- Files: GIF, JPG, PNG, Maximum:1000 KB, Thumbnails: 600x600 pixels
- Currently 3028 unique user posts. View catalogue
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]
Posting mode: Reply [First 100 posts][ Reply ]
183 posts omitted. First 100 posts shown.
Expand all images.
|>>|| No. 86507
Government asks Queen to suspend Parliament
The government has asked the Queen to suspend Parliament just days after MPs return to work in September - and only a few weeks before the IIIWW deadline.
Boris Johnson said a Queen's Speech would take place after the suspension, on 14 October, to outline his "very exciting agenda". But it means MPs are unlikely to have time to pass laws to stop a no-deal IIIWW on 31 October.
The ride never ends!
|>>|| No. 86513
We've known about this for a long time so I hardly think its worth a new thread, there is obvious need for a new legislative programme to be set. What Boris has done is cut Parliamentary time by 4 days as MPs are heading off for conference season.
It's irrelevant though. Next week Commons will either pass a vote of No Confidence or MPs will have to accept that there is no majority for any position and face the default.
|>>|| No. 86514
Has this been sensationalised by those unfamiliar with parliamentary process? I've read a few articles on this and it's said that parliament was going to enter a recess that week anyway for conference season and most new governments prorogue parliament before the Queen's speech.
|>>|| No. 86515
>I hardly think its worth a new thread
The last two pages or so on /pol/ are primarily various fragmented and piecemeal threads related to IIIWW. I think we've all lost the plot a bit.
|>>|| No. 86516
>there is obvious need for a new legislative programme to be set.
Yes, but it can wait until the instant crisis is dealt with. Quite simply, there is no reason why he couldn't have asked for a prorogration and a new session for the first couple of weeks of November instead.
>What Boris has done is cut Parliamentary time by 4 days as MPs are heading off for conference season.
That's a bit misleading. While it does technically remove an additional four sitting days from the Parliamentary calendar, being prorogued is very different from being in recess. Parliament can be recalled from recess, but prorogation is final.
|>>|| No. 86517
We've been in crisis mode for over 2 years now. Obviously the government does need to establish its legislative programme sharpish given events and the direction it needs to take. I'm surprised you didn't see this coming, especially as The Northern Ireland (Executive Formation) Bill 2019 has deliberately bound the governments hands between October and December to avoid this.
>That's a bit misleading.
No it's not. We've been here before and, if MPs have the balls, a Surrogate Parliament can be held. MPs can still pull the pin and do a vote of no confidence with the hope the EU will grant a further extension given we're already out of time.
|>>|| No. 86518
>Obviously the government does need to establish its legislative programme sharpish given events and the direction it needs to take.
Which events would those be? As far as I can tell, nobody without a vested interest in ramming an exit through ASAP has suggested the need for a programme before EU Transfer Deadline Day. In fact, it would seem rather silly given the need to plan for and potentially execute no-deal to suddenly decide to lay out what you're going to do after it.
>No it's not.
Yes, it is. A motion in Parliament would be binding. A motion in a parallel body would be persuasive but not binding. Thanks to the Maybot, Boris has plenty of precedent for disregarding it, and a solid Parliamentary scholar as his Leader to back him up.
|>>|| No. 86519
>As far as I can tell, nobody without a vested interest in ramming an exit through ASAP has suggested the need for a programme before EU Transfer Deadline Day
Hasn't the position from Corbyn over the past couple of years been that IIIWW is a secondary issue, other than an excuse to make a power grab, compared with tackling austerity and other domestic issues?
|>>|| No. 86520
>Hasn't the position from Corbyn over the past couple of years been that IIIWW is a secondary issue, other than an excuse to make a power grab, compared with tackling austerity and other domestic issues?
Right, and how well has that worked out for him in the last 12 months?
|>>|| No. 86522
I'd like to see as a result of the petition a debate next parliament about not ending the previous session.
|>>|| No. 86526
Why don't migrants just wear a hi-vis jacket when trying to enter a country illegally? Aren't you supposed to be able to get in anywhere like that?
|>>|| No. 86528
I read something one time, it might have been on here, about a group of burglars who wore hi-vis jackets before removing someone's front door and clearing the place out; people thought they were workmen so they went completely unchallenged. If a bunch of illegal immigrants came into the county wearing hi-vis jackets and carrying clipboards I doubt anyone would suspect a thing.
|>>|| No. 86531
Grant Shapp's tired eyes say more than I ever could.
|>>|| No. 86535
Just goes to show.
