Brexit the Movie 31 - Now It Gets Really Heavy Watch

Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#81
Report 3 weeks ago
#81
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
Must be a tight vote.
Lol! I thought it was going to be tighter than it was.
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#82
Report 3 weeks ago
#82
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
PM has already gone back on his threat to seek a general election and is instead now insisting he will continue to treat Oct 31st as the deadline. This is clearly another Cummings wheeze to blame the EU, as the Commission will have to reject this and instead go for an extension. Boris will most certainly consent to an extension but try not to look like he's asked for one!
Hes not asked for one, parliament have let's be accurate. Hes been forced to ask by parliamentarians who dont wish to ask themselves.

Regards the General election, he has to because he a hostage of a dysfunctional anti democratic parliament who wont allow one because they are fearful they will lose, well correction, they will know they will lose. This is why any future majority government will ditch the fixed term parliament act, no party will want their PM treated as Johnson currently is.
0
reply
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#83
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#83
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
Lol! I thought it was going to be tighter than it was.
I wonder if the long delay was because the majority against the Programme Motion looked too large and the tellers were busy rechecking the figures.
0
reply
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#84
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#84
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
Hes not asked for one, parliament have let's be accurate. Hes been forced to ask by parliamentarians who dont wish to ask themselves.

Regards the General election, he has to because he a hostage of a dysfunctional anti democratic parliament who wont allow one because they are fearful they will lose, well correction, they will know they will lose. This is why any future majority government will ditch the fixed term parliament act, no party will want their PM treated as Johnson currently is.
He said earlier today that he would seek another general election if the House rejected the Programme Motion, but when they did, he simply chewed on about leaving on Oct 31st and made no mention of it, then he stalked out of the House. I assume he (correctly) believes Labour and the Independents would simply block an election again, so he now has no real choice but to discuss the length of the next extension with Brussels. He just doesn't want to look too big an arse doing it.
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#85
Report 3 weeks ago
#85
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
I wonder if the long delay was because the majority against the Programme Motion looked too large and the tellers were busy rechecking the figures.
I'd guess so, all indications was it was closer than it was. So I guess they ordered a recount, which id guess is why the teller first stood on the government side.
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#86
Report 3 weeks ago
#86
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
He said earlier today that he would seek another general election if the House rejected the Programme Motion, but when they did, he simply chewed on about leaving on Oct 31st and made no mention of it, then he stalked out of the House. I assume he (correctly) believes Labour and the Independents would simply block an election again, so he now has no real choice but to discuss the length of the next extension with Brussels. He just doesn't want to look too big an arse doing it.
Labour and the independants would block a election, because they have been acting undemocraticaly and/or lost the party whip and will almost certainly get mullered in an election.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#87
Report 3 weeks ago
#87
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
He said earlier today that he would seek another general election if the House rejected the Programme Motion, but when they did, he simply chewed on about leaving on Oct 31st and made no mention of it, then he stalked out of the House. I assume he (correctly) believes Labour and the Independents would simply block an election again, so he now has no real choice but to discuss the length of the next extension with Brussels. He just doesn't want to look too big an arse doing it.
He cant put down an election motion until parliament has approved the extension, the whaffle about the 31st is just a delaying tactic until he can put down the motion.

Corbyn's office is apparently saying they'll back the election as soon as we have the delay.
0
reply
DJKL
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#88
Report 3 weeks ago
#88
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
This is it. That nonsensical arguement is baced on having a majority Tory government for ever, which is as I said nonsensical.

The current government cannot win a fight in a paper bag in parliament, let alone scrap workers rights. This is more project fear lies.
The current government is not likely to be the government for much longer, both sides are playing chess and trying to lead the other to commit to moving into a square that holds danger, why Boris tonight has paused proceedings.

I am pretty sure he knew his timetable was unacceptable to parliament but HMG had war gamed this in advance, he needs the message re 31st October and being frustrated by Parliament ringing out to convince possible Brexit Party supporters (the danger to the Conservatives at a GE) that he can be trusted with their votes in the fast approaching election, if he has got it right he possibly comes back with a majority and gets whatever Brexit he wants which could mean USA Trade deal first EU second (as order they get done determines what is still possible in the second one) , if he gets it wrong likely hung parliament but as he has that already. limited downside except his argument that his Brexit has a mandate from the people is weakened/exposed as incorrect.

If he had proceeded the bear trap was the amendments that could have been hung on his Brexit, that could have forced him back to the EU with an exit proposal he did not want but the EU said fine, we can live with it, at that point game over.

