BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

1…11641165116711691170…2110

Comments

  • mr_goo
    mr_goo Posts: 3,770
    Ironic that one of the most staunch anit Brexit personalities that has been spouting off about taking the government to court is John Major who prorogued parliament in 1997 to suppress 'Cash for Questions'. What goes around comes around.
    Always be yourself, unless you can be Aaron Rodgers....Then always be Aaron Rodgers.
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 21,918
    I still think there should be more constitutional outrage over the speaker of the house calling it a constitutional outrage
  • tailwindhome
    tailwindhome Posts: 19,436
    TailWindHome wrote:
    Ruth Davidson has quit as leader of Scottish Tories.
    Citing family reasons, which may or may not be true.

    As someone smarter than me has pointed out this could have a considerable impact on IndyRef2
    “New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 21,918
    Mr Goo wrote:
    Ironic that one of the most staunch anit Brexit personalities that has been spouting off about taking the government to court is John Major who prorogued parliament in 1997 to suppress 'Cash for Questions'. What goes around comes around.

    One of the benefits of watching sport is seeing the journey from player to pundit/commentator. It is a well trodden path which sometimes starts with a bit of insight, but usually ends with a triple layer of rose tinted glasses. Politics is largely the same.
  • Ben6899
    Ben6899 Posts: 9,686
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Ballysmate wrote:

    MPs from both sides of the argument should have got their heads out of their collective arses months ago and got a deal done.

    In fairness, that is more difficult to do if parliament is suspended (which, as I learned last night, is different to 'recess', where plenty of work still goes on. Suspended really means nothing is allowed to be done).

    In fairness to Bally, he did concede that he's no authority on the matter... ;-)
    Ben

    Bikes: Donhou DSS4 Custom | Condor Italia RC | Gios Megalite | Dolan Preffisio | Giant Bowery '76
    Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ben_h_ppcc/
    Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143173475@N05/
  • kingstonian
    kingstonian Posts: 2,847
    Interesting to see so many politicians saying it is outrageous, and that Parliament should be kept open to allow debate on Brexit, but what have those debates conjured up so far? Debates in Parliament really aren't going to structure a deal that a majority would vote for, because too many politicians from all sides are doing all in their power to resist Brexit altogether despite it being democratically decided that the country would leave.

    I suspect part of this is Boris showing the EU that he is deadly serious - before they were dealing with a PM that wouldn't stare at them to see who blinks first, but he will, so perhaps that will prove to be a forcing function. I guess it is worth a try, everything else the UK government has tried to negotiate a workable deal has failed so a bit of brinksmanship has to be worth a shot.

    I voted Remain, by the way, so the above isn't from someone that was or is a diehard Leaver........
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,154
    Can we agree that any argument that says - this is entirely normal and is just what any incoming government would do, this is an entirely normal situation, "Is it Brexitting? I hadn't noticed" - is not made in good faith?
  • tailwindhome
    tailwindhome Posts: 19,436
    Kingstonian wrote:
    I suspect part of this is Boris showing the EU that he is deadly serious - before they were dealing with a PM that wouldn't stare at them to see who blinks first, but he will, so perhaps that will prove to be a forcing function. I guess it is worth a try, everything else the UK government has tried to negotiate a workable deal has failed so a bit of brinksmanship has to be worth a shot.


    Alternatively he's shut down parliament as he hasn't the numbers to ratify anything and to prevent scrutiny of no deal planning.

    What can the EU do with that?
    “New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 21,918
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    Can we agree that any argument that says - this is entirely normal and is just what any incoming government would do, this is an entirely normal situation, "Is it Brexitting? I hadn't noticed" - is not made in good faith?

    In the absence of the Brexit deadline it would be completely normal. The Brexit deadline tests a good faith argument somewhat which is the point I think you are making.
  • haydenm
    haydenm Posts: 2,997
    Kingstonian wrote:
    Interesting to see so many politicians saying it is outrageous, and that Parliament should be kept open to allow debate on Brexit, but what have those debates conjured up so far? Debates in Parliament really aren't going to structure a deal that a majority would vote for, because too many politicians from all sides are doing all in their power to resist Brexit altogether despite it being democratically decided that the country would leave.

