Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1601  
Old 08-18-2019, 01:18 PM
Steophan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 9,085
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
You seem to be suggesting that it should never be possible, in the future, to leave the E.U. Exactly how is that going to be decided?
Ok, permanently was perhaps an exaggeration. Replace that with "for the forseeable future". It's become extremely clear that we can't leave the EU without serious harm being done to the country, and unless that changes the idea of leaving should not even come up.
  #1602  
Old 08-18-2019, 01:22 PM
Steophan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 9,085
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baron Greenback View Post
But Jeremy Corbyn is Leader of the Opposition. He's the only one who can absolutely guarantee a VONC takes place at all.
And the best way to guarantee that the VONC will be won by the opposition is for there to be an acceptable alternative to Johnson, which Corbyn is not.
  #1603  
Old 08-18-2019, 01:27 PM
Baron Greenback's Avatar
Baron Greenback is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 11,906
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
And that is utterly irrelevant for this situation. The precedents for a unity government do not require an opposition leader to be the head.
The Leader of the Opposition is the only person in Parliament (other than the PM) who can - without any other electoral shenanigans, no ifs, no buts - force a VONC. It has to be initiated by Corbyn. Not ideal, I know.
  #1604  
Old 08-18-2019, 01:27 PM
Novelty Bobble is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 9,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steophan View Post
Ok, permanently was perhaps an exaggeration. Replace that with "for the forseeable future". It's become extremely clear that we can't leave the EU without serious harm being done to the country, and unless that changes the idea of leaving should not even come up.
I don't think you can even do that, I don't see a way you could legislate such a request that doesn't unreasonably tie the hands of a future governement. The possibility of leaving the E.U. is written into its laws and I think that absolutely has to remain a possibility for any country seeing as none of us can forsee how the E.U. will turn out in the future.
__________________
I'm saving this space for the first good insult hurled my way

Last edited by Novelty Bobble; 08-18-2019 at 01:27 PM.
  #1605  
Old 08-18-2019, 01:34 PM
Novelty Bobble is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 9,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baron Greenback View Post
The Leader of the Opposition is the only person in Parliament (other than the PM) who can - without any other electoral shenanigans, no ifs, no buts - force a VONC. It has to be initiated by Corbyn. Not ideal, I know.
That is irrelevant to whether he should form the head of a unity government. Seeing how he is distrusted so widely by so many (and plenty of his own MP's) he is, short of Jacob Rees-Mogg, pretty much the worst choice.

Were he any sort of a leader, he'd suggest another candidate. It is blindingly obvious that he can't lead this. Either he sees that and chooses to put himself forward anyway, in which case he is putting personal gain over the needs of the country, or he doesn't see it and is as thick and useless as I already think he is.
__________________
I'm saving this space for the first good insult hurled my way

Last edited by Novelty Bobble; 08-18-2019 at 01:35 PM.
  #1606  
Old 08-19-2019, 05:40 AM
Wrenching Spanners is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: London
Posts: 538
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baron Greenback View Post
The Leader of the Opposition is the only person in Parliament (other than the PM) who can - without any other electoral shenanigans, no ifs, no buts - force a VONC. It has to be initiated by Corbyn. Not ideal, I know.
For a Vote of No Confidence to pass, Corbyn has to have the support of his own party, the SNP, the Lib-Dems, the independent MPís, Change UK, Plaid Cymru, and the Green Party MP, plus at least one Conservative MP. Iím not sure how the independent MPís are aligned, so the VONC might need a handful of Conservative rebels in order to succeed. If Corbyn thinks he can win the general election, the smart thing to do is to bring all these parties together with the intention of forcing a general election. Thatís going to require trust, and Corbyn hasnít been acting trustworthy. He might win over all the above parties if he publicly and clearly promised that his only acts as Prime Minister before the election would be to ask for a delay for Brexit, and to call the election. Instead, heís asking to lead a unity government. Heís not going to get any Conservatives rebelling in order to put him in charge. Even if he made a promise to only be a caretaker PM, heís still going to face an uphill battle getting any Conservative MP to provide him a declaration of confidence. Having a different caretaker PM, especially if itís Ken Clarke, would have a much higher chance of attracting Conservative rebels. But that only works for Corbyn if he thinks he can win the election. Instead of being bold, heís dithering, which isnít going to encourage any party or MP reluctant to support Corbyn to back him.
  #1607  
Old 08-19-2019, 10:38 AM
Stanislaus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: London
Posts: 3,067
All the reporting about stopping on No Deal is about a VONC leading to a request for extension and an election. And the focus has been so much on who would be caretaker PM and what kind of coalition you could get that it's easy to forget that this isn't the only way Parliament can stop No Deal.