There was a woman on that radio 4 panel show earlier today who said something along the lines of "people who want to stop the third world war- which means, normal people" and I just had to shake my head.
Just encapsulates that perceived moral high ground which has entirely undermined the remain case from the beginning. Remain is outnumbered. Remain has to appeal to people and persuade them, which should be common sense when you're the minority group and you need more support for your cause. But most remainers are happier to belittle and patronise.
Polling like that shows how oblivious they are. People who wanted a second referendum would be in for a rude awakening when it came back as an even bigger Leave victory. The ignorance of people like that is why we're so fucked right now- Instead of mounting an effective and pragmatic campaign to gain a level of control, and push for damage mitigation and contingency planning, they've done basically nothing for three years.
|>>|| No. 86536
You can't win a political campaign by offering the status quo when your opponent has free reign to make up any bullshit and promise they want stick it on the side of a bus and never be held accountable for if it is true.
The only solution is to tell an equal amount of bullshit about the exagerated horrors that the unknown will bring and that we are safer where we are.
|>>|| No. 86537
That wouldn't work and hasn't worked to date.
Many people who voted leave did not do so for economic reasons, citing something like "taking back control" or immigration as their primary concern; the areas voting leave tended to have the greatest change in demographics since 2001.
One of the reasons the remain campaign failed is because they largely ignored this and focused almost exclusively on the economic effects of leaving the EU. The so-called Project Fear heavily backfired in the Scottish independence referendum yet it was complacently adopted for the EU referendum.
The leave campaign, if you ignore the unofficial one run by Are Nige, was a largely positive message even if it was pandering to notions of British exceptionalism about how we can stand on our own two feet. The remain campaign was negative, didn't address the priorities of the people it actually needed to get the message across to and was fixated on why we shouldn't leave rather than the benefits of remaining. A lot of the negative growth forecasts have ended up being revised up as the economy has generally been a lot more resilient than expected since the referendum result, which is now taken as evidence by leave voters that every single piece of bad news, particularly if it is a forecast or includes the words 'if' or 'may', is hyperbolic bollocks so can be easily dismissed.
Insulting them and creating bullshit will only make them more deeply entrenched in their views.
|>>|| No. 86538
The problem with british exceptionalism, and taking back control is that they are intangible feel good positions you can't really dismantle them with logic. They are just hype like the easily duped carried away mobs in the Simpsons.
People will just assume you hate Britain if you argue we aren't exceptional that you hate Britain and become more entrenched, and taking back control is so nebulous in this context as to not mean anything and if it doesn't mean anything you can't argue against it. And you can't argue for how great the status quo is because these people are already dissatisfied with that. So you are stuck telling them either they are mistaken (I.e stupid) or that the results will be really bad.
You can't make a proactive campaign for the status quo.
|>>|| No. 86539
>they are intangible feel good positions you can't really dismantle them with logic
Have you tried? Your posts just oozes of arrogance for positions that ordinary people find hard to articulate. Britain is exceptional because our constitutional makeup built on Parliamentary Sovereignty doesn't mesh at all well with European conceptions of government which we deliberately avoided taking part in designing at the start. Normally people put it in words of bringing power back and in our unique conception of Parliament they are absolutely right, even if you scoff at this, the EU bureaucracy is not a better answer.
If you understood this you can then grasp that Remain was never a status quo position. Britain's interaction with Europe of the past few decades has already bought constitutional tension and if we remain these tensions will need resolving. You could instead argue for greater judicial oversight or that EU immigration at least gives us people of a somewhat similar cultural background but no, you'd rather pretend the European Union is static and not a project.
I suggest reading the attached book. Vernon seems to be what everyone goes off this days when it comes to IIIWW.
|>>|| No. 86543
Remember when the polls said Theresa May would get a majority if she called a snap election?
|>>|| No. 86547
Survation were the most accurate polling company for the 2017 general election by some distance. They were also the most accurate polling company for the Scottish Independence referendum and ran two polls prior to the EU referendum which came out 52% in favour of leave.
