BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
https://twitter.com/ProfMarkElliott/sta ... 21440?s=19darkhairedlord wrote:briantrumpet wrote:John Major voicing his worries tonight:My fear is that the government will seek to bypass statute law, by passing an order of council to suspend the [Benn] Act until after 31 October. It is important to note that an order of council can be passed by privy councillors – that is government ministers – without involving HM the Queen. I should warn the prime minister that – if this route is taken – it will be in flagrant defiance of parliament and utterly disrespectful to the supreme court. It would be a piece of political chicanery that no one should ever forgive or forget.
I've no idea if Parliament would be able to find any mechanism to prevent or reverse that, but I imagine it would provoke a constitutional crisis the likes of which none of us has ever seen: a minority government using an arcane mechanism to bypass parliament, to change the status of the nation.
If that's what bj does I suppose there needs to be a vonc and temporary national gvmt to get it done. Perhaps a may-deal vs revoke referendum to close then ge.
Long thread on why what Major has said isn't exactly clear and probably wouldn't work.
TL;DR: Act of Parliament trumps everything else, constitutionally.0 -
That's obviously not to say they won't try it and get the Supreme Court involved again0
-
You beat me to it. I wouldn't put anything past them.bobmcstuff wrote:That's obviously not to say they won't try it and get the Supreme Court involved again0 -
So they can claim people vs the elite?briantrumpet wrote:
You beat me to it. I wouldn't put anything past them.bobmcstuff wrote:That's obviously not to say they won't try it and get the Supreme Court involved again
As in Bullingdon Eton boys are standing up for their fellow commoners...0 -
As has been noted by others, Johnson's offensive performance in the Commons was an odd one, if he really is trying to get anything passed by a chamber where the numbers are against him... unless the tactics are designed for other ends.darkhairedlord wrote:
So they can claim people vs the elite?briantrumpet wrote:
You beat me to it. I wouldn't put anything past them.bobmcstuff wrote:That's obviously not to say they won't try it and get the Supreme Court involved again
As in Bullingdon Eton boys are standing up for their fellow commoners...0 -
briantrumpet wrote:
As has been noted by others, Johnson's offensive performance in the Commons was an odd one, if he really is trying to get anything passed by a chamber where the numbers are against him... unless the tactics are designed for other ends.darkhairedlord wrote:
So they can claim people vs the elite?briantrumpet wrote:
You beat me to it. I wouldn't put anything past them.bobmcstuff wrote:That's obviously not to say they won't try it and get the Supreme Court involved again
As in Bullingdon Eton boys are standing up for their fellow commoners...
He's fighting an election. Nout to do with parliament.
Expect more of the same at the EU summit.0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:Cummings making out it’s going better than expected.
Presumably he means electorally.
He just means it's going better than expected.0 -
darkhairedlord wrote:
Blame Cummings all you like, he's not the pm, he's not even an mp, they have all gone along with it.Pross wrote:There's no chance of the tone of debate improving whilst Cummings is there. He came across as a right arrogant **** in the run in with the Labour MP. The Labour MP didn't come out to well either with his (paraphrasing) 'it's Cummings, let's go and have a rant at him' but the smug response felt more like 1990s Liam Gallagher than the person advising our PM. If there's any way to Tory party can get rid of him they really ought to.
He's setting the strategy and therefore the tone. His response to an MP telling him he'd received death threats was 'well get Brexit done'. He knows full well that his man and many of his Cabinet are those who have prevented Brexit getting done because it wasn't on their terms.
As others have said the strategy appears to be to create even more alienation and a feeling that the poor old PM is being prevented giving the 'people' what they want by rebels determined to stop Brexit. The Labour MP made the point he had tried to make Brexit happen 3 times already but isn't a nice little rallying Moto like 'get Brexit done', 'surrender bill' etc. that the likes of Coopster lap up and repeat ad nauseum.0 -
TheBigBean wrote:random person internet wrote:Labour and the Lib Dems both managed to hold their conferences while parliament was in session, why can't the Conservatives
That's excellent work.0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:john80 wrote:
Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a form of far right-wing, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and of the economy which came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe.
