we live in extraordinary times.
Why can't they pass the VONC on October 14th, vote through a humble address or whatever expressing their support for $CARETAKER on October 15th, and have their new guy in place on October 16th?
Except there is a Queen's Speech on the 14th and I believe that overrides even a VONC organised for the next day in Parliament.
This has been a really curious move. Parliament is to be prorogued some time between the 9th and 12th of September and to reconvene for the Queens Speech on 14th October. The prorogation is therefore for between 32 and 35 days. Had Parliament merely been adjourned for the Conference season, as usual, it would have been adjourned for a minimum of 21 days, probably 28.
The amount of additional time lost to Parliament is therefore quite small. Why has No. 10 taken all this flak for such a marginal gain? The only answer that makes any sense to me is that it is only a part of a larger strategy which is designed to prevent the Opposition from taking control of Parliament or at least gives that impression.
What I think it is designed to do is to force Corbyn to submit his VoNC on the first day that Parliament is back. If he intimates such a motion on Monday it will be debated on Tuesday, superseding the spending review. If it is passed the 14 days will run to the 17th by which time Parliament is not sitting. The result, in terms of the FTPA is that there would be an election but if that election was fixed for 7th November there would be nothing Parliament could do about it because it would be dissolved.
If the VoNC is intimated on 14th October then Parliament is not dissolved until the 28th or 29th, far too late to do anything about a leave date of the 31st.
The result is that to stop Boris the opposition need to not only pass a VoNC but also have an alternative government in which confidence can be expressed as required by the Act by 9th or 12th September. I wonder if that is going to be possible. It would require some Tory MPs (or the DUP) to vote for Corbyn as PM. I think that is pretty inconceivable but we live in extraordinary times.
It’s not a marginal gain. Parliament could and likely would have chosen to sit during the conference season. Proroguing takes that out of their hands.
True, but David's point about the FTPA is an interesting one. As it happens I don't think there will be a VoNC next week, but if there was, I wonder if the government being no confidenced could overturn the prorogation (I guess this wasn't considered in the FTPA).
No it wasn't. I think it can be inferred that the presumption was that Parliament would be sitting (the reference to a vote of confidence makes little sense otherwise) but it is not express.
Could MPs have cancelled the summer recess? It seems to me that if that was an option, they were foolish to not do it.
I have never really given much thought to the monarchy as an institution - and am a firm fan of the Queen. But today I’m thinking that maybe an elected president would have more scope to refuse a request by an unelected Prime Minister with no mandate to close Parliament down.
Or equally if they were from the same party an elected President could assist that PM to close Parliament down right through October 31st
I have never really given much thought to the monarchy as an institution - and am a firm fan of the Queen. But today I’m thinking that maybe an elected president would have more scope to refuse a request by an unelected Prime Minister with no mandate to close Parliament down.
Or equally if they were from the same party an elected President could assist that PM to close Parliament down right through October 31st
If the VoNC is intimated on 14th October then Parliament is not dissolved until the 28th or 29th, far too late to do anything about a leave date of the 31st.
The result is that to stop Boris the opposition need to not only pass a VoNC but also have an alternative government in which confidence can be expressed as required by the Act by 9th or 12th September. I wonder if that is going to be possible. It would require some Tory MPs (or the DUP) to vote for Corbyn as PM. I think that is pretty inconceivable but we live in extraordinary times.
Why can't they pass the VONC on October 14th, vote through a humble address or whatever expressing their support for $CARETAKER on October 15th, and have their new guy in place on October 16th?
Except there is a Queen's Speech on the 14th and I believe that overrides even a VONC organised for the next day in Parliament.
Queen's speech as filibuster. The idea that they are setting out a program for government, without a Parliamentary majority, is simply absurd.
Well they could but it again means that the 14 day countdown procedure needs to be superseded by a vote of confidence in an alternative government, that is Tories or the DUP have to vote for Corbyn to be PM.
If the VoNC is intimated on 14th October then Parliament is not dissolved until the 28th or 29th, far too late to do anything about a leave date of the 31st.
The result is that to stop Boris the opposition need to not only pass a VoNC but also have an alternative government in which confidence can be expressed as required by the Act by 9th or 12th September. I wonder if that is going to be possible. It would require some Tory MPs (or the DUP) to vote for Corbyn as PM. I think that is pretty inconceivable but we live in extraordinary times.
Why can't they pass the VONC on October 14th, vote through a humble address or whatever expressing their support for $CARETAKER on October 15th, and have their new guy in place on October 16th?
If the VoNC is intimated on 14th October then Parliament is not dissolved until the 28th or 29th, far too late to do anything about a leave date of the 31st.