As you will see above (>>86534) their polling has found that support for the Tories has gone up since the prorogation was agreed.
|>>|| No. 86548
Why does Tony Blair get uninterupted coverage of another milquetoast, out of touch, non-committal speech on BBC News? He just told people protesting is bad, mmm'kay WHILE HONG KONG IS IN THE MIDDLE OF A GENERAL STRIKE!
|>>|| No. 86550
>Why does Tony Blair get uninterupted coverage [telling] people protesting is bad
Why'd you think?
The beeb is the elite, don't forget.
|>>|| No. 86551
first time poster in this thread.
I've no idea which part of the country you live in, I live in the North Midlands in an area which has seen huge numbers of Eastern European immigrants settle and voted overwhelmingly to leave.
It wasn't dolphin rape that caused this, it was the flooding of the lower end of labour market combined with zero hour contracts and minimum wage which caused this.
Yes its arguable the EU tried to protect this labour market with legislation against zero hour contracts but when your stuck in a job without even the prospect of a permanent contract and earning so little you struggle with even the basics of life and seeing massive immigration saturating the labour market destroying any chance of this changing you start seeing the enshrining of freedom of movement as destroying any chance of a comfortable life.
This has been a labour safe seat going back nearly a century, which I find interesting when compared with the framing of leave/don't leave as a battle between right and left. The people around here aren't particularly political but unsurprisingly they do want a comfortable life and see this prevented by both government and the EU.
This is what is meant by elitism, the political left are traditionally seen to be protectors of the working person, these same people feel betrayed and have done so for years. Vote leave was seen as the only way to improve lives and left wing lovies proclaiming anyone who did so is racist/thick/gammon/lied to etc only encourages this and leaves you seen as elitist.
|>>|| No. 86552
>anyone who did so is racist/thick/gammon/lied to etc
I'm sorry if the truth makes you uncomfortable.
|>>|| No. 86553
The part you don't seem able to get your head around is that wether it's the truth or not, we're leaving the EU because of it.
Was it really worth pushing us over the edge of what could be the worst economic disaster this country has ever seen, just to keep your seat on your high horse?
|>>|| No. 86554
This is the exact same reasoning as "I'm only alt-right because some Paul Joseph Watsons told me not to say the n-word". Are the working people thick? Do they lack agency? Do they only act in response to the middle classes?
|>>|| No. 86557
>>86556>>86556all those gas plumber s and electricians must be thick, it's not like they deal with complex systems capable of causing death
|>>|| No. 86558
An excess of something causes the price to drop
Potatoes or people this holds true
|>>|| No. 86559
Primary school children can competently play games where you have to arrange pipes from A to B such that their contents don't escape.
|>>|| No. 86562
>Are the working people thick? Do they lack agency? Do they only act in response to the middle classes?
Britain has had a long, long cultural history of deference to the upper classes, and I think the echoes of that still remain to this day. Many people simply are born and raised to trust someone who went to Eton or Oxbridge because surely they must know what they're on about, or to support the monarchy because that what Britain Is All About. We, as a country, have always looked up to the upper classes, aspired towards it, and assumed that they were our betters. Even those who don't really like a posho will still seem to assume they are better qualified to run the country, back when Labour courted proper union lads they still didn't want the fat yorkshire bloke in charge, and indeed ridiculed him for having ideas (and cars) above his station.
We're still very set in our ways in this country, at least the older generations (i.e most of the voting population) and I think that also goes to explain why we do have such a crab bucket mentality in this country too - the lines of class are still clearly marked for many and crossing them is either traitorous or courts extreme jealousy.
Maybe they're thick too, I don't know.
|>>|| No. 86564
What needs to be acknowledged is that pretty much everyone is thick. Most people I know who voted Remain did so because it's what everyone else they knew was planning on doing so they'd rather go with the flow, pretend it's because they're enlightened and avoid being a social pariah; they couldn't articulate why they voted the way they did or the benefits of remaining in the EU unless it was parroting an image they'd seen on social media.
