The Queen agrees to let Boris Johnson shut down Parliament...

[jimnyc]

2 articles.

---

The Queen agrees to let Boris Johnson shut down Parliament and thwart Corbyn’s anti-Brexit plot

THE Queen has approved Boris Johnson’s bombshell request to suspend Parliament and stop Jeremy Corbyn’s plans to block No Deal Brexit.

Her Majesty met with members of Privy Council today at Balmoral and an order to prorogue Parliament between September 9 to October 14 was given the green light this afternoon.

https://i.imgur.com/2p1JStl.png

Rest - https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/brexit/9811352/the-queen-agrees-to-let-boris-johnson-shut-down-parliament/


Boris Johnson asks Queen Elizabeth to suspend Parliament to force through Brexit

LONDON — Britain's Queen Elizabeth II approved a request Wednesday by Prime Minister Boris Johnson to suspend Parliament, a constitutionally unusual move that makes it easier for Johnson to force through the country's departure from the European Union.

It means British parliamentarians, determined to stop the nation leaving the EU without a formal exit deal, will have little time to do so just weeks ahead of a Brexit deadline on Oct. 31. Johnson requested the Queen "prorogue" Parliament — shut it down, essentially — on Sept. 10, a week after lawmakers return from a summer recess.

Critics argue the move subverts the democratic process. Dominic Grieve, a member of Johnson's ruling Conservative Party, called it "an outrageous act" and warned that it could lead to a no confidence vote. "This government will come down," said Grieve.

Britain's monarch rarely intervenes directly in politicized affairs of state and it would be exceptionally rare for her to defy the prime minister's request. The British pound currency fell sharply on the news, recently down almost 1% against the dollar.

Rest - https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2019/08/28/boris-johnson-ask-queen-elizabeth-suspend-parliament-brexit/2138789001/

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Bet me he didn't talk this strategy over with President Trump.

[Drummond]

Bet me he didn't talk this strategy over with President Trump.

Well, anyway ... with Labour, and others, meeting to discuss ways of stopping Boris from having any ability to get us out of the EU minus a deal with the EU .. Boris didn't have a choice, as I see it.

I find it comical that critics of Boris's move were so quick to dismiss the intention as 'an outrage' and 'unconstitutional' .. when along came the Queen, to approve the move !!

Without this, Boris's political enemies intended to pass legislation forcing him to commit to making a deal with the EU as a mandatory step to exiting. Since the EU has no interest in offering one other than the one which Parliament has rejected THREE times already, that would've stalled progress until beyond the deadline date (i.e we'd remain in the EU long after October).

With that in place .. their No Confidence motion could've triggered an election, with in all probability a second Referendum (to negate the first one) following. The end product of all of this would've been to force the ending of Brexit entirely, making our subordination to EU diktat irrevocable in everyone's lifetimes.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Heard on the news that there's a huge uproar about this now.

Well, England likes their QUEEN. You mean they're going to turn on HER NOW too?

And I had no idea the Queen, or royal family for that matter, had any official power over anything. I always thought they were just dinosaurs from romantic ages long past that the people of England still simply tolerated.

[Drummond]

Heard on the news that there's a huge uproar about this now.

Well, England likes their QUEEN. You mean they're going to turn on HER NOW too?

And I had no idea the Queen, or royal family for that matter, had any official power over anything. I always thought they were just dinosaurs from romantic ages long past that the people of England still simply tolerated.

Hah ! An uproar, whatever happens, is guaranteed these days !

The 'Remain in the EU' side is knowing some pretty 'desperate' times, now. If they're going to win through, they have to pull out all the stops to manage it. If not now ... then, when ?? So they'll do what it takes, attack anybody they must (even the Queen !) to get their way.

Notably, though, once the Queen HAD given her consent for Boris's pro-roguing ... some strident voices became quieter. The Speaker of the House of Commons called Boris's move a 'constitutional outrage', before the Queen backed Boris, but he's suddenly gone quiet. Interesting, that.

The Queen is nearly powerless. She is constrained to be, publicly, politically neutral. She can't initiate political moves. That said, she still is a 'rubber-stamping' mechanism when it comes to the appointment of new PM's, or new Governments, so you'll always have a PM-elected or PM-'hopeful' having to visit Buckingham Palace for her to give official approval. Should she see a request or political move involving her as lacking procedural merit, she can argue that point, and refuse to rubber-stamp (in theory ... it doesn't get tested !) However, this time, she effectively defeated calls of 'unconstitutional' by approving the pro-roguing request, in these unusual circumstances.

Remember, officially, it's still HER MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT. Any UK Government, governs in HER name. She is still the Head of any Government we have ... we're still a monarchy !

That said, she must remain politically neutral in terms of airing opinion, or using what's remaining of her power to favour one political ideology over another.

[Drummond]

Just seen this ....

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1171266/brexit-latest-labour-news-mp-queen-elizabeth-ii-boris-johnson-prorogue-kate-osamor?fbclid=IwAR1NnlKTO1KZg09ztByq0-9m1KRdf1pKt5JoPED8fryx0DVLIN8bh_wKDpY


A LABOUR MP threatened the Queen on Twitter by claiming the monarchy should be abolished after she approved Boris Johnson’s request to prorogue Parliament.

Kate Osamor took to social media to share her anger at the decision, which Her Majesty was constitutionally required to do. She tweeted: “The Queen should look at what happened to her cousin Tino ex King of Greece when you enable a right wing coup! Monarchy abolished!”

The Edmonton MP caused backlash last year when she used House of Commons headed notepaper to ask a judge not to jail her son for drug dealing.

Nice .. eh ?

[Noir]

The Queen was never going to block the request. The fact that the request was made at all however is concerning.
As much as Drummond will applaud it, because the end result will be what he wants, Boris has committed to a path of gross misuse of power, for which our other branches of government have no ability to hold him to account for.

[STTAB]

The Queen was never going to block the request. The fact that the request was made at all however is concerning.
As much as Drummond will applaud it, because the end result will be what he wants, Boris has committed to a path of gross misuse of power, for which our other branches of government have no ability to hold him to account for.

What sort of bizzaro world are we living in when a politician who is actually trying to do the will of the people is accused of abusing their power? That has stood true for Trump for 3 years now and is apparently now true of Boris Johnson as well. "Oh you give a shit about what the people want? That's ab abuse of power"

[Noir]

What sort of bizzaro world are we living in when a politician who is actually trying to do the will of the people is accused of abusing their power? That has stood true for Trump for 3 years now and is apparently now true of Boris Johnson as well. "Oh you give a shit about what the people want? That's ab abuse of power"

The executive is using its power designed to break up parliament for an election, not because an election is being called, but because they don’t want the legislature to be able to sit/debate/vote for a few weeks, is an abuse of power, regardless of the reason.

It is especially egregious given only last month a number of high profile conservatives (including Boris) were dismissing the idea that anyone would even consider doing this.

[STTAB]

The executive is using its power designed to break up parliament for an election, not because an election is being called, but because they don’t want the legislature to be able to sit/debate/vote for a few weeks, is an abuse of power, regardless of the reason.

It is especially egregious given only last month a number of high profile conservatives (including Boris) were dismissing the idea that anyone would even consider doing this.

Seems to me that things were done in the legal manner , and so that isn't an abuse of power. It may be a dick move, but not all dick moves are abuses of power.

[Kathianne]

Drummond Noir

Came across this, dated 8/29

https://order-order.com/2019/08/29/tory-double-digit-polling-lead/

https://i1.wp.com/order-order.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/yg28-7-19-e1567073252925-540x203.jpg?zoom=1.25&resize=540%2C203&ssl=1

[Noir]

Seems to me that things were done in the legal manner , and so that isn't an abuse of power. It may be a dick move, but not all dick moves are abuses of power.

Again - the government ministers involved in this were all saying last month that they would not even consider dissolving Parliament because it is undemocratic, unconstitutional, and so on. Of course now they’re busy deleting those tweets.

Also Gove is on the record today as saying that dissolving Parliament is “certainly not” about stopping Parliament stopping Brexit :laugh:

[Drummond]

The Queen was never going to block the request. The fact that the request was made at all however is concerning.
As much as Drummond will applaud it, because the end result will be what he wants, Boris has committed to a path of gross misuse of power, for which our other branches of government have no ability to hold him to account for.

Who else but a Leftie would consider that a politician doing all he can to heed, respect, implement, the democratic Will of the People, can deserve censure for it !!!!

All that's now happening has come about, Noir, as a result of wreckers who are determined to derail that Will of the People, any way they can, and have already reduced Parliament itself to paralysed dysfunctionality in that effort ... where, to date, nothing on Brexit is getting through !!

Why WOULDN'T Boris put a stop to all the sabotage ?? If Parliament carried on, not curbed, not following a decent and reputable path ... then, the wreckers would continue on, compounding the current mess, and in the hope of destroying the hopes and wishes of 17.4 million of the electorate. WHY permit it all, when the vandalism can be countered with something remedially sensible (no matter how drastic) ?

Or does Parliament, in Leftie eyes, exist to DEFY democratic accountability ... whenever convenient ??

[Drummond]

The executive is using its power designed to break up parliament for an election, not because an election is being called, but because they don’t want the legislature to be able to sit/debate/vote for a few weeks, is an abuse of power, regardless of the reason.

It is especially egregious given only last month a number of high profile conservatives (including Boris) were dismissing the idea that anyone would even consider doing this.

MP's trying their very hardest (with not a sign of conscience showing, when doing so) to derail a Brexit process VOTED FOR BY THE GENERAL PUBLIC, is the very worst use of their power, Noir.

The Labour Party campaigned in the 2017 election as a pro-Brexit Party. Now, they're the reverse of that. Nobody voted for any of them on the understanding that they'd ever renege on their election promise, but they're doing it now, big time !!

Had Boris not undertaken his proroguing strategy, Noir, Labour's wholly non-representative vandalism would've continued at full pelt. So, Noir, quit YOUR lecturing about so-called 'abuse of power', from BORIS !!!

[Noir]

Who else but a Leftie would consider that a politician doing all he can to heed, respect, implement, the democratic Will of the People, can deserve censure for it !!!!

All that's now happening has come about, Noir, as a result of wreckers who are determined to derail that Will of the People, any way they can, and have already reduced Parliament itself to paralysed dysfunctionality in that effort ... where, to date, nothing on Brexit is getting through !!

Why WOULDN'T Boris put a stop to all the sabotage ?? If Parliament carried on, not curbed, not following a decent and reputable path ... then, the wreckers would continue on, compounding the current mess, and in the hope of destroying the hopes and wishes of 17.4 million of the electorate. WHY permit it all, when the vandalism can be countered with something remedially sensible (no matter how drastic) ?

Or does Parliament, in Leftie eyes, exist to DEFY democratic accountability ... whenever convenient ??


MP's trying their very hardest (with not a sign of conscience showing, when doing so) to derail a Brexit process VOTED FOR BY THE GENERAL PUBLIC, is the very worst use of their power, Noir.

The Labour Party campaigned in the 2017 election as a pro-Brexit Party. Now, they're the reverse of that. Nobody voted for any of them on the understanding that they'd ever renege on their election promise, but they're doing it now, big time !!

Had Boris not undertaken his proroguing strategy, Noir, Labour's wholly non-representative vandalism would've continued at full pelt. So, Noir, quit YOUR lecturing about so-called 'abuse of power', from BORIS !!!

I hope you’re not suggesting that dissolving Parliament has anything to do with Brexit?! Gove made very clear today in his statement that is “certainly not” the case.

[NightTrain]

I was reading about this matter this morning... I've been out of the loop lately.

However, it seems that Boris appears to have this matter mapped out, and I applaud it.

The British people voted to leave, and the English version of "OMG Resist!!!" has run amok with the sore losers trying to undo an election but instead creating chaos and quagmire.

It's too bad that May didn't have the courage to just get it done, but that's all in the past now.

This was an excellent article for those like me with a tenuous grasp on the intricacies of British politics :

https://finance.townhall.com/columnists/mikeshedlock/2019/08/30/boris-johnsons-deviously-clever-brexit-strategy-unfolds-n2552416

Now the resisters are staring down the barrel of a No-Deal Brexit and powerless to do anything to stop it. Fiendishly clever! :2up:

[Noir]

I was reading about this matter this morning... I've been out of the loop lately.

However, it seems that Boris appears to have this matter mapped out, and I applaud it.

The British people voted to leave, and the English version of "OMG Resist!!!" has run amok with the sore losers trying to undo an election but instead creating chaos and quagmire.

It's too bad that May didn't have the courage to just get it done, but that's all in the past now.

This was an excellent article for those like me with a tenuous grasp on the intricacies of British politics :

https://finance.townhall.com/columnists/mikeshedlock/2019/08/30/boris-johnsons-deviously-clever-brexit-strategy-unfolds-n2552416

Now the resisters are staring down the barrel of a No-Deal Brexit and powerless to do anything to stop it. Fiendishly clever! :2up:

You seem to be under the same misunderstanding as Drummond. Gove was very clear - this has absolutely nothing to do with Brexit. Nothing at all. Not a thing.

[Drummond]

You seem to be under the same misunderstanding as Drummond. Gove was very clear - this has absolutely nothing to do with Brexit. Nothing at all. Not a thing.

You're playing games, Noir.

You know what ? I really DON'T CARE what's claimed about the reason for shutting down Parliament. The POINT is, Noir, that your wrecker comrades are going to have far less time for their sabotaging efforts than they would've had otherwise. Poor ol' Boris, eh ... under the delusion that (a) he should govern, and without having his efforts sabotaged .. and, (b) that stopping sabotage is the right and responsible action to take !!

Consider. Your comrades (aided & abetted by others, too) have done their best to stop Brexit happening, by the original due time back in March. Never mind what the general public voted for, in 2016. Never mind that most of the wreckers voted those individuals to Parliament, thinking they were backing people who'd keep their manifesto pledge to behave considerably differently ! No, Noir, 'never mind' all of that.

To your comrades, all that really matters is to continue to stall Brexit, and keep its implementation from being workable. To hell with everyone else; THEY will do what THEY want to do, and, to hell with democracy ITSELF .. if it gets in the way.

Barnier said today that the backstop cannot be removed from any deal. Parliament won't ratify any deal, with one !! So what exactly are your wrecker chums working towards ? WHAT'S THE POINT OF WHAT THEY'RE DOING ?

Despite what they claim, their only aim must be to crush the democratic decision made on June 2016, and to overturn Brexit entirely. You know it, Noir, as do I.

[Noir]

You know what ? I really DON'T CARE what's claimed about the reason for shutting down Parliament.

Of course, it would be too much to of expected you to care.

[NightTrain]

You seem to be under the same misunderstanding as Drummond. Gove was very clear - this has absolutely nothing to do with Brexit. Nothing at all. Not a thing.


It doesn't?

Then what, pray tell, was the purpose behind the maneuvers and the timing with all of this?

[Drummond]

Of course, it would be too much to of expected you to care.

Considering the circumstances ... yes, it would.

Parliament is supposed to serve democracy, and the people who vote its Members to positions of Parliamentary power there. But Parliament has been dominated, these past several months, by MP's who've DEFIED their mandate to deliver Brexit !

So, why should I care ? Parliament, currently, does not serve the clearly-voiced Will of the People.

When it does .. I'll care.

Until it does .. I won't.

All that currently matters is that Boris, who IS committed to doing the Will of the People, succeeds in his efforts.

[Noir]

It doesn't?

Then what, pray tell, was the purpose behind the maneuvers and the timing with all of this?

Well there you have me stumped.
I don’t know.
and Drummond doesn’t care so I guess there’ll be no answer forthcoming from him - But Gove was absolutely clear when asked that suspending parliament was “absolutely not” to do with Brexit.