    I suspect part of this is Boris showing the EU that he is deadly serious - before they were dealing with a PM that wouldn't stare at them to see who blinks first, but he will, so perhaps that will prove to be a forcing function. I guess it is worth a try, everything else the UK government has tried to negotiate a workable deal has failed so a bit of brinksmanship has to be worth a shot.

    I voted Remain, by the way, so the above isn't from someone that was or is a diehard Leaver........

    On the first bit, it's totally beside the point. Proroguing parliament is outrageous and sets a dangerous precedent regardless of what they were going to do with the time. They could spend it pulling their heads out of their arses which would be a good start.

    I agree with the second bit, I think this helps him whip up some sort of Deal but No Deal type arrangement.
  • ballysmate
    ballysmate Posts: 15,930
    Ben6899 wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Ballysmate wrote:

    MPs from both sides of the argument should have got their heads out of their collective arses months ago and got a deal done.

    In fairness, that is more difficult to do if parliament is suspended (which, as I learned last night, is different to 'recess', where plenty of work still goes on. Suspended really means nothing is allowed to be done).

    In fairness to Bally, he did concede that he's no authority on the matter... ;-)

    I refer my honourable friend to my earlier answer in regard to my use of tense.
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 21,918
    TailWindHome wrote:
    Kingstonian wrote:
    I suspect part of this is Boris showing the EU that he is deadly serious - before they were dealing with a PM that wouldn't stare at them to see who blinks first, but he will, so perhaps that will prove to be a forcing function. I guess it is worth a try, everything else the UK government has tried to negotiate a workable deal has failed so a bit of brinksmanship has to be worth a shot.


    Alternatively he's shut down parliament as he hasn't the numbers to ratify anything and to prevent scrutiny of no deal planning.

    What can the EU do with that?

    Reopen the withdrawal agreement?
  • haydenm
    haydenm Posts: 2,997
    TheBigBean wrote:
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    Can we agree that any argument that says - this is entirely normal and is just what any incoming government would do, this is an entirely normal situation, "Is it Brexitting? I hadn't noticed" - is not made in good faith?

    In the absence of the Brexit deadline it would be completely normal. The Brexit deadline tests a good faith argument somewhat which is the point I think you are making.

    Without Brexit it is weirdly long. The fact they are trying to pretend it's anything else is offensive.

    'Ruth Fox - director of parliamentary experts the Hansard Society - said this prorogation was "significantly longer than we would normally have" for the purpose of starting a new parliamentary session.'
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,154
    PM who wasn't leader at a general election, in charge of a party without a majority, goes to the unelected monarch to ask her to shut down parliament to prevent the elected representatives being heard before a deadline. The EU is so antidemocratic to allow this kind of thing from one of its members.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,558
    HaydenM wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    Not sure I follow you there Bally. What are you saying he hasn't done?

    They were talking about him proroguing over the deadline to stop any possible intervention, whereas this stops short. IBS made that point in the interview also, the interviewer said that if this has nothing to do with brexit, why is it weeks longer than any other time this has happened? He ignored it and started berating MPs again (which I have a bit of sympathy for)
    Not sure they were all being that specific and yes there will be a fortnight of parliament before 31st October. I'm sure that that will make all the difference.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • kingstonian
    kingstonian Posts: 2,847
    HaydenM wrote:
    Kingstonian wrote:
    Interesting to see so many politicians saying it is outrageous, and that Parliament should be kept open to allow debate on Brexit, but what have those debates conjured up so far? Debates in Parliament really aren't going to structure a deal that a majority would vote for, because too many politicians from all sides are doing all in their power to resist Brexit altogether despite it being democratically decided that the country would leave.

    I suspect part of this is Boris showing the EU that he is deadly serious - before they were dealing with a PM that wouldn't stare at them to see who blinks first, but he will, so perhaps that will prove to be a forcing function. I guess it is worth a try, everything else the UK government has tried to negotiate a workable deal has failed so a bit of brinksmanship has to be worth a shot.

    I voted Remain, by the way, so the above isn't from someone that was or is a diehard Leaver........

    On the first bit, it's totally beside the point. Proroguing parliament is outrageous and sets a dangerous precedent regardless of what they were going to do with the time. They could spend it pulling their heads out of their arses which would be a good start.