Nothing of the current pantomime politics is really as it seems, Parliament does not really support his deal in its current form (This first vote leads him on to the punch the second reverses numbers to ensure he cannot control the timetable, he avoided the dangerous one by pausing his Bill.

I think he had even lodged a note with Bercow explaining HMG policy if they lost the second vote on the scheduling before it was lost.

Currently I think ( not always easy to read) there is more backing in Parliament for a varied Boris deal with say a CU attached plus other bits and if that had been enacted by amendment at third reading he could have lost control of the process, so all this was pantomime so that once the EU grant the extension (which I am 95% certain they will) he pushes for an election.

So the next round is will Labour support the election call and give him the 2/3rds he needs, I suspect they will as they cannot duck it once the extension has been granted, at which point a general election and if we get a Conservative majority all bets re type of Brexit are off (including possibly his own deal), anything goes.
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#89
Report 3 weeks ago
#89
(Original post by DJKL)
The current government is not likely to be the government for much longer, both sides are playing chess and trying to lead the other to commit to moving into a square that holds danger, why Boris tonight has paused proceedings.

I am pretty sure he knew his timetable was unacceptable to parliament but HMG had war gamed this in advance, he needs the message re 31st October and being frustrated by Parliament ringing out to convince possible Brexit Party supporters (the danger to the Conservatives at a GE) that he can be trusted with their votes in the fast approaching election, if he has got it right he possibly comes back with a majority and gets whatever Brexit he wants which could mean USA Trade deal first EU second (as order they get done determines what is still possible in the second one) , if he gets it wrong likely hung parliament but as he has that already. limited downside except his argument that his Brexit has a mandate from the people is weakened/exposed as incorrect.

If he had proceeded the bear trap was the amendments that could have been hung on his Brexit, that could have forced him back to the EU with an exit proposal he did not want but the EU said fine, we can live with it, at that point game over.

Nothing of the current pantomime politics is really as it seems, Parliament does not really support his deal in its current form (This first vote leads him on to the punch the second reverses numbers to ensure he cannot control the timetable, he avoided the dangerous one by pausing his Bill.

I think he had even lodged a note with Bercow explaining HMG policy if they lost the second vote on the scheduling before it was lost.

Currently I think ( not always easy to read) there is more backing in Parliament for a varied Boris deal with say a CU attached plus other bits and if that had been enacted by amendment at third reading he could have lost control of the process, so all this was pantomime so that once the EU grant the extension (which I am 95% certain they will) he pushes for an election.

So the next round is will Labour support the election call and give him the 2/3rds he needs, I suspect they will as they cannot duck it once the extension has been granted, at which point a general election and if we get a Conservative majority all bets re type of Brexit are off (including possibly his own deal), anything goes.
All that is well written and a good insight into what is actually happening, I agree with much of it too boot. I would like to point out the post you highlighted of mine was directly talking about the nonsensical agruement that leaving the EU ditches workers rights and our workers rights come from the EU, inplying we are too stupid and incapable of protecting our own people thus we need unelected EU fat cats to do it for us.

This is nonsensical and baced on the two assumptions, firstly, a post Brexit Britain will have hard core Thatcher like Tory majority governments for an eternity, secondly, the British working electorate will be too stupid to notice and remove them. Its completely nonsensical, remainer campaign lies, an argument for leaving is to allow the public to get what we vote for, if they vote tory - we get Tories warts n all. That's probably what the socialist left of this country needs to bury the tories and strengthen workers rights in the long term. This was my point to Fullofsurprises
Last edited by Burton Bridge; 3 weeks ago
0
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#90
Report 3 weeks ago
#90
(Original post by DJKL)
The current government is not likely to be the government for much longer, both sides are playing chess and trying to lead the other to commit to moving into a square that holds danger, why Boris tonight has paused proceedings.

I am pretty sure he knew his timetable was unacceptable to parliament but HMG had war gamed this in advance, he needs the message re 31st October and being frustrated by Parliament ringing out to convince possible Brexit Party supporters (the danger to the Conservatives at a GE) that he can be trusted with their votes in the fast approaching election, if he has got it right he possibly comes back with a majority and gets whatever Brexit he wants which could mean USA Trade deal first EU second (as order they get done determines what is still possible in the second one) , if he gets it wrong likely hung parliament but as he has that already. limited downside except his argument that his Brexit has a mandate from the people is weakened/exposed as incorrect.