It would be difficult to get a VONC majority no matter if the planned new PM is Corbyn or Not-Corbyn. But if you think the votes are there to get an anti-No Deal VONC, then you've got the votes to just stop No Deal. We went through this process in March: we've established that Parliament can take control of the business of the House, and that it can bring a motion requiring the government to take action with respect of A50, and that it can amend legislation with regard to dates of exit. I'm sure Dominic Grieve and Yvette Cooper have half a dozen other routes to turn a Parliamentary vote into No Deal avoidance.

All the back and forth over who is putting country ahead of party and who is the conniving careerist/backstabber are all very revealing in their own way, but not strictly germane to the question of how No Deal could be stopped. If the vote against No Deal doesn't involve turning on your own party, putting a divisive figure into Number 10, or admitting that LOTO is a liability, then it's much easier to get the numbers.
  #1608  
Old 08-19-2019, 02:22 PM
Grim Render is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,305
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
Were he any sort of a leader, he'd suggest another candidate. It is blindingly obvious that he can't lead this. Either he sees that and chooses to put himself forward anyway, in which case he is putting personal gain over the needs of the country, or he doesn't see it and is as thick and useless as I already think he is.
He favors a hard Brexit. That is what he honestly thinks will be for the best. Putting the country ahead of his personal ambitions means getting a no-deal Brexit over himself becoming PM.

The Conservatives destroying themselves and then getting the blame for Brexit is a huge bonus, but in the end its not his main objective. Brexit is the objective. He is being difficult about who would be caretaker PM, because he doesn't want anyone!

Of course, he wants to run silent on that so the conservatives get the blame, and Labour get the votes in the next election. UK elections have always been about which party makes themselves most unpalatable to the voters, and right now the conservatives are miles ahead.

Yes, Labour is doing poorly in the polls but history is pretty clear that come election day, the first past the post system ensures that the party the voters hate least out of Labour and the Conservatives will win.

Last edited by Grim Render; 08-19-2019 at 02:23 PM.
  #1609  
Old 08-20-2019, 12:01 AM
PatrickLondon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: London
Posts: 3,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wrenching Spanners View Post

Instead of being bold, heís dithering, which isnít going to encourage any party or MP reluctant to support Corbyn to back him.
I'm not sure about the dithering. The reports of his latest speech suggest that for him the biggest prize is a general election to produce a 1945-style change of direction. That may be wildly unrealistic, and he's no Clem Attlee (more like George Lansbury without the moral stature, if you want to go even further back in Labour history), but it suggests that in his heart of hearts, Brexit is a sideshow best kept out of, in the hope of building his idea of "socialism in one country" on the ruins. It may be wrong (and it would be possible to be much more radical than their 2017 manifesto within the EU), but it would be a coherent position.
  #1610  
Old 08-21-2019, 09:49 AM
Walken After Midnight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 5,045
English soccer football manager Ian Holloway provides a perfect illustration of the pig-ignorant moronism of Brexiteers while criticizing this season's new handball rule in the English Premier League.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian Holloway
ďI hope we get out, Brexit, because that's what people are voting for and sorting that out because you cannot have someone telling us how to do our own game.Ē
Needless to say, the new handball rule has been instituted by the English Premier League and has absolutely jack shit to do with the E.U. or any European governing body.
  #1611  
Old 08-21-2019, 09:58 AM
The Stainless Steel Rat's Avatar
The Stainless Steel Rat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Close to the Saturn V
Posts: 10,984
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walken After Midnight View Post
Needless to say, the new handball rule has been instituted by the English Premier League and has absolutely jack shit to do with the E.U. or any European governing body.
To be specific:
Quote:
The Laws of the Game are authorized on an annual basis by the International Football Association Board (IFAB) and provided by the Fťdťration Internationale de Football Associations (FIFA).
(from the U.S. Soccer Federation).

But yes, he's an idiot.
  #1612  
Old 08-21-2019, 10:10 AM
Baron Greenback's Avatar
Baron Greenback is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 11,906
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Stainless Steel Rat View Post
To be specific: (from the U.S. Soccer Federation).