    I agree with the second bit, I think this helps him whip up some sort of Deal but No Deal type arrangement.



    I think we all know that there is zero hope of politicians pulling their heads out of their arses, whether Parliament is open or not !!!
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,154
    TheBigBean wrote:
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    Can we agree that any argument that says - this is entirely normal and is just what any incoming government would do, this is an entirely normal situation, "Is it Brexitting? I hadn't noticed" - is not made in good faith?

    In the absence of the Brexit deadline it would be completely normal. The Brexit deadline tests a good faith argument somewhat which is the point I think you are making.

    "In the absence of that anvil falling towards my head, my decision to stay standing here would be completely normal."
  • haydenm
    haydenm Posts: 2,997
    rjsterry wrote:
    HaydenM wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    Not sure I follow you there Bally. What are you saying he hasn't done?

    They were talking about him proroguing over the deadline to stop any possible intervention, whereas this stops short. IBS made that point in the interview also, the interviewer said that if this has nothing to do with brexit, why is it weeks longer than any other time this has happened? He ignored it and started berating MPs again (which I have a bit of sympathy for)
    Not sure they were all being that specific and yes there will be a fortnight of parliament before 31st October. I'm sure that that will make all the difference.

    I agree, it's like this so he can pretend it's not because of brexit which it definitely is. Willfully ignorant to think otherwise. Interesting stats of the willfully ignorant below:

    A snap YouGov poll conducted on Wednesday found 47% of British adults thought the decision was unacceptable, with 27% saying it was acceptable and 27% unsure.

    But it found the suspension was supported by 51% of people who voted Leave, with 52% of Conservative voters also approving of the move.
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,154
    TheBigBean wrote:
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    Can we agree that any argument that says - this is entirely normal and is just what any incoming government would do, this is an entirely normal situation, "Is it Brexitting? I hadn't noticed" - is not made in good faith?

    In the absence of the Brexit deadline it would be completely normal. The Brexit deadline tests a good faith argument somewhat which is the point I think you are making.

    Wouldn't the "normal" thing be to have a recess which is agreed by Parliament for the conferences, and then have a suspension for the queen's speech? There not being a sitting Parliament for that long by decision of the government is not normal. So even if you want to do the mental contortions required to ignore the approaching deadline, it doesn't add up. But there's no point in doing those contortions, because we all know why it's being done.

    (And even its bad faith defenders like IDS agree it is for "only" 4 days more than it would have been, which is quite a lot out of the possible number of days before Halloween.)
  • john80
    john80 Posts: 2,965
    TailWindHome wrote:
    john80 wrote:
    It is a little bit amusing that parliament taking a break is a affront to democracy yet an overwhelming majority of MP's voting for article 50 then spending three years doing their best to prevent the UK leaving the EU after they asked the nation in a fairly well publicised referendum is democratic.

    Elected representatives holding the government to account is entirely democratic.

    And I am sure that a few of them will suffer the consequences of their decision at the next general election. When they are holding the government to account when it is trying to leave and deliver the outcome of a referendum by stopping it repeatedly I am not seeing how this is overly democratic but each to their own.
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,154
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    PM who wasn't leader at a general election, in charge of a party without a majority, goes to the unelected monarch to ask her to shut down parliament to prevent the elected representatives being heard before a deadline. The EU is so antidemocratic to allow this kind of thing from one of its members.

    I forgot the bit about it being one old Etonian sending a monocle wearing old Etonian to the Queen's castle to ask for it.
  • hopkinb
    hopkinb Posts: 7,129
    john80 wrote:
    TailWindHome wrote:
    john80 wrote:
    It is a little bit amusing that parliament taking a break is a affront to democracy yet an overwhelming majority of MP's voting for article 50 then spending three years doing their best to prevent the UK leaving the EU after they asked the nation in a fairly well publicised referendum is democratic.

    Elected representatives holding the government to account is entirely democratic.

    And I am sure that a few of them will suffer the consequences of their decision at the next general election. When they are holding the government to account when it is trying to leave and deliver the outcome of a referendum by stopping it repeatedly I am not seeing how this is overly democratic but each to their own.


    MPs are not delegates of their constituents, they never have been.

