Brexit Deal agreed ( updated )

[Victorian]

1 minute ago, Cade said:

If he tries that, then Parliament would call a no-confidence, win it, he'd be replaced by an interim PM who would apply for the extension then after that we have a GE

 

The immediate sticking point is finding an emergency cabinet and leader that would win the second confidence vote in the house.     LD seem determined that Corbyn should not be PM for the period of a few weeks involved.    Labour (rightly) insist that they,  as the largest opposition party,   have the opportunity to lead a cross house group to command confidence and that Corbyn is the party leader,   therefore should be in place.     

 

The LD stance on this is illogogical and damaging.     We're talking about an ultra short term,  caretaker administration.    There is no practical reason to obstruct it.      My guess is that Swinson can see her name up in lights and is holding out for the possibility that she is backed by Labour MPs as an alternative.      

[Beni]

1 hour ago, Cade said:

 

I wouldn't start dancing on his political grave just yet

Johnson is a pragmatic leaver not a fundamentalist. He only supported leave to maximize his chance of getting to No 10, and it worked.

 

Imo, his only goal now is to win a general election on a 'people versus the establishment' ticket. I don't think he cares how Brexit pans out as long as he gets a majority at the inevitable election. 

 

The polls indicate his strategy is working ok so far.

[Jambo, Goodbye]

An hour to go if anyone will be watching. 

 

Watch Parliament Live

[Mikey1874]

12 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

The immediate sticking point is finding an emergency cabinet and leader that would win the second confidence vote in the house.     LD seem determined that Corbyn should not be PM for the period of a few weeks involved.    Labour (rightly) insist that they,  as the largest opposition party,   have the opportunity to lead a cross house group to command confidence and that Corbyn is the party leader,   therefore should be in place.     

 

The LD stance on this is illogogical and damaging.     We're talking about an ultra short term,  caretaker administration.    There is no practical reason to obstruct it.      My guess is that Swinson can see her name up in lights and is holding out for the possibility that she is backed by Labour MPs as an alternative.      

 

Not sure what Swinson's thinking is aside from appeal to voters based on Corbyn's (outside election campaign) low popularity. 

 

She must know that Labour are highly disciplined and united when it comes to key votes. Possibly aiming to get a load of Labour MPs to join Lib Dems.

Edited September 25, 2019 by Mikey1874

[Victorian]

1 minute ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Not sure what Swinson's thinking is aside from appeal to voters based on Corbyn's (outside election campaign) low popularity. 

 

She must know that Labour are highly disciplined and united when it comes to key votes. 

 

I think it's about naked personal glory,   albeit a very brief and completely pointless personal glory.      Sees (assumes) Corbyn is unpopular.    Thinks she is popular.    Doesn't like the idea of the less popular,   less deserving person being in the spotlight.    Would rather settle for another Labour figure assuming the position because at least then,   the less deserving party leader is denied the glory she isn't getting.

[Cade]

32 Urgent Questions, 5 Government Statements and 1 SO24 application to wade through today.

 

[Mikey1874]

12 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

I think it's about naked personal glory,   albeit a very brief and completely pointless personal glory.      Sees (assumes) Corbyn is unpopular.    Thinks she is popular.    Doesn't like the idea of the less popular,   less deserving person being in the spotlight.    Would rather settle for another Labour figure assuming the position because at least then,   the less deserving party leader is denied the glory she isn't getting.

 

As my late edit the whole strategy could be based on splitting Labour, getting more MPs to leave for Lib Dems.

 

I do not think this is realistic. A Labour Government will be more holistic in representing the cross section of views. Plenty jobs and worthwhile causes for more right / central positions. Chuka Umunna isn't very representative. Just my view though. 

Edited September 25, 2019 by Mikey1874

[Mikey1874]

6 minutes ago, Cade said:

32 Urgent Questions, 5 Government Statements and 1 SO24 application to wade through today.

 

 

Including PM

 

 

[DETTY29]

 

56 minutes ago, Cade said:

If he tries that, then Parliament would call a no-confidence, win it, he'd be replaced by an interim PM who would apply for the extension then after that we have a GE.

Boris would then be chased through the courts for contempt and end up in tommy robinson's old cell for a few months

Yep, but vote of no confidence will not happen anytime before the EU Council sits in mid October and the PMs position is more clear on how he is going to proceed.

 

I doubt however there is much chance  a high ranking politician will do anything that has a high chance they will end up in the slammer.

Edited September 25, 2019 by DETTY29

[The Real Maroonblood]

Johnson will probably mumble and bumble his way through this mess he’s created.