[Drummond]

Well there you have me stumped.
I don’t know.
and Drummond doesn’t care so I guess there’ll be no answer forthcoming from him - But Gove was absolutely clear when asked that suspending parliament was “absolutely not” to do with Brexit.

Do I correctly understand, Noir, that the UK Parliament is an institution you hold in high esteem ?

Do you seriously think it EARNS any respect ?

If you do ... please, explain the basis you have for that respect.

If we live in a democracy (a rather big 'if' !) .. then, Parliament exists to serve that democracy. For it to be dominated by individuals who'll ride roughshod over the democratic Will of the People, thereby completely subverting the basis for Parliament's moral authority ... means that Parliament has earned the perception of having become a dysfunctional irrelevance.

Boris's actions - considering this truth - couldn't be more appropriate. Boris is heeding the 2016 Referendum result, and in the face of the EU's, and Barnier's, utter intransigence .. his actions are the only decent ones to take.

The alternative is what we've already seen .. a Parliament incapable of taking any decisive actions of its own, and one where the Will of the People, these days, receives scant consideration.

[Gunny]

You change the name of the country. You can change the names of the political parties. In the end, Noir will STILL be wrong :).

[Gunny]

So I have a question Noir: There are currently politicians or at least A politician fighting for the UK's independence from the EU. You DON'T support that? Are you planning to move to the Continent if PM Johnson is successful?

I have also made note of the fact the Queen didn't appear to hesitate in granting the PM's request. She probably went primly and properly into the Royal Privy and said "FUKKIN' A!!" No disrespect to Her Majesty intended.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

It is a MYSTERY to me how someone can get SO... LEFT... like noir. Evidently the BRAIN WASHING in Europe is DEEP and has been going on for a LONG TIME.

So the PEOPLE, VOTE, FOR, leaving the EU. So then there's opposition to it by the EU leftists and they do everything possible to DERAIL it, and then along comes Boris who is actually going to CARRY OUT the will of the PEOPLE, and he gets a little help from the Queen, and noir calls this ABUSE OF POWER? Uuuumm... on WHAT PLANET? Good God... I'll never understand leftists. I just can't wrap my head around their WARPED bull shit.

[Noir]

So I have a question @Noir (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=517): There are currently politicians or at least A politician fighting for the UK's independence from the EU. You DON'T support that? Are you planning to move to the Continent if PM Johnson is successful?

No.


I have also made note of the fact the Queen didn't appear to hesitate in granting the PM's request. She probably went primly and properly into the Royal Privy and said "FUKKIN' A!!" No disrespect to Her Majesty intended.

The day the queen hesitates to grant a PMs request any power the Monarchy have will be removed.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

No.

The day the queen hesitates to grant a PMs request any power the Monarchy have will be removed.
---------------- http://www.sherv.net/cm/emo/laughing/yellow-laughing-smiley-emoticon.gif (http://www.sherv.net/)

[Gunny]

No.



The day the queen hesitates to grant a PMs request any power the Monarchy have will be removed.That will remain to be seen. I don't believe the Queen is as powerless as some would have one believe.

Tying yourself to mediocrity such as the EU offers was a loser move to start with. You think you got it all figured out, but it looks to me like the PM has YOU and your ilk figured out and your "drag it out forever" until it flips back to the "still enslaved" permanently. We have a political party here plays the same game.

Now is the best time I can think of for the UK to make a move. I'm not going to proclaim President Trump the UK's "Messiah" as some have, BUT ... he DOES present opportunity for pro-BREXIT because he's willing to help. Not "save", but help. Was this happening during Obama's faux Presidency, the UK could scratch the US as any kind of potential help since that knucklehead would probably have tried to join the EU if he could have.

[Elessar]

Of course, it would be too much to of expected you to care.

To of? Try to have intellectual genius.

[Drummond]

That will remain to be seen. I don't believe the Queen is as powerless as some would have one believe.

Tying yourself to mediocrity such as the EU offers was a loser move to start with. You think you got it all figured out, but it looks to me like the PM has YOU and your ilk figured out and your "drag it out forever" until it flips back to the "still enslaved" permanently. We have a political party here plays the same game.

Now is the best time I can think of for the UK to make a move. I'm not going to proclaim President Trump the UK's "Messiah" as some have, BUT ... he DOES present opportunity for pro-BREXIT because he's willing to help. Not "save", but help. Was this happening during Obama's faux Presidency, the UK could scratch the US as any kind of potential help since that knucklehead would probably have tried to join the EU if he could have.

I've posted on this before ... but, Obama did interfere during his Presidency. We were coming up to the 'Brexit' Referendum .. and Obama warned us of being put to the back of any queue to trade with the US, if we failed to SUPPORT our continued EU membership.

Who knows ... maybe his hostile interference helped make up some minds to do the opposite. If Obama had been President now, he'd be ensuring that the UK was locked out of trade with America for a considerable time.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/663665/Barack-Obama-Britain-back-queue-Brexit


BARACK Obama was last night condemned for trying to “blackmail” Britain into remaining in the EU.

The US President warned the UK would be “at the back of the queue” for a trade deal with America if it quit Brussels.

But his threat provoked outrage and scorn from pro-Brexit campaigners, who dismissed it as yet another scaremongering ploy from the pro-EU lobby.

Mr Obama, who will no longer be in office when decisions on a trade deal are made, delivered a lecture to the British people on why he thinks it is in the UK’s, America’s and the world’s best interests for Britain to vote to stay in the EU on June 23.

He weighed into the debate despite being warned by a host of anti-EU campaigners to “butt out” of our referendum battle.

He said there could be a US-UK trade agreement “down the line” but warned: “It’s not going to happen any time soon, because our focus is on negotiating with a big bloc, the EU. The UK is going to be in the back of the queue.”

The claim, made during a joint news conference with David Cameron, angered Leave campaigners.

Tory Justice Minister Dominic Raab said Mr Obama had made “a pretty cynical intervention”.

He added: “We’ve got a lame duck president doing an old friend a favour for purely political reasons – and taking a few unnecessary risks, being a bit irresponsible with the special relationship between our two countries.

“You can’t say on the one hand that the relationship is essential and always will be, then say that if you don’t take my advice you’ll be at the back of the queue for a free trade deal. I don’t think the British people will be blackmailed by anyone ....

[Kathianne]

https://hotair.com/archives/ed-morrissey/2019/09/02/tony-blair-bojos-laying-trap-corbyns-bait/


Tony Blair: BoJo’s Laying A Trap, And Corbyn’s The Bait
ED MORRISSEYPosted at 10:31 am on September 2, 2019

“We want a general election,” Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn declared today, in order to “do everything we can in the coming weeks to prevent a no deal [Brexit].” His more wily predecessor warned in response that Corbyn’s walking into “an elephant trap.” A general election is exactly what Boris Johnson wants, Blair argued later, because it will create a referendum not just on Brexit but also on the idea of the odious Corbyn as prime minister. Blair politely suggested that Labour might not like what British voters have to say about that idea at all:




"None of these details added up at all": Dave Chappelle on the Jussie Smollett hoax


“Boris Johnson knows that if no-deal Brexit stands on its own as a proposition it might well fail but if he mixes it up with the Corbyn question in a general election he could succeed despite a majority being against a no-deal Brexit because some may fear a Corbyn premiership more,” Blair said.


Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn “should see an election before Brexit is decided for the elephant trap it is,” he said.


Johnson ally Jacob Rees-Mogg is already shaping the electoral battlefield in that direction:


House of Commons Leader Jacob Rees-Mogg has said rebel legislation would be considered a matter of confidence in the government.


“It is important for the government to establish the confidence of the House of Commons and this is essentially a confidence matter: Who should control the legislative agenda, Jeremy Corbyn or Boris Johnson?” Rees-Mogg said.


Blair’s analysis matches that of practically everyone else but Corbyn and his allies. It’s been clear that Johnson has been maneuvering for a no-confidence motion in order to get “pushed” into a general election. Johnson can delay it so that a no-deal Brexit takes place before the election; in fact, it will be nearly impossible to hold an election prior to the October 31st deadline. Corbyn’s demand for an election puts the knife in his hand rather than Johnson’s, which is also a very clever trap by Johnson.


Is it wise to push Corbyn into this position? Johnson thinks his no-holds-barred approach to Brexit will generate a lot of goodwill with voters, and thus far the data suggests he’s correct. A poll in the past two weeks showed the Conservatives vaulting to a 14-point lead over Labour, rising seventeen points from a May survey in the same polling series. Corbyn’s party declined six points in the same period. Some of Johnson’s gains came at the expense of Nigel Farage’s Brexit party, which advocated the hard line that Johnson has adopted. Combine that with the chaos of a no-deal Brexit unfolding at the same time, and a decision by British voters to allow Johnson to steer its course would not be surprising at all.


On the other hand, Johnson will need strict party cohesion in order to win a general election. He has a one-seat majority in Parliament now, provided by ten seats from the Northern Ireland party DUP where Brexit was unpopular to start with and is getting more unpopular the closer a hard border comes. Johnson can’t afford to lose a single person — and yet today he’s threatening a purge unless Tories stop balking at his hardline tactics:


Prime Minister Boris Johnson sharply raised the stakes in the Brexit fight on Monday, threatening to kick members of Parliament out of the Conservative Party if they don’t support his plans to leave the European Union next month.


The move comes as Johnson and his opponents position themselves for a fierce showdown over Brexit on Tuesday when Parliament returns from its summer recess. …


Conservative rebels reacted angrily to Johnson’s threat to force them out of the party, which would mean they could not run as Conservative candidates in future elections. A general election, as soon as the next few weeks, is a possibility if Johnson and his opponents fail to reach agreement over Brexit.


Talk about traps. That would work if Johnson can guarantee that new Tory candidates can win in those constituencies over incumbents running under another party banner. It’s more likely that these incumbents are reflecting worries from their constituents over a no-deal Brexit, which means that the Tories would not only lose the power of incumbency but would be asking Brexit-skeptical voters to endorse Johnson’s crash-out strategy. Even if the Kantor poll from late last month is accurate, don’t forget that Theresa May forced an election when Tories looked safe in polling, too — and ended up losing the Conservative majority. Things change quickly in British politics, especially in the Brexit era.


Perhaps the best thing Johnson has going for him is Jeremy Corbyn, but that could be a trap, too. Corbyn could step aside and allow a more moderate — or at least less anti-Semitic and more palatable — Labourite to take the reins of the party. If they do that after Johnson gets his general election, Boris might have stepped into an elephant trap of his own. That’s what Blair hinted at in today’s speech, not-so-subtly urging his successor to take one for the team and for the nation. Corbyn hasn’t been smart enough to see that so far, and unless he has this up his sleeve, he doesn’t appear to have figured out Johnson’s play even while everyone else has.

[Drummond]

https://hotair.com/archives/ed-morrissey/2019/09/02/tony-blair-bojos-laying-trap-corbyns-bait/

If the BBC's accounts are to be believed (.. & this following a speech made by Boris just hours ago, following a 'surprise' Cabinet meeting ..) ... the latest thinking is that Boris wants to measure the extent of rebellion still in the Conservative ranks.

We're in for some very 'lively' moments, imminently, in the Commons. Boris has tried to outflank the way things may go, by warning his people that disloyalty to the Boris line will earn the rebels deselection as Conservative MP's. This he'd follow up with a snap election, which may be settled BEFORE the end of October !!

Boris, it seems, calculates that betrayers from within the Conservative Party may be enough in number to make his intentions nearly impossible to realise. The calculation would be that Boris has sold himself to the British electorate as THE politician who's listened to their wishes (as expressed in the 2016 Referendum), and so is THE person most willing to represent them.

So, he'd hope to go into an election, win it, replace the deselected MP's with those loyal to the pro-Brexit Conservative manifesto, and have a properly workable majority comprising properly loyal Party members. Armed with all this, he'd have got rid of meaningful impediments.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49558596


The government is expected to table a motion to hold a general election on 14 October if it is defeated by MPs opposed to a no-deal Brexit on Tuesday.
Boris Johnson said he did not want an election, but progress with the EU would be "impossible" if they won.


Tory rebels are joining forces with Labour to bring a bill designed to stop the UK leaving the EU on 31 October without an agreement.

It would force the PM to request a delay to 31 January 2020 in that event.

A senior government official said a motion for an election would be put forward if MPs take the first steps towards passing legislation to block no deal this week.

The prime minister is confident he would win the required two-thirds majority for the motion to be passed, the official added.

Speaking outside No 10 earlier, Mr Johnson insisted that with MPs' backing, he would be able to achieve changes to the UK's current Brexit deal - negotiated by Theresa May and rejected three times in the Commons - at an EU summit on 17 October.

But he said if MPs voted to block no deal they would "plainly chop the legs out from under the UK position".

Ideally, Corbyn would be wrong-footed, big-time. He'd have to issue a Party manifesto at odds with the preceding one ... and with people knowing that Labour's manifesto pledges aren't necessarily worth a damn. His 'vote of No Confidence' could only lead to a change in the Parliamentary status quo, which a General Election would deliver, anyway ! AND ... Corbyn would have to face all those pro-Brexit constituencies who voted Labour, who'll now feel betrayed.

The truly amusing thing is that Corbyn is clearly DESPERATE for an election !! His lust for power has been plain to see, for a long time. He's blinded to anything and everything that threatens his dream of acquiring the PM job.

We live in interesting times ...

.... chaotic as hell ... !!! ......

[Noir]

We’ll know more tomorrow, but I think we’re heading for a general election Mid-October.

[NightTrain]

Well there you have me stumped.
I don’t know.
and Drummond doesn’t care so I guess there’ll be no answer forthcoming from him - But Gove was absolutely clear when asked that suspending parliament was “absolutely not” to do with Brexit.


I think it's pretty clear what's going on here, from all I've read.

I think this is a way to deliver to the legitimate voters that elected to leave the EU.


What say you and I make a wager? On December 1st of this year, we can revisit this and the loser pays Jim $50 for the board.

Deal?

[Noir]

I think it's pretty clear what's going on here, from all I've read.

I think this is a way to deliver to the legitimate voters that elected to leave the EU.

I think the suspension is about Brexit too, but it all begs the question - why is Gove lying about it?


What say you and I make a wager? On December 1st of this year, we can revisit this and the loser pays Jim $50 for the board.

Deal?

No.

[Drummond]

We’ll know more tomorrow, but I think we’re heading for a general election Mid-October.

Indeed.

I'm watching the BBC's output.

I'm appalled by the total lack of contrition from any of the Conservative rebels who've been interviewed. It's abundantly clear that none of them are at all willing to listen to anybody .. and that they, right along with the Labour opposition, think they're there, in the Commons, just to do what THEY want to do, & to hell with anybody else's views.

So I think that Boris's strategy, as 'high risk' as it is, is the right one. He just cannot have his task of dealing seriously and decisively with the EU forever undermined by rebellious factions !! The only reasonable thing he CAN do is to bring this all to a head, I think ... have a clear-out of the rebels, whoever they are, test matters in a General Election .. and, with his victory from that (?), get the numbers of LOYAL MP's behind him for a workable majority to then properly govern !!

It's no exaggeration to say that the future of democracy in the UK is now at stake. A perception that MP's are willfully deaf and blind to anything the general public want, is the one that's coming across. Boris's approach should prove to a great many that integrity and receptiveness to the public Will still counts for something ... we badly need this !!

[I'm annoyed, though. Much of all of this comes as a product of Theresa May's chronic, myopic weakness. If she'd only stood up to the EU, and not fought tooth and nail to get a BAD deal through the Commons (something she always pledged she'd never do: 'No deal is better than a bad deal', she CLAIMED) ... she'd still be PM, and we'd have left the EU by now !!!]

[Drummond]

I think the suspension is about Brexit too, but it all begs the question - why is Gove lying about it?

I think it's only a partial untruth, Noir. This is a new Session of Parliament, and Boris's intentions as PM are very markedly different to Mrs May's. The policy directions his Government will follow need to be thought out in great detail, then all stated clearly in a forthcoming Queen's Speech.