If he had proceeded the bear trap was the amendments that could have been hung on his Brexit, that could have forced him back to the EU with an exit proposal he did not want but the EU said fine, we can live with it, at that point game over.

Nothing of the current pantomime politics is really as it seems, Parliament does not really support his deal in its current form (This first vote leads him on to the punch the second reverses numbers to ensure he cannot control the timetable, he avoided the dangerous one by pausing his Bill.

I think he had even lodged a note with Bercow explaining HMG policy if they lost the second vote on the scheduling before it was lost.

Currently I think ( not always easy to read) there is more backing in Parliament for a varied Boris deal with say a CU attached plus other bits and if that had been enacted by amendment at third reading he could have lost control of the process, so all this was pantomime so that once the EU grant the extension (which I am 95% certain they will) he pushes for an election.

So the next round is will Labour support the election call and give him the 2/3rds he needs, I suspect they will as they cannot duck it once the extension has been granted, at which point a general election and if we get a Conservative majority all bets re type of Brexit are off (including possibly his own deal), anything goes.
Can you predict what will be the reason for the Opposition to block an election after a delay? Corbyn tried to play a good card by offering to work with Johnson, so it looks like Labour are not about delay and frustration.

I feel that Labour will be obliterated during the GE, so I don't personally foresee them agreeing to their own demise. They have been creative before, so I am keen to know what their new reason is for not agreeing to an election. Possibly a VoNC to try to weaken the PM?

This is truly a zombie Parliament. Nothing is moving forward and the MPs seem to be content with the chaos.
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#91
Report 3 weeks ago
#91
(Original post by Wired_1800)
Can you predict what will be the reason for the Opposition to block an election after a delay? Corbyn tried to play a good card by offering to work with Johnson, so it looks like Labour are not about delay and frustration.

I feel that Labour will be obliterated during the GE, so I don't personally foresee them agreeing to their own demise. They have been creative before, so I am keen to know what their new reason is for not agreeing to an election. Possibly a VoNC to try to weaken the PM?

This is truly a zombie Parliament. Nothing is moving forward and the MPs seem to be content with the chaos.

I think if no-one does anything else, Corbyn will consent to an election.

If we assume that the SNP want an election but the Lib Dems and everyone else doesn't (either for political or financial reasons) that is 220 votes for an election. Boris needs 434. Will 114 Labour MPs vote for it? I think so but it isn't guaranteed.

Boris would be an idiot to try the VoNC route. He could well end up in the Supreme Court facing the same abuse of powers argument as in Miller 2 (the prorogation case) but he seems to have little insight.

If he can't get a 2/3s majority, he should try a one clause Act of Parliament to force an election.

However, this is all if no-one does anything. I am not sure Letwin is finished yet. What about these two possibilities:-

1 Letwin moves a sensible programme motion for the existing Bill

2 Letwin introduces a Private Members' Bill in the same terms as the existing Bill and seizes control of the Order Paper to get it a Second Reading and programme motion. The Government would abstain on Second Reading, Labour and the Lib Dems could justify abstention, the DUP would vote against as might a few Spartans, but it would probably be carried by Tory backbenchers, Tory rebels and Labour Brexiteers.

For either approach, there is the problem that the Government must move a Ways and Means Resolution, a Money Resolution and give Queen's Consent. but the optics don't look good if a Bill that is moving forward is killed off on those grounds.

The advantage with this approach is that it allows non-hard Brexiteers/Remainers to tack things onto the WAB constraining the Government's negotiating position in the trade talks. It would hard for Boris to get over the message to the electorate that he only wanted his Deal so long as it came without bells and whistles.

If the WAB was moving again, Corbyn could justify refusing an election until it had completed its passage.

What is in it for Corbyn? He would have to ensure Boris didn't get the credit. He solves Labour's Brexit crisis because the WAB passes with or without (it doesn't matter) a Referendum but (hopefully for him) with a lot of bells and whistles. He delays an election until after Salmond's trial has begun.
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#92
Report 3 weeks ago
#92
(Original post by Wired_1800)
Can you predict what will be the reason for the Opposition to block an election after a delay? Corbyn tried to play a good card by offering to work with Johnson, so it looks like Labour are not about delay and frustration.

I feel that Labour will be obliterated during the GE, so I don't personally foresee them agreeing to their own demise. They have been creative before, so I am keen to know what their new reason is for not agreeing to an election. Possibly a VoNC to try to weaken the PM?