But yes, he's an idiot.
There are five entities that have a vote at IFAB: FIFA itself, the English FA, the Scottish FA, the Welsh FA and the Northern Irish FA. FIFA has 4 votes, and the UK FAs have one each. A rule-change needs at least six votes out of eight to pass. So, yeah, he's an idiot.
  #1613  
Old 08-21-2019, 10:12 AM
Walken After Midnight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 5,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Stainless Steel Rat View Post
To be specific: (from the U.S. Soccer Federation).

But yes, he's an idiot.
Yes, you're right, it's a new handball rule for all football around the globe, not just EPL. So still has jack shit to do with the E.U. or Brexit.
  #1614  
Old 08-21-2019, 10:51 AM
Wrenching Spanners is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: London
Posts: 538
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walken After Midnight View Post
English soccer football manager Ian Holloway provides a perfect illustration of the pig-ignorant moronism of Brexiteers while criticizing this season's new handball rule in the English Premier League.

Needless to say, the new handball rule has been instituted by the English Premier League and has absolutely jack shit to do with the E.U. or any European governing body.
Are you sure you want to discuss personality politics and morons the day after Diane Abbott comes out as a Remainer?
  #1615  
Old 08-21-2019, 11:29 AM
Walken After Midnight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 5,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wrenching Spanners View Post
Are you sure you want to discuss personality politics and morons the day after Diane Abbott comes out as a Remainer?
That's great to hear.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diane Abbott
ďThe [Labour] party is committed to a referendum now and Jeremy has made that clear.Ē
  #1616  
Old 08-27-2019, 09:53 AM
Stanislaus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: London
Posts: 3,067
There was a meeting of the leaders of anti-No Deal parties today.

The upshot is that they have agreed to pursue a legislative solution rather than the nuclear option of VONC. At this stage. VONC may still come in to play if no such solution can be found.

Quote:
Jeremy Corbyn has backed cross-party plans to delay a vote of no confidence in Boris Johnson and prioritise rebel MPsí attempts to use legislation to stop a no-deal Brexit.

In a meeting with opposition parties convened by the Labour leader, Corbyn is understood to have opened the discussion by reassuring MPs that Labour would not seek a premature vote of no confidence that might stymie legislative efforts to stop no deal.

The meeting, attended by the Scottish National partyís Ian Blackford, Jo Swinson of the Liberal Democrats, the Green partyís Caroline Lucas and the Independent Group for Changeís Anna Soubry, agreed to focus efforts on passing legislation to stop a no-deal Brexit.

Although Dominic Grieve, Oliver Letwin and Caroline Spelman, all prominent Conservatives opposed to Brexit, were invited to the meeting, no Tory MPs attended.
  #1617  
Old 08-27-2019, 11:32 AM
GreenWyvern's Avatar
GreenWyvern is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cape Town
Posts: 1,737
I watched the video of their press conference, and things seem a bit more promising.

They didn't mince their words. They talked about a 'coup' by Johnson, and called a no-deal Brexit the biggest crisis since WWII. They promised to put party and personal rivalries aside and work together.

Anna Soubrey denounced Tory MPs who call this 'madness' in private, but won't come out and vote against it. She called on them to have the courage of their convictions for the sake of their constituents.

John McDonnell said, "Prime ministers come and prime ministers go, but I donít think we've ever seen a prime minister like this who has the potential to threaten the very nature of our democracy."

Last edited by GreenWyvern; 08-27-2019 at 11:37 AM.
  #1618  
Old 08-28-2019, 07:01 AM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 26,245
And...here we go:
Johnson asks Queen to suspend Parliament
  #1619  
Old 08-28-2019, 07:32 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,550
What does "suspending parliament" mean? Can the Queen say no?
  #1620  
Old 08-28-2019, 08:12 AM
Inner Stickler's Avatar
Inner Stickler is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 15,149
I'm seeing that meme of the sailor cartoon saying, "Well yes, but actually no" in my mind.

Very interested in UK dopers opinions. I initially thought that the expectation is that she would prorogue Parliament in accordance with the norm of non-interference but honestly proroguing or not proroguing are both majorly political acts.
  #1621  
Old 08-28-2019, 08:17 AM
Filbert is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,647
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
What does "suspending parliament" mean? Can the Queen say no?
Suspending parliament is what it sounds like- basically a shut down, so no official discussions or, more importantly, votes can take place.

