BREXIT

[Capt Christopher Jones]

45 minutes ago, timps said:

you can read the full judgement or listen to countless Boris interviews where he said it wasn't about Brexit.

Like I said the decision of the court was not about Brexit, he took a gamble on procedure they have not said he lied but left the two choices up to parliament to decided. 

this is not a remainer rant just a reckless prime minister rant, it was a gamble that lost my respect not that any of them have my respect now.

 

 

Bozo is now Parliaments ( trapped ) puppet rather then Cummings glove puppet

Written by Peston this afternoon

 

The most important point is that the Supreme Court has formalised that Boris Johnson's minority government is the servant of the House of Commons, and it will intervene to prevent any attempt by him to neuter MPs' power.

That means he is their captive. That when they say "no to no-deal", he has no route left to get round them.

So he has a choice. He can work with MPs to find a compromise. Or he can quit.

Now you might think the PM would resign, given that the extent of today's humiliation and that his aim of Brexit by October 31, deal or no-deal, "do or die," now looks wholly undermined, impossible.

 

Edited September 24, 2019 by Capt Christopher Jones

[Smokersmith]

8 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Exposure of the factions trying to pervert the referendum result ?

Manoeuvreing the opposition into a position they dont want to be in (GE)

Think of it like a game of chess, that juicy piece you have to sacrifice for the end game result .

Hmmm .. not revealed anything too insightful there …

It's very clear that a majority of MP's don't want to honour the result, and Corbyn hasn't taken the election bait that was on offer.

I await the brilliance!

[Raja Clavata]

11 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Exposure of the factions trying to pervert the referendum result ?

Manoeuvreing the opposition into a position they dont want to be in (GE)

Think of it like a game of chess, that juicy piece you have to sacrifice for the end game result .

It will be interesting to see how it plays out but if Brexit is thwarted then Cummings can blame it all on everyone else, if it happens he'll make up a story about his strategy all along and make a shed load more cash doing the circuit talking about it. That thought narks me off more than it probably should, but...

[Retsdon]

On 29/08/2019 at 11:47, JohnfromUK said:

The EU flatly refused to discuss this until the transition deal was signed.  That should have been a BIG red flag. 

I agree with most of your post, but not the inference that the EU was somehow underhand here. The EU is just following its own laws in that under the terms of Article 50 there is a period allowed to draw up the terms of a Withdrawal Agreement ( 2 years), but that negotiations on the future relationship between the country that's leaving and the EU must be conducted ' in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union'. And Article 218 is EU law that covers how it conducts negotiations with 3rd party countries.

If our own people had bothered to lift their heads and study for a moment how the EU conducts itself they would have known that a) it does everything by the book (as you'd expect from an institution with 28 members and a set of rules), and b) that even if that weren't true and the EU had legal wriggle room there was no way that the EU was going to get involved in a multi-year protracted wrangle over the minutiae of Britain's future trade and political relationship whilst Britain was still a member. Despite that there are no mechanisms in place for such internal negotiations, it would have paralyzed the Union.

When Ivan Rogers pointed out to May and Davis that the Eu had a system and it would stick to it because THAT'S THE ONLY WAY IT CAN FUNCTION, he was sidelined for not being 'on message'. No, he was just telling it as it is, but of course that was inconvenient. And that's the reason that this whole business is such a mess. Right from the word go, even at the campaign stage, everyone involved in Britain -  politicians, media, and public have never bothered to look at how the EU functions and how its laws are applied  Instead they carried  on- and are still carrying on for the most part-  in a dream as if the EU would or could just change the way it works or break its own laws to accommodate the domestic  political concerns of a country that's voted to be a non-member.

The EU has done nothing but be the EU and follow its own laws and procedures that have been there, in black and white, all along. And now with our eyes on our navels we've sailed the ship into the rock.

Edited September 24, 2019 by Retsdon

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Comrade Jeremy is due to make his speech to conference at 16:30, I wonder how long the standing ovation will go on for?

Edited September 24, 2019 by TIGHTCHOKE
Syntax!