All this takes time, in the normal course of events ... but now, we've got Brexit consuming all the available time, instead. What better way to deal with all this than through a 'reset', where Parliament doesn't take up all available time by employing its wrecking actions ??

[Kathianne]

Here's a very optimistic commentary on what Johnson has unleashed:

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/09/as_boris_johnson_amasses_strength_strange_things_s tart_to_fall_into_place.html



September 2, 2019
As Boris Johnson amasses strength, strange things start to fall into place
By Monica Showalter


U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson has shown some phenomenal political nerve in first shutting down parliament, and then insisting on party discipline on penalty of expulsion from the wets and wobblies in his Tory Party who'd rather drag the Brexit farce out to keep Britain caged within the EU just a little longer. He's got his eyes on the prize, knowing that it's his job to ensure that Britain can leave the European Union as British voters demanded. Like President Trump, he means to keep his promises.


What's vivid now is that a whole lot of things he probably didn't expect -- and had nothing to do with -- are starting to fall into place for him from the outside.


One we know about is that Johnson's Tories have started to soar in the polls. I wrote about that a few days ago here.


But there's more, way more.


How's this for 'betcha didn't see this coming?'


The lefty Archbishop of Canterbury, who's the highest prelate in the Church of England (the head of the church is actually the queen), who of course opposed Brexit, has now had a weird change of heart. Here's the report from the U.K. Sun:


The Archbishop of Canterbury has urged Remainers to “stop whingeing” and accept the result of the Brexit referendum.


Most Rev Justin Welby said those who voted to stay in the EU must now “take seriously the fact that the majority voted Leave”, stating: “We may not like it, but that is democracy.”


Wow. Just wow. Can you imagine one of our Catholic archbishops saying something comparable about the voters' will on the border wall and their right to having a nation ruled by law? That's pretty much what this lefty archbishop's change of heart amounts to.


Here's another one, from the U.K. Express:


Bern is hoping to ramp up research with London as its relationship with Brussels starts to disintegrate after their failed talks to strike up a permanent economic deal. Swiss leaders don’t believe “dogmatic” eurocrats are willing budge on their final three demands, making a deal being reached this year highly unlikely. The deadlocked talks have left relationships with Brussels, who blocked EU-based investors from trading on Swiss exchanges, strained over the summer.

Failure to strike a permanent treaty could also see Swiss researchers blocked from the single market.

Economy minister Guy Parmelin said this could lead the country’s top scientists to turn to new markets, including Britain after Brexit.


He said: “I think the EU would weaken itself, it no longer cooperated with Switzerland on research.


“We are then forced to seek alternatives, perhaps along with Britain, if the EU remains dogmatic.”


So Switzerland has had it up to here with the European Union same as Britain did, and now it's making itself an ally of Britain. Britain can use these kinds of non-supplicant, totally out-of-the-blue, not even asked-for, yet totally welcome, allies against the arrogant monster in Brussels.

The forces are amassing, and if Switzerland does this very publicly, you can bet a lot of them inside the EU and unhappy are thinking about it, too.


Here's another one Boris didn't ask for, a voice of reason -- and encouragement -- from a market bigfoot:


Here's a tweet crowing about it - can't tell if it ran in a tabloid or the person was just happy about it and expressing himself:



But the content speaks for itself. Deutsche Bank represents big money and the chief economist says Brexit is foreseen as a good thing for Britain, not the screaming crash the left, the European Union, and its allied doomsayers are howling about. The headline claims that Germany and France are afraid of this (something the economist did not say) but an inference that is likely correct. This kind of talk can only serve as wind at Boris Johnson's back. The video link is here.


Which brings up a fourth thing that is probably helpful to Boris. The tabloids seem to be on his side, exuberantly reporting all of these good developments. It's not the main press, of course, but having the popular press in one's tree again amounts to an unasked-for gift.


Funny how Johnson's show of strength has this unintended consequence -- of a cascading chain reaction of 'events' (as Churchill once said) all moving to support Boris Johnson's direction.


Image credit: Monica Showalter via IMGUR meme generator

[Noir]

I think it's only a partial untruth, Noir.

How very generous of you.

Everyone *knows* this suspension of parliament is because of Brexit.

But the government can’t just say that because they know exactly how bad it is to admit it. So they’re lying about it. And we all know they’re lying, but they figure enough people, like yourself, won’t care about being lied to.

[Drummond]

Here's a very optimistic commentary on what Johnson has unleashed:

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/09/as_boris_johnson_amasses_strength_strange_things_s tart_to_fall_into_place.html

This all sounds great. I'm especially surprised by The Archbishop of Canterbury's 'rethink' ... presumably he's had protests made to him about his former stance ?

... still. In all of this, we're dealing with monumental egos. Conservative MP's who rebel against their Leader, and their Party. Labour, who have reneged on their manifesto pledges from the last election, defied pro-Brexit Constituencies who voted their MP's into the Commons, for ... what ? To have their wishes ignored or defied ??

I've seen no sign of contrition from any rebel MP. I think that Boris Johnson is going to undergo the 'May effect', where Theresa May couldn't get anything of what she wanted past those Commons rebellions. Boris will find himself outvoted, I think, later on today; in which case, he'll have to hold an election if he's any hope of getting anything done in the Commons.

What makes this especially annoying (quite apart from the insult to democratic process being perpetrated, where the Referendum result is being openly defied) .. is that, in a recent Conservative Party Leadership election, Boris won that very decisively .. and Boris made his intentions, as 'Leader-hopeful' extremely clear to everyone at the time. The rebels REALLY need to reflect on that .. not that they will ....

[Noir]

We’ll know more tomorrow, but I think we’re heading for a general election Mid-October.

Chief labour whip Nick Brown has told the PLP that the Labour Party would not support the Prime Minster calling a general election, so Boris can quote “stew in his own juices” and be made to “own” his mess.

A conservative also defected away from the Conservative party while Boris was making a speech to the house, reducing the governments majority in the house to zero.

[Noir]

12186

One wonders what kind of message someone like Mogg is trying to give when he knows this image is going to end up everywhere - how he “sat” during tonight’s debate.

As described by one MP “The physical embodiment of arrogance, entitlement, disrespect and contempt for our parliament.”

The house is currently voting to try and take control of parliamentary business tomorrow. - Boris loses the vote by 26 (Which is a very large loss given it was made clear to Conservative MPs that voting against the executive would result in them being removed from future ballots, essentially ending their political career), Parliament will be in control of tomorrow’s business. In response Boris states that he his going to start the process for an election 17th October, which he says he doesn’t want...

[Gunny]

One has to wonder about people like you hoping like Hell for failure of something good. Sure you aren't an American Democrat?

[High_Plains_Drifter]

One has to wonder about people like you hoping like Hell for failure of something good. Sure you aren't an American Democrat?
Same thing, living in a different country.

Brainwashed, and anti anything nationalist or individualistic. All they've ever been taught is the leftist collective and group think.

[Drummond]

12186

One wonders what kind of message someone like Mogg is trying to give when he knows this image is going to end up everywhere - how he “sat” during tonight’s debate.

As described by one MP “The physical embodiment of arrogance, entitlement, disrespect and contempt for our parliament.”

The house is currently voting to try and take control of parliamentary business tomorrow. - Boris loses the vote by 26 (Which is a very large loss given it was made clear to Conservative MPs that voting against the executive would result in them being removed from future ballots, essentially ending their political career), Parliament will be in control of tomorrow’s business. In response Boris states that he his going to start the process for an election 17th October, which he says he doesn’t want...

Typical Leftie. You'll go to any lengths, no matter how petty or inconsequential, to attack your opposition. 'Amazing', isn't it, Noir .. in Labour, you've got a Party defying an electorate's democratic vote. Your response ? To be critical of a much-respected MP's manner of relaxation, following an arduous debate in the Commons !!

Yes. As you say, Boris lost that vote by 26. Which clears the way for MP's to gain control of Commons business, which they'll use to table legislation trying to force Boris into giving up on any possibility of our leaving the EU minus a deal (which destroys the one good bargaining chip we have with them).

With Labour pulling out all the stops to wreck Brexit itself ... you've no criticism to offer over their CONTEMPT for democracy, Noir ?? The EU only offers one deal, which the Commons has repeatedly rejected. No others exist ... yet, we can't exit the EU without agreeing one ???

This is pure vandalism.

Boris, it seems, is going to be forced into an election. However ... Corbyn only wants one, IF the 'leave only with a deal' legislation first becomes law !

[Drummond]

Chief labour whip Nick Brown has told the PLP that the Labour Party would not support the Prime Minster calling a general election, so Boris can quote “stew in his own juices” and be made to “own” his mess.

... and what IS Boris's 'mess', anyway ?

His 'mess' is THAT HE IS DOING HIS UTMOST TO HEED AND CARRY THROUGH THE DEMOCRATIC WISH OF THE ELECTORATE.

The Labour Party's response ? Vandalism. Contempt for the electorate.

These, you consider 'meritorious'.

[Gunny]

... and what IS Boris's 'mess', anyway ?

His 'mess' is THAT HE IS DOING HIS UTMOST TO HEED AND CARRY THROUGH THE DEMOCRATIC WISH OF THE ELECTORATE.

The Labour Party's response ? Vandalism. Contempt for the electorate.

These, you consider 'meritorious'.SO what are the PM's options now?

[Noir]

... and what IS Boris's 'mess', anyway ?

Boris has lost his majority in the house as MPs have left the party.
He has literally lost control of the houses order of business today.
He was unable to win a vote which he tried to win by threatening ending the career of any conservative MP who voted against the government.
He has had to start the process for a general election, which he says he doesn’t want, and which we know will lose the Conservative party seats in the house if it does take place.

Looks like a mess to me, 5 weeks into his premiership.

[Noir]

Labour have confirmed they will not support today’s bid for a general election. Cowards.

[Noir]

The Benn Bill has just passed its second reading vote by 329 to 300. Meaning 2 more conservatives have voted against the Government, rumours that former Party Chair Spelman is one of them - Joining other established conservative voices like Ken Clark, Phillip Hammond, Rory Stewart, and Nicholas Soames. Exiling themselves from the party.

[Drummond]

SO what are the PM's options now?

I'm not even sure I can give a fully accurate answer. Things have become very complicated, just in the past few hours.

Even BBC commentators admitted they were struggling with their analyses. What's happening now has no precedent in British politics.

What I am sure of is that Boris's options have diminished considerably.

He's 'lost' around 20 of his own MP's (... if he actually did 'lose' them, as they'd all decided to defy his leadership). So, he did what any strong leader would do, and chucked them out of the Party.

... so. Labour have successfully got (as a result of the Government losing control of Commons business) a bill passed, which rules out the pushing for a 'no deal' Brexit. Boris always wanted that option available to him, to help convince Brussels that they needed to negotiate with him. Labour have all but killed that off (it still needs the Lords to confirm it legally, though !).

See ...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49584907


The bill to block no deal passed all its stages in the Commons in one day, with the support of most opposition parties and 21 Tory rebels, as they tried to push it through ahead of Parliament being suspended next week.

It will now go to the Lords for approval.

Peers are debating a business motion on how to move forward with the bill - but pro-Brexit peers have laid down over 100 amendments to derail its progress.

What's insane about this is that there IS NO DEAL OUT THERE, THAT LABOUR OR THE COMMONS WILL RATIFY. They've refused to, three times over, with the ONE deal the EU has agreed with us. No substitute deal is out there, nor does Brussels have an interest in bargaining for one.

Yet, Labour claim to be focused on only Brexiting, WITH a deal. Because, as they claim, the UK needs one to avoid chaos.

Logically, therefore, Labour can only be trying to sabotage Brexit itself. Nothing else makes sense, but ... they'll never admit it.

There was a Referendum, in 2016, one deciding that we should leave the EU. No qualifications as to 'how', only that we DO. But Labour couldn't care less. They, along with much of the Commons, are showing total contempt for anyone else's wishes but their own.

Boris had a solution ... to call a General Election, & let the People decide ... and so, as Boris would've hoped, he could command a voting majority in the Commons. Though Labour have been clamouring for an election for years, NOW, they're suddenly rejecting the idea, and in fact have formally done so. Boris humorously commented (typically for him) that this must be the first Parliament in history where the Opposition conferred their 'confidence' in their governing political opponents.

There's a reason why Labour are suddenly averse to an election (besides thinking they'd lose, of course !). They don't trust Boris to keep to his October 15th election date ... they don't want to see Boris change his mind, locking them out of Commons business until after the EU's Brexit deadline of 31st October.

So ... Corbyn has said that he'll only agree to an election once it becomes an iron-clad legal imperative that no PM can pull the UK out of the EU, without a deal agreed with the EU, and, one ratified by Parliament.

This makes Boris's position impossible, as he'd guaranteed to pull us out, 'come-what-may', in October. But without a deal agreed, he'll be legally obliged to keep asking for deferrals until a deal is done.

That could literally take years.

I think Labour is trying to make the fact of Brexit so unattainable that we'll have to give up on it ... and, to hell with democratic accountability and what the UK's people voted for.

But, that's the Left for you. They don't listen. They want to be unaccountable to anybody but themselves. They don't listen ... they DICTATE.

.... and, here we are. With the worst constitutional mess (partly because we lack one, in the American sense !) I think we've ever seen.

The BBC have suggested (& it makes procedural sense, as ridiculous as it otherwise is) that Boris could institute a Vote of No Confidence in HIMSELF. Armed with a vote against him, he'd then be free to call the election he tried to push for.

Who knows ... it might appeal to Boris's sense of humour enough for him to go for it !! He could then enjoy seeing his own Party vote against themselves, and the Opposition Labour Party vote FOR him.

Yes. This is how insane things now are, around here, folks .... :rolleyes::rolleyes:

[Drummond]

Labour have confirmed they will not support today’s bid for a general election. Cowards.

Of course they're cowards ... that's a 'given'. More, they're completely unprincipled, and completely contemptuous of any democratic decision which they disapprove of.

Ask any of the 17.4 million who voted for Brexit, if you have any doubts on that score, Noir.

But it does make a sort of tactical sense .. see my other post. Because, you see, Noir, Labour DO lack principles and reputability. It's a part of what defines them. To them, everything is a means to an end. They see political advantage in NOT sticking to principle. So, that's what they're doing.

... and to hell with everybody else ... starting with the General Public (.. you know, those people they'd claim to 'represent' ..).

I take comfort in one, ultimately unarguable (?), truth. That is, that once the dust has settled a bit, once the full import of democratic accountability kicks in (as in a General Election), few except for the most fanatical diehards will see Labour as fit to be part of a so-called 'working, functioning' democratic system. They SHOULD be writing their electoral obituary with what they're now doing.

Here's hoping !!

[Drummond]

The Benn Bill has just passed its second reading vote by 329 to 300. Meaning 2 more conservatives have voted against the Government, rumours that former Party Chair Spelman is one of them - Joining other established conservative voices like Ken Clark, Phillip Hammond, Rory Stewart, and Nicholas Soames. Exiling themselves from the party.

It's a fate they've brought upon themselves.

They, like Labour, lack the principle to understand that the Brexit Referendum outcome should be the deciding imperative, and that all should be subordinated to achieving that end.

What irks me is that they lack the shame they should be feeling right now.

[Drummond]

Boris has lost his majority in the house as MPs have left the party.
He has literally lost control of the houses order of business today.
He was unable to win a vote which he tried to win by threatening ending the career of any conservative MP who voted against the government.
He has had to start the process for a general election, which he says he doesn’t want, and which we know will lose the Conservative party seats in the house if it does take place.

Looks like a mess to me, 5 weeks into his premiership.

We know no such thing, Noir. Losing seats is a mere possibility. Otherwise ... his 'I will respect the Will of the People and deliver the Referendum result they voted for' position could easily bring him enormous support.