[Mikey1874]

28 minutes ago, Cade said:

32 Urgent Questions, 5 Government Statements and 1 SO24 application to wade through today.

 

 

Will be a few questions picked

 

First is Joanna Cherry asking about the legal advice to Government 

[Cade]

I highly recommend watching BoJo's speech to the UN yesterday.

A mumbling, bumbling mess, including his trademark greek mythology gobshite.

[Victorian]

1 minute ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

As my late edit the whole strategy could be based on splitting Labour, getting more MPs to leave for Lib Dems.

 

I do think this isn't realistic. A Labour Government will be more holistic in representing the cross section of views. Plenty jobs and worthwhile causes for more right / central positions. Chuka Umunna isn't very representative. Just my view though. 

 

The LD raison d'etra is and always has been to occupy a balance of power position.     They aren't remotely interested in attempting to achieve a position of majority power.    They're all about trying to maximise their Westminster bloc in order to become the balance of power.      They have no policy platform or philosophy to offer.    Their Brexit / election strategy is to make entirely notional promises about reversing Brexit in the event of majority rule.     A policy that can never be enacted.      In our crazy politics,   people will vote for it and they'll win a few seats.    The policy is to command enough vote share to enable a hung parliament with them holding a large enough bloc to be the balance of power and end up in coalition or a confidence & supply deal.      To do what?    To largely facilitate someone else's policies.     To vote for things they say they oppose and pretend they're compromising.     To claim credit for a few minor policies of little consequence.     

 

The LDs are the wasps of the political arena.     They do **** all and have no use to anyone.

[...a bit disco]

More butthurt on this thread than the aftermath of a midnight daisy chain at HMP Edinburgh.

[Brighton Jambo]

56 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

I think it's about naked personal glory,   albeit a very brief and completely pointless personal glory.      Sees (assumes) Corbyn is unpopular.    Thinks she is popular.    Doesn't like the idea of the less popular,   less deserving person being in the spotlight.    Would rather settle for another Labour figure assuming the position because at least then,   the less deserving party leader is denied the glory she isn't getting.

I think the Lib Dem’s are terrified of being seen to be the ones who put Corbyn into number ten, even for a short time, and then held accountable for it for ever more.  

 

A number of my more sensible reminder friends have said they would rather no deal than see him ever walk into number ten as prime minister.  

 

Im sure there is polling data that says likewise.  Don’t underestimate how terrified people are of JC in number 10.  I think Swinson is playing to that. 

[Cade]

.......as opposed to all the shining stars of politics in the Tory party who would make for an excellent PM?

 

 

LibDems are just attention seeking arseholes with no morals and no policies

[Mikey1874]

Attorney General speaking now.

 

Considering publishing his advice. 

Edited September 25, 2019 by Mikey1874

[Mikey1874]

Theresa May got 42% of vote in 2017

Jeremy Corbyn got 40%

 

Not bad for 2 shit, unpopular leaders. 

[Victorian]

5 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

I think the Lib Dem’s are terrified of being seen to be the ones who put Corbyn into number ten, even for a short time, and then held accountable for it for ever more.  

 

A number of my more sensible reminder friends have said they would rather no deal than see him ever walk into number ten as prime minister.  

 

Im sure there is polling data that says likewise.  Don’t underestimate how terrified people are of JC in number 10.  I think Swinson is playing to that. 

 

Ok.  Tell your friends they're gullible idiots.     

[Cade]

Cox avoiding Cherry's question.

 

Answering something he wasn't asked. (Which was if cabinet members asked to see the legal advice but were denied)

Told again what the question was.

Evaded it again.

Bang to rights.

[I P Knightley]

Listening to this Attorney General, I'm very tempted to look up some car insurance. 

[DETTY29]

Just now, I P Knightley said:

Listening to this Attorney General, I'm very tempted to look up some car insurance. 

Oh, yes.

[gjcc]

Just now, I P Knightley said:

Listening to this Attorney General, I'm very tempted to look up some car insurance. 

 

Oh yes. 

[Brighton Jambo]

15 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Ok.  Tell your friends they're gullible idiots.     

Will do.

 

then will leave it to the wider masses to prove how unpopular Jeremy Corbyn is in the election.

 

its funny the party that has stated categorically that they will overturn brexit will risk a no deal as they see that as less damaging then letting him into number ten.

 

tells you everything you need to know about how bad that man is for the labour cause.  

[DETTY29]

1 minute ago, DETTY29 said:

Oh, yes.