    There were several tory rebels who defied the whip and voted against the government's withdrawal agreement for ideological reasons. Do they attract your ire as well?
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 21,918
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    TheBigBean wrote:
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    Can we agree that any argument that says - this is entirely normal and is just what any incoming government would do, this is an entirely normal situation, "Is it Brexitting? I hadn't noticed" - is not made in good faith?

    In the absence of the Brexit deadline it would be completely normal. The Brexit deadline tests a good faith argument somewhat which is the point I think you are making.

    Wouldn't the "normal" thing be to have a recess which is agreed by Parliament for the conferences, and then have a suspension for the queen's speech? There not being a sitting Parliament for that long by decision of the government is not normal. So even if you want to do the mental contortions required to ignore the approaching deadline, it doesn't add up. But there's no point in doing those contortions, because we all know why it's being done.

    (And even its bad faith defenders like IDS agree it is for "only" 4 days more than it would have been, which is quite a lot out of the possible number of days before Halloween.)

    Yes, but then I could see it being quite practical to do it before the conferences, so I doubt there would have been many complaints. It is all a bit hypothetical though as you say.

    Every year there are complaints about the lack of time between the summer recess and the conference recess.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    TheBigBean wrote:
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    TheBigBean wrote:
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    Can we agree that any argument that says - this is entirely normal and is just what any incoming government would do, this is an entirely normal situation, "Is it Brexitting? I hadn't noticed" - is not made in good faith?

    In the absence of the Brexit deadline it would be completely normal. The Brexit deadline tests a good faith argument somewhat which is the point I think you are making.

    Wouldn't the "normal" thing be to have a recess which is agreed by Parliament for the conferences, and then have a suspension for the queen's speech? There not being a sitting Parliament for that long by decision of the government is not normal. So even if you want to do the mental contortions required to ignore the approaching deadline, it doesn't add up. But there's no point in doing those contortions, because we all know why it's being done.

    (And even its bad faith defenders like IDS agree it is for "only" 4 days more than it would have been, which is quite a lot out of the possible number of days before Halloween.)

    Yes, but then I could see it being quite practical to do it before the conferences, so I doubt there would have been many complaints. It is all a bit hypothetical though as you say.

    Every year there are complaints about the lack of time between the summer recess and the conference recess.

    Prorogation does not equal recess.

    They are quite different.
    _
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,154
    TheBigBean wrote:
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    TheBigBean wrote:
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    Can we agree that any argument that says - this is entirely normal and is just what any incoming government would do, this is an entirely normal situation, "Is it Brexitting? I hadn't noticed" - is not made in good faith?

    In the absence of the Brexit deadline it would be completely normal. The Brexit deadline tests a good faith argument somewhat which is the point I think you are making.

    Wouldn't the "normal" thing be to have a recess which is agreed by Parliament for the conferences, and then have a suspension for the queen's speech? There not being a sitting Parliament for that long by decision of the government is not normal. So even if you want to do the mental contortions required to ignore the approaching deadline, it doesn't add up. But there's no point in doing those contortions, because we all know why it's being done.

    (And even its bad faith defenders like IDS agree it is for "only" 4 days more than it would have been, which is quite a lot out of the possible number of days before Halloween.)

    Yes, but then I could see it being quite practical to do it before the conferences, so I doubt there would have been many complaints. It is all a bit hypothetical though as you say.

    Every year there are complaints about the lack of time between the summer recess and the conference recess.

    No point trying to justify it as being just normal procedure. We all know.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    TheBigBean wrote:
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    TheBigBean wrote:
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    Can we agree that any argument that says - this is entirely normal and is just what any incoming government would do, this is an entirely normal situation, "Is it Brexitting? I hadn't noticed" - is not made in good faith?

    In the absence of the Brexit deadline it would be completely normal. The Brexit deadline tests a good faith argument somewhat which is the point I think you are making.

    Wouldn't the "normal" thing be to have a recess which is agreed by Parliament for the conferences, and then have a suspension for the queen's speech? There not being a sitting Parliament for that long by decision of the government is not normal. So even if you want to do the mental contortions required to ignore the approaching deadline, it doesn't add up. But there's no point in doing those contortions, because we all know why it's being done.

    (And even its bad faith defenders like IDS agree it is for "only" 4 days more than it would have been, which is quite a lot out of the possible number of days before Halloween.)