Posted up for you so you can maybe realise that the left can also do facism. I know you are having a tough time with this.
Your attempt to relate remain/brexit voters to american culture wars of the 1920s is rather amusing though. Hard to know who the conservative/traditionalist are versus the liberal/progressives in this rather tenuous link.
Oh mate. You know the left is the hand which makes an L with the thumb and index?
If helps if you read *all* of the words.
When the tory party looks like it can be authoritarian, wield dictorial power, forcibly supress the opposition or start to regiment behaviour or the economy I will take an interest. The opposition have been doing a good job of being dictorial by ignoring a referendum result after fighting an election saying they would honour it. No brexit means a long term rise of the right which seems to be an inconvenient truth for the remainers.
Dont worry though if we get a whopping labour majority under corbyn and he starts seizing assets and regiment the economy it will be peachy.0 -
john80 wrote:The opposition have been doing a good job of being dictorial by ignoring a referendum result after fighting an election saying they would honour it.
The opposition walked through the same no lobby as the ERG on 3 occasions.
Are the ERG ignoring the referendum?“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
john80 wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:john80 wrote:
Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a form of far right-wing, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and of the economy which came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe.
Posted up for you so you can maybe realise that the left can also do facism. I know you are having a tough time with this.
Your attempt to relate remain/brexit voters to american culture wars of the 1920s is rather amusing though. Hard to know who the conservative/traditionalist are versus the liberal/progressives in this rather tenuous link.
Oh mate. You know the left is the hand which makes an L with the thumb and index?
If helps if you read *all* of the words.
When the tory party looks like it can be authoritarian, wield dictorial power, forcibly supress the opposition or start to regiment behaviour or the economy I will take an interest. The opposition have been doing a good job of being dictorial by ignoring a referendum result after fighting an election saying they would honour it. No brexit means a long term rise of the right which seems to be an inconvenient truth for the remainers.
Dont worry though if we get a whopping labour majority under corbyn and he starts seizing assets and regiment the economy it will be peachy.
No-one has said a left wing Party can't be authoritarian ,there's plenty of history to show it can be, but by definition (the very definition you posted yourself) it cannot be facist. I also haven't seen much support for Labour on this forum either so your last paragraph is a complete strawman presumably to deflect from your massive own goal?0 -
Aw diddums, the opposition MP's who are disrespecting, undermining and playing games with our democracy don't like when the electorate pushes back.
They are quite clearly ducking the electorate and because of this will take a kicking when the electorate finally get consulted for our view on their recent antics.0 -
TailWindHome wrote:john80 wrote:The opposition have been doing a good job of being dictorial by ignoring a referendum result after fighting an election saying they would honour it.
The opposition walked through the same no lobby as the ERG on 3 occasions.
Are the ERG ignoring the referendum?
it is bizarre that voting to leave the EU makes you fascist, traitor thwarting the wishes of the people whereas voting to stay in the EU makes you an heroic spartan
Despite Coopsters best efforts I feel that we do not fully understand how thick/compliant/easily led the average Leave voter is0 -
bobmcstuff wrote:
https://twitter.com/ProfMarkElliott/sta ... 21440?s=19darkhairedlord wrote:briantrumpet wrote:John Major voicing his worries tonight:My fear is that the government will seek to bypass statute law, by passing an order of council to suspend the [Benn] Act until after 31 October. It is important to note that an order of council can be passed by privy councillors – that is government ministers – without involving HM the Queen. I should warn the prime minister that – if this route is taken – it will be in flagrant defiance of parliament and utterly disrespectful to the supreme court. It would be a piece of political chicanery that no one should ever forgive or forget.
I've no idea if Parliament would be able to find any mechanism to prevent or reverse that, but I imagine it would provoke a constitutional crisis the likes of which none of us has ever seen: a minority government using an arcane mechanism to bypass parliament, to change the status of the nation.
If that's what bj does I suppose there needs to be a vonc and temporary national gvmt to get it done. Perhaps a may-deal vs revoke referendum to close then ge.
Long thread on why what Major has said isn't exactly clear and probably wouldn't work.
TL;DR: Act of Parliament trumps everything else, constitutionally.
