5,063 posts
|
Brexit
Sept 24, 2019 16:57:40 GMT
Post by Phantom of London on Sept 24, 2019 16:57:40 GMT
Geoffrey Robinson has came out of this well and is likely now to be ‘reshuffled.’
|
|
|
Post by d'James on Sept 24, 2019 16:59:56 GMT
just to see them try and explain it to Brexit fans. Literally reduced now to a team sport. Isn’t that what it’s always been, especially with such memorable chants as ‘you lost, get over it!’
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 24, 2019 17:25:35 GMT
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2019 17:25:35 GMT
Everyone seems very jolly about this but I’m fearful. The Gina Millers of this world now in control so hey, money talking and anything a future government decides will be vulnerable to similar tactics thus making the judges political appointees by default. A lot of cross parliamentary support went to court, Gina Miller just decided to be one of the people to front it. There was talk about her joining the Lib Dems but I don't know what her more general politics are.
With this action we could have all factions with the means running to the courts if they don't like certain decisions. Imagine the Tories doing this if Labour was in power or what if the likes of James Dyson, Richard Branson, Alan Sugar and Tim Martin etc. started using their financial muscle this way to try and shape policy.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 24, 2019 17:30:35 GMT
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2019 17:30:35 GMT
With Labour being at Conference this week and the Tories next week how can Parliament effectively sit I wonder. The Labour Conference is finishing early at the end of today, hence Corbyn's speech being moved to today. The Tories are still considering whether to go ahead with their conference, or in a shortened or amended form. Some people are suggesting Parliament could go into recess to allow the Conservative conference to take place, although in the current environment that seems unlikely. Bet the hosting cities are happy!. Wherever the Tories are holding theirs is likely going into lockdown in preparation given they are the Government and that has extra protection than the opposition.
Doesn't the Labour Leader usually do their speech on Conference Tuesdays?
If they have Diane Abbott doing the planning then they may end up all over the place.
|
|
1,863 posts
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Sept 24, 2019 17:38:19 GMT
Sorry, did not clarify, this judgement (Prorogation) and the prior one (Parliamentary Debate/Approval of a Bill) was about Parliamentary Process not Policies/Bills and about our Democratic Constitution.
The use of the judiciary to overturn a Parliamentary Act has not been tabled and if this ever happens believe this will be more difficult as the Court cannot review the legality of what by definition is legal by the introduced act, it can only be appealed if you break the law and take it through the legal system which has always been there in our legal system as precedents have always defined/evolved the initial Parliamentary Act.
|
|
2,340 posts
|
Brexit
Sept 24, 2019 18:39:20 GMT
Post by theglenbucklaird on Sept 24, 2019 18:39:20 GMT
Sorry, did not clarify, this judgement (Prorogation) and the prior one (Parliamentary Debate/Approval of a Bill) was about Parliamentary Process not Policies/Bills and about our Democratic Constitution. The use of the judiciary to overturn a Parliamentary Act has not been tabled and if this ever happens believe this will be more difficult as the Court cannot review the legality of what by definition is legal by the introduced act, it can only be appealed if you break the law and take it through the legal system which has always been there in our legal system as precedents have always defined/evolved the initial Parliamentary Act. Two really good posts
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2019 19:09:51 GMT
Wonder if MPs will start using Parliamentary Privilege to disclose where the Judiciary have ordered identities to be withheld as the Judiciary have now been meddling with Parliament.
If Liz Smith was still alive she'd be good to play Lady Hale.
|
|
|
Post by d'James on Sept 24, 2019 19:16:30 GMT
Everyone seems very jolly about this but I’m fearful. The Gina Millers of this world now in control so hey, money talking and anything a future government decides will be vulnerable to similar tactics thus making the judges political appointees by default. It's quite simple, the executive is not able to override parliament. The only politics involved is to stop this and the judgment made it very clear that that, not any political import such as Brexit is the reason.
