 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Backwoodsman Date: 29 May 19 - 02:24 AM Magid Magid on BBC Breakfast right now. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Dave the Gnome Date: 28 May 19 - 05:04 PM Message from Magid Magid A ray of hope in the darkness. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Stanron Date: 28 May 19 - 02:41 PM However prerogation is a differnt fish. https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/judicial-law/prerogative-powers-remain-an-important.php |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Stanron Date: 28 May 19 - 02:36 PM I had to search what prorogation meant. For any others wondering try this https://www.parliament.uk/about/how/occasions/prorogation/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: DMcG Date: 28 May 19 - 02:35 PM I will get told off if I stay on this, so this is the last post on the prorogatiin matter unless it becomes centre stage later. In 1948 Parliament was preroged on 25 Octber until 26th Octiber. I.e. There was a 'reset' but apart from a nominal few hours both houses were sitting on the day before and the day after. Most recently, prerogation was talked about as a mechanism to bring May's deal back again. In both cases, the intention was to continue the work of the house with no significant gap in the times the houses were sitting. In the idea being floated is that Parliament was preroged for the precise purpose of stopping it being able to work for some time around the 31 October. It would be days or weeks beforehand, because otherwise the house could attempt to introduce some form of action to amend the decision to leave without a deal. So it is completely opposite to the earlier examples: it is about thwarting the ability of Parliament to act, not enabling it. Hence Bercow's informal comment that the idea is "for the birds." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Iains Date: 28 May 19 - 02:04 PM It was a procedure last invoked in 1948 to quell rebellious Lords. If the government were to pursue such an unlikely step I would surmise there is precious little the speaker could do to thwart it. https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2019/01/the-prime-minister-could-prorogue-parliament-but-almost-certainly-wont.htm |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: DMcG Date: 28 May 19 - 01:46 PM I am not sure that is what Bercow said on Marxh 18th. Here is the extract from Hansard: Stephen Doughty (Cardiff South and Penarth) (Lab/Co-op) On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Thank you for your statement today. The Government have gained an infamous historical reputation for trickery and abuse of Parliament during this whole process, and already rumours are going around that they might seek to use prorogation as a method of getting out of this. Can you confirm that that would not only provoke a greater constitutional crisis, but also result in us losing every single piece of legislation currently before both Houses, including many of the pieces of legislation needed to implement any Brexit? Mr Speaker If particular legislation was subject to carry-over, that would not apply, but in the expectation, let us say—or, to use a more neutral term, in the circumstance—that it was not subject to the carry-over procedure, manifestly and incontrovertibly it would fall. As for whether the Government are contemplating that, I have no way of knowing. No Minister has indicated that to me. I have no idea what is in their mind. It would be an unusual step, but look: I have been in this place a little over 20 years, and some quite unusual things have happened. I have no way of knowing whether this is being contemplated. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Iains Date: 28 May 19 - 01:18 PM They are a one-policy party who will have no reason to continue to exist when (an if) Britain leaves Europe Dream on squire! They are the largest party in the EU and will be around until we finally leave the EU and will fight the next General Election. The idea that parliament is going to be evacuated for the centre stage of debate on Brexit is simply unimaginable...The idea the House won’t have its say is for the birds," he said.(Bercow) Not quite what he said several months ago "Labour MP Stephen Doughty asked Bercow in the Commons if a prorogation such as the one in 1948 could happen. The Speaker replied this would be “an unusual step”, but it was possible, although he had no idea whether the government had such plans" March 18th 2019 There would be a reluctance to do this as a Queen's speech would be required and there would thereby involve the monarchy. This is contrary to accepted procedures,where there is a presumption for parliamentary business to be carried out without involvement of the Queen. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: DMcG Date: 28 May 19 - 12:22 PM From a Guardian live feed: ===== John Bercow, the Speaker of the House of Commons, has warned Conservative leadership candidates that they will not be able to force through a no deal Brexit without parliament’s approval. Speaking in New York, he gave a clear sign that the speaker would make sure parliament has an opportunity to stop the UK leaving without a deal if MPs believe it should be halted. "The idea that parliament is going to be evacuated for the centre stage of debate on Brexit is simply unimaginable...The idea the House won’t have its say is for the birds," he said. He highlighted the fact that while leaving the EU without a deal is the legal default: "There is a difference between a legal default position and what the interplay of different political forces in parliament will facilitate." ===== So much for the idea by Rabb (or perhaps just his supporters) that Parliament could be prorogued can be quietly forgotten. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Dave the Gnome Date: 28 May 19 - 12:06 PM They can't change light bulbs. It takes one to book a man to do It and the rest to make money out of the transaction... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Steve Shaw Date: 28 May 19 - 11:50 AM Maybe they still haven't got enough to change a light bulb. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: DMcG Date: 28 May 19 - 11:38 AM So Cleverley and Malthouse have decided they could be PM now. Let me know when 5% of all Tory MPs are in the ring … I am not sure how many backers you need to stand for PM, or whether there is a formal minimum, but is getting to be a bit silly now. If we aren't careful we will run out of time to get the choice whittled down to the two to ask party members to vote on. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Jim Carroll Date: 28 May 19 - 09:18 AM Didn't quite finish ONE OF THE MOST POSITIVE OF THE RESULTS Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Jim Carroll Date: 28 May 19 - 09:15 AM I think it needs to be remembered that The Brexit Party is an ad-hoc set up made up of rejacted Ukip, which collapsed because they proved themselves unfit too be taken seriously, and fortified by the dregs of the Tory right - including some of They are a one-policy party who will have no reason to continue to exist when (an if) Britain leaves Europe |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Steve Shaw Date: 28 May 19 - 08:37 AM I see that Paul Staines has initiated an unofficial pro-Boris campaign. I wonder whether Bozza will dissociate himself from it... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Dave the Gnome Date: 28 May 19 - 08:37 AM Change hands... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Backwoodsman Date: 28 May 19 - 08:32 AM LOL! Or ‘Dyslexic Fingers’ - my usual excuse for mis-spellings in pieces I’ve typed! ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: DMcG Date: 28 May 19 - 07:54 AM Indeed it is. I would like to say we live and learn, but I don't guarantee either! (When I was in primary school I used to do some conjuring in an 'end of school year' party we had. So this looks a clear case of 'we live and forget') |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Backwoodsman Date: 28 May 19 - 07:49 AM DMcG - sincere apologies in advance for going into 'Nigel' mode, but it's sleight of hand. Not my fault, it was The Pedant in Me wot made me do it! ;-) :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: DMcG Date: 28 May 19 - 07:27 AM Can anyone explain to me why the brexit and UKIP combined vote of 34.9% versus 40.39% polled by the pro-remain parties is an indication that we should leave the EU? Slight of hand, really. The Brexit Party is being reported as if it had no connection with UKIP, and so the 29 seats gained is as if it had none before. Not true of course: even some of the UKIP MEPs had switched to the Brexit Party before the elections, I believe. No one ever treated New Labour as if it were a completely new party, for the very good reason it wasn't. The same is really true of UKIP/Brexit. Both were/are really "The Nigel Farage Election Vehicle Party". Then of course the media really does want to report a story, so the percentage voting for the Brexit Party is a good one, and quite a sensible one to discuss, at that. But approach it more calmly and you are right, the fact that is that a clear 'remain' stance did gain more seats. As I said before the election, this result will not bring clarity and both sides will spin things to look as if they won. Nothing unusual there. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Iains Date: 28 May 19 - 06:56 AM I refer you to the events of June 2016, in case you have forgotten. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Dave the Gnome Date: 28 May 19 - 06:44 AM Can anyone explain to me why the brexit and UKIP combined vote of 34.9% versus 40.39% polled by the pro-remain parties is an indication that we should leave the EU? I have not counted Labour and Tory as either BTW |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Iains Date: 28 May 19 - 04:40 AM My apologies. Missed it I did. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: DMcG Date: 28 May 19 - 04:01 AM You seem to have missed my post of 27 May 19 - 01:29 AM. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Iains Date: 28 May 19 - 03:59 AM From: DMcG - PM Date: 22 May 19 - 10:26 AM Last time I understand Farage and UKIP got 22 seats. At the time, Brexit was really of interest only to nerds. COnsequently, I would be surprised if the Brexit Party did not get considerably more, but it would, for me, have to be 28 or above to be particularly noteworthy. Howsabout 29? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: DMcG Date: 28 May 19 - 02:46 AM In so far as Farage has another policy, it seems to be 'direct democracy', which is providing a mechanism to enable the general population to instruct the government what to do. It is really easy to present this as if it were a good idea, but it is incredibly dangerous. Democracy needs more than the ability to reflect the views of the populus - it needs then to be informed and to take account of the trade-offs. And it needs time to reflect to ensure all the trade offs have been properly considered. Lynch mobs were/are direct democracy. The attacks on the Jews in the Nazi era were direct democracy. Getting NICE to approve a cancer drug for treatment that costs £200,000 a course while not taking into account that is now twenty hip replacements per time that cannot now be afforded is an example of direct democracy. But even worse than that: direct democracy is extremely vulnerable to advertising campaigns and social media manipulation: the cancer treatment example is an example of that in action - such a campaign is almost always behind the change of decision by NICE. And that means direct democracy is in many cases indirect dictatorship. The person who funds and runs the campaigns gets to pick the topics and with enough pressure often the result. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Backwoodsman Date: 27 May 19 - 02:33 PM Interesting - and very disturbing - letters In The Guardian 19/5/19. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Iains Date: 27 May 19 - 01:23 PM In the local council elections the Tories lost 1300 seats and Labour instead of picking up 500 seats managed to lose 500. The Brexit Party formed several weeks ago won the highest number of seats of any EU party in the EU elections. The Brexit party is to the Tories and Labour as The Black Death was to the Middle Ages! No amount of pin dancing, or deleting of posts will alter that blindingly obvious truth. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Dave the Gnome Date: 27 May 19 - 01:14 PM As I pointed out earlier, there is all the talk of the massive gains by the Brexit party and no mention of the total wipeout of UKIP. If you offset one against the other there has been a modest gain for leave. Compared to the gains made by pro remain SNP, LibDem and Green, it is nothing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: DMcG Date: 27 May 19 - 12:07 PM Sorry about the blank post. I was also going to say converting this result into a 'general election equivalent' is meaningless. As I said earlier, and echoing the comments on policies, if Farage became PM we can suppose on day 1 he writes to the EU and says that's it, goodbye, we are now on WTO rules. Fine. Now what does he do on day 2 for the next five years? No one has been told. I would hope even the most ardent Brexiteer who thinks at all would find that an unacceptable state of affairs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Steve Shaw Date: 27 May 19 - 11:48 AM Well it wasn't a general election, the turnout was little more than half of a typical general election turnout, Brexit is not a political party that has ever had a general election manifesto and, once brexit has been settled one way or another, the party will lose its raison d'être. Brexiteers today are in denial about the rather obstinate fact that they are now in a minority. Mid-term protest voting is time-honoured in this country and it's also time-honoured that hopeful parties that have benefited like to tell us that politics have changed forever. For sure, Labour has misjudged this severely. I agreed with the sentiment expressed by Emily Thornberry last night. Jezza may have his doubts about the EU (I mean, who hasn't?), but he has to start listening to his membership and Labour voters. We overwhelmingly don't want brexit, Jeremy. That's your starting point, and you got a very sharp reminder of that last night. The biggest Marxist I know voted LibDem last week. Bloody Nora... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: peteglasgow Date: 27 May 19 - 11:05 AM does anyone know their policy on providing a brexit that works for anyone except the nicotine stained man frog? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Raggytash Date: 27 May 19 - 10:16 AM Does anyone know the Brexit partys policy on defence, housing, education, health service, security, welfare, climate etc etc .......................?? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Iains Date: 27 May 19 - 09:27 AM Brexit has won 9 of 11 regions. According to electoral calculus, had it been a General Election Brexit would have taken 446 seats - a resounding majority. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Steve Shaw Date: 27 May 19 - 09:03 AM 65% of Labour voters voted remain in 2016. A poll commissioned by Hope Not Hate suggests that 1.4 million Labour leave voters have changed their minds. That alone would reverse the result. Brexiteers are desperate to avoid another referendum, and their fear has nothing to do with "betraying democracy." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: DMcG Date: 27 May 19 - 08:25 AM Perhaps, Steve. But we can't really know. Some people who voted Labour may be in favour of leaving, but strongly opposed to no deal. There are few homes for such people. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Iains Date: 27 May 19 - 06:38 AM Interesting that the highest turnout was in remain areas. From this it can be read that having voted for a referendum to leave already, a fair number of brexiteers refused to play in this election. Now doubt they are saving their efforts for the forthcoming general election. This is assuming Steptoe senior can manage a no confidence vote, after all the electorate have already demonstrated their zero confidence in both major parties. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Steve Shaw Date: 27 May 19 - 06:15 AM A large majority of Labour voters voted remain. If you were a minority leave Labour voter, you either stayed Labour or went Brexit party. If you were a majority remain Labour voter, you either stayed Labour or went LibDem/Green. It's a pretty fair guess that much or most of the large LibDem/Green gain came from Labour protest voters. And it's a pretty fair guess that most of the voters who stayed Labour are remainers. Denial is useless: leave would struggle if we held another referendum. Especially with these Tory bubbletwits going large on the impossible no deal. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Iains Date: 27 May 19 - 06:07 AM I would definitely dispute your 50/50 Labour guesstimate, The in out shake it all about hoky coky party. Who knows what their brexit stance is? They certainly do not |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Backwoodsman Date: 27 May 19 - 05:58 AM Strange, innit? The BrexShitters are soiling their boxers in case we have another referendum, but they’re happy to accept the EU elections as, effectively, a referendum ‘confirming’ the original referendum! You really couldn’t make it up! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Steve Shaw Date: 27 May 19 - 05:54 AM I would definitely dispute your 50/50 Labour guesstimate, Jon. Most Labour voters are remainers. Some of the minority "leave" Labourites would have jumped ship to the Brexit party, but I suspect that a far larger number of "remain" Labourites would have gone to the LibDem/Green side. Most of those who stayed with Labour would have been remain voters. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Steve Shaw Date: 27 May 19 - 05:45 AM The turnout was under 37%, just about half of the referendum turnout. Any analysis should include that in the reckoning, especially by those who would like to view this as another referendum on brexit. Trying to make your case by counting seats is far less safe than counting the numbers who voted for remain parties versus leave parties, the latter being far more in sync with what we did in the referendum. Even if you count all the Tory votes as leave (unsafe) and all the Labour votes as remain (less unsafe but still a bit too blunt), it's clear that leave would struggle in another referendum. Which is precisely why leave don't want one, whatever burbling you hear from them about its "betraying democracy," etc. Basically, what seems to have happened is that the Brexit party mopped up almost all the Ukip vote plus a few disaffected Tory leavers and probably far fewer disaffected Labour leavers, whereas the remain protest vote went to the Greens and the LibDems. A lot of protest voting on a low turnout informs little about the way politics will go in the future. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Dave the Gnome Date: 27 May 19 - 04:03 AM A good and very fair review. In my opinion From Sir John Curtice, professor of politics. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Dave the Gnome Date: 27 May 19 - 02:39 AM As far as I could see before I went to bed, most of the Brexit party gains were from UKIP. If they had no rebranded themselves it would have been a very good gain for UKIP but far from the landslide that the press are reporting. Far more significant are the gains made by the pro-remain factions of LibDem, Green and the SNP. Both main parties suffered because of their stance, or non stance, on Brexit. Europe wide the picture seems similar. Everyone is cheesed off with main stream politics. The populist right wing and the Greens have both done well because of this. It seems that when a power vacuum is left by the mainstream, sensible people vote to save the planet while the easily led vote for those who tell them what they want to hear! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: DMcG Date: 27 May 19 - 01:29 AM Let's not forget these are Europe-wide elections. I think this clip from the Guardian has it about right: A more complicated, ad hoc, but still fairly comfortable pro-European, mainstream majority is, naturally, a somewhat less exciting narrative than a tidal wave of populism sweeping away the foundations of the EU. But it looks like that is the outcome of these elections. Taking a more parochial view, the Brexit Party has undoubtedly done well, and it looks like they will reach at least 29 or 30 seats. That is at the top end of my estimates (which were based on recalling UKIP had 22 seats rather than the actual 24, but let's not quibble.). To me, that says the future path of the U.K. now rests on the anonymous, probably Tory, MP who is genuinely certain that to leave with no deal would be a disaster for the country but also is from an area which has just voted for the Brexit Party in large numbers. Such an MP is also probably aware that if his or her sincere belief in the problems of a no deal come to pass, the Brexit Party voters would blame the MP, not themselves. What these MPs choose to do will be critical. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Jon Freeman Date: 26 May 19 - 11:04 PM Last two posts are a jumble. If you are going to post tabular data, surround it with <pre></pre>
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Stanron Date: 26 May 19 - 10:39 PM I interpret that as Party Out In Bredxit 28 seats Lib Dems 15 Lab ? 50/50 5 5 Green In 7 Conservative 3 Welsh Nationalists In 1 totals 31 28 Not a million miles away from the referendum result. Maybe we should vote again. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Iains Date: 26 May 19 - 10:18 PM The reality of the outside world will never perforate the bubble on this forum. Anything they do not like they delete. They cannot delete brexit though. Party Vote Share Brexit Stance EU Seats Brexit Party 31.6% OUT 28 Lib Dem 21.3% In 15 Labour 14.1% God Knows they certainly dont. 10 Green 12.1% Mainly IN 7 Conservative 9.1% Inveterate liars (some in/some out) 3 Plaid Cymru 1% In 1 SNP 3.5% In Change UK 3.4% In UKIP 3.3% OUT |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Stanron Date: 26 May 19 - 09:13 PM From https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/05/26/european-elections-2019-results-maps-brexit-party-expected-win/ Brexit party 28 seats Lib Dems 15 seats Labour 10 seats Green Party 7 seats Conservatives 3 seats ouch others 1 seat To suit your arguments you move the goal posts to where you shot the ball. In any other context this would be called cheating. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture? From: Steve Shaw Date: 26 May 19 - 09:01 PM From the Guardian at 1.18 am: "Potentially most significantly, the share of the two unambiguously pro-Brexit parties – the Brexit party and Ukip – was 34.9%, markedly lower than the aggregate total of the pro-second referendum parties (the Lib Dems, Greens, Change UK, the Scottish National party and Plaid) at 40.3%." And I'd add to that that most people who voted Labour (not included in the GuRdian's assessment) would have been remainers, as the vast majority of those who have jumped the Labour ship would have shifted to the Brexit brigade. And it's a bloody good bet that the majority of those who stayed loyal to the Tories were the Tory remainers. So that 40.3% was actually quite a lot higher. Be very afraid, Brexiteers. Especially of a second referendum! I'm dealing with the solid numbers here, Stanron. Telling me I'm "wrong" without qualification is, frankly, puerile. |