This is truly a zombie Parliament. Nothing is moving forward and the MPs seem to be content with the chaos.
Oh didn't he just, I thought that brilliant and exceptionally dishonest move. So hes just whipped his MP's to vote against a hearing of the bill at all, then after his MPs risk losing the whip, to go against him in the public interest. He dishonestly say, oh we will work with you we dont wish to delay.

I cannot predict the reason he will give but I do think he will block and election.
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#93
Report 3 weeks ago
#93
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
It isn't bias, it's enforcing the ancient rules of the House to not have the government repeatedly browbeat the House with the same demands until the House gives way.

The likelihood of a No Deal is I think probably not much affected by this - the result of what's just happened is that the government must now bring the bill to the House for scrutiny. Generally, better scrutinised legislation survives better and has better results.
Oh come on, are you actually telling me the speaker is acting neutral?
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#94
Report 3 weeks ago
#94
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
Oh come on, are you actually telling me the speaker is acting neutral?
I'm sure he thinks he is neutral, but the problem is that you cannot keep switching between form and substance.

Allowing backbenchers to seize the order paper recognised that the Rule that Government business had priority was only there to protect majoritarian interests. Against an active majority, the Rule should not hold.

The Rule that the same business should not be brought repeatedly to the House was there to prevent the Commons being browbeaten and was rightly deployed against Theresa May. That wasn't the case on Monday, but Bercow retreated to pure form "Rules is Rules".

The clerks are totally committed to the principle that nothing must happen for the first time which means that a Speaker who wishes to defy the weight of precedent must go out on a limb and it is very hard to do that for a cause which you dislike.
Last edited by nulli tertius; 3 weeks ago
0
reply
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#95
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#95
(Original post by nulli tertius)
The Rule that the same business should not be brought repeatedly to the House was there to prevent the Commons being browbeaten and was rightly deployed against Theresa May. That wasn't the case on Monday, but Bercow retreated to pure form "Rules is Rules".
Surely that was indeed the case? The motion being brought back was the same. The context was slightly different, but not much.

On the general point of bias, the main location for the alleged bias of Speaker Bercow has been on calling amendments - he does stand accused of allowing in amendments that other speakers might well not have, but I think he's followed his stated goal from the beginning, which was to defend backbench rights against the executive and they nearly always come under that category rather than being pro-Remain.

He rightly pointed out in his responses to all the attacking Points of Order on Saturday that he had extended this numerous times to the ERG now critiquing him for allowing such dreadful anarchists as Oliver Letwin and Hilary Benn to have their moments.
0
reply
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#96
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#96
(Original post by Wired_1800)
Can you predict what will be the reason for the Opposition to block an election after a delay? Corbyn tried to play a good card by offering to work with Johnson, so it looks like Labour are not about delay and frustration.

I feel that Labour will be obliterated during the GE, so I don't personally foresee them agreeing to their own demise. They have been creative before, so I am keen to know what their new reason is for not agreeing to an election. Possibly a VoNC to try to weaken the PM?

This is truly a zombie Parliament. Nothing is moving forward and the MPs seem to be content with the chaos.
Theoretically (I think I'm right in saying) someone other than Corbyn could attempt and win a vote of no confidence if they had the support to form a government - one can imagine negotiations around a figure like Margaret Beckett or Ken Clarke for example. However, this does seem implausible in practise and I assume it has to come from Corbyn eventually and be followed by a general election.

There's going to a pause now while we wait to hear what Boris cooks up with the EU - my money is on an extension to the end of Jan and then Boris will come back and agree with Corbyn the terms of a VoNC and an election vote, perhaps in early Dec, giving Labour a little more time to organise.

It will undoubtedly be one of the worst general elections we will have ever had, both in the way it is framed (a single issue), on the inevitable levels of nastiness (Farage will be leading the pack, but the Tory war machine and tabloids will be accusing Corbyn of everything from being a Soviet spy to an IRA hitman) and the voters will be hopelessly misled by the media pack baying for a self-destructive Hard Brexit to be put in place by St Boris of Byzantium.
0
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#97
Report 3 weeks ago
#97
(Original post by nulli tertius)
I think if no-one does anything else, Corbyn will consent to an election.

If we assume that the SNP want an election but the Lib Dems and everyone else doesn't (either for political or financial reasons) that is 220 votes for an election. Boris needs 434. Will 114 Labour MPs vote for it? I think so but it isn't guaranteed.