[JohnfromUK]

14 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

but not the inference that the EU was somehow underhand here.

That post was a while back!

I didn't mean to say that they had been underhand.  The 'red flag' to me is simply this;

• A transition (deal) is the change from one set of circumstances to another.
• We know the present (in the EU) set
• We don't know what the 'post EU' set will be
• Therefore - one cannot properly negotiate a 'transition'

The post EU set of circumstances should be agreed (in outline anyway) BEFORE a transition can be finalised - otherwise you don't know what you will be transitioning to - and that would be my 'red flag'.

[welsh1]

I honestly cannot remember a time in my past when i looked at the political scene and the people who are supposed to represent us and thought what a complete bunch of sycophantic self serving idiots.
If this is the best of british politics, then we are all going to hell in a handcart

[Retsdon]

1 minute ago, JohnfromUK said:

That post was a while back!

It took me a while to write the response!

[oowee]

1 hour ago, grrclark said:

I’m not so sure Rob.  It is entirely possible that the “rebel alliance” could try to enact primary legislation under standing order 24, which Bercow has said he will allow, to legislate for let’s say a second referendum.

The rebel alliance could keep the Conservative government in situ, with no majority and no ability to conduct business whilst they effectively run a government of national unity, without it actually being so.

If Bercow continues to permit the use of standing orders and humble addresses they could call the shots and mandate the executive to do what they wish.

They have been openly prepared to act in the face of the electorate to stymy Brexit already, despite fallacious argument to the contrary, so why not continue in that theme to stymy a GE?

Of course Boris could prorogue again for 4-6 days purely for the Queen’s speech, which couldn’t be challenged, that would then get rid of Bercow earlier than the 31st and mix things up a wee bit more.

This ^^^^^ seems unlikely but in the current climate looks like a possible. The lack of a strong figure to bind them together is a problem. They would still need an agenda either a deal or a second ref to aim at. 

[Retsdon]

1 minute ago, JohnfromUK said:

e post EU set of circumstances should be agreed (in outline anyway) BEFORE a transition can be finalised

I agree, but not even just agreed with the EU, but agreed within the country. There were two stages that were missed out before Article 50 was triggered. One, find agreement withing the country on an economic and political destination before setting off on the journey. Two, ascertain that such a destination was viable. Actually - three. Then, plan a route to get there.

Instead, in a frenzy of political virtue-signalling, they just triggered Article 50, cutting the rope without a clue where the ship was headed. 

Irresponsible, very.

[Gordon R]

I note the sneering about the leadership shown by Boris, but I don't see suggestions as to who has been better. I thought Maggie was unbalanced and Boris has many, many faults, but is trying to lead the country in providing what the Referendum result demanded. I await the suggestions, with evidence to back them up. 🤣

Please no truly silly remarks about that wasn't what people voted for - that would be rather pathetic.

Quote

Thanks for sharing that pearl which would have otherwise passed me by 👍

Now that is a little gem. 

[grrclark]

15 minutes ago, oowee said:

This ^^^^^ seems unlikely but in the current climate looks like a possible. The lack of a strong figure to bind them together is a problem. They would still need an agenda either a deal or a second ref to aim at. 

I suspect a single agenda issue of another referendum would be enough to galvanise them.

Despite the LibDem position of revoke they are still supporting another referendum until a GE.

Labour’s position is another referendum.

The independents all support another referendum.

SNP will also support another referendum.

So for the rebel alliance why not let the government stumble on in dealing with business as usual, defeat any substantive government bills and enact primary legislation for a 2nd referendum with no deal or revoke?

Will BoJo try and have a Queen’s speech when he has no chance of getting anything remotely contentious voted through.

No matter what happens from now on in the political landscape of this country is irrevocably changed and i think the 2 party system is finished.  We will be like so many other countries and rely on coalitions.  That will moderate any extremes, but also inhibit disruptive change and we will slowly lurch into impotent mediocrity, hogtied and moribund by our own aching conscience and hand wringing in trying to appease everyone and offend no one.  Until there is a war of course.

