ChatterBank1 min ago
Tonight's The Night
'Downing Street has confirmed Parliament is to be prorogued after the close of business tonight, with MPs to return on the 14th October for a Queen’s Speech.
The Queen’s original order allowed Boris to pick any time between today and the 12th. Hilariously, Bercow has to announce the prorogation order in Parliament, which he won’t be too pleased about'.
The Queen’s original order allowed Boris to pick any time between today and the 12th. Hilariously, Bercow has to announce the prorogation order in Parliament, which he won’t be too pleased about'.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Khandro. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
ah so HERE is the daily Brexit fred
I wondered -- -
like a vase on the mantlepiece - you miss it if it not there
AOG and his daily fear that today will be his last and he will murdered in his bedd that night
Nigh saying something and then saying the opposite a few hours later adding the words - oh do keep up - as she spins like a T-totem
Andie with acres of prose in support of something....
and here it is -
Boris the Bounder bouncing his barls in Baile aht Cliath
( dublin to you and me )
I wondered -- -
like a vase on the mantlepiece - you miss it if it not there
AOG and his daily fear that today will be his last and he will murdered in his bedd that night
Nigh saying something and then saying the opposite a few hours later adding the words - oh do keep up - as she spins like a T-totem
Andie with acres of prose in support of something....
and here it is -
Boris the Bounder bouncing his barls in Baile aht Cliath
( dublin to you and me )
//Yes, you have to admit that Boris Johnson, who has lost control of Parliament, lost control of the election timetable,//
And what do you think he could or should have done differently, Jim?
The country has said it will leave the EU. The EU have produced just one Withdrawal Agreement which is totally unacceptable. They refuse to renegotiate it. What does the UK do? In the latest six month extension precisely nothing has been achieved. All that has happened is that the EU has restated its position (x 99). Do we simply not leave and continue our membership by means of rolling three month extensions?
You said yesterday that he would have done better if he had engaged with Parliament instead of enraging it (or words to that effect). Just how does he engage with a body that steadfastly refuses to accept either of the only two alternatives on offer?
And what do you think he could or should have done differently, Jim?
The country has said it will leave the EU. The EU have produced just one Withdrawal Agreement which is totally unacceptable. They refuse to renegotiate it. What does the UK do? In the latest six month extension precisely nothing has been achieved. All that has happened is that the EU has restated its position (x 99). Do we simply not leave and continue our membership by means of rolling three month extensions?
You said yesterday that he would have done better if he had engaged with Parliament instead of enraging it (or words to that effect). Just how does he engage with a body that steadfastly refuses to accept either of the only two alternatives on offer?
Well, for starters:
1. Don't prorogue Parliament.
2. Don't refer to MPs as collaborators.
3. Don't insist that you have no interest in a General Election, then call for one at the first excuse, thus revealing that to start with you were lying and untrustworthy all along.
4. Don't withdraw the whip from 21 Tory MPs, thus persuading a few others to go and join them, fracturing your own party and destroying any chance of a compromise.
5. *Do* hold meetings with MPs to establish what kind of deal, if any, they will accept and vote for.
6. *Do* actually think of useful and concrete proposals to replace the elements of the present Agreement with the EU that you don't like, so that any further negotiations might actually go somewhere.
I think point 5 is the biggest. I wouldn't care to suggest how successful this would be, but as I see it it would also be a far more effective way to achieve what was likely to be Johnson's aim anyway. Consider: in all likelihood, he will fight an election later this year on a platform of People v. Parliament. What better way to sell that than to have proved that he has made every constructive effort possible to unite Parliament and still come up short? And, who knows, it may have been successful.
But the entire problem has arisen because the last two Prime Ministers have treated Parliament as an enemy despite the simple and obvious fact that only with Parliament's agreement can any progress be made. It's a stunning lack of foresight. I don't deny that Parliament is filled with a lot of Remain MPs, but it was also filled with people who were prepared to concede the general point that the 2016 referendum be respected as long as their concerns over some details were addressed.
1. Don't prorogue Parliament.
2. Don't refer to MPs as collaborators.
3. Don't insist that you have no interest in a General Election, then call for one at the first excuse, thus revealing that to start with you were lying and untrustworthy all along.