Theoretically yes, the queen can refuse assent; in practice, no. The Queen officially holds the power to refuse, but it's basically ceremonial. Although she may privately advise the PM, she's not going to publicly oppose the government.
  #1622  
Old 08-28-2019, 08:21 AM
Baron Greenback's Avatar
Baron Greenback is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 11,906
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
What does "suspending parliament" mean?
Prorogation usually happens every year. It's the process that leads to a new Queen's Speech (which is the Government setting out its new legislative agenda). It basically temporarily stops all parliamentary business, guillotines any legislation that hasn't managed to be completed, essentially ties up loose ends and leaves a clean slate for the new Parliament. It's usually just for a couple of weeks.

In this case it's been over two years since the last Queens Speech as the government decided that because of Brexit pressures a much longer Parliament than usual was a good idea.

And Brexit is the problem here. The 31st of October is rapidly approaching and, as regular thread readers will know, it's all been a bit of a disaster. Party conference season is also coming up, and the Commons usually votes to recess for three weeks so that MPs can deal with Party business. This year it was looking likely that there was no majority for this recess to take place, thus giving Parliament an extra three weeks to deal with Brexit fire-fighting.

By proroguing Parliament for five weeks, Johnson is attempting to limit Parliament's input into late-stage Brexit stuff - and while it's very likely legal to do so* it's causing quite a bit of a fuss.

Parliament is back next week - expect fireworks.

* A cross-party group of MPs have a petition being heard tomorrow at the Court of Session in Edinburgh to test this
  #1623  
Old 08-28-2019, 08:44 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,550
CNN reports that Corbyn will call for a "vote of confidence" (is that the same as a vote of no confidence?). https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news...ntl/index.html

EDIT: Thanks for the answers to my questions!

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 08-28-2019 at 08:44 AM.
  #1624  
Old 08-28-2019, 09:01 AM
Novelty Bobble is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 9,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
What does "suspending parliament" mean? Can the Queen say no?
The Queen can certainly say no and insert herself into politics, but in doing so she couldn't really remain as Queen.

What may be quite amusing is imaging what Corbyn is thinking regarding that. He'd both love and hate the Queen saying "no". I wouldn't put it past him to egg her on and then use it as a reason for binning her.
__________________
I'm saving this space for the first good insult hurled my way
  #1625  
Old 08-28-2019, 09:13 AM
PastTense is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 7,733
The Queen has said yes to suspending Parliament:
Quote:
The Queen has formally approved Boris Johnson's request to suspend parliament from the second week of September until October 14.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a9082281.html

Why not suspend until November 1 to make absolutely sure Parliament can do nothing?

Last edited by PastTense; 08-28-2019 at 09:14 AM.
  #1626  
Old 08-28-2019, 09:25 AM
Ludovic is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 30,384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
The Queen can certainly say no and insert herself into politics, but in doing so she couldn't really remain as Queen.

What may be quite amusing is imaging what Corbyn is thinking regarding that. He'd both love and hate the Queen saying "no". I wouldn't put it past him to egg her on and then use it as a reason for binning her.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PastTense View Post
The Queen has said yes to suspending Parliament:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a9082281.html

Why not suspend until November 1 to make absolutely sure Parliament can do nothing?
Maybe it's to make sure that they don't consider a bold move like calling on the Queen to resist suspension (and thus more possible that she would have acceded since it would not look like a power grab)? Now there is a fig leaf of a few weeks to try to work out a deal without such a constitutional crisis even if it isn't likely.
  #1627  
Old 08-28-2019, 11:46 AM
Ludovic is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 30,384
Thought of another one. He might give such a short time frame because only one of two things could reasonably happen: a hard Brexit or another delay, both of which Parliament as a whole would take the blame for rather than Johnson.
  #1628  
Old 08-28-2019, 01:08 PM
iamthewalrus(:3= is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 12,024
Quote:
Originally Posted by PastTense View Post
Why not suspend until November 1 to make absolutely sure Parliament can do nothing?
I'm very much not in-the-know here but the speculation I have read is that he can present an alternative to a Hard Brexit and there will be no time to consider anything else. Gives him tremendous power to get his favorite "slightly less-bad catastrophe" plan through.
  #1629  
Old 08-28-2019, 02:38 PM
Mk VII is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: England
Posts: 2,942
Quote:
Originally Posted by PastTense View Post
Why not suspend until November 1 to make absolutely sure Parliament can do nothing?
That might be seen as a bridge too far, particularly as some current cabinet members denounced such a possibility when they were fighting over the party leadership. This way the PM can point out that it's merely a slightly longer break than Parliament always takes around the autumn for the party conference season.
  #1630  
Old 08-28-2019, 06:05 PM
Baron Greenback's Avatar
Baron Greenback is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 11,906
You know what comes back into play after a prorogation? Theresa May's Withdrawal Agreement, that's what.