Tell me. What politician, today, is doing more to heed the Brexit result ?? You seriously think nobody appreciates his receptiveness to that decision ? You think that people don't get that he is therefore fighting for THEM ?

This is bound to translate into votes for him, not least from all those pro-Brexit communities who voted for Labour last time .. BEFORE .. Labour reneged on its manifesto pledge !!

[Noir]

It's a fate they've brought upon themselves.

They, like Labour, lack the principle to understand that the Brexit Referendum outcome should be the deciding imperative, and that all should be subordinated to achieving that end.

What irks me is that they lack the shame they should be feeling right now.

A lot of Conservatives are not happy with the fact that Soames, Clarke etc have been treated this way - From Payne for the FT “Boris Johnson came under sustained attack in the 1922 committee this evening for withdrawing the whip from the 21 anti no deal rebels.

The prime minister blamed it on the chief whip, saying it would be wrong to undermine him. "It was completely pathetic," said one MP.”





We know no such thing, Noir. Losing seats is a mere possibility. Otherwise ... his 'I will respect the Will of the People and deliver the Referendum result they voted for' position could easily bring him enormous support.

Tell me. What politician, today, is doing more to heed the Brexit result ?? You seriously think nobody appreciates his receptiveness to that decision ? You think that people don't get that he is therefore fighting for THEM ?

This is bound to translate into votes for him, not least from all those pro-Brexit communities who voted for Labour last time .. BEFORE .. Labour reneged on its manifesto pledge !!

In a general election the Conservative party will definitely lose seats to the Brexit party. 100%.

[Drummond]

A lot of Conservatives are not happy with the fact that Soames, Clarke etc have been treated this way - From Payne for the FT “Boris Johnson came under sustained attack in the 1922 committee this evening for withdrawing the whip from the 21 anti no deal rebels.

The prime minister blamed it on the chief whip, saying it would be wrong to undermine him. "It was completely pathetic," said one MP.”

I'm not thrilled about it myself. In their day, most if not all of the individuals involved made their valuable contributions to the Conservative cause.

Nonetheless, Noir, they richly deserved their fate, at the hands of Boris ... and his wholly reasonable expectation that HIS people, don't stab him in the back !! Boris has the right to lead as he chooses. He has the right to loyalty. But, he and the interests of his Party were betrayed.

I fail to see what else, as a strong Leader, Boris could have done. Backstabbers deserve their fate. It's that simple.


In a general election the Conservative party will definitely lose seats to the Brexit party. 100%.

I agree they'll lose some seats. To suppose that they'll lose 100% of them is completely ridiculous.

If they do lose some ... it'll be because the Conservatives are the victims of a Parliament that far prefers to go on self-serving wrecking sprees, and play cynical, self-serving games with democracy itself (!!), than respect a Prime Minister's meritorious efforts to obey the Will of the People !!

The Brexit Party has no fracturing within it. Their purpose, their dedication towards achieving it, is 100% guaranteed to be rock solid. I'm unaware of any traitorous backstabbers in the Brexit Party's ranks.

[Noir]

I'm not thrilled about it myself. In their day, most if not all of the individuals involved made their valuable contributions to the Conservative cause.

Nonetheless, Noir, they richly deserved their fate, at the hands of Boris ... and his wholly reasonable expectation that HIS people, don't stab him in the back !! Boris has the right to lead as he chooses. He has the right to loyalty. But, he and the interests of his Party were betrayed.

I fail to see what else, as a strong Leader, Boris could have done. Backstabbers deserve their fate. It's that simple.

I remember when labour supporters were saying similar things about Corbyn when he was churning through Front-Benchers almost weekly - strong leadership... Rebels deserve it...though he was merely passing them over to the back benches, whereas Boris is removing his rebels from the party - It wasn’t impressive when Corbyn did it, it isn’t impressive now that Boris is doing it.


We know [an election] will lose the Conservative Party seats in the house



We know no such thing, Noir. Losing seats is a mere possibility.



In a general election the Conservative party will definitely lose seats to the Brexit party. 100%.


I agree they'll lose some seats.


Glad we got there in the end. (And of course my “100%” was to convey certainty in the statement it was following, not that they would lose all their seats.)

[Drummond]

I remember when labour supporters were saying similar things about Corbyn when he was churning through Front-Benchers almost weekly - strong leadership... Rebels deserve it...though he was merely passing them over to the back benches, whereas Boris is removing his rebels from the party - It wasn’t impressive when Corbyn did it, it isn’t impressive now that Boris is doing it.

I don't think Boris did it to 'impress'. Rather, he wants to lead a united Party, one going in one single direction.

He can have no reason to tolerate backstabbers and traitors in his ranks. May was a weak Leader ... she did. Her position as PM became untenable.

We've yet to see if Parliament's wreckers force the same fate on Boris. However, Boris is a strong leader. Such strength, not least of implacable purpose, cannot help but aid him ..

... and, through him, aid the rest of us, too.

Aid us, with what ?

Answer ... with an outcome that serves the Democratic Will of the People ...

.... something Corbyn 'understands' only when it suits him to.

[Noir]

I don't think Boris did it to 'impress'. Rather, he wants to lead a united Party, one going in one single direction.

He can have no reason to tolerate backstabbers and traitors in his ranks. May was a weak Leader ... she did. Her position as PM became untenable.

We've yet to see if Parliament's wreckers force the same fate on Boris. However, Boris is a strong leader. Such strength, not least of implacable purpose, cannot help but aid him ..

... and, through him, aid the rest of us, too.

Aid us, with what ?

Answer ... with an outcome that serves the Democratic Will of the People ...

.... something Corbyn 'understands' only when it suits him to.

Part of the problem with are political system is just how much strength the executive can weld over the legislature. A Prime Minister like Boris who is happy to further increase that disparity in power, by ending the careers of legislators who don’t vote the way he wants them to should not be applauded.

In 3 days Johnson has lost 4 votes in the house, lost his majority in the house, chosen to exile over 20 MPs from their party, and so comes news today of more leavers and resignations, including his brother Jo Johnson.

The Government also confirmed today it would delay the prorogation of Parliament until the Ben Bill had its full readings, good if you’re a fan of Parliamentary sovereignty - Though slightly perplexing from the point of view of the Government, given they have dubbed the Ben Bill “The Surender Bill” and it looks likely to pass, you’d of through having gone to all this effort Boris would of quashed “the surrender bill” with the powers he’s already invoked, but for whatever reason he seems content to let it pass.

[Drummond]

Part of the problem with are political system is just how much strength the executive can weld over the legislature. A Prime Minister like Boris who is happy to further increase that disparity in power, by ending the careers of legislators who don’t vote the way he wants them to should not be applauded.

So, let's be clear. You're saying that Boris's duty was to continue to tolerate backstabbers, people who'll very happily work in opposition to the direction their own Party is required to move towards .. ?

Are you being serious ? You seem to be advocating that a Party that pulls in multiple directions, one where its unified direction (or lack of one) must be allowed to continue to ... and, to hell with teamwork, and the very ability to govern ??

This is a total nonsense. You're advocating chaos.


In 3 days Johnson has lost 4 votes in the house, lost his majority in the house, chosen to exile over 20 MPs from their party, and so comes news today of more leavers and resignations, including his brother Jo Johnson.

Yes, indeed.

Some of this speaks of the dysfunctional climate that was allowed to build on Mrs May's watch. She should've been far stronger, should've been unafraid to take on the opposition in her own ranks !! It's emboldened the 'bastard' element in the Party, and Boris is getting some fallout from it.

As for Corbyn ... Corbyn is being Corbyn. He's on his wrecking spree. He insists that Parliament is committed to only leaving the EU, with a deal ... one that doesn't exist, and one which the EU has no interest in pursuing. As for the one which the EU has tried to shove down our throats, this is the one that Corbyn & Co have rejected, THREE times.

So, then ....

... only two possibilities make sense to me.

1. Corbyn's on a wrecking spree, committing Parliament to an ultimately unrealisable goal. Which begs the question: what's the REAL agenda ??

Is it to demonstrate that we have no ability to conclude Brexit (... because HE has engineered it that way) ??

2. Is Corbyn barking mad ??

Noir, I don't discount option 2. Seriously .. I don't. Corbyn's supposed 'position' is completely fantasist.

Option 1 .. I think Corbyn wants Brexit neutralised. I think he wants to make it impossible for us to leave the EU.

-- And the electorates' wishes, be damned. As he demonstrated yesterday, he'll distance himself from any democracy he finds to be inconvenient to him, personally.


The Government also confirmed today it would delay the prorogation of Parliament until the Ben Bill had its full readings, good if you’re a fan of Parliamentary sovereignty - Though slightly perplexing from the point of view of the Government, given they have dubbed the Ben Bill “The Surender Bill” and it looks likely to pass, you’d of through having gone to all this effort Boris would of quashed “the surrender bill” with the powers he’s already invoked, but for whatever reason he seems content to let it pass.

I invite you to pay attention to grammatical rules when you post.

Delaying the prorogation of Parliament ? I hadn't heard that.

I'm only going to say of this that I'm only a fan of Parliamentary sovereignty when it doesn't clash with, and defy, the Will of the People. But here, what we have is a large collection of MP's who have absolutely no consideration for anyone else's wishes but their own.

If I'd been wrong about that, Corbyn would've happily agreed to an election, yesterday. But .. no, he rejected that chance at accountability. He showed contempt for it, in fact.

Then again ... we'd have already left the EU ... not, now, be considering a second Brexit delay !!

[Noir]

So, let's be clear. You're saying that Boris's duty was to continue to tolerate backstabbers, people who'll very happily work in opposition to the direction their own Party is required to move towards .. ?

Are you being serious ? You seem to be advocating that a Party that pulls in multiple directions, one where its unified direction (or lack of one) must be allowed to continue to ... and, to hell with teamwork, and the very ability to govern ??

This is a total nonsense. You're advocating chaos.

An MP should be able to voice their opposition to their own whip without fear (or in this case certainty) of being thrown out of their party.


If I'd been wrong about that, Corbyn would've happily agreed to an election, yesterday. But .. no, he rejected that chance at accountability. He showed contempt for it, in fact.

I’m quite sure if Corbyn had agreed to an election you would of called it a ‘power grab’ ‘attempt to undermine democracy’ etc.



Delaying the prorogation of Parliament ? I hadn't heard that.

I invite you to read up about it.

As as it stands the prorogation of Parliament may end up guaranteeing another extension to the brexit deadline, because politics is a cruel mistress indeed.

[Drummond]

An MP should be able to voice their opposition to their own whip without fear (or in this case certainty) of being thrown out of their party.

Really ? Where do you get that from ??

What do you think is the point of 'whipping' MP's, if not to ensure that they follow the Party line ?!?

What makes you believe that a Party Leader somehow has a 'duty' to tolerate traitorous activity when it happens ? Do you not comprehend that Party discipline must be maintained ? And ... that we saw the result, under Mrs May's watch, when she failed to. The result was fracturing and complete chaos, with Mrs May rendered incapable of leading her Party.


I’m quite sure if Corbyn had agreed to an election you would of called it a ‘power grab’ ‘attempt to undermine democracy’ etc.

Bizarre.

List for me those instances when opposition Parties fail to agree to the opportunity of having an election ! I seriously suspect that Corbyn's running from one is unique in our history.

Elections are expressions of democracy (.. except if used to specifically nulify previous democratic acts) !! Why would I think otherwise ?

As for what you'd think ... I cannot imagine, Noir.


As as it stands the prorogation of Parliament may end up guaranteeing another extension to the brexit deadline, because politics is a cruel mistress indeed.

Unless you have some other as-yet-unseen perversion of democratic accountability that Corbyn has waiting for us all ... I really fail to see how. What am I missing, by your reckoning ? Care to explain ?

[Noir]

Really ? Where do you get that from ??

What do you think is the point of 'whipping' MP's, if not to ensure that they follow the Party line ?!?

What makes you believe that a Party Leader somehow has a 'duty' to tolerate traitorous activity when it happens ? Do you not comprehend that Party discipline must be maintained ? And ... that we saw the result, under Mrs May's watch, when she failed to. The result was fracturing and complete chaos, with Mrs May rendered incapable of leading her Party.

Whips trying to manage votes is one thing (not exactly a great system but hey-ho) the executive removing legislators from their party is quite another, an extreme




Bizarre.

List for me those instances when opposition Parties fail to agree to the opportunity of having an election ! I seriously suspect that Corbyn's running from one is unique in our history.

Elections are expressions of democracy (.. except if used to specifically nulify previous democratic acts) !! Why would I think otherwise ?

As for what you'd think ... I cannot imagine, Noir.

I think Corbyn should of gone to election, and I think we still will end up with one. Did you want Corbyn to go to election?


Unless you have some other as-yet-unseen perversion of democratic accountability that Corbyn has waiting for us all ... I really fail to see how. What am I missing, by your reckoning ? Care to explain ?

The Ben Bill passes into law.
The government is not able to withdraw from the EU without a deal (legally)
Becuase Parliament is prorogued the government does not have the time to make any progress on a deal and so has to delay.

[Drummond]

Whips trying to manage votes is one thing (not exactly a great system but hey-ho) the executive removing legislators from their party is quite another, an extreme

Whips managing votes is a tried & tested system. Normally, it works, it's effective, and it maintains Party discipline, which of course is its reason for existing.

As for 'removing legislators' ... you're talking about MP's who betray their Leader, betray the whole direction of their Party, and who, by their actions, help facilitate the wrecking actions of their vandalistic opposition. Are you SERIOUSLY suggesting that they must remain immune, unaccountable, for their traitorous actions ???

That's a nonsense. There can be no sensible reason for tolerating any of that. Mrs May, DID ... she was weak in the face of it ... and her job became untenable, as did her Government's very ability to govern !!

So, no. Boris took action. Those receiving that action deserved what they got, as did Boris, since what he gained was a Party that understood that betrayal has its consequences.


I think Corbyn should of gone to election, and I think we still will end up with one. Did you want Corbyn to go to election?

You can never guarantee the result of an election: it COULD bring us a Corbyn Government !! By no stretch of the imagination could I ever want such a travesty to befall my country.

That said .. Boris is effectively unable to govern. He inherited a Party devoid of discipline, lacking unity, lacking a single direction, one infested with treachery. He also is now incapable of commanding a numerical majority in the House (possible Labour rebellions notwithstanding ?). So, Boris, to remedy this mess, ideally needs to get a voting majority (and one that'll be loyal to him !!) he can work with, one allowing him to coherently govern.

He therefore needs an election, in the hope and expectation that one will give him the MP majority he badly needs.

So I want Corbyn's hypocrisy to end. He's been baying for an election for years (!!), at every conceivable opportunity. NOW, he's offered one on a plate, and as Boris points out, FOR THE FIRST TIME IN LIVING MEMORY, IF NOT FOR EVEN LONGER, AN OPPOSITION PARTY REFUSES THE CHANCE OF ONE !!

Here's a radical thought. How about, for once, seeing our political system cleansed of chaos ??

An election might well be the answer. Let Boris win his majority, and one that can stop Corbyn's disgusting vandalism, once and for all.

Then, let's be shot OF THE EU !!! Once and for all !! Let's be our OWN masters, capable of coherent, sensible, meritorious decision-making ... meaning, Corbyn and his trash Party are finally neutralised as the wrecking force they so delight in being !!


The Ben Bill passes into law.
The government is not able to withdraw from the EU without a deal (legally)
Becuase Parliament is prorogued the government does not have the time to make any progress on a deal and so has to delay.

So tell me: WHAT DEAL ??

The one the Commons keeps on rejecting ?

The one the EU refuses, time and again, to even begin to consider offering us .. in its place ??