The result is that to stop Boris the opposition need to not only pass a VoNC but also have an alternative government in which confidence can be expressed as required by the Act by 9th or 12th September. I wonder if that is going to be possible. It would require some Tory MPs (or the DUP) to vote for Corbyn as PM. I think that is pretty inconceivable but we live in extraordinary times.
Why can't they pass the VONC on October 14th, vote through a humble address or whatever expressing their support for $CARETAKER on October 15th, and have their new guy in place on October 16th?
Rees Mogg is goading them into doing it and suggests they could even put the extension demand into a queens speech amendment, not sure about a VONC would it take precedence over the Queens speech or subsequent debate.
This has been a really curious move. Parliament is to be prorogued some time between the 9th and 12th of September and to reconvene for the Queens Speech on 14th October. The prorogation is therefore for between 32 and 35 days. Had Parliament merely been adjourned for the Conference season, as usual, it would have been adjourned for a minimum of 21 days, probably 28.
The amount of additional time lost to Parliament is therefore quite small. Why has No. 10 taken all this flak for such a marginal gain? The only answer that makes any sense to me is that it is only a part of a larger strategy which is designed to prevent the Opposition from taking control of Parliament or at least gives that impression.
What I think it is designed to do is to force Corbyn to submit his VoNC on the first day that Parliament is back. If he intimates such a motion on Monday it will be debated on Tuesday, superseding the spending review. If it is passed the 14 days will run to the 17th by which time Parliament is not sitting. The result, in terms of the FTPA is that there would be an election but if that election was fixed for 7th November there would be nothing Parliament could do about it because it would be dissolved.
If the VoNC is intimated on 14th October then Parliament is not dissolved until the 28th or 29th, far too late to do anything about a leave date of the 31st.
The result is that to stop Boris the opposition need to not only pass a VoNC but also have an alternative government in which confidence can be expressed as required by the Act by 9th or 12th September. I wonder if that is going to be possible. It would require some Tory MPs (or the DUP) to vote for Corbyn as PM. I think that is pretty inconceivable but we live in extraordinary times.
Remember, if Boris fixes a GE for after 31st October following a VONC then it HAS to be no-deal, because Parliament will have been dissolved so can not approve a deal. Surely a GE a week after the initial chaos of no deal is too risky for Boris?
You would think so, especially as I find it hard to believe that leave with no deal is not going to require further secondary legislation which needs to be put before Parliament for approval. But is the threat of this enough?
It does require I believe seven bills to pass to reduce the impact of no deal but you’ll have to google it as I can’t remember what they are but it seems these are no longer important or less important than a queens speech set against a background of who knows what.
If there is a GE called after the VONC then there will be no Queen’s Speech.
I honestly think this may be the Remainers’ best option now. VONC the government and dare them to try and set a GE date after 31st October
I have never really given much thought to the monarchy as an institution - and am a firm fan of the Queen. But today I’m thinking that maybe an elected president would have more scope to refuse a request by an unelected Prime Minister with no mandate to close Parliament down.
Except there is a Queen's Speech on the 14th and I believe that overrides even a VONC organised for the next day in Parliament.
So I guess the plan is:
* Stall everything until October, blocking the legislative route * Queen's Speech full of attractive baubles with no regard for affordability or practicality * VONC the next day, election
Personally I struggle to accept the cries of “constitutional outrage” from MPs that they are being restricted in the time they are having to debate and shape/prevent Brexit before Oct 31st, given that they have expressed no equivalent outrage that they have recently failed to “debate” Brexit over a lengthy Summer holiday, were expected to fail to “debate” Brexit over the coming 3 week period for party conferences, and have so far spent 3 years failing to show any evidence that “debating” has got us any closer to satisfactory Brexit outcomes anyway.
And am also quite relieved that the prospect of Johnson failing to get any changes from Brussels and subsequently proroguing Parliament over the period of October 31st to ensure no deal Brexit has now been ruled out.
It’s not
An analogy: Remainers in Parliament are like a toddler who came up with a cunning plan to creep downstairs in the middle of the night to eat all the cookies
At midnight they get downstairs to find their big brother has got there before them and there’s barely a crumb left
Their resection isn’t to reflect on the rights and wrongs of what they were planning. It’s to scream that they didn’t get any cookies
And lo! It came to pass.
And when we are living through the reality of No Deal, all voters will remember is that the PM said it would be easily manageable and that he closed down the Parliament the people elected to ensure that it all happened.
This has been a really curious move. Parliament is to be prorogued some time between the 9th and 12th of September and to reconvene for the Queens Speech on 14th October. The prorogation is therefore for between 32 and 35 days. Had Parliament merely been adjourned for the Conference season, as usual, it would have been adjourned for a minimum of 21 days, probably 28.