Corroborated by David Allen Green and Jolyon Maugham. Seems Major is worrying unnecessarily.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Remind me again, how did those MPs get their jobs? There couldn't possibly have been some sort of democratic process could there?Coopster the 1st wrote:Aw diddums, the opposition MP's who are disrespecting, undermining and playing games with our democracy don't like when the electorate pushes back.
As for the electorate pushing back, I'm seeing reckless demagogues trying to whip up a mob, but not much sign of the electorate pushing back: no surprise as there has never been any proof that the majority of the electorate back Brexit.0 -
bompington wrote:no surprise as there has never been any proof that the majority of the electorate back Brexit.
Well that's not true, is it?“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
Coopster the 1st wrote:Aw diddums, the opposition MP's who are disrespecting, undermining and playing games with our democracy don't like when the electorate pushes back.
Are you talking about death threats being sent to MPs' houses and someone trying to smash an MP's windows?0 -
Yes, it is. The ref was evidence that the majority did - not irrefutable proof though. Given all the issues, I don't even think it's particularly strong evidence.TailWindHome wrote:bompington wrote:no surprise as there has never been any proof that the majority of the electorate back Brexit.
Well that's not true, is it?0 -
That's about as poor an argument I've ever read.0
-
Yes, consensus seems to be it wouldn't wash, though it still wouldn't surprise me if they tried it in desperation. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -misplacedbobmcstuff wrote:
https://twitter.com/ProfMarkElliott/sta ... 21440?s=19darkhairedlord wrote:briantrumpet wrote:John Major voicing his worries tonight:My fear is that the government will seek to bypass statute law, by passing an order of council to suspend the [Benn] Act until after 31 October. It is important to note that an order of council can be passed by privy councillors – that is government ministers – without involving HM the Queen. I should warn the prime minister that – if this route is taken – it will be in flagrant defiance of parliament and utterly disrespectful to the supreme court. It would be a piece of political chicanery that no one should ever forgive or forget.
I've no idea if Parliament would be able to find any mechanism to prevent or reverse that, but I imagine it would provoke a constitutional crisis the likes of which none of us has ever seen: a minority government using an arcane mechanism to bypass parliament, to change the status of the nation.
If that's what bj does I suppose there needs to be a vonc and temporary national gvmt to get it done. Perhaps a may-deal vs revoke referendum to close then ge.
Long thread on why what Major has said isn't exactly clear and probably wouldn't work.
TL;DR: Act of Parliament trumps everything else, constitutionally.0 -
KingstonGraham wrote:Coopster the 1st wrote:Aw diddums, the opposition MP's who are disrespecting, undermining and playing games with our democracy don't like when the electorate pushes back.
Are you talking about death threats being sent to MPs' houses and someone trying to smash an MP's windows?
No, these are abhorrent.
What the referenced MP's don't like is their game playing being exposed. For the first time in this Brexit process the Leave side is now matching or winning the narrative and unsurprisingly the losers don't like it up 'em!0 -
Shirley Basso wrote:That's about as poor an argument I've ever read.
to which one do you refer?0 -
OK, so I didn't list all the logic or evidence in favour of it.Shirley Basso wrote:That's about as poor an argument I've ever read.
But, given the giga-words of guff that have been spoken in favour of Brexit, that's a bit rich - insulting even.
The key word is majority. It is true that:
1. The referendum
2. A minority of opinion polls
show more people backing Leave than Remain.
There has never been a majority, i.e. >50%, in favour.
My post was not actually an argument, it was an objectively true statement. You can indeed make a case that the available evidence suggests that a majority backs Brexit, and I could make a case that they don't: and neither of us could prove it.
But you can't claim that there is proof that a majority back Brexit.0 -
KingstonGraham wrote:Coopster the 1st wrote:Aw diddums, the opposition MP's who are disrespecting, undermining and playing games with our democracy don't like when the electorate pushes back.
Are you talking about death threats being sent to MPs' houses and someone trying to smash an MP's windows?
Coopster steals our oxygen again.0 -
bompington wrote:
OK, so I didn't list all the logic or evidence in favour of it.Shirley Basso wrote:That's about as poor an argument I've ever read.