4. Don't withdraw the whip from 21 Tory MPs, thus persuading a few others to go and join them, fracturing your own party and destroying any chance of a compromise.
5. *Do* hold meetings with MPs to establish what kind of deal, if any, they will accept and vote for.
6. *Do* actually think of useful and concrete proposals to replace the elements of the present Agreement with the EU that you don't like, so that any further negotiations might actually go somewhere.
I think point 5 is the biggest. I wouldn't care to suggest how successful this would be, but as I see it it would also be a far more effective way to achieve what was likely to be Johnson's aim anyway. Consider: in all likelihood, he will fight an election later this year on a platform of People v. Parliament. What better way to sell that than to have proved that he has made every constructive effort possible to unite Parliament and still come up short? And, who knows, it may have been successful.
But the entire problem has arisen because the last two Prime Ministers have treated Parliament as an enemy despite the simple and obvious fact that only with Parliament's agreement can any progress be made. It's a stunning lack of foresight. I don't deny that Parliament is filled with a lot of Remain MPs, but it was also filled with people who were prepared to concede the general point that the 2016 referendum be respected as long as their concerns over some details were addressed.
Maybe if you ignore it, it will go away.
Suspending parliament will not make Johnson’s problems go away - it will make things worse.
You will have a bunch of Conservative rebels frustrated at being disenfranchised, and plotting mischief.
Then there is a United Opposition, who are cooperating with each other to achieve their collective goals. They see a mortally wounded Government, and like Jackals, they are surveying their prey for the best time to go in for the kill.
Then there is the new Cabinet, no sooner have they got their kicking boots on and the game is cancelled for 5 weeks. The devil will find work for idle hands to do.
Then there are backbench Tories, now forced to see more of their angry constituents (not to mention their wives or husbands). An unhappy membership is never good for the smooth running of a party.
The EU look on perplexed and bemused. Waiting to see if Boris & Dom Show can possible get any worse (It can).
Then there are us, the hapless electorate. Shut out and both baffled and fed up by it all. Guessing what rules, conventions and procedures will get ripped up today.
When will it all end? , we murmur.
Suspending parliament will not make Johnson’s problems go away - it will make things worse.
You will have a bunch of Conservative rebels frustrated at being disenfranchised, and plotting mischief.
Then there is a United Opposition, who are cooperating with each other to achieve their collective goals. They see a mortally wounded Government, and like Jackals, they are surveying their prey for the best time to go in for the kill.
Then there is the new Cabinet, no sooner have they got their kicking boots on and the game is cancelled for 5 weeks. The devil will find work for idle hands to do.
Then there are backbench Tories, now forced to see more of their angry constituents (not to mention their wives or husbands). An unhappy membership is never good for the smooth running of a party.
The EU look on perplexed and bemused. Waiting to see if Boris & Dom Show can possible get any worse (It can).
Then there are us, the hapless electorate. Shut out and both baffled and fed up by it all. Guessing what rules, conventions and procedures will get ripped up today.
When will it all end? , we murmur.
//*Do* hold meetings with MPs to establish what kind of deal, if any, they will accept and vote for. //
to what end? if the PM were to engage with parliament and they with him, that would involve a lot of everyone's time and effort, and for what?
the EU will not renegotiate. and anyone saying "oh they will" won't change anything. they will not renegotiate.
to what end? if the PM were to engage with parliament and they with him, that would involve a lot of everyone's time and effort, and for what?
the EU will not renegotiate. and anyone saying "oh they will" won't change anything. they will not renegotiate.
Oh, and another thing: Johnson is now in a situation where he can, in principle, be trapped in office until 2022, if Corbyn so chooses. Political and practical reasons tell us that this won't happen, of course. But, short of suspending Parliament altogether until the next election, there is simply no way out for Johnson that doesn't involve either working with Parliament or stepping away altogether, which, he might reasonably think, is even more of a risk: the next in line for the premiership should Johnson step down is clearly Corbyn.
In those circumstances the strong-man routine that Johnson has tried so far is going to be increasingly counterproductive, just driving more and more of the support he needs away while having less and less of a chance to take the escape route he has relied upon, namely an early election.