Talk of 'a deal' is fantasy, short of the EU having a collective brainstorm, and just for once, choosing not to be obstructive !! [What's more, it's a guaranteed fantasy, if the EU is given no incentive to believe that they have any practical need to offer us one, which Corbyn's contrived status quo arranges]

You see, that's the point. By any SANE measure, the truth is that Corbyn and his ilk cannot be genuinely chasing after a non-existent 'deal' !! That is utter nonsense. So, what does that leave ?

If we 'can't' leave the EU without a deal, and if there ISN'T ONE AROUND WE CAN, OR WILL, RATIFY .. THIS MEANS THAT BREXIT ITSELF FAILS.

And, that, Noir .. is the real, yet un-admitted to, agenda at work. Every last bit of this, from all of Boris's opposition, is designed to ultimately DEFEAT THE 2016 REFERENDUM RESULT ... KILLING OFF ANY HOPE OF FUTURE TRUE, DIRECT, DEMOCRATIC ACCOUNTABILITY.

No wonder Labour is doing what it is ! Their much dreamed-of pot at the end of the rainbow is a political climate where they RULE us, with accountability entirely dead and buried. A Socialist nirvana ... if there ever was one, @Noir (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=517).

[Noir]

Whips managing votes is a tried & tested system. Normally, it works, it's effective, and it maintains Party discipline, which of course is its reason for existing.

As for 'removing legislators' ... you're talking about MP's who betray their Leader, betray the whole direction of their Party, and who, by their actions, help facilitate the wrecking actions of their vandalistic opposition. Are you SERIOUSLY suggesting that they must remain immune, unaccountable, for their traitorous actions ???

That's a nonsense. There can be no sensible reason for tolerating any of that. Mrs May, DID ... she was weak in the face of it ... and her job became untenable, as did her Government's very ability to govern !!

So, no. Boris took action. Those receiving that action deserved what they got, as did Boris, since what he gained was a Party that understood that betrayal has its consequences.

The treatment of Conservative MPs by their party is nothing close to normal. Do you think May should of removed Johnston, Gove, Mogg etc when they defied the whip against her? Or do you only consider expulsion for defying the whip then it suits your political interest?


You can never guarantee the result of an election: it COULD bring us a Corbyn Government !! By no stretch of the imagination could I ever want such a travesty to befall my country.

That said .. Boris is effectively unable to govern. He inherited a Party devoid of discipline, lacking unity, lacking a single direction, one infested with treachery. He also is now incapable of commanding a numerical majority in the House (possible Labour rebellions notwithstanding ?). So, Boris, to remedy this mess, ideally needs to get a voting majority (and one that'll be loyal to him !!) he can work with, one allowing him to coherently govern.

He therefore needs an election, in the hope and expectation that one will give him the MP majority he badly needs.

So I want Corbyn's hypocrisy to end. He's been baying for an election for years (!!), at every conceivable opportunity. NOW, he's offered one on a plate, and as Boris points out, FOR THE FIRST TIME IN LIVING MEMORY, IF NOT FOR EVEN LONGER, AN OPPOSITION PARTY REFUSES THE CHANCE OF ONE !!

Here's a radical thought. How about, for once, seeing our political system cleansed of chaos ??

An election might well be the answer. Let Boris win his majority, and one that can stop Corbyn's disgusting vandalism, once and for all.

Then, let's be shot OF THE EU !!! Once and for all !! Let's be our OWN masters, capable of coherent, sensible, meritorious decision-making ... meaning, Corbyn and his trash Party are finally neutralised as the wrecking force they so delight in being !!

So the TL;DR is that you do want an election. Okay


So tell me: WHAT DEAL ??

We haven’t yet had a deal that all sides agree on.

Speaking of deals - I heard Johnson has a fanciful idea of being able to strike a deal with America that allows us to export Scottish beef freely to America, while stoping American “hormone treated beef” being imported to the U.K.
I look forward to the Americans raising an eyebrow at these kinds of //offers// the U.K. has for them :laugh:

[Drummond]

The treatment of Conservative MPs by their party is nothing close to normal. Do you think May should of removed Johnston, Gove, Mogg etc when they defied the whip against her? Or do you only consider expulsion for defying the whip then it suits your political interest?

This misses (conveniently ?) a central and fundamental point .. one of reputable context.

In Mrs May's case .. she'd publicly claimed, again and again (didn't a commentator say for over a HUNDRED times ??) that in a choice between accepting a bad deal and no deal at all, she'd always choose 'no deal'.

When tested, she did her absolute utmost to shove a BAD deal, down everyone's throats.

It was so bad, that opposition to it reached historically high levels, in terms of the number of votes cast against it.

... So, now. THIS is the basic context, against which your belief that the Party whip should've been respected, is to be seen against.

Party discipline to serve the needs, wishes, promises made, to The People of the UK .. these are fine and reputable. Party discipline taken in a direction that defies promises and assurances made, discipline wielded to force a level of obedience against what's properly decent, & consistent with public duty ... the two extremes hardly equate to each other, do they ?

Or do you think it just doesn't matter, Noir ?


So the TL;DR is that you do want an election. Okay

Not particularly OK, no.

An 'OK' scenario would've been to have no Conservative MP's rebel against Boris's leadership. An 'OK' scenario would've been to see nobody walk away from that leadership, and Party. However .. these things have happened, which means that Boris Johnson has no majority in the Commons. Without a majority, and with such losses, he can't hope to properly govern (if at all).

Therefore, for the sake of having a UK which does have a working Government, his only responsible course of action is to press for an election. This, as a responsible PM, he's done.

HOWEVER ... his opposition are enjoying their relative wielding of power, in the absence of that working Government. Rather than put the UK's interests above their own, they're doing their damndest to DICTATE to the ELECTED GOVERNMENT.

As if their Referendum-wrecking agenda wasn't contemptuous enough of democratic accountability, NOW, they want to fend off moves allowing the chance of coherent Government ... be it Conservative or Labour !! They like their power, as they now have it. They're not keen to 'prematurely' give it up. All other considerations, be damned ... why, they'd even see Boris jailed for defying them, than responsibly act in the national interest !

Does that constitute treasonable activity ?


We haven’t yet had a deal that all sides agree on.

That's an understatement.

Only one 'deal' exists. Only one has been offered (totally rejected, repeatedly). As of now, no other deal is even in prospect. Against this insane backdrop, Parliament INSISTS upon enshrining into law an imperative that we cannot leave the EU without a deal ???

It's madness. Utterly insane ...

... UNLESS ...

... the real objective is to derail Brexit for an indeterminate period ? Maybe -- for good ?


Speaking of deals - I heard Johnson has a fanciful idea of being able to strike a deal with America that allows us to export Scottish beef freely to America, while stoping American “hormone treated beef” being imported to the U.K.
I look forward to the Americans raising an eyebrow at these kinds of //offers// the U.K. has for them :laugh:

Oh, I'm sure you want all US-UK trade to be as problematic as possible, Noir.

But then, you are a Leftie.

Of course.

[Kathianne]

This seems dodgy to me. In line with seeking foreign advice regarding internal decisions? Undermining the elected leader? Colluding to undermine the democratically decided will of the people?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/07/mps-checked-with-eu-chiefs-over-brexit-delay-before-passing-bill


MPs 'checked with EU chiefs over Brexit delay' before passing bill
MPs prepare for legal battle in case PM attempts to defy law forcing him to ask for extension

Senior MPs opposing a no-deal Brexit sought assurances from the EU that their bid for a three-month delay would be granted, it has emerged.


European leaders were sounded out before MPs, including the “rebel alliance”, passed a bill, which is expected to receive royal assent on Monday, forcing Boris Johnson to ask for an extension. However, those involved said there were no guarantees in a process that was changing by the day.


It comes as the rebels, including former Tories who have been thrown out of the party, prepare for a legal battle in case the prime minister attempts to defy a law forcing him to ask for an extension on 19 October. The UK is due to leave the EU on 31 October, but the new law would envisage a Brexit extension until the end of January 2020.


Opposition parties have agreed to block a general election before a Brexit extension has been agreed.

...

[Kathianne]

Drummond Noir

What the heck is this?

https://reformclub.blogspot.com/2019/09/the-prime-ministers-next-ace.html


Saturday, September 07, 2019
The Prime Minister’s Next Ace






The Benn-Burt Bill goes back to the Commons on Monday morning, where it is expected to be finalized and then receive royal assent—and so become a statute.


Can the Prime Minister (“PM”) stop that process? Yes, as a formal, legal matter nothing stops the PM from asking the Queen to prorogue Parliament on Monday morning. It could be a short prorogation—one day. That would kill the bill, even if it was on its way to receive royal assent. And if the Commons restarts the process by passing Benn-Burt-Bill-#2 the next day it sits—absent amendments making the bill palatable to the government—the PM can prorogue again, and again, and again.


Do I expect the PM to take this path? That depends how serious he is about winning the next election. The people opposed to Brexit will vote against him. He has lost them. As for the people who are for Brexit … he must convince them that he is fully behind Brexit on October 31, 2019. If the PM voluntarily passes up lawful means to stop the Benn-Burt Bill … then those pro-Brexit voters have no reason to vote for him and his party. They will flee to others: the Brexit Party. So, yes, I expect the PM is contemplating a Monday morning prorogation.


That’s a prediction—not advice.


Seth

[Noir]

@Drummond (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=2287) @Noir (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=517)

What the heck is this?

https://reformclub.blogspot.com/2019/09/the-prime-ministers-next-ace.html

Seth

As I mentioned a few posts ago - it’s very strange that Boris has let the Ben Bill get as far as it has - and I’m sure he is rueing the way he has handled the situation. He has lost the support of many in his party by his actions (much as they may please Drummond et al)

He is now left with ridiculous options like ‘force continuous 1 Day suspensions any time it looks like the bill could go to a vote’. :laugh:

[Drummond]

As I mentioned a few posts ago - it’s very strange that Boris has let the Ben Bill get as far as it has - and I’m sure he is rueing the way he has handled the situation. He has lost the support of many in his party by his actions (much as they may please Drummond et al)

He is now left with ridiculous options like ‘force continuous 1 Day suspensions any time it looks like the bill could go to a vote’. :laugh:
Noir ... What do you think (in line with his beliefs and intentions, of course !) Boris could've done differently, then, which would have helped him better succeed in his aims ?

As I've tried to argue ... tolerating those who'll stab you in the back (the Conservative rebels, of course) makes no sense. You might as well argue in medical terms to say that drugs or other treatments that can inhibit cancer need never be administered to a sufferer from it.

What is 'ridiculous' about all of this, Noir, is Parliament's MP's completely defying the Will of the People. It's as though the very concept of democratic accountability has been forgotten about, and individual MP's being drunk on power has superseded it. Boris is dedicating his efforts to obeying the mandate the 2016 Referendum delivered. His opposition is stooping to vile, disgusting lengths to defeat him. Apparently these can even include taking Boris to court and landing him (should he lose) with a jail sentence !!

For what, exactly ? Doing his job, in the face of extreme opposition ??

Be in no doubt, Noir. If we get within miles of such a situation, democracy in the UK will have demonstrably died a death. Our political situation will be one where MP's expect to get elected every few years, but beyond that, they'll ignore and have contempt for anything the electorate wishes of them.

No doubt the Left would applaud. It's their dream to dictate to people, make them fall in line with their dreams and ambitions .. WHATEVER it takes.

[Drummond]

@Drummond (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=2287) @Noir (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=517)

What the heck is this?

https://reformclub.blogspot.com/2019/09/the-prime-ministers-next-ace.html



Seth

What this is, Kathianne, is Boris's opposition attempting to make him suffer for defying them. Boris made a pubic promise to deliver Brexit, 'come-what-may', by the end of October this year. They want to publicly force Boris into reneging on his promise. They want to break his opposition to them entirely.

The Labour opposition is currently taking every media opportunity to brand Boris as a 'liar' and to completely discredit him. Forcing Boris to renege on his Brexit promise aids their propaganda effort. Should they succeed ... then, from that launching point, they'll happily agree to a General Election, in the hope that a 'broken, shamed' Boris cannot win that election.

They win ... then, smashing up Brexit will be something contrived to follow, whether directly or through stages.

The current situation is that a legal mandate to have Boris go to the EU and beg them for yet another extension beyond October (the second such delay, since March) is about to become law. If Boris does it, his opposition will want him discredited for doing so.

If Boris doesn't do it (he's said he'd rather be found dead in a ditch, than comply) .. then, his opposition will say that he's broken the law. He'll be taken to court. If he loses his case, he will face a jail term.

Either way ... Boris has had the unforgivable affrontery to defy the Remainers .. who are now showing us that, if they cannot win out through democratic approval, they will dictate events to smash their opposition instead, no matter how foul the actions they take have to be, to win out.

Interestingly ... they may not have a friend in Macron !! He's declared that under current circumstances he'd oppose a Brexit extension.

Now, whether Labour's delusionary power-drunk mindset can even process that reality .. I have my doubts. They may just ignore him, because they can't accept a reality they don't approve of.

We live in interesting (a.k.a insane !!) times.

[Kathianne]

What this is, Kathianne, is Boris's opposition attempting to make him suffer for defying them. Boris made a pubic promise to deliver Brexit, 'come-what-may', by the end of October this year. They want to publicly force Boris into reneging on his promise. They want to break his opposition to them entirely.

The Labour opposition is currently taking every media opportunity to brand Boris as a 'liar' and to completely discredit him. Forcing Boris to renege on his Brexit promise aids their propaganda effort. Should they succeed ... then, from that launching point, they'll happily agree to a General Election, in the hope that a 'broken, shamed' Boris cannot win that election.

They win ... then, smashing up Brexit will be something contrived to follow, whether directly or through stages.

The current situation is that a legal mandate to have Boris go to the EU and beg them for yet another extension beyond October (the second such delay, since March) is about to become law. If Boris does it, his opposition will want him discredited for doing so.

If Boris doesn't do it (he's said he'd rather be found dead in a ditch, than comply) .. then, his opposition will say that he's broken the law. He'll be taken to court. If he loses his case, he will face a jail term.

Either way ... Boris has had the unforgivable affrontery to defy the Remainers .. who are now showing us that, if they cannot win out through democratic approval, they will dictate events to smash their opposition instead, no matter how foul the actions they take have to be, to win out.

Interestingly ... they may not have a friend in Macron !! He's declared that under current circumstances he'd oppose a Brexit extension.

Now, whether Labour's delusionary power-drunk mindset can even process that reality .. I have my doubts. They may just ignore him, because they can't accept a reality they don't approve of.

We live in interesting (a.k.a insane !!) times.

So as strange as this sounds, it may work?

[Drummond]

So as strange as this sounds, it may work?

Well, the 'repeated short-term proroguings' idea posted is one that hasn't been suggested at all in our mainstream media, and until I read about it here, I'd not heard of it. There's the one period of one that'll last considerably longer than that, which Gina Miller (businesswoman, a Remainer) has already challenged in our courts, and - so far - she's lost her case. She is, however, submitting an appeal to be heard this week.

My guess is that as Gina Miller is still trying to win her case, no shorter-form proroguings are at all likely ! With one still being tested legally, how could shorter ones be introduced, in the interim, and succeed ?

No. I think that we're about to witness the 'main event' of Boris being ordered to go to the EU and request the Brexit extension. We have yet to see if Boris will stick to his word and risk legal action against himself for having the reputability to NOT do so (!!) ... or, whether he'll buckle to Labour's strong-arm tactics instead. Or, if Boris has another trick up his sleeve.

Me ... I still like the idea of Boris declaring he has No Confidence in himself (!) and arranging an election in that way. Watching all of his opposition then voting in FAVOUR of confidence in Boris, while simultaneously trying to discredit him ... is as nuts as it gets !!

[Noir]

Me ... I still like the idea of Boris declaring he has No Confidence in himself (!) and arranging an election in that way. Watching all of his opposition then voting in FAVOUR of confidence in Boris, while simultaneously trying to discredit him ... is as nuts as it gets !!