[Raja Clavata]

It's kinda ironic that I chose to take the action to block content from the person who declared in open fora that they were not going to reply to any of mine.

[Retsdon]

16 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

I note the sneering about the leadership shown by Boris, but I don't see suggestions as to who has been better. I thought Maggie was unbalanced and Boris has many, many faults, but is trying to lead the country in providing what the Referendum result demanded. I await the suggestions, with evidence to back them up. 🤣

Gordon, the sad part is that I don't have any suggestions. Never has the political landscape of Britain looked so barren. 

[Cosmicblue]

Spot on grrclark

 

[JohnfromUK]

40 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

There were two stages that were missed out before Article 50 was triggered.

I think they were missed earlier than that.  Despite my current siding I voted Remain - for the very simple reason that I couldn't see how leave would actually be 'put into practice'.

Cameron went to the EU pre referendum and 'negotiated' some 'relaxations' - mainly if I remember right on benefits claimants rights to claim immediately and a waiver for 'ever closer union'.

Frankly these were nowhere near enough, but the smug people thought they had the result in the bag for remain, so we got virtually nothing.  When it became clear that the vote wasn't to be a walkover for remain, Project Fear was launched - drawing in even Obama (who would leave office shortly anyway).  That simply put peoples backs up - and was (in my view) the final push that got leave over the line.

Since then, many like myself simply believe the outcome MUST be carried out - for democracy.  IF there is another referendum - I will vote leave (as will countless other former marginal remainers).

The exception might be IF we had a Corbyn government - in which case remaining in the EU would come in handy to bail us out when he (inevitably) bankrupts the country.  We wpuld then go from a major net contributor to being like Greece - living on German handouts.

[Retsdon]

1 minute ago, JohnfromUK said:

The exception might be IF we had a Corbyn government - in which case remaining in the EU would come in handy to bail us out when he (inevitably) bankrupts the country. 

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/business-economics/jeremy-corbyn-better-than-no-deal-brexit-investment-bankers-say/04/09/ 

[JohnfromUK]

6 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/business-economics/jeremy-corbyn-better-than-no-deal-brexit-investment-bankers-say/04/09/ 

I would not agree with that.  I have seen what Labour governments can do.  I do not believe even a no deal Brexit will be that bad.

[oowee]

So where do we think this is all going. The lack of progress points to nowhere fast and despite the 

30 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

Gordon, the sad part is that I don't have any suggestions. Never has the political landscape of Britain looked so barren. 

Mogg needs to go with Boris. We need one of the Tory stalwarts to call for a GNU sit down with outside help and agree a plan.  

[oowee]

15 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

I would not agree with that.  I have seen what Labour governments can do.  I do not believe even a no deal Brexit will be that bad.

The worst Labour government could not be worse than no deal. 

[JohnfromUK]

3 minutes ago, oowee said:

The worst Labour government could not be worse than no deal. 

We will have to agree to differ on that.

[oowee]

Just now, JohnfromUK said:

We will have to agree to differ on that.

However a few years after no deal when the economy has collapsed we could join the EU and qualify for the Euro and Direct aid from the EU. Our citizens would emigrate to Poland and Hungary. Land Rover could come back to where it belongs and all would be well 🙂 

[SpringDon]

4 minutes ago, oowee said:

The worst Labour government could not be worse than no deal. 

Worse for the population or worse for banks. Bankers are not people’s friends. 

[Retsdon]

3 minutes ago, oowee said:

Land Rover could come back to where it belongs and all would be well 🙂 

Yes, I suppose that being the cheapest place for the Indians to make their cars could be construed as a plus.

[Gordon R]

Quote

Gordon, the sad part is that I don't have any suggestions. Never has the political landscape of Britain looked so barren. 

I have to agree. Rebecca Long-Bailey seems like one of the better Labour possibles. I am no fan of Starmer - a man with no memory of what he previously said. 

Tory candidates - bit thin on the ground. Raab seems okay, but he has his detractors.