A lot of remain voters were thick. A lot of leave voters were thick. The major difference is that voting remain because you're an airhead is a lot more palatable than voting leave because you hate brown-eyed people.
|>>|| No. 86565
Yeah, a lot of working class people are thick. That's why they work at the checkout in Iceland instead of a design consultancy agency or whatever it is us lot do for a living.
The fact is the left hasn't been saying anything they want to listen to. In the absence of an appealing left, the lesser educated masses have been very easily swayed by far right populism pandering to their fears and insecurities.
How do you people find it so hard to understand that nobody is going to vote for the guy who tells them they're wrong, when there's another guy promising to solve all their problems? People are thick. People are selfish. People vote for the guy who tells them they're right.
This is how the Tories have won for the last decade. It's how Leave won the referendum. It's not rocket science.
|>>|| No. 86567
Because a national economy is exactly that simple. Boy, why don't they just put you in charge so you can fix everything instead of the shower we currently have? With insights like that how can we possibly go wrong?
|>>|| No. 86568
>Don't bother, the best you'll get from him are edgy replies.
If he wants better replies, he'll have to earn them.
|>>|| No. 86569
>The fact is the left hasn't been saying anything they want to listen to. In the absence of an appealing left, the lesser educated masses have been very easily swayed by far right populism pandering to their fears and insecurities.
Are you trying to abdicate any responsibility on the left for abandoning the traditional working class values and groups they used to represent? I mean, voters have said for decades that they don't want immigration, don't like the idea of the EU and whatever else you want to berate people for. Maybe you have just have shit for brains if you won't listen to that.
|>>|| No. 86571
You tell 'em m7. Everyone enjoys your edgy brand of trolling that stops us discussing politics on here.
|>>|| No. 86572
It doesn't stop us those of us who aren't spewing brain-dead pseudointellectual rubbish discussing politics.
|>>|| No. 86573
That's pretty much exactly what I'm criticising the left for in the first place you daft sod.
|>>|| No. 86576
Oh, look, Owen Smith is briefing against the party again, what a suprise...
|>>|| No. 86578
Remember when he tried dubbing himself 'Remoaner-in-Chief' but it never caught on because everyone thinks he's insignificant? Owen Smith's top priority is always Owen Smith.
|>>|| No. 86579
I'm disappointed in the crowds trying to drown out Johnson's speech that they're just chanting "Stop. The. Coup." as it reads, rather than to the tune of The KLF's Doctorin' the TARDIS.
|>>|| No. 86580
Corbyn's present position is that he want's to stop no-deal and subsequently hold a GE. If you're just a person doing person things I can understand not knowing, because for various reason Labour struggle to get their message out. However, if you're a Labour MP pretending not to know you're just playing stupid, which is a risky business for someone like Smith who's already quite thick. Case in point >>86578
|>>|| No. 86581
>Corbyn's present position is that he want's to stop no-deal and subsequently hold a GE
No, the "subsequently" isn't his position. That's the position of most of the rest of his MPs, Owen Smith included.
|>>|| No. 86582
Corbyn's solution for 99.99% of matters is to call for a general election.
|>>|| No. 86583
Screenshot_2019-09-03 Brexit Boris Johnson fails t.png
That simply isn't the case. See pic related.
I don't know if this is Corbyn's thinking on the matter, but we should have had one the moment it was obvious May could not get her deal through Parliament. Instead the Conservatives made a cack-handed play at brinksmanship and only managed to exhaust themselves in the process. The reason no one party can do anything in Parliament regarding IIIWW is in part that none of them are entirely sure what their voters want and, more importantly, none of them have a majority.
The Conservatives have treated the IIIWW process, and by extension to country, with more contempt than I treated my GCSEs, but you can't resit IIIWW.
|>>|| No. 86584
I can entirely believe the following would be a real conversation in the Corbyn household:
>Laura: The upstairs toilet is blocked again!
>Jeremy: Right, the only way out of this is an immediate general election!
|>>|| No. 86585
Conservative MP Phillip Lee has defected to the Liberal Democrats ahead of a showdown between Boris Johnson and Tory rebels over IIIWW.