You like the idea that Conservatives are going to run on the platform ‘vote for our leader who declared he had no confidence in himself’?

[Kathianne]

You like the idea that Conservatives are going to run on the platform ‘vote for our leader who declared he had no confidence in himself’?

I can only say from the perspective of an observer, a not well informed one at that, it seems as reasonable as anything else going on at present.

While I lack Drummond's certainty on most things, the Parliament does seem out to derail the will of the people. It may be time to let the people speak.

[Drummond]

You like the idea that Conservatives are going to run on the platform ‘vote for our leader who declared he had no confidence in himself’?

I think it's funny, Noir. So, yes, in that particular sense, I like it.

Does it also not appeal to your sense of humour ? I strongly suspect that Boris would see the funny side of it ....

All that aside, though: what we have here is a PM with a titanic battle on his hands: one, Noir, where he's remaining loyal to a democratic mandate which so-called 'representative' MP's want to see him fail to deliver !! I think that the general public will appreciate his loyalty to the Referendum result, sufficiently so, at least, to give him the electoral majority he now badly needs just to do his job !

Bear in mind other factors: the public's disgust at Boris's treatment, of course .. MP's disregard for representing The People .. and the spectre of possibly seeing Corbyn in power, leading an anti-Semitic Party, offering a hard-Left leadership from an individual who was once an IRA sympathiser, and who's happily shared a public platform with Hamas spokespersons !!

[Noir]

I can only say from the perspective of an observer, a not well informed one at that, it seems as reasonable as anything else going on at present.

While I lack Drummond's certainty on most things, the Parliament does seem out to derail the will of the people. It may be time to let the people speak.

We are governed by a representative parliamentary democracy. Not direct democracy.

Imagine someone saying that the Electoral College derailed the ‘will of the American people’ because Trump ended up president rather than Clinton who got a few million more votes.

[Drummond]

I can only say from the perspective of an observer, a not well informed one at that, it seems as reasonable as anything else going on at present.

While I lack Drummond's certainty on most things, the Parliament does seem out to derail the will of the people. It may be time to let the people speak.

Unfortunately .. letting the People speak, isn't the issue (the loudest anti-Brexiteers clamour for a second Referendum. Or yet a third .. or as many as it'll take, to get the 'correct' result ..).

What the Left doesn't require is silence from people. What it requires is loud voices that'll always say what they require to be said.

My certainty on issues comes from extensive experience telling me I'm right, Kath. Don't imagine that I leap to views and conclusions on a whim: I'm no 'hothead' bigot. I first satisfy myself that my thinking is sound.

A lifetime spent living in a society that was once in danger of tearing itself apart through over-deference to Left-wing militancy taught me a considerable amount. I know what I know from proof of its being true.

[Kathianne]

We are governed by a representative parliamentary democracy. Not direct democracy.

Imagine someone saying that the Electoral College derailed the ‘will of the American people’ because Trump ended up president rather than Clinton who got a few million more votes.

You do not have a written Constitution-for better or worse. While I prefer what the Framers set up here, you have what you have.

[Kathianne]

Unfortunately .. letting the People speak, isn't the issue (the loudest anti-Brexiteers clamour for a second Referendum. Or yet a third .. or as many as it'll take, to get the 'correct' result ..).

What the Left doesn't require is silence from people. What it requires is loud voices that'll always say what they require to be said.

My certainty on issues comes from extensive experience telling me I'm right, Kath. Don't imagine that I leap to views and conclusions on a whim: I'm no 'hothead' bigot. I first satisfy myself that my thinking is sound.

A lifetime spent living in a society that was once in danger of tearing itself apart through over-deference to Left-wing militancy taught me a considerable amount. I know what I know from proof of its being true.


Again, just an outside observation that is influenced by what I read here; it does seem if the people, again, tell Parliament to heed their directive, their patience is wearing thin.

[Drummond]

Again, just an outside observation that is influenced by what I read here; it does seem if the people, again, tell Parliament to heed their directive, their patience is wearing thin.

Opinion is polarised. That's the biggest problem. In the 2016 Referendum, we had 52% vote for Brexit, compared with 48% against it. So there are many people (no doubt a great many Lefties amongst them) who'd shout for the 'Remain in the EU' cause.

Those 'Remainers' take on board the viewpoint that Noir is happy with; namely, that as we have a Parliamentary democracy, the authority Parliament wields doesn't somehow 'deserve' to be challenged. So, if Parliament contrives to put a stop to Boris, and has the votes, and legislative latitude, to do so (it was granted that, last week), the 'Parliamentary democracy' we operate seizes control, rides roughshod over other democracy around, and just dictates to everybody.

It's currently trying to dictate to our Prime Minister, using force of law to make him break his pledge to answer to The People's wishes.

... and do I take it that Noir approves of this seizure of power, and its being wielded as it is ?

My view is that, 'Parliamentary Democracy' or not, the central principle of voter representation is being sidelined, as if the general population's democratic wishes are rendered irrelevant. MP's inhabit the House because THEY WERE PLACED THERE, BY THE ELECTORATE, TO REPRESENT THOSE WHO VOTED FOR THEM. Yet ... that part of the equation is now absent. MP's are just following their own agendas .. and Boris's higher imperative, to be loyal to The People, is suffering sheer abuse.

The 'upper hand' in all of this, even IF this is under Opposition control right now (a big 'if') ... won't be, forever. Short of an actual coup being enacted, we will have our General Election. When we do, those defying public opinion will be forced to regret it. Big time.

See ....

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1175377/boris-johnson-brexit-news-voters-poll-labour-tories-uk-politics


Jeremy Corbyn support plummets as Boris Johnson snatches 14 point lead in new poll

BORIS JOHNSON’s most tumultuous week yet as prime minister has culminated in a shock poll showing the Tories enjoying a 14 point lead over Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour.

The Conservative leader’s hardball tactics and his “do or die” Brexit pledge are proving popular with voters, with 35 percent of respondents throwing their support behind his party ahead of Labour’s 21 percent. The boost for Mr Johnson comes after he said this week he would "rather be dead in a ditch” than ask the EU for a further Brexit extension after Parliament passed a bill preventing a hard exit on October 31. During an interview on Sky News’ Sophy Ridge on Sunday Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab said the prime minister will go to court to challenge the order and insisted the government would not break the law.

The YouGov ballot conducted between September 5 and 6 for The Sunday Times gave the Liberal Democrats, led by Jo Swinson, 19 percent of the vote while Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party was on 12 percent.

It showed support for Labour had fallen by four points since an earlier poll on September 2-3, with the Lib Dems and Brexit Party mopping up the votes while backing for the Tories remained the same.

So far Mr Johnson has shown no signs he is prepared to abandon his key campaign pledge to deliver Brexit by Halloween with or without a deal.

[Kathianne]

I've been reading here that support for Brexit has also risen, according to polls.

[Kathianne]

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/there-will-still-be-an-election-in-the-uk-and-brexit-will-still-happen


OPINIONThere will still be an election in the UK, and Brexit will still happen
by Dan Hannan
| September 04, 2019 06:51 PM

...

[Drummond]

I've been reading here that support for Brexit has also risen, according to polls.

Perhaps I should widen my sampling of our media, then (or at least, watch less of the BBC's output). I've seen no polls saying that. In fact, I don't recall seeing any poll on that subject recently -- it's all been about Boris, lurching from 'disaster' to 'disaster'.

In any case, our polls tend to not be very accurate. Our Mrs May relied on them, to persuade her that our 2017 election was worthwhile, to increase her Parliamentary majority. Instead .. she crippled it.

John Major confounded all our polls, when he won his election, in '92.

Anyway .. if you're right, it's very good news. If nothing else, I think that Labour will pay dearly for what they're trying to do to Boris.

[Drummond]

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/there-will-still-be-an-election-in-the-uk-and-brexit-will-still-happen

It's just an opinion piece (and its author isn't a neutral observer in all this). We'll see if his opinion pans out, in time.

[Kathianne]

It's just an opinion piece (and its author isn't a neutral observer in all this). We'll see if his opinion pans out, in time.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwizzpXH68HkAhXJKDQIHZXdAukQzPwBegQIARAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.politico.eu%2Farticle%2Fuk-voters-favor-no-deal-brexit-over-jeremy-corbyn-as-pm-poll%2F&psig=AOvVaw1oHudw8hNTWxbWTcf1LiVY&ust=1568053212801911

[Drummond]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwizzpXH68HkAhXJKDQIHZXdAukQzPwBegQIARAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.politico.eu%2Farticle%2Fuk-voters-favor-no-deal-brexit-over-jeremy-corbyn-as-pm-poll%2F&psig=AOvVaw1oHudw8hNTWxbWTcf1LiVY&ust=1568053212801911

Fair enough, as far as that goes. Though I note its emphasis seems to be a 'Which is worse ?' question, rather than one I'd prefer .. namely, 'Which will do us good'.

Ah, well ....

Your source also confirms this ...

https://www.politico.eu/article/french-minister-eu-wont-grant-uk-brexit-delay-as-things-stand/


Brussels won’t grant the U.K. a Brexit extension beyond October 31 if circumstances remain the same, Jean-Yves Le Drian, France's foreign minister, said Sunday.

“The British must tell us what they want,” he told Europe1 radio, Reuters reported. “We are not going to do this [grant an extension] every three months.”

This helps illustrate just how delusional Boris's opposition really are.

[Noir]

The real punchline for the joke that is Brexit will involve the EU trying to get rid of us.

[Drummond]

The real punchline for the joke that is Brexit will involve the EU trying to get rid of us.

Judging by Macron's attitude, I'd say there was a certain accuracy to that ...

.... which only goes to show how stupidly power-drunk the likes of Corbyn really is. He assumes he has power to influence events to his (not The People; HIS) liking. In non-delusional reality, his wishes are subordinate to the foreign powers running the EU.

[STTAB]

We are governed by a representative parliamentary democracy. Not direct democracy.

Imagine someone saying that the Electoral College derailed the ‘will of the American people’ because Trump ended up president rather than Clinton who got a few million more votes.


That's a TERRIBLE comparison.

A more apt comparison would be to say look at the all the idiotic Republicans who REFUSED to fund the wall when they had full control of both houses of Congress when it was quite clear that Trump was elected by the will of the people wanting that wall.

And look at what it cost those Republicans. The House.

I wish we had a mechanism to dissolve Congress when they didn't follow the will of the people.

[Noir]

Not much to report other than the U.K. has still not proposed what they’re going to do about the Northern Irish border, and Johnson refused to hold a joint press conference with the Prime Minster of Luxembourg, because protestors were making too much noise :rolleyes:

[Kathianne]

Not much to report other than the U.K. has still not proposed what they’re going to do about the Northern Irish border, and Johnson refused to hold a joint press conference with the Prime Minster of Luxembourg, because protestors were making too much noise :rolleyes:
I read that he asked them to move the debate inside, but no. Then the Brexit guy did his own 'empty chair' debate. The only real criticism I read about Johnson was that he shouldn't have done the 'tough guy' talk and then not show. He had reasons to not show, but looked weak after his boasts.

[Drummond]

I read that he asked them to move the debate inside, but no. Then the Brexit guy did his own 'empty chair' debate. The only real criticism I read about Johnson was that he shouldn't have done the 'tough guy' talk and then not show. He had reasons to not show, but looked weak after his boasts.

You make fair points, but then ... tactics may also be involved. I've seldom seen any PM receive such concentrated and relentless criticism at home as Boris has ... and this within a context that Boris must consider, that of an impending election.

Boris has pushed the idea that he's capable of getting cooperation from the EU, and that things aren't static. He doubtless thought that broadcasts transmitted back to the UK showing nothing but enmity not only sent the wrong image, but were a gift to his political opponents.

As it turned out, the Luxembourg PM was himself highly unhelpful in his own remarks !!

I thought it extremely 'rich' that this joker tried to deflect blame away from the EU side in all of this !! During 'negotiations', they wasted nearly two years with obstruction, forever rejecting any proposals our side offered. Then, when they did see fit to cobble a 'deal' together, it turned out to be so shoddy that Commons voting against it reached historically high levels for any vote conducted there !

The EU's response ? Rejected or not, the 'deal' had to stand as it was. No renegotiation would happen. Intransigence was 'king'.

We've seen no tangible evidence of the EU offering us anything different to this day.

[Noir]

What is the UKs proposal for the Northern Irish border?

[Kathianne]

You make fair points, but then ... tactics may also be involved. I've seldom seen any PM receive such concentrated and relentless criticism at home as Boris has ... and this within a context that Boris must consider, that of an impending election.

Boris has pushed the idea that he's capable of getting cooperation from the EU, and that things aren't static. He doubtless thought that broadcasts transmitted back to the UK showing nothing but enmity not only sent the wrong image, but were a gift to his political opponents.

As it turned out, the Luxembourg PM was himself highly unhelpful in his own remarks !!

I thought it extremely 'rich' that this joker tried to deflect blame away from the EU side in all of this !! During 'negotiations', they wasted nearly two years with obstruction, forever rejecting any proposals our side offered. Then, when they did see fit to cobble a 'deal' together, it turned out to be so shoddy that Commons voting against it reached historically high levels for any vote conducted there !

The EU's response ? Rejected or not, the 'deal' had to stand as it was. No renegotiation would happen. Intransigence was 'king'.

We've seen no tangible evidence of the EU offering us anything different to this day.
First off, they weren't 'my points,' I just read and shared.

I do believe the EU's behavior is the reason that all the parties are there, unable to really work together?

[Drummond]

First off, they weren't 'my points,' I just read and shared.

I do believe the EU's behavior is the reason that all the parties are there, unable to really work together?

H'm .. the only thing the EU has shown itself to be capable of is intransigence, coupled with an insistence that WE work with THEM, in an unequal so-called 'partnership'. If it were otherwise, we'd have seen them be a lot more open about renegotiation than they have been.

Our own politicians are so power-drunk that they think they exercise power they don't have. Talk of 'not leaving without a deal' ... well, WHAT deal ? The EU has still only offered the one deal (the one they refuse to ratify), and the EU consider us to be at fault for not agreeing it.

I really don't know what to say (as must be obvious ?) that's of any use. I don't believe that the EU will usefully bend to the reality of our position, and probably not at all. Boris's efforts, whatever they actually are, I doubt will come to anything. Yet, his opposition here insist he must 'get a deal' for us to leave, and they're backing that with legal mandate.

I've no idea how this'll play out. Nobody does. Will Boris dig his heels in, and end up defying the law, by keeping to his promise to The People ? Or, will Parliament force him to renege on that ?

Who knows.:dunno::(:dunno:

[Drummond]

What is the UKs proposal for the Northern Irish border?

You think I am privy to the negotiating contact Boris has with the EU ? These things (to whatever extent they are) are being discussed behind closed doors. I understand that Boris was going to report back on that, following the proroguing period (for however long that lasts) ...

[Kathianne]

H'm .. the only thing the EU has shown itself to be capable of is intransigence, coupled with an insistence that WE work with THEM, in an unequal so-called 'partnership'. If it were otherwise, we'd have seen them be a lot more open about renegotiation than they have been.

Our own politicians are so power-drunk that they think they exercise power they don't have. Talk of 'not leaving without a deal' ... well, WHAT deal ? The EU has still only offered the one deal (the one they refuse to ratify), and the EU consider us to be at fault for not agreeing it.

I really don't know what to say (as must be obvious ?) that's of any use. I don't believe that the EU will usefully bend to the reality of our position, and probably not at all. Boris's efforts, whatever they actually are, I doubt will come to anything. Yet, his opposition here insist he must 'get a deal' for us to leave, and they're backing that with legal mandate.

I've no idea how this'll play out. Nobody does. Will Boris dig his heels in, and end up defying the law, by keeping to his promise to The People ? Or, will Parliament force him to renege on that ?