Johnson said that the prorogation was nothing to do with Brexit, yet now is complaining that overturning the prorogation is everything to do with Brexit. He can't even get his lies straight.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 24, 2019 19:39:24 GMT
Post by londonpostie on Sept 24, 2019 19:39:24 GMT
Literally reduced now to a team sport. Isn’t that what it’s always been, especially with such memorable chants as ‘you lost, get over it!’ Perhaps it has if you view your politics through the lens of the 24-hour info-news cycle / social media commentariat.
The overwhelming majority do not. It's politics. It's complicated. It's for adults to consider and reflect like adults. It is not a cartoon strip.
Hell, even The Guardian produced a considered Editorial article on Corbyn yesterday:
|
|
2,340 posts
|
Brexit
Sept 24, 2019 19:45:54 GMT
Post by theglenbucklaird on Sept 24, 2019 19:45:54 GMT
Isn’t that what it’s always been, especially with such memorable chants as ‘you lost, get over it!’ Perhaps it has if you view your politics through the lens of the 24-hour info-news cycle / social media commentariat.
The overwhelming majority do not. It's politics. It's complicated. It's for adults to consider and reflect like adults. It is not a cartoon strip.
Hell, even The Guardian produced a considered Editorial article on Corbyn yesterday:
Don't see where Boris goes, he needs a Falklands pronto. Any odds on Dominic Cummings going Guy Fawkes and lashing 500kg of semtex in the cellars of westminster
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 24, 2019 20:11:21 GMT
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2019 20:11:21 GMT
Perhaps it has if you view your politics through the lens of the 24-hour info-news cycle / social media commentariat.
The overwhelming majority do not. It's politics. It's complicated. It's for adults to consider and reflect like adults. It is not a cartoon strip.
Hell, even The Guardian produced a considered Editorial article on Corbyn yesterday:
Don't see where Boris goes, he needs a Falklands pronto. Any odds on Dominic Cummings going Guy Fawkes and lashing 500kg of semtex in the cellars of westminster Like the old joke, the last person to have the right idea in Parliament was Guy Fawkes.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 24, 2019 20:14:57 GMT
via mobile
vdcni likes this
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2019 20:14:57 GMT
Everyone seems very jolly about this but I’m fearful. The Gina Millers of this world now in control so hey, money talking and anything a future government decides will be vulnerable to similar tactics thus making the judges political appointees by default. That's a very extreme extrapolation from a judgment which upholds the constitutional law of the United Kingdom. And it has nothing to do with money either - plenty of worthy cases are pursued pro bono by excellent lawyers and this could have been the same, it just so happens that Gina Miller has some money. I always find you very sensible Lynette but if I've read it right that comment is hugely unnecessary hyperbole in my opinion, and I can't see how it gets to your end point of judges being political appointees - please could you explain a bit more as I'm struggling to understand that point. It has absolutely nothing to do with politics, but some of those who do not understand constitutional law and dislike the judgment are assuming that it does because that is an easy way to criticise the judges for doing their job and doing it well. They are upholding the very principles of parliamentary sovereignty that the Leave campaign was predicated on, and yet when applied in a way the extreme Brexiteers don't like they are up in arms. Their reactions are the ultimate example of throwing toys out of the pram, and also a chilling example of how uneducated some people clearly are about the UK's constitution. Anything a future government decides SHOULD be open to the same tactics - that is the very core of a government being accountable to the people. Why that should scare anyone is beyond me - it should scare you if it doesn't happen.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 24, 2019 20:40:55 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2019 20:40:55 GMT
Another day and another Brexit drama. I don’t disagree with today’s judgement, but every single time the government attempts to do something and get the job done, someone somewhere stops them. I suppose my question now is where the hell was all of this opposition to the mere idea of a referendum in the first place?
So the government has lost control, but the opposition won’t raise a motion of no confidence, they won’t support calls for a general election and we now have a law forcing the Prime Minister to ask for an extension if they can’t get a deal the house will approve... despite the EU quite happily telling us there isn’t any new deal on the table. How on earth did we back ourselves into such a corner, when we wanted to leave the room in the first place?