But, given the giga-words of guff that have been spoken in favour of Brexit, that's a bit rich - insulting even.
The key word is majority. It is true that:
1. The referendum
2. A minority of opinion polls
show more people backing Leave than Remain.
There has never been a majority, i.e. >50%, in favour.
My post was not actually an argument, it was an objectively true statement. You can indeed make a case that the available evidence suggests that a majority backs Brexit, and I could make a case that they don't: and neither of us could prove it.
But you can't claim that there is proof that a majority back Brexit.
You could say that every time the UK has held an election. It's a statement of fact but it doesn't get anyone anywhere. A waste of internet bandwidth.0 -
bompington wrote:
OK, so I didn't list all the logic or evidence in favour of it.Shirley Basso wrote:That's about as poor an argument I've ever read.
But, given the giga-words of guff that have been spoken in favour of Brexit, that's a bit rich - insulting even.
The key word is majority. It is true that:
1. The referendum
2. A minority of opinion polls
show more people backing Leave than Remain.
There has never been a majority, i.e. >50%, in favour.
My post was not actually an argument, it was an objectively true statement. You can indeed make a case that the available evidence suggests that a majority backs Brexit, and I could make a case that they don't: and neither of us could prove it.
But you can't claim that there is proof that a majority back Brexit.
The turnout was 72.2% in a referendum before and during which it assumed by both sides that Remain would win.
It could be argued that had the Leave side been favourite there would have been a higher turn out of Remain supporters or it could be argued the other way. But the fact is that only 72.2% of the electorate registered an opinion.
It's also approaching 3.5 years and a huge output of information/misinformation since the event. Many voters have now become eligible to vote since then and many have ceased to be.
I guess the figures are available somewhere but we'll probably never know what difference it makes unless we have another referendum. What fun that would be!0 -
darkhairedlord wrote:Does anyone else see the parallels with '30s Germany. Inflammatory divisive rhetoric, shutting down debate, extending executive power. When is our kristalnacht, 31st October?
The thing is, the vast majority of right-leaning, No Dealers just cannot get themselves mobilised to do any form of effective protest, so the chances of the Essex and Kent Revolutionary Guard getting their carb-soaked, diabetic, nebuliser dependant 4rses onto their mobility scooters or into their Q7s to storm Parliament, let alone setting fire to a park bin is pretty much zero.
The left-leaning remainer however seems to be able to whip-up thousands with a swift Facebook event page.0 -
darkhairedlord wrote:Does anyone else see the parallels with '30s Germany. Inflammatory divisive rhetoric, shutting down debate, extending executive power. When is our kristalnacht, 31st October?
Early days, perhaps? One of the features of National Socialist strategy was to influence the influencers. They would work on individuals whose voice was respected in German society and try to get their party membership. (Eventually, if you wanted to get anywhere in Germany with few exceptions e.g. Hjalmar Schacht, you had to be a party member.)
It started right after WW1 and one group who at that time were influential were, strangely enough, foresters. Forestry was a key industry and foresters were held in esteem and were also teachers in colleges. As time passed Hitler's supporters also targeted students who were urged to report teachers who criticised National Socialism and get them replaced with teachers on message. If Brexit brings hardship that will be exploited by the far right just as it was in Germany.0 -
yes it is, in multiple ways, for instance...TailWindHome wrote:bompington wrote:no surprise as there has never been any proof that the majority of the electorate back Brexit.
Well that's not true, is it?
the leave:remain split was 17,410,742 : 16,141,241, a difference of 1,269,501, which is dwarfed by the number who failed to vote, let alone those who were not allowed to vote, fact is that over 40 million british people did not vote leave, there is no proof of the voting intention of those tens of millions who did not vote or were excluded from voting
the leave campaign provably and materially lied and misrepresented both the status quo and what 'brexit' meant, proving no voter voted for any potential deal presented so far, further proof is that even leavers didn't like the proposed deals
leave did not campaign that brexit meant 'no deal', therefore proving that no voter voted for 'no deal'my bike - faster than god's and twice as shiny0