After several failed attempts to pass it in the prior Parliament the Speaker ruled - rightly - that it could not be brought again. When a new Parliament starts up that restriction goes away, and after all it's the only agreement that the UK .gov and the EU have managed. I wonder how that vote would go on, say, 30th October...
  #1631  
Old 08-28-2019, 08:46 PM
Greg Charles is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: San Diego
Posts: 4,002
OK, I’m confused again. Last month, MPs voted (by a margin as these things go) to block prorogation to stop this exact situation. Brexit: MPs back bid to block Parliament suspension. I haven’t seen that even mentioned today. Did something change?
__________________
STGM
  #1632  
Old 08-28-2019, 09:47 PM
UDS is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 8,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Charles View Post
OK, Iím confused again. Last month, MPs voted (by a margin as these things go) to block prorogation to stop this exact situation. Brexit: MPs back bid to block Parliament suspension. I havenít seen that even mentioned today. Did something change?
No. The Government has worked around the attempted block.

The block takes the form of legislation which, in summary, says:

1. The government must present a certain report to Parliament by 4 September. There must be a debate on that report with 5 calendar days. If parliament is not sitting, it must be recalled in time for that to happen.

(This effectively prevents Parliament being prorogued in a way that prevents that debate happening. But Johnson doesn't intent to prorogue until 9 September or later, so no problem there.)

2. The government must prevent a further report on the same subject by 9 October and, again, a debate must follow within 5 calendar days (i.e. by 14 October) and, again, if necessary Parliament must be recalled to allow this to happen.

(But Johnson intends to recall Parliament for 14 October.)

The reason for this gap between the reports is that Parliament was always going to be in recess (not prorogued) in late September anyway, so that MPs could go off and attend their annual party conferences, all of which happen at around this time.
  #1633  
Old 08-29-2019, 10:26 AM
kevlaw is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Bristol, UK
Posts: 778
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baron Greenback View Post
You know what comes back into play after a prorogation? Theresa May's Withdrawal Agreement, that's what.
Before TM even put the withdrawal bill to parliament for the first time, I predicted that it would fail and that she would try to run down the clock and that it would pass at the last moment before Brexit Midnight because the alternatives (for both Brexiters and Remainers) were too awful to contemplate. The Brexit delay messed that up. Also the opinions on the backstop became too entrenched to back down from.

I think Johnson is using exactly the same strategy but making super sure that Brexit can't be delayed again this time. I think he can a whole bunch of moderate remainers and not-quite-mental leavers on board for that.

He can get even more on board if he can persuade the EU to make some cosmetic change to the backstop like: "What if we call it a safety net instead of a backstop?" or "What if we spell it Bakkstop with two Ks?". That will get a few more Brexiters on board. Enough to pass it.

Johnson will be a hero for saving the nation and he'll win the next election in a landslide. We'll all have lashings and lashings of ginger beer on Independence Day. Hoorah!

That has been my prediction for a while and I'm sticking with it.
  #1634  
Old 08-29-2019, 12:24 PM
Greg Charles is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: San Diego
Posts: 4,002
Quote:
Originally Posted by UDS View Post
No. The Government has worked around the attempted block.
Thanks for that, UDS. The coverage from last month, even from the BBC, didn't call this out at all, and the coverage from this week, as far as I've seen, doesn't even refer to last month's vote.

Was that vote pointless then, or is this partly-constrained prorogue less impactful than it could have been without it?
__________________
STGM
  #1635  
Old 08-29-2019, 07:32 PM
UDS is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 8,933
The vote was not pointless, since it has in fact prevented Johnson from proroguing Parliament immediately, and until after Brexit. (Of course, possibly he wouldn't have tried to do that anyway.)

This means that Parliament will sit next week, and that presents an opportunity either to vote no confidence in Johnson and attempt to install an altenative government, or to pass legislation intended to impede or prevent a no-deal Brexit on 31 October. So Johnson could yet be stymied.

There is another view, which is that Johnson't intention all along has been to goad parliament into doing exactly this. He doesn't want a no-ceal Brexit on 31 October, since that would be ruinous and would be all anyone would ever remember about his (probably very short) stint as PM. But he also doesn't want to wear the political responisiblity for preventing it. He wants it to be prevented, but by others. I don't find this view very persuasive, myself, but it's definitely out there.
  #1636  
Old 08-30-2019, 05:12 AM
lisiate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,771
Wow John Major's joined a case trying to stop the prorogation.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:34 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017