The best thing that could happen now is for the EU to just deny an extension and tell us to get on with it. As I see it, we are in a political stand off - Boris isn’t going to offer a second referendum, nor take no deal off the table. Either he waits out the rest of the governments term for the next general election in 2022, or he waits for Jeremy Corbyn to blink and do anything except say he won’t do anything.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 24, 2019 21:09:49 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2019 21:09:49 GMT
I suppose my question now is where the hell was all of this opposition to the mere idea of a referendum in the first place? It isn't opposition to the mere idea of a referendum though, it's nothing of the sort. It's opposition to the chaos of leaving without a deal. Despite what some Brexiteers would have you believe, the result of this judgment is nothing to do with a desire to remain in the EU (though of course many do desire that), and everything to do with making sure the government actually understands that they have been mandated to find a deal and actually have to get on with that rather than stalling and forcing a no deal Brexit.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 24, 2019 21:24:51 GMT
Post by londonpostie on Sept 24, 2019 21:24:51 GMT
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 24, 2019 21:26:29 GMT
via mobile
Post by xanady on Sept 24, 2019 21:26:29 GMT
BJ’s new theme tune....I Fought The Law And The Law Won (The Clash)....
|
|
1,863 posts
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Sept 24, 2019 21:30:38 GMT
The failure of Brexit was that Brexit was not defined, the referendum was idiotic in its premise of ‘Leave’ being a simple one dimensional entity.
In fact the irony is that Parliament is aligned with Public opinion, a proportion of leave at any cost, a proportion to leave in an orderly manner and a proportion who want to remain which represents public opinion perfectly.
If each of these had been defined in the original referendum the mess we are in would not have occurred as the ‘will of the people’ would have been understood and could have been implemented.
I think the only way forward is another referendum with ‘Leave’ defined and preferably before a General Election as a General Election will likely leave us in exactly the same position of a hung Parliament leaving nobody with a mandate to carry out the ‘will of the people’ which will continue to be undefined.
This will not happen as Johnson has successfully scuppered this by making his position untenable and once an extension is in place the Opposition Parties will be duty bound to go to the people and we will have another 5 years of wrangling or another General Election ad infinitum.
All in all we have to remember, the Tories called for a referendum, had a majority to implement the result but through their incompetence and disunity have bought the whole Political landscape into disrepute.
Johnson can cry Corbyn/Labour/Lib Dems who he now considers the Establishment are responsible for the mess, his and his cronies actions in scuppering May’s attempt to get a Deal is the real reason we are in this mess and if we end up having a General Election this is the message that needs to be communicated, this is not a breakdown of our Political System this is a breakdown of the Tory Party.
If you believe in Democracy I believe there are now only two major Parties, the Liberal Democrat’s and the Labour Party but the narrative has been spun so far that we now have people believing the Tory Party are innocent victims.
My voting intention is still undecided apart from the fact it definitely won’t be for the Conservatives who after their incompetence around Brexit who in an ideal world be unelectable.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 24, 2019 21:54:54 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2019 21:54:54 GMT
I suppose my question now is where the hell was all of this opposition to the mere idea of a referendum in the first place? It isn't opposition to the mere idea of a referendum though, it's nothing of the sort. It's opposition to the chaos of leaving without a deal. Despite what some Brexiteers would have you believe, the result of this judgment is nothing to do with a desire to remain in the EU (though of course many do desire that), and everything to do with making sure the government actually understands that they have been mandated to find a deal and actually have to get on with that rather than stalling and forcing a no deal Brexit. I’ve read the full judgement and know it wasn’t about the referendum. It was always bigger than that and today’s judgement will be discussed and taught for decades to come probably. I was speaking more generally, and wondering where all the overall outrage was at the mere idea of us leaving in the first place. If only such a fuss had been made before the referendum. But today had nothing to do with ensuring the government follow the mandate to find a deal: the court can’t enforce that because they have no authority over the EU to provide one. This