    Yes, but then I could see it being quite practical to do it before the conferences, so I doubt there would have been many complaints. It is all a bit hypothetical though as you say.

    Every year there are complaints about the lack of time between the summer recess and the conference recess.

    Prorogation does not equal recess.

    They are quite different.

    can you explain the difference as most media do not seem to have picked up on this
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 21,918
    Rick Chasey wrote:

    Prorogation does not equal recess.

    They are quite different.

    You could justify why recess + prorogation is materially different from one long prorogation. As standalone things, they are different as one kills all the bills progressing through parliament, but it is not clear to me that a recess + prorogation is any different to one long prorogation.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,558
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    TheBigBean wrote:
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    TheBigBean wrote:
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    Can we agree that any argument that says - this is entirely normal and is just what any incoming government would do, this is an entirely normal situation, "Is it Brexitting? I hadn't noticed" - is not made in good faith?

    In the absence of the Brexit deadline it would be completely normal. The Brexit deadline tests a good faith argument somewhat which is the point I think you are making.

    Wouldn't the "normal" thing be to have a recess which is agreed by Parliament for the conferences, and then have a suspension for the queen's speech? There not being a sitting Parliament for that long by decision of the government is not normal. So even if you want to do the mental contortions required to ignore the approaching deadline, it doesn't add up. But there's no point in doing those contortions, because we all know why it's being done.

    (And even its bad faith defenders like IDS agree it is for "only" 4 days more than it would have been, which is quite a lot out of the possible number of days before Halloween.)

    Yes, but then I could see it being quite practical to do it before the conferences, so I doubt there would have been many complaints. It is all a bit hypothetical though as you say.

    Every year there are complaints about the lack of time between the summer recess and the conference recess.

    No point trying to justify it as being just normal procedure. We all know.
    As posted previously it's a result of the weakness of his position. Perhaps I'm being too generous, but he knows he doesn't have a majority to take things forward through conventional means so he needs to try something radical to not be the guy that steered us into the rocks. One thought is that the tactics are more about showing MPs that he's serious than the EU (they have already assumed we're leaving without a deal). Having held a metaphorical gun to their heads, I suspect he could get a minimally tweaked WA over the line in spite of the ERG.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    TheBigBean wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:

    Prorogation does not equal recess.

    They are quite different.

    You could justify why recess + prorogation is materially different from one long prorogation. As standalone things, they are different as one kills all the bills progressing through parliament, but it is not clear to me that a recess + prorogation is any different to one long prorogation.

    MPs have a say over one but not the other for starters.
    _
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 43,463
    Ballysmate wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    Worth recapping what assorted cabinet ministers said about proroguing parliament.
    Liz Truss
    “He wants to bring parliament with him,” she said. She was asked: “He’s definitely ruling out proroguing or suspending parliament, is that right?” Her answer was: “That’s right.”
    Matt Hancock
    goes against everything those men who waded onto those beaches fought & died for – and I will not have it
    Amber Rudd
    The idea of leaving the EU to take back more control into parliament and to consider the idea of closing parliament to do that is the most extraordinary idea I’ve ever heard,
    Sajid Javid
    You don't deliver democracy by trashing democracy.' - you can't just shut down parliament
    Michael Gove
    I think it will be wrong for many reasons. I think it would not be true to the best traditions of British democracy
    Nicky Morgan
    You cannot say you are going to take back control … and then go: ‘Oh, by the way, we are just going to shut parliament down for a couple of months, so we are just going to drift out on a no deal
    Andrea Leadsom
    Asked in July if she would go along with a plan to suspend parliament to ensure a no-deal Brexit, Leadsom, a leading supporter of Boris Johnson, and now the business secretary, said: “No I don’t believe I would and I don’t believe it would happen.”

    He hasn't done so though has he? Those quotes. I assume are in relation to proroguing to force through a no deal brexit.
    If he had, Parliament would return in November.
    MPs passed a bill in July to expressly preventing him doing so.

    So why has he done it then? The whole 'setting out the new Government's agenda for this session' is plainly nonsense as, until Brexit is resolved, it is significantly reducing parliamentary time for discussing other issues and coming up with policies will be easier once the government has some idea of what the future path is.

Categories