The amount of additional time lost to Parliament is therefore quite small. Why has No. 10 taken all this flak for such a marginal gain? The only answer that makes any sense to me is that it is only a part of a larger strategy which is designed to prevent the Opposition from taking control of Parliament or at least gives that impression.
What I think it is designed to do is to force Corbyn to submit his VoNC on the first day that Parliament is back. If he intimates such a motion on Monday it will be debated on Tuesday, superseding the spending review. If it is passed the 14 days will run to the 17th by which time Parliament is not sitting. The result, in terms of the FTPA is that there would be an election but if that election was fixed for 7th November there would be nothing Parliament could do about it because it would be dissolved.
If the VoNC is intimated on 14th October then Parliament is not dissolved until the 28th or 29th, far too late to do anything about a leave date of the 31st.
The result is that to stop Boris the opposition need to not only pass a VoNC but also have an alternative government in which confidence can be expressed as required by the Act by 9th or 12th September. I wonder if that is going to be possible. It would require some Tory MPs (or the DUP) to vote for Corbyn as PM. I think that is pretty inconceivable but we live in extraordinary times.
It’s not a marginal gain. Parliament could and likely would have chosen to sit during the conference season. Proroguing takes that out of their hands.
To do what? If they can't pass their bill requiring the Government to seek a further extension next week you have to wonder if they can pass it at all.
Filibuster in the lords taking the bill out of time and falling on prorogation.
Personally I struggle to accept the cries of “constitutional outrage” from MPs that they are being restricted in the time they are having to debate and shape/prevent Brexit before Oct 31st, given that they have expressed no equivalent outrage that they have recently failed to “debate” Brexit over a lengthy Summer holiday, were expected to fail to “debate” Brexit over the coming 3 week period for party conferences, and have so far spent 3 years failing to show any evidence that “debating” has got us any closer to satisfactory Brexit outcomes anyway.
And am also quite relieved that the prospect of Johnson failing to get any changes from Brussels and subsequently proroguing Parliament over the period of October 31st to ensure no deal Brexit has now been ruled out.
It’s not
An analogy: Remainers in Parliament are like a toddler who came up with a cunning plan to creep downstairs in the middle of the night to eat all the cookies
At midnight they get downstairs to find their big brother has got there before them and there’s barely a crumb left
Their resection isn’t to reflect on the rights and wrongs of what they were planning. It’s to scream that they didn’t get any cookies
And lo! It came to pass.
It’s utterly facile to equate a few procedural changes with suspending Parliament, an act you claimed on Tuesday would never happen.
I have never really given much thought to the monarchy as an institution - and am a firm fan of the Queen. But today I’m thinking that maybe an elected president would have more scope to refuse a request by an unelected Prime Minister with no mandate to close Parliament down.
The time to change the monarchs influence is on the passing of the queen
I have no desire to see Charles head of state
So you are actually against the monarchy, simply in favour of the current UK Head of State. A monarchy is entierly based the hereditary principle with no consideration of suitability of the role.
I have never really given much thought to the monarchy as an institution - and am a firm fan of the Queen. But today I’m thinking that maybe an elected president would have more scope to refuse a request by an unelected Prime Minister with no mandate to close Parliament down.
The time to change the monarchs influence is on the passing of the queen
I have no desire to see Charles head of state
Personally I support the institution not just the incumbent.
In any case according to Yougov most monarchists voted Leave anyway, by 56% to 44% and most republicans voted Remain, by 65% to 35% and 61% of republicans voted Labour at the last general election and 49% of monarchists voted Tory, so I doubt yesterday changes much on that front. Indeed 52% of voters now like Prince Charles, even if below the 92% who like the Queen and the 87% who like Prince William, still well above the 18% who like Prince Andrew for instance.
Comments
And am also quite relieved that the prospect of Johnson failing to get any changes from Brussels and subsequently proroguing Parliament over the period of October 31st to ensure no deal Brexit has now been ruled out.
VONC on day one imo.
If the opposition are to do anything, it needs to be done now.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/aug/29/british-car-industry-suffers-worst-period-of-decline-since-2001
I expect he will allow Standing orders to be suspended so that parliament can sit all night and even on Saturday to pass legislation.
There is nothing the govt can do about that...Rees Mogg will try but be put back in his box by Mr Speaker.
I do suspect the PM has made an error of judgement.
There is, for example, a plan to arrange refusal of royal assent for any legislation Parliament might come up with to constrain his freedom of manoeuvre.
Yep, expect flags. Lots of flags.
No doubt the current administration of rogues and liars will attempt all manner of filibusters in the Lords.