is the part I think everyone keeps forgetting: we can’t make the EU change the deal they already put on the table... and let’s not forget even Parliament couldn’t figure out what kind of deal it wanted just a few months ago when it held all of those votes. Corbyn refuses to go to the polls because he knows he won’t win. He is the worst labour leader in a long time and I thought we’d seen it all with the joy that was Brown followed quickly by Miliband. I’m not saying an election is the best way forward as I’m not convinced anyone will win a majority (and I think quite a chunk of labour voters will move across to the Lib Dems) but with so many MPs going rogue and pushing their own agendas lately, I don’t think an election is the worst idea: let us vote for the party that promises to deliver the Brexit we as individuals decide we want - be that no deal (Tory) or no Brexit (Lib Dems) etc. But either way, we have to stop going around in circles and do something - anything - to get us past this hurdle we have continued to postpone for almost 6 months now.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 24, 2019 22:13:14 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2019 22:13:14 GMT
If you believe in Democracy I believe there are now only two major Parties, the Liberal Democrat’s and the Labour Party but the narrative has been spun so far that we now have people believing the Tory Party are innocent victims. My voting intention is still undecided apart from the fact it definitely won’t be for the Conservatives who after their incompetence around Brexit who in an ideal world be unelectable. Im not sure I agree with people believing the Tory Party are the victims. I think the general consensus is that the party has only itself to blame - and all these back bench politicians that overthrew May basically had it coming. I really think people are aware it is now the career politicians playing the game, and that there is an outdated element of male ego at play, thinking they could get the job done that a woman couldn’t. Personally I think the career politicians from the other parties are flying under the radar somewhat, and it’s those that you have to keep an eye on.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 24, 2019 23:06:43 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2019 23:06:43 GMT
But today had nothing to do with ensuring the government follow the mandate to find a deal: the court can’t enforce that because they have no authority over the EU to provide one. The Court can't enforce the mandate, but Parliament now can. And it is nothing to do with the EU providing a deal, the onus is on the UK to propose one, which Parliament could now force the PM to do. Of course no-one can force the EU to agree it, but unlike the British government the EU aren't complete idiots, they recognise the need for a deal if the UK is willing to compromise as it should.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2019 23:30:30 GMT
Corbyn and co didn't want an Election prior to when they think Boris will ask for an extension or have Parliament closed in the run up to 31st October due to an Election.
Typical day in politics, the Democrats trying to impeach Trump, Boris and Brexit. What next Greta's head starts spinning when she is cast in The Exorcist remake.
|
|
754 posts
|
Post by Latecomer on Sept 25, 2019 7:46:36 GMT
Corbyn cant do vote of no confidence as this plays into Johnson’s hands....the PM has to recommend an alternative government within 14 days if one can be found, and he will just refuse to do so, he then gets to call an election on the date he wants, so could make it for after Oct 31st and then just prorogue parliament for the election.....even if he swears blind he would have an election BEFORE 31st Oct, do any of us believe him? He has the power to change the election date after it’s set. So....
No vote of confidence until we can be sure Boris Johnson will not abuse his power as he is not to be trusted. It is a sorry state of affairs but The PM cannot be trusted.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 25, 2019 8:30:34 GMT
Post by londonpostie on Sept 25, 2019 8:30:34 GMT
Like Tony Blair was "trusted" by the political class on Iraq, and PPI, or "light touch regulation". How about Theresa May and her "burning injustices" aka more austerity, for longer. It's a bit disingenuous to pick out this particular clown.
|
|
952 posts
|
Post by vdcni on Sept 25, 2019 8:36:49 GMT
Well after Iraq, Blair clearly wasn't trusted was he, and Theresa May's reputation fell month by month during her time in office.
The difference is Johnson was already known as an outrageous liar before he became PM and was then happy to operate entirely outside the political norm by trying to shut down Parliament for no good reason. If he's already done it once then why not again.
He has responsible for his own reputation.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 25, 2019 9:09:46 GMT
Post by londonpostie on Sept 25, 2019 9:09:46 GMT
I'm struggling with the distinction. You do remember Theresa May as Home Sec, and Blair in opposition?
|
|