Who knows.:dunno::(:dunno:

Again, from an outsider's view, it seems to me that the EU behaviors are the reason Brexit became a reality vote to leave? In a less, (hard to believe), desirable way it's actually worse than our federal government-takes more and gives much less of everything. At least we have a workable military.

Seems it's better to leave without a plan, than to stay.

[Drummond]

Again, from an outsider's view, it seems to me that the EU behaviors are the reason Brexit became a reality vote to leave? In a less, (hard to believe), desirable way it's actually worse than our federal government-takes more and gives much less of everything. At least we have a workable military.

Seems it's better to leave without a plan, than to stay.

I agree .. better to leave minus a deal, than to accept either a shoddy deal, or to have our political maniacs insist we can only leave with a deal ... when no workable one is anywhere near, much less over, the horizon !

Now, we have our LibDem Party which has just agreed to commit itself to end Brexit entirely, if it can ever get the electoral power to do so. Cries of 'This is undemocratic, ignoring the 2016 Referendum entirely' fall on deaf ears where they are concerned.

Being tied into the EU means that we have open borders with every other EU country, smashing our hopes of properly controlling our own borders.

Being tied to them means accommodating into our own laws every law passed in their Parliament, where we lack a law providing its equivalent ruling. We have a legal duty to comply.

https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-law-and-uk/


EU laws in areas for which the EU is responsible override any conflicting laws of member countries.

Two important ideas make this system work. These are ‘supremacy’, meaning the higher status of EU laws compared to national laws, and ‘direct effect’, meaning that EU laws can be relied on in court.

Both these constitutional principles were recognised decades ago in leading decisions of the EU court.

The court said that they were necessary to ensure the survival of the EU legal system and to guarantee that EU rules are followed in all member countries.

The supremacy of EU laws

The principle of supremacy, or primacy, describes the relationship between EU law and national law.

It says that EU law should prevail if it conflicts with national law.

This ensures that EU rules are applied uniformly throughout the Union.

If national laws could contradict the EU treaties or laws passed by the EU institutions, there wouldn’t be this single set of rules in all member countries.

The UK has accepted the supremacy of EU law for some time.

We're also subject to rulings passed by the appropriate European courts.

We want our autonomy. That's the whole point of Brexit.

[Noir]

You think I am privy to the negotiating contact Boris has with the EU ? These things (to whatever extent they are) are being discussed behind closed doors. I understand that Boris was going to report back on that, following the proroguing period (for however long that lasts) ...

We know what the EU have offered, all of which the U.K. negotiators have rejected, so the EU seem to be happy to ‘lift the curtain’ on what they are offering ‘behind closed doors’. The U.K. on the other hand seem to of chosen instead to keep their proposals secret from the public.

...or at least they would if they existed - As Juncker has also been public is stating only the other day that the U.K. have not put a proposal to them.

[Drummond]

We know what the EU have offered, all of which the U.K. negotiators have rejected, so the EU seem to be happy to ‘lift the curtain’ on what they are offering ‘behind closed doors’. The U.K. on the other hand seem to of chosen instead to keep their proposals secret from the public.

...or at least they would if they existed - As Juncker has also been public is stating only the other day that the U.K. have not put a proposal to them.

Then, enlighten us all, Noir. What exactly is it that the EU has generously offered, which we ungrateful and unappreciative UK persons have rejected ? How are WE being the 'obstructive' ones ??

My belief, unless you claim otherwise: truthfully, you're simply referring to the one 'deal' the EU agreed with Mrs May and her team ... which Parliament found to be so dodgy as to feel it merited historically high levels of rejection !!

We're currently (so far as we all know, right now) still stuck with that same 'deal' which the EU is forever hell-bent on shoving down our throats. Idiot Left-winger types in the UK (who were the ones principally rejecting that deal !) somehow idiotically believe that they can magically renegotiate it all, given much extra time, beyond the three years plus there's already been, to get this sorted out !

But the EU has never said it would capitulate to even the minimal extent necessary to bring that about.

So, enlighten us, Noir. What wondrous goodies are we spurning, from the EU's version of Father Christmas ? What am I overlooking ? Details, @Noir (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=517) !!

[Noir]

There are endless details, news articles, opinion pieces and so on available about the EUs proposed backstop plans, which we can scrutinise (and reject!) becuase we know what they are.

We have ZERO information on what the British proposal is, and those involved in the discussions from the EU have said Britain have not proposed any alternative to the backstop to them. That is concerning.

[Noir]

The U.K. Supreme Court has ruled unanimously that the prorogation of Parliament by the Prime Minister was unlawful, and they certainly did not mince their words when giving the verdict.
As of right now Parliament is no longer dissolved.

[Kathianne]

The U.K. Supreme Court has ruled unanimously that the prorogation of Parliament by the Prime Minister was unlawful, and they certainly did not mince their words when giving the verdict.
As of right now Parliament is no longer dissolved.

Thank you for that infor. Now what?

[Noir]

Thank you for that infor. Now what?

I imagine MPs will look to take back their seats ASAP, maybe even today, I think it is also likely that they will call for a vote of no confidence in Johnson. Being found to of Illegally suspended Parliament by all Eleven of our Supreme Justices seems like a ditch too deep to dig out of (never mind everything else)

A Brexit delay, and a new conservative leadership contest seem on the cards, but Johnson is not known for doing the sensible thing so no-one really knows.

[Noir]

The current line from the Tory Whip :laugh:

[Noir]

Well it’s fair to say tensions have been escalating over the past few days - Parliament sat on Wednesday and resumed its orders of business, the government tabled a vote to close parliament for a week, the vote failed (Johnson has now lost all 7 votes that he has brought to the house since becoming Prime Minister)

Johnson himself faced questions from the house on Wednesday night that went on for a few hours - the main takeaways being that he thought the Supreme Court verdict was “wrong” and offered no apology for having been found to of broken the law, and for lying to the Queen. Johnson (and his legal council) confirmed they would abide by the Ben Bill (that a ‘No-Deal’ Brexit in October 31st would be illegal) meaning we must have a deal for Brexit or he will delay.

Most controversially when replying to a question from Tracy Brabin (Slight background - Tracy was elected to the office after the seats Previous MP Jo Cox was murdered. Jo was a vocal supporter of remaining in Europe, and her murderer considered her a ‘traitor to white people’ for her views) Johnson replies to Barbins question by stating “The best way to honour the memory of Jo Cox...would be to get Brexit done.” Which is simply breathtaking.

[STTAB]

Well it’s fair to say tensions have been escalating over the past few days - Parliament sat on Wednesday and resumed its orders of business, the government tabled a vote to close parliament for a week, the vote failed (Johnson has now lost all 7 votes that he has brought to the house since becoming Prime Minister)

Johnson himself faced questions from the house on Wednesday night that went on for a few hours - the main takeaways being that he thought the Supreme Court verdict was “wrong” and offered no apology for having been found to of broken the law, and for lying to the Queen. Johnson (and his legal council) confirmed they would abide by the Ben Bill (that a ‘No-Deal’ Brexit in October 31st would be illegal) meaning we must have a deal for Brexit or he will delay.

Most controversially when replying to a question from Tracy Brabin (Slight background - Tracy was elected to the office after the seats Previous MP Jo Cox was murdered. Jo was a vocal supporter of remaining in Europe, and her murderer considered her a ‘traitor to white people’ for her views) Johnson replies to Barbins question by stating “The best way to honour the memory of Jo Cox...would be to get Brexit done.” Which is simply breathtaking.

Question, what good is a national referendum if elected leaders just ignore the results because the people want something they don't ?

[jimnyc]

Question, what good is a national referendum if elected leaders just ignore the results because the people want something they don't ?

Useless. And the leftist are just as scummy there as here, and just like here, the left couldn't care less about anyone else.

[STTAB]

Useless. And the leftist are just as scummy there as here, and just like here, the left couldn't care less about anyone else.

Bingo, all they care about is getting and keeping power.

[Noir]

Question, what good is a national referendum if elected leaders just ignore the results because the people want something they don't ?

We do not live in a direct democracy, Referendums are advisory.

[Drummond]

I imagine MPs will look to take back their seats ASAP, maybe even today, I think it is also likely that they will call for a vote of no confidence in Johnson. Being found to of Illegally suspended Parliament by all Eleven of our Supreme Justices seems like a ditch too deep to dig out of (never mind everything else)

A Brexit delay, and a new conservative leadership contest seem on the cards, but Johnson is not known for doing the sensible thing so no-one really knows.

Just back from a week away from my home computer (where I do all my blogging). I'm now reviewing things ...

So, Noir. How did your 'analysis' pan out ? Any sign of that 'No Confidence' vote you're expecting, yet ?

Noir. Are you not following events ? Well ... here's the current situation, in a 'nutshell' ...

Boris doesn't particularly want an election (he's repeatedly said that). Nonetheless, he's offered one (repeatedly).

Jeremy Corbyn has been begging for an election for years. Now he's being handed one on a plate. Is he seizing the opportunity ? NO.

The person not wanting an election, offers one. The person begging for one refuses the chance of one. British politics in 'all its glory' ...

Noir, a No Confidence motion, if successful, triggers an election !! BUT CORBYN DOESN'T WANT ONE (.. all of a sudden). So of course, Noir, there's no way that you can, currently, be right in your 'analysis'.

After all, Parliament hasn't reached the pinnacle of its dysfunctionality quite yet ....

There's just one truth out there. Boris is doing his best to serve The Peoples' democratic wishes. All of his opponents want his efforts frustrated or killed off, and preferably, Boris's career killed off into the bargain.

Trust a CONSERVATIVE to be the most reputable figure in Parliamentary politics today ....

[Drummond]

We do not live in a direct democracy, Referendums are advisory.

You conveniently forget all of the pledges issued by MP's at the time TO HONOUR the Referendum.

Study this newspaper piece on that subject ....

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6904667/In-words-read-MPs-House-Hypocrites-swore-honour-Brexit-U-turned.html





Independent Anna Soubry promised to honour Brexit and now wants 2nd vote
Colleague Chuka Umunna said we would leave even if they won by a single vote
Vince Cable and Jeremy Corbyn are among others who changed their minds


They swore if we voted to leave that Brexit would mean Brexit, then vowed to honour the result.

Here, ANDREW PIERCE exposes how MPs and grandees have U-turned... starting with the politician who outlawed 'No Deal' – and paraded the royal assent on Twitter.

Doesn't it make you proud!


Yvette Cooper, Labour MP for Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford


THEN: 'I voted in Parliament to support triggering Article 50 because I thought it was important to respect the referendum result' – BLOG POST ON HER WEBSITE, SUMMER 2018


NOW: 'My amendment is a vote against the chaos of a No Deal Brexit' – February 2019


Hilary Benn, Labour MP for Leeds Central


THEN: 'You vote to Leave. We are out. We are going' – Before the Brexit referendum in June 2016


NOW: 'It is now clear that... leaving the EU without an agreement would be a disaster. If it turns out that there is no alternative deal that can win a majority in the Commons, then... the only way we will resolve this is to go back to the people' – December 17, 2018


Anna Soubry, Independent Group MP for Broxtowe


THEN: 'We are leaving the EU and must now get a good deal... Many people voted Leave for genuine and respected reasons. We have to respect the result.' – After referendum in June 2016


NOW: 'We have to plan for a People's Vote. The current deal we have with the EU is the best deal' – February 2019


Sir Keir Starmer, Labour MP for Holborn and St Pancras


THEN: 'We all have to accept and respect the referendum outcome. I campaigned to stay in the EU. I would have expected the result to be honoured if we had won it' – After the 2016 referendum


NOW: 'A public vote ought to be between the option of a credible Leave deal and Remain' – March 2019


Chuka Umunna, Independent Group MP for Streatham


THEN: 'We will Leave if Leave wins even by one vote' – on the eve of the 2016 referendum


NOW: 'A People's Vote is our final chance to get it right for generations to come' – October 2018


Sir Vince Cable, Lib Dem leader and MP for Twickenham


THEN: 'The public have voted and it's seriously disrespectful and politically utterly counter-productive to say: 'Sorry guys, you've got it wrong. We are going to try again' – After the 2016 Brexit vote


NOW: 'We are a Remain country now with 60 per cent wanting to stop the Brexit mess' – People's Vote rally, March 2019


Sarah Wollaston, Independent Group MP for Totnes


THEN: 'We must accept the result.' She added: 'A second referendum... is a direct incentive for us to get the worst possible deal. We should not be going back and saying we don't accept the result' – During 2017 election


NOW: 'I don't think we have anything to fear from a second referendum now. It's not about blocking Brexit; it's about saying to people: I think you have the right to give informed consent' – August 20, 2018

[B]
Heidi Allen, Independent Group MP for South Cambridgeshire


THEN: 'We must respect the democratic outcome of the referendum and work positively together to ensure we make Brexit a success' – 2017 election


NOW: 'There is no alternative. We need to go back to the public to decide what they want us to do next. The referendum should include the option of staying in the EU under existing terms' – September, 2018


Dominic Grieve, Tory MP for Beaconsfield


THEN: 'What is clear to me is that the decision of electorate in the referendum must be respected and I should support a reasoned process to give effect to it,' – 2017 election literature


NOW: 'I believe that a further public consultation through a referendum offers the best way forward' – January 2019


Jeremy Corbyn, Labour leader and Islington North MP


THEN: 'This is a one-off vote... between staying in the EU or leaving completely' – June 2017


NOW: 'We are committed to... supporting an amendment in favour of a public vote to prevent a damaging Tory Brexit being forced on the country.' – February 2019

.... etc .... etc .....

SELF SERVING HYPOCRITES, all. Note in particular Corbyn's own 'about-face'.

If the Referendum was always merely 'advisory' and eminently open to revision or even nullification .. then, Noir, how come so many senior politicians didn't initially think so, and are on the record making that clear ???

Fact is ... they've all become power-drunk, putting THEIR agendas above that of serving The People.

[STTAB]

We do not live in a direct democracy, Referendums are advisory.

That doesn't answer the question Noir.

Why even bother "advising" elected officials about what you want, if they don't give a shit what you want?

And I'm a person who believes the vast majority of people in a given city/state/country should have zero input into how that city/state/nation is ran . But if you're going to tell people they do have a say you ought require elected officials to follow their lead.

[Noir]

You conveniently forget all of the pledges issued by MP's at the time TO HONOUR the Referendum.

Study this newspaper piece on that subject ....

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6904667/In-words-read-MPs-House-Hypocrites-swore-honour-Brexit-U-turned.html

.... etc .... etc .....

SELF SERVING HYPOCRITES, all. Note in particular Corbyn's own 'about-face'.

If the Referendum was always merely 'advisory' and eminently open to revision or even nullification .. then, Noir, how come so many senior politicians didn't initially think so, and are on the record making that clear ???

Fact is ... they've all become power-drunk, putting THEIR agendas above that of serving The People.

Which is why we should go to election, but no one really wants that either.

[Noir]

At long last the Conservative government have published a proposal for the Irish border, and boy is it a doozy :laugh:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/836030/Explanatory_Note.pdf

[Noir]

In other news it’s seems that Johnson is going to try to suspend parliament again...

[Elessar]

At long last the Conservative government have published a proposal for the Irish border, and boy is it a doozy :laugh:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/836030/Explanatory_Note.pdf


In other news it’s seems that Johnson is going to try to suspend parliament again...

It seems that you might as well pack your bags and scoot out of there if you are so
disenfranchised with Parliament.

You are a whiner that comes in with "Why, Why. Why" most all of the time.

[Drummond]

In other news it’s seems that Johnson is going to try to suspend parliament again...

Provide me with evidence that this latest suspension is / will be, unlawful. Show me it's being done for disreputable motives.

No, Noir. You're relying on American non-familiarity with the British political establishment to make a cheap, and actually baseless, inference.