 

1 minute ago, gjcc said:

 

Oh yes. 

haha

[Brighton Jambo]

21 minutes ago, Cade said:

.......as opposed to all the shining stars of politics in the Tory party who would make for an excellent PM?

 

 

LibDems are just attention seeking arseholes with no morals and no policies

Ken Clarke would be a good choice as interim leader to revoke article 50.  Anyone who disagrees a needs to take the Tory hating lenses off.

 

equally there are a number of labour MP’s who would command the respect of the house.  

[Mysterion]

2 minutes ago, I P Knightley said:

Listening to this Attorney General, I'm very tempted to look up some car insurance. 

 

He has a tremendous voice.

[Taffin]

21 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

Theresa May got 42% of vote in 2017

Jeremy Corbyn got 40%

 

Not bad for 2 shit, unpopular leaders. 

 

Conservative got 42% and Labour got 40%

[DETTY29]

Going back to yesterday's decison and notably the comment from Lady Hale of 'blank sheet of paper' as to why prorogue was required for Queens Speech.

 

It generally takes days to put a Queens Speech together, not 5 weeks.

 

Ergo, if the competence of this government is to takes weeks longer than the norm how can it be expected to realistically expect to get some form of EU exit agreement in a few weeks that will take as we have seen nowhere in years.

 

AG has been thrown under a bus.

Edited September 25, 2019 by DETTY29

[Cade]

Tories had an 8 seat majority.

Labour were polling at 22%.

May called an election.

Labour ended up with 40%.

Tories lost their majority.

Hilarity ensued.

[Justin Z]

I have to admit, as an American, it would be . . . highly irregular for an Attorney General, a member of the Executive, to speak the way he just did about a house of the Legislative, in the States.

Well, until the Trump administration.

[Mikey1874]

Just now, Justin Z said:

I have to admit, as an American, it would be . . . highly irregular for an Attorney General, a member of the Executive, to speak the way he just did about a house of the Legislative, in the States.

Well, until the Trump administration.

 

It was a nice argument 

 

But it's his own colleagues who voted May's Brexit deal down. Blamed Labour instead. 

[Justin Z]

3 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

It was a nice argument 

 

But it's his own colleagues who voted May's Brexit deal down. Blamed Labour instead. 

 

Yeah. My feeling of strangeness isn't about the argument. It's about the role of the Attorney General, who is in this system now acting as a cheerleader for his party, whereas s/he is at least nominally a representative only of the sovereign, which in the US is the People, because s/he is appointed and not elected to that post or any post in order to become part of the government.

[Cade]

5 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

It was a nice argument 

 

But it's his own colleagues who voted May's Brexit deal down. Blamed Labour instead. 

Correct.

Tory rebels (and May's arrogant snap election shambles) are the reason nothing has gotten through.

Labour are just doing what opposition does.

[Justin Z]

Also, this pissant former lawyer disagrees with the Tory assertion that the Supreme Court has invented a new constitutional rule. The decision, as I read it, was based in the longstanding, historical principle of parliamentary sovereignty and the general constitutional concept of the separation of powers, as well as the idea that it is Parliament's role to monitor and check the Government. This attempt to call it new and a creation is at best sour grapes and at worst an insidious attempt to undermine the authority of the judiciary in, if you'll forgive me, a very British way--as indirectly and politely and couched in respectful language as possible.

 

Edit: While giving every deference and outward sign of respect toward the judiciary as possible.

 

Edit 2: Caroline Lucas just basically said this in a different way and made a good initial case for a written constitution or radical change to the constitutional order.

 

Edited September 25, 2019 by Justin Z

[Brighton Jambo]

3 minutes ago, Cade said:

Correct.

Tory rebels (and May's arrogant snap election shambles) are the reason nothing has gotten through.

Labour are just doing what opposition does.

Except normally they provide an alternative to the electorate.  After nearly a decade they are further away from power than ever.

 

A number of labour MP’s have admitted in the last election that they resorted to telling voters on the doorstep that it was okay to vote for them as they wouldn’t win a majority so Corbyn wouldn’t be PM.  Tells you everything.

 

Shambles of a Toxic Tory government miles ahead in the polls, resurgent Lib Dem’s almost polling level with labour, SNP will continue to ensure labour are wiped off the map in Scotland, a former stronghold.

 

Yet all those millions of voters are wrong, labour are doing fine!  Wake the **** Up and realise this is your big chance and you are going to blow it! 

[Victorian]

Are we really in for yet another chapter of mass whataboutery from the Tory gravy train?      Boris and his thugs continue to bluster, deny, deflect and the passengers all cheer while the train continues to tear the country a new arsehole.