Finally, Johnson's preferred option remains, he claims, in negotiating a modified deal. Well, that Deal has no chance in hell of passing as long as it is what *he* wants rather than what Parliament does. So he would still have to work with Parliament.
All of this mess is ultimately Theresa May's fault; she was stupid enough to call an early election in 2017, and then conduct the campaign in such a way as to surrender her majority rather than increase it. But Johnson is saddled with that problem now and so far his solution seems to be compounding May's mistake of trying to shut Parliament out, rather than heed her final, belated message that "compromise is not a dirty word".
In those circumstances the strong-man routine that Johnson has tried so far is going to be increasingly counterproductive, just driving more and more of the support he needs away while having less and less of a chance to take the escape route he has relied upon, namely an early election.
Finally, Johnson's preferred option remains, he claims, in negotiating a modified deal. Well, that Deal has no chance in hell of passing as long as it is what *he* wants rather than what Parliament does. So he would still have to work with Parliament.
All of this mess is ultimately Theresa May's fault; she was stupid enough to call an early election in 2017, and then conduct the campaign in such a way as to surrender her majority rather than increase it. But Johnson is saddled with that problem now and so far his solution seems to be compounding May's mistake of trying to shut Parliament out, rather than heed her final, belated message that "compromise is not a dirty word".
mushroom: "to what end [should Johnson talk with Parliament]?" -- I already answered this. Either the talks succeed, or Johnson makes certain that failure is Parliament's responsibility. In either case, Johnson gains control of the narrative.
TTT: I know you support this VBQC crap but it's still completely inaccurate. People have a different idea of what the best route forward is for the UK. Disagreement over this should not see one side or the other condemned as collaborators. It's a tragedy of modern politics, and of Brexit in particular, that the debate has been reduced to that level.
TTT: I know you support this VBQC crap but it's still completely inaccurate. People have a different idea of what the best route forward is for the UK. Disagreement over this should not see one side or the other condemned as collaborators. It's a tragedy of modern politics, and of Brexit in particular, that the debate has been reduced to that level.
jim; "TTT: I know you support this VBQC crap but it's still completely inaccurate. People have a different idea of what the best route forward is for the UK. Disagreement over this should not see one side or the other condemned as collaborators. It's a tragedy of modern politics, and of Brexit in particular, that the debate has been reduced to that level. " - but you play into the hands of the enemy, no doubt the original V(F)B and collaborator types though what they were doing was right too. I'm still open to better suggestions. if only such determination could be brought to bear on our side.
Also, I don't think I have said that the EU won't budge at all. They won't budge on the principle behind the Backstop, ie they require a legal guarantee that the open nature of the Irish border will be preserved. If the UK can find an alternative solution that successfully addresses the EU's and Ireland's concerns whilst allaying the UK's then the picture becomes different.
The real way to get the EU to budge though is to persuade them that budging will be worth it. So far the Brexiteers' strategy has been to rely on No deal as a threat, but that is doubly failing because firstly it's not acceptable to Parliament (or the majority in the UK), and secondly hasn't proven to be much of a threat to the EU anyway.
I don't propose Parliament cancelling Article 50, at least not without an explicit mandate from the people to do so. I suggested elsewhere that asking for perpetual extensions might actually be an idea worth trying as an alternative "threat": tell the EU that either we resolve this, or the UK will drag their feet (and potentially mess the EU around by interfering in EU Parliament, EU Council, EU Commission decisions, etc), or the EU must trigger a No Deal.
The real way to get the EU to budge though is to persuade them that budging will be worth it. So far the Brexiteers' strategy has been to rely on No deal as a threat, but that is doubly failing because firstly it's not acceptable to Parliament (or the majority in the UK), and secondly hasn't proven to be much of a threat to the EU anyway.
I don't propose Parliament cancelling Article 50, at least not without an explicit mandate from the people to do so. I suggested elsewhere that asking for perpetual extensions might actually be an idea worth trying as an alternative "threat": tell the EU that either we resolve this, or the UK will drag their feet (and potentially mess the EU around by interfering in EU Parliament, EU Council, EU Commission decisions, etc), or the EU must trigger a No Deal.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank28 mins ago
Asma Al-Assad Cannot Return To The Uk
News30 mins ago
Jokes37 mins ago