You don't say WHY this latest 'suspension' is taking place. Why not, if your intention isn't to encourage a certain inference ? What do you mean by 'try' to suspend Parliament ??

Here's the point: prorogation of Parliament is a NORMAL FUNCTION. It's done to arrange and introduce, for example, the latest Queen's Speech, in which she describes in a public speech what the objectives of her Government will be in its new session in Parliament. The furore over the last proroguing of Parliament came about partly because of its unusual duration, but chiefly because it wasn't called for to satisfy (it was alleged, this being why it came before the Judiciary) any usual or even legitimate purpose.

So, then. When is the next Queen's Speech ?

14th OCTOBER.

See ...

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1185680/Queens-Speech-2019-date-when-Queens-Speech-Parliament-time-schedule-boris-johnson


Boris Johnson will request Parliament is prorogued from next Tuesday, which would then allow him to outline his legislative programme for the next session of Parliament. The first prorogation - which was scheduled to last five weeks - was ruled unlawful because it frustrated or prevented Parliament from its duties, partially due to its duration. Mr Johnson has said he wants Parliament to be prorogued again on Tuesday, to prepare for a Queen’s Speech the following week.

Downing Street said: “The Prime Minister has been consistently clear that he wants to set out a fresh legislative programme in a Queen’s Speech.

“He, therefore, intends to request that the current session of Parliament be prorogued from the evening of Tuesday, October 8, with a Queen’s Speech on Monday, October 14.”

The speech read by the Queen in the House of Lords Chamber, outlines the Government’s programme of legislation and policies for the coming year.

It is written by the Government and not by the Queen herself.

Downing Street said the planned timings would mean Parliament would be prorogued for the shortest time possible to enable all the necessary logistical preparations for a State Opening to be undertaken, including those done by the House Authorities.

Mr Johnson said: “I want to deliver on the people’s priorities.

“Through a Queen’s Speech, the Government will set out its plans for the NHS, schools, tackling crime, investing in infrastructure and building a strong economy.

You've a problem with any of that, Noir ?

How about with this, then .. ?

https://www.parliament.uk/site-information/glossary/prorogation/


When a parliamentary session comes to an end the House is prorogued until the next session begins. Prorogation is the formal end to the parliamentary year.

The Queen's Speech will mark the beginning of the next Parliamentary Session ... hence the speech she'll make, which describes Government's objectives for the next Session.

Care to admit that Boris has acted properly, with due observance of well-established protocol ? H'mm ? Or are you too busy trying to establish cheap and thoroughly misleading inferences ?

[Drummond]

At long last the Conservative government have published a proposal for the Irish border, and boy is it a doozy :laugh:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/836030/Explanatory_Note.pdf

You'd rather it failed ?

I can predict that the Labour Party will oppose it. Why ? Because Labour are busily proceeding with their wrecking spree.

Labour threw out Mrs May's deal no less than THREE times. The reason ? The backstop clause.

Boris has carved that clause up, removed it from contention. Parliament SHOULD have altogether more reason to ratify this latest version of a deal than they had the last one.

The truth, though, is that although the Labour opposition insist we should only leave the EU with a deal .. Labour will happily oppose any that surfaces. Watch them oppose this one.

I daresay that the EU will do likewise. They wanted the backstop, because its inclusion worked for them. Its absence will not please them.

[Kathianne]

Drummond, you may like this:

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/10/boris-johnsons-weapons-grade-speech/

[Noir]

@Drummond (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=2287), you may like this:

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/10/boris-johnsons-weapons-grade-speech/

“If you ask me how we are going to grow the UK economy, I will tell you that it is by raising the productivity of the whole of the UK. Not with socialism, not with deranged and ruinous plans borrowed from the playbook of Bolivarian revolutionary Venezuela. But by creating the economic platform for dynamic free market capitalism.Yes, you heard it right: capitalism. And when did you last hear a Tory leader talk about capitalism? We are the party of the NHS precisely because we are the party of capitalism not because we shun it, or despise it and we understand the vital symmetry at the heart of the modern British economy between a dynamic enterprise culture and great public services”

Hearing Johnson proudly proclaim he is a free market capitalist and (in the same breath) that his party is the party of national socialised healthcare is a good reminder of how empty of meaning his words are.

[Noir]

You'd rather it failed ?

I can predict that the Labour Party will oppose it. Why ? Because Labour are busily proceeding with their wrecking spree.

Labour threw out Mrs May's deal no less than THREE times. The reason ? The backstop clause.

Boris has carved that clause up, removed it from contention. Parliament SHOULD have altogether more reason to ratify this latest version of a deal than they had the last one.

The truth, though, is that although the Labour opposition insist we should only leave the EU with a deal .. Labour will happily oppose any that surfaces. Watch them oppose this one.

I daresay that the EU will do likewise. They wanted the backstop, because its inclusion worked for them. Its absence will not please them.

I’d rather they didn’t have a proposal that was dead on arrival.

[Drummond]

@Drummond (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=2287), you may like this:

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/10/boris-johnsons-weapons-grade-speech/
Kathianne ... I do ! Thanks for posting this. Some classic Boris humour there ... not untypical of other speeches he'd made to Conference in years past ...

I'd already seen this one ... I recorded the live BBC transmission of his speech. Your clip captures some of the best of it, though.

[Drummond]

I’d rather they didn’t have a proposal that was dead on arrival.

Oh, yes, you would !!

In Leftie eyes, Noir, EVERY deal proposal will be seen in that way. BE HONEST. Corbyn will never approve ANY deal coming from Boris, regardless of what's in it. I absolutely promise you that. The sky is blue. The Earth is round. The Moon is not made of cheese. And, Labour will oppose any Brexit deal out there, now or at any time.

The Left is implacably opposed to any deal coming from the Conservatives, while simultaneously insisting that the UK must leave with an agreed deal !! Theirs is a wrecking agenda. It always was. It always will be. GUARANTEED.

Why ?

Well, quite apart from enjoying and savouring all the political vandalism involved (they are creatures of the Left, after all !) ... THEY WANT TO OVERTURN THE 2016 REFERENDUM RESULT. That is their only intention. That is all they'll dedicate themselves to do.

[Drummond]

@Kathianne (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=8) ... I do ! Thanks for posting this. Some classic Boris humour there ... not untypical of other speeches he'd made to Conference in years past ...

I'd already seen this one ... I recorded the live BBC transmission of his speech. Your clip captures some of the best of it, though.

Posting this just for comic effect. Classic Boris ...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPWFrl4e7l4

[Drummond]

“If you ask me how we are going to grow the UK economy, I will tell you that it is by raising the productivity of the whole of the UK. Not with socialism, not with deranged and ruinous plans borrowed from the playbook of Bolivarian revolutionary Venezuela. But by creating the economic platform for dynamic free market capitalism.Yes, you heard it right: capitalism. And when did you last hear a Tory leader talk about capitalism? We are the party of the NHS precisely because we are the party of capitalism not because we shun it, or despise it and we understand the vital symmetry at the heart of the modern British economy between a dynamic enterprise culture and great public services”

Hearing Johnson proudly proclaim he is a free market capitalist and (in the same breath) that his party is the party of national socialised healthcare is a good reminder of how empty of meaning his words are.

If you truly are from anywhere at all in the UK, you'll know as I do that no British politician can be openly hostile to the NHS without committing political suicide.

And if you think the Conservative Party fails to be pro-Capitalism, can you name a UK Party that is more pro-Capitalist than the Conservatives ? Look at who comprises the Party, for God's sake .. how many MP's of theirs are also successful business people ?

Indeed, the new post-austerity era they're embarking on will be a breath of fresh air to them. Austerity measures were only imposed in the first place to counter all of Labour's sabotage, pre-2010 election time. It was nothing more or less than good housekeeping, but forced through force of circumstances.

The Conservative strategy won through (of course !) ... and so, here we are, with funds available for those sectors of the economy and our very society that need it. Including - yes - the NHS, which, as we all know, will forever need cash injections .. because of what it is, how it operates ....

[Noir]

If you truly are from anywhere at all in the UK, you'll know as I do that no British politician can be openly hostile to the NHS without committing political suicide.

And if you think the Conservative Party fails to be pro-Capitalism, can you name a UK Party that is more pro-Capitalist than the Conservatives ? Look at who comprises the Party, for God's sake .. how many MP's of theirs are also successful business people ?

Indeed, the new post-austerity era they're embarking on will be a breath of fresh air to them. Austerity measures were only imposed in the first place to counter all of Labour's sabotage, pre-2010 election time. It was nothing more or less than good housekeeping, but forced through force of circumstances.

The Conservative strategy won through (of course !) ... and so, here we are, with funds available for those sectors of the economy and our very society that need it. Including - yes - the NHS, which, as we all know, will forever need cash injections .. because of what it is, how it operates ....

The libertarian party of the U.K. is certainly more free-market capitalist than the Conservative party.

Im glad we’ve been able to save these much needed funds during the Conservative austerity years - what was our national debt before austerity as compared to the national debt today?

[Noir]

“The Court of Session in Scotland has been told that Government documents say the Prime Minister will seek an extension from the EU if no EU Withdrawal Agreement is reached by 19 October”

via Beth Rigby, Sky News.

And here I was thinking we’d find Johnson dead in a ditch...

[Drummond]

The libertarian party of the U.K. is certainly more free-market capitalist than the Conservative party.

Im glad we’ve been able to save these much needed funds during the Conservative austerity years - what was our national debt before austerity as compared to the national debt today?

I've debated on this forum before about the Libertarians. My conclusion was (backed up with material) that the Libertarians were, and are, LEFT wing. So it beggars belief that they are in any sense more Conservative than the Conservatives.

Try comparing the stated aspirations of Libertarians with what Trade Unions declare are THEIR core beliefs. Then, tell me I'm wrong !

As for the national debt .. it shot up as a result of reckless and uncontrolled borrowing, courtesy of Labour wreckers. Such borrowing incurs a debt following from interest payments demanded from those lending such funds. In attempting to pay off debts, the interest must be paid, too.

Such interest obligations cripple the effectiveness of repayments. But, the Conservatives, in trying to clean up after Labour, have been saddled with that obligation. They didn't create that obligation: they're merely a victim of it.

As are we all -- courtesy of Labour vandalism.

[Drummond]

“The Court of Session in Scotland has been told that Government documents say the Prime Minister will seek an extension from the EU if no EU Withdrawal Agreement is reached by 19 October”

via Beth Rigby, Sky News.

And here I was thinking we’d find Johnson dead in a ditch...

If true (it appears to be ?) .. it is indeed most disappointing.

Still, consider the position Boris is in, courtesy of disgusting Labour vandals.

Boris has done (is still doing) his very best to conclude Brexit by 31st October, as promised. He respects the UK voting public to an extent that, obviously, none of his opposition do. Now, thanks to being reputable and decent enough a politician to fight for the rights of the voting public, here he is, facing a law designed to break him of that reputable stance.

Question: what right, or freedom, does even a PM have to defy the law of the land ?

The law in question is one passed by Parliament, and its purpose is to force defiance upon the Government of the voting Public. To force contempt of them.

It appears that Boris is now minded to obey the law. As opposed to defying it.

I think that we'll leave at the end of October, regardless. It's one thing to send a letter. But that letter, as Boris and our Government well knows, doesn't have the power to govern events. Indeed, the UK itself has never had that power. The EU also does, AND, these extensions only serve to exhibit weakness in the EU's eyes .. as Boris points out, whenever he refers to a 'Surrender Bill'.

Perhaps the EU will say, 'No, we'll grant you no new extension'. Or, perhaps they'll say, 'Have an extension .. but it'll be for far longer than the 3 months you want. Agree to a one year, or two year, extension .. OR, none at all'.

... 'Nice', eh ??

So, here's a question for you, Noir. Let's say that Boris sends 'his' letter (in reality, it's Labour's letter, since they'll have dictated its very existence). The EU reads that letter, and responds with 'You may have AN extension, but not for 3 months. Our offer is a 12 month extension, only that. Take it or leave it'.

My question is this: the 'surrender bill' only provides for a 3 month extension. If Boris agreed a 12 month extension, WOULD HE BE BREAKING THE LAW ?

I think he would be, which would then see Parliament desperately scrabble about to pass a new law to permit a 12 month extension ... SOMETHING THEY ABSOLUTELY REFUSE TO DO, TO BRING US OUT BY 31ST OCTOBER, IN DEFERENCE TO THE VOTING PUBLIC'S WISHES !!

H'm.

When, one day, all this ends .. Labour will have a VERY hard time convincing the People that they have any legitimate place in a democratic system. Maybe it'll kill off Labour entirely.

If so, it'll be richly deserved.

[Noir]

So it beggars belief that they are in any sense more Conservative than the Conservatives.

I said they are more Free-Market Capitalist. Do you reject that?


As for the national debt .. it shot up as a result of reckless and uncontrolled borrowing, courtesy of Labour wreckers. Such borrowing incurs a debt following from interest payments demanded from those lending such funds. In attempting to pay off debts, the interest must be paid, too.

Since the Conservatives took power, 9 years ago, the percentage of public sector debt over GDP rose from 40% to over 80%, where it has been for the last 5 years. U.K. net borrowing (in both real terms and against a % of GDP) hasn't been negative since 2001. So how do we have “funds available for those sectors of the economy and our very society that need it.” And how many years of consecutive Conservative governments does it take before the become reasonable for increasing the National Debt?

[Drummond]

I said they are more Free-Market Capitalist. Do you reject that?

It didn't take me long to find material which questions whether Libertarians are Capitalists, AT ALL.

I'll post you a link. I'm not at all sure I agree with their conclusion that Capitalism can run contrary to individual freedoms ... still, this piece is clear that you can't equate Capitalism with Libertarianism without serious questions arising, at absolute best.

Entitled, 'The Difference Between Capitalism and Libertarianism' .... an excerpt ...

http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/politics/the-difference-between-capitalism-and-libertarianism/


In practice, however, capitalism achieves the opposite of what libertarian law promotes. In any nation that implements capitalism, citizens are given the right to amass exchangeable commodities such as money or even property (Klein, 2007). This then inspires wealthy proprietors to diversify into the several industries, search for cheaper raw materials, and even cut wages in an effort to realize more profits. This naturally infringes on the rights of workers. In legal terms, capitalism prioritizes objective laws over citizen’s rights. Crony capitalism is today common in many nations due to the dedication that corporations show to their shareholders even when their activities negatively affect surrounding community or even company workers (Kang, 2002).

It is inaccurate to assert that capitalism, like libertarianism, is based on the promotion of individual rights because modern capitalism has proved that it is shareholders such as corporate executives, and not ordinary citizens, who benefit most from free market trade.

I think you need to rethink your premise. Better yet, just junk it ...


Since the Conservatives took power, 9 years ago, the percentage of public sector debt over GDP rose from 40% to over 80%, where it has been for the last 5 years. U.K. net borrowing (in both real terms and against a % of GDP) hasn't been negative since 2001. So how do we have “funds available for those sectors of the economy and our very society that need it.” And how many years of consecutive Conservative governments does it take before the become reasonable for increasing the National Debt?

OK, Noir. How about some HONEST argumentation ?

.. Fat chance ?

https://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_national_debt_chart.html

Read it for yourself.

You talk about 'the percentage of public sector debt'. You date this from the time, in 2010, when the Conservatives took Office. YET ... the material in my link shows that your 40 percent figure doesn't start in 2010, but instead, 2008 .. the year of the Crash.

Nice try, Noir. You tried to foist the whole of UK debt ever since 2008, upon the Conservatives, who took over in 2010. In truth ... check the graph. It shows a figure in 2010 for well over SIXTY percent. Not FORTY percent.

So, you're not debating honestly. As I said, 'nice try'. But I'm not going to indulge in any debate with you where you misrepresent the so-called 'truth' of a case you put.

5/10. Must do better.

Debate over.