 

[The Real Maroonblood]

10 minutes ago, Victorian said:

Are we really in for yet another chapter of mass whataboutery from the Tory gravy train?      Boris and his thugs continue to bluster, deny, deflect and the passengers all cheer while the train continues to tear the country a new arsehole.

 

I watched some of it.

The government are a total shambles.

The AG dearie me.

[Victorian]

Cox said that parliament is a disgrace and a spineless gang.     

 

From the guy who provided the legal case to deceive the Queen and who has previously been voted in contempt of parliament.

 

Wow.     A man with no moral conscience.     An out of control gangster government mouthpiece venting his poison.     We need rid of these ***** very very soon.

[The Mighty Thor]

11 minutes ago, Victorian said:

Are we really in for yet another chapter of mass whataboutery from the Tory gravy train?      Boris and his thugs continue to bluster, deny, deflect and the passengers all cheer while the train continues to tear the country a new arsehole.

 

It's started.

 

The revised groupthink is that this is a new law and the government did nothing wrong. 

 

Every last man jack of them is now spouting this new mantra.

 

It's a new law. 

 

Boris hasn't done anything wrong.

 

There's nothing to apologise for.

 

rinse and repeat.

[Victorian]

1 minute ago, The Mighty Thor said:

It's started.

 

The revised groupthink is that this is a new law and the government did nothing wrong. 

 

Every last man jack of them is now spouting this new mantra.

 

It's a new law. 

 

Boris hasn't done anything wrong.

 

There's nothing to apologise for.

 

rinse and repeat.

 

It's a bit Rangers-esque.      We didn't break the rules.    The rules weren't robust enough.    If we've broken your rules,  it's your fault for having the wrong rules.       

 

Psychopaths.

[Victorian]

Cox also saying :

 

1.    Judiciary is and should be independent.

 

2.    Judiciary appointments may have to come under political scrutiny.

 

Well that's two wholly different messages matey.      

 

 

[The Mighty Thor]

3 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

It's a bit Rangers-esque.      We didn't break the rules.    The rules weren't robust enough.    If we've broken your rules,  it's your fault for having the wrong rules.       

 

Psychopaths.

This is the new totem for the ERG/Brexshitters are going to cling to.

 

It plays beautifully into the Boris versus the world schtick cos all he's trying to do is get Brexit through.

 

It's a win/win as it probably suits Brenda too as it keeps  away the questions about the shenanigans of her laddie and underage girls.

[Cade]

"We're going to hand pick all the judges coz we can't take no for an answer"

 

[Boris]

1 hour ago, Brighton Jambo said:

Will do.

 

then will leave it to the wider masses to prove how unpopular Jeremy Corbyn is in the election.

 

its funny the party that has stated categorically that they will overturn brexit will risk a no deal as they see that as less damaging then letting him into number ten.

 

tells you everything you need to know about how bad that man is for the labour cause.  

 

Or how pseudo Tory Swinson and her lib dems are.

 

 

[Victorian]

2 minutes ago, The Mighty Thor said:

This is the new totem for the ERG/Brexshitters are going to cling to.

 

It plays beautifully into the Boris versus the world schtick cos all he's trying to do is get Brexit through.

 

It's a win/win as it probably suits Brenda too as it keeps  away the questions about the shenanigans of her laddie and underage girls.

 

Yep.    It's hideous stuff.

 

They're going to convince people it's OK for them to destroy democracy and the country's prospects in order to protect a fraudulently derived tick in a box that happened three and a half years ago.     

[Mikey1874]

Government and Cox using lots of words that basically criticise the Supreme Court judgement.

 

Being I'll just say they are bad losers, being used as very privileged people to getting their own way. 

[Victorian]

Even the responsible act of stating disagreement with the unanimous judgement is totally hollow.    These judges are the most learned experts in law in the whole legal system.     But opposing people are entitled to an opinion,   no matter how hollow.    

 

To suggest deeper motives is almost criminal.

[gjcc]

5 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

Government and Cox using lots of words that basically criticise the Supreme Court judgement.

 

Being I'll just say they are bad losers, being used as very privileged people to getting their own way. 

 

He just can’t bring himself to state that he respects the supreme courses decision without adding in the caveat that the lower court disagreed. Not once. 

[Mikey1874]

A question relating to Boris Johnson's potential dealings with a woman who its alleged got a preferential government grant. 

 

Government saying Boris had nothing to do with the grant. 

 

Government statements to follow.