Is a one line bill to repeal the FTPA a sensible first step next week? Would therefore remove the trap door and make it beholden on the government to resign if they lost a confidence vote.
The other weapon that could be deployed is the humble address to scrap prorogation. Is this even needed? The speaker and a large swathe of MPs are outraged, so what if the Commons refuses to go? The Crown losing its authority over Parliament would be a grave crisis, so I suspect that even the "I'm sorry ma'am but we really are serious" threat would be enough
This situation should not have arisen and a large part of responsibility falls at the feet of Corbyn who is quite the most unsuitable labour leader we have ever seen. If labour had been led by a sensible collegiate leader we would have had a deal by now or more likely an overwhelming HOC in favour of revoke
Johnson's election strategy depends not just on squeezing the Brexit Party but also on Labour not doing the same towards Lib Dems in the seats they hold.
When i booked the cruise 18 months ago I did not realise HMG would go on leave while I was away thereby saving me lots of internet time !!!!!
13,000 took part
11,000 agree with him
2,000 disagree
42 undecided
Not everything needs to be an opportunity to try and score political points
Whatever they are going to do they need to get on with it, as it will take longer than they think.
Human nature kicks at this point. Almost none of these people have the awareness to think, I got that wrong. Instead they blame others for not doing what was only implied and never planned for.
They will try this, and any other available wheezes.
13,700 took part
11,325 agree with him (82%)
2,431 disagree (18%)
42 undecided
If they try that and the Queen refuses it would be a very bad look indeed. If they try and succeed it may look like bullying HM.
Trying to influence royal assent is not smart.
The amount of additional time lost to Parliament is therefore quite small. Why has No. 10 taken all this flak for such a marginal gain? The only answer that makes any sense to me is that it is only a part of a larger strategy which is designed to prevent the Opposition from taking control of Parliament or at least gives that impression.
What I think it is designed to do is to force Corbyn to submit his VoNC on the first day that Parliament is back. If he intimates such a motion on Monday it will be debated on Tuesday, superseding the spending review. If it is passed the 14 days will run to the 17th by which time Parliament is not sitting. The result, in terms of the FTPA is that there would be an election but if that election was fixed for 7th November there would be nothing Parliament could do about it because it would be dissolved.
If the VoNC is intimated on 14th October then Parliament is not dissolved until the 28th or 29th, far too late to do anything about a leave date of the 31st.
The result is that to stop Boris the opposition need to not only pass a VoNC but also have an alternative government in which confidence can be expressed as required by the Act by 9th or 12th September. I wonder if that is going to be possible. It would require some Tory MPs (or the DUP) to vote for Corbyn as PM. I think that is pretty inconceivable but we live in extraordinary times.
Boris is right that he could win an election prior to us leaving, once we've left I doubt the Tories could win an election ever again.
Rees Mogg to John Humphrys.
I'm confused here. If she has equal rights, presumably she has the right to vote in general elections, but then doesn't she need to be a British Citizen?
English flags
He said his remarks were the most unconstitutional thingbthat happened yesterday.
The fuse is lit..
The important thing is not how it plays out now but how it plays out 3 weeks down the line (or in mid October were there an election).
https://twitter.com/NickBoles/status/1166973645236948992
I have no desire to see Charles head of state
An analogy: Remainers in Parliament are like a toddler who came up with a cunning plan to creep downstairs in the middle of the night to eat all the cookies
At midnight they get downstairs to find their big brother has got there before them and there’s barely a crumb left
Their resection isn’t to reflect on the rights and wrongs of what they were planning. It’s to scream that they didn’t get any cookies
And lo! It came to pass.
https://twitter.com/davidherdson/status/1166944952548548609?s=21
The idea that they are setting out a program for government, without a Parliamentary majority, is simply absurd.
I honestly think this may be the Remainers’ best option now. VONC the government and dare them to try and set a GE date after 31st October
* Stall everything until October, blocking the legislative route
* Queen's Speech full of attractive baubles with no regard for affordability or practicality
* VONC the next day, election
The suspension of Parliament for the conference season is one of the rogues' threadbare figleaves. Remove it.
It’s utterly facile to equate a few procedural changes with suspending Parliament, an act you claimed on Tuesday would never happen.
In any case according to Yougov most monarchists voted Leave anyway, by 56% to 44% and most republicans voted Remain, by 65% to 35% and 61% of republicans voted Labour at the last general election and 49% of monarchists voted Tory, so I doubt yesterday changes much on that front.
Indeed 52% of voters now like Prince Charles, even if below the 92% who like the Queen and the 87% who like Prince William, still well above the 18% who like Prince Andrew for instance.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2018/05/18/who-are-monarchists