Dr Lee, the MP for Bracknell, took his seat on the opposition benches as the PM addressed the Commons. His defection means that Boris Johnson no longer has a working majority in the Commons.
|>>|| No. 86586
As far as Boris is concerned, he has a majority of 1.
|>>|| No. 86590
I got an email from my MP saying he's headed in to Parliament today to vote for Hilary Benn's Bill to stop the UK crashing out of the EU with no deal. I'm guessing he's emailed all his constituents with the same thing as I've never expressed anything about it to him. Seems weird.
|>>|| No. 86592
Out of the ordinary sure, but at least it makes you aware of what he stands for. What is probably weirder is that we don't know more about our MPs and what they care about when you think about it.
|>>|| No. 86593
Get on their mailing list and you'll get an opportunity to find out what they want you to think they care about and maybe you'll have an opportunity to meet them and get a feel for what they're really like.
|>>|| No. 86594
I got the forms through to confirm voters roll the other day, too.
It's election time.
|>>|| No. 86595
>I got the forms through to confirm voters roll the other day, too.
They do that every year.
|>>|| No. 86596
The Leader of the House of Commons is pretending to be asleep. I did that once at a "party" when I was 13 and I didn't want to talk to anyone. Utterly embarrassing.
|>>|| No. 86599
Looks like Boris is off to a good start. Played 1, lost 1.
|>>|| No. 86600
So, is this prorogure (prorogation?) still happening then? I'm confused.
|>>|| No. 86601
Unless the legal challenges succeed, or the House passes a Humble Address, yes.
The vote tonight was a repeat of the tactic used to introduce the bill that forced May to request an extension. A similar bill will be introduced tomorrow. The whole thing about threatening de-whipping has almost certainly backfired, since if they carry it out as advertised the rebels will have no incentive to back the government tomorrow, and if they don't carry it out the threat is no longer credible and the rebels will rebel again.
|>>|| No. 86604
I wouldn't go that far. For now they might be, but I couldn't tell you a thing about how a post GE parliament might look, and if enough of these 22 are in safe Tory seats they might not become a long term loss. However, figuring that out is for a me who isn't quite so tired.
|>>|| No. 86605
Some of them are big enough names that they'd easily be competitive running as an independent. If you've voted for Nicholas Soames for the last 30 years and you see his name on the ballot again, it's going to be a tough choice between him and an official Tory candidate.
FWIW, some of them have already been re-selected by their constituency associations, which means that the whips will have missed the boat on de-selecting them.
|>>|| No. 86606
I know the LibDems don't have a brain cell between them, but would they want a bunch of ex-Tories rocking up on their ballots? Slightly off topic I know.
|>>|| No. 86612
Just in case anyone hasn't caught up, in the elected chamber decided not to give us a vote, while in the unelected chamber they've spent most of the evening going through a cycle of having a vote on whether to have a vote, and then having a vote.
|>>|| No. 86613
Also something about Kinnock's amendment. I don't know what's going on any more.
|>>|| No. 86614
The working theory is that Boris did not want evidence of support for an alternative to his own plans on the record. No tellers means no division, so the amendment was adopted by default, whereas if the amendment had passed by division his critics could claim there was a consensus forming in the House when his entire act at the moment relies on the premise that the House is paralysed.
|>>|| No. 86615
There's a business motion currently pending in the Lords, as a counterpart to the one that went through the Commons on Tuesday. Pro-IIIWW Lords have basically mounted a brute-force attack on it.
At the part where there it says that the bill from the Commons should take priority over all other business, there are 20 amendments trying to add exceptions for individual bills.
There are a couple of references to Friday. There are amendments for each of these references to change them to several days next week. There are multiple amendments to change the cut-off time from 5pm to some other time of day.
There are 11 paragraphs. There is an amendment to leave out paragraphs 2-11, and another to leave out 3-11, etc. There are a couple more of this form that also want to add a few words further up.
Right now, they're currently wading through a set of three amendments wanting to put the matter on hold until each of the three court cases currently under way is resolved.
A few more amendment have been added as "manuscript amendments" after the order paper was printed. Once the current batch of MSAs have been dealt with, they'll move on to amendment 3 of 86.
|>>|| No. 86616
If the Lords debate continues until 10:30 AM tomorrow, it'll still technically be Wednesday for parliamentary purposes. It could still be Wednesday on Monday. I am trapped in a nightmare, please send help.
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]