Boris would be an idiot to try the VoNC route. He could well end up in the Supreme Court facing the same abuse of powers argument as in Miller 2 (the prorogation case) but he seems to have little insight.

If he can't get a 2/3s majority, he should try a one clause Act of Parliament to force an election.

However, this is all if no-one does anything. I am not sure Letwin is finished yet. What about these two possibilities:-

1 Letwin moves a sensible programme motion for the existing Bill

2 Letwin introduces a Private Members' Bill in the same terms as the existing Bill and seizes control of the Order Paper to get it a Second Reading and programme motion. The Government would abstain on Second Reading, Labour and the Lib Dems could justify abstention, the DUP would vote against as might a few Spartans, but it would probably be carried by Tory backbenchers, Tory rebels and Labour Brexiteers.

For either approach, there is the problem that the Government must move a Ways and Means Resolution, a Money Resolution and give Queen's Consent. but the optics don't look good if a Bill that is moving forward is killed off on those grounds.

The advantage with this approach is that it allows non-hard Brexiteers/Remainers to tack things onto the WAB constraining the Government's negotiating position in the trade talks. It would hard for Boris to get over the message to the electorate that he only wanted his Deal so long as it came without bells and whistles.

If the WAB was moving again, Corbyn could justify refusing an election until it had completed its passage.

What is in it for Corbyn? He would have to ensure Boris didn't get the credit. He solves Labour's Brexit crisis because the WAB passes with or without (it doesn't matter) a Referendum but (hopefully for him) with a lot of bells and whistles. He delays an election until after Salmond's trial has begun.
This is deep, thanks for sharing. I have some follow up questions:

1. what is the play with Salmond’s trial? Do you think that would weaken the SNP? I hope it does...

2. The Lib Dems are truly undemocratic. They don't want Brexit but also don't want an election. Is there any vehicle in Parliament to weaken their position?

3. I understand what you mean about Corby, but I see him as passed his prime. I think he is nearing the end of his time and I would be shocked if Labour can get away from this quagmire. Apparently, some commentators are claiming that Cummings and Johnson are about to play the master card to finally end Corbyn. They claim that HMG knew that the programme motion wont pass, so used it against Corbyn.

4. Ken Clarke said last night that a few more days may help the Govt to pass the WAB. Do you think Johnson may accept that move? I want him to get Brexit done so we can begin the process of getting Labour back into power.
0
reply
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#98
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#98
(Original post by Wired_1800)
This is deep, thanks for sharing. I have some follow up questions:

1. what is the play with Salmond’s trial? Do you think that would weaken the SNP? I hope it does...

2. The Lib Dems are truly undemocratic. They don't want Brexit but also don't want an election. Is there any vehicle in Parliament to weaken their position?

3. I understand what you mean about Corby, but I see him as passed his prime. I think he is nearing the end of his time and I would be shocked if Labour can get away from this quagmire. Apparently, some commentators are claiming that Cummings and Johnson are about to play the master card to finally end Corbyn. They claim that HMG knew that the programme motion wont pass, so used it against Corbyn.

4. Ken Clarke said last night that a few more days may help the Govt to pass the WAB. Do you think Johnson may accept that move? I want him to get Brexit done so we can begin the process of getting Labour back into power.
There's no master card that ends Corbyn that the Tories can play, they've already tried every smear in the book to no effect and the rules of the House mean they can't bring their own confidence motion. What do these commentators say is the hidden stroke? Corbyn can only be removed when the higher circles within Labour, including Momentum and the key union leaders decide he has to go. There's no sign of that happening before an election now.
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#99
Report 3 weeks ago
#99
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
Surely that was indeed the case? The motion being brought back was the same. The context was slightly different, but not much.

On the general point of bias, the main location for the alleged bias of Speaker Bercow has been on calling amendments - he does stand accused of allowing in amendments that other speakers might well not have, but I think he's followed his stated goal from the beginning, which was to defend backbench rights against the executive and they nearly always come under that category rather than being pro-Remain.

He rightly pointed out in his responses to all the attacking Points of Order on Saturday that he had extended this numerous times to the ERG now critiquing him for allowing such dreadful anarchists as Oliver Letwin and Hilary Benn to have their moments.
I think on amendments Bercow is on safe ground. Amendments either make a political point or have a serious prospect of success.

“Political” amendments should only be granted sparingly to anyone other than the Official Opposition because they don’t generally attack the Government but seek to distinguish minor parties from the Official Opposition.

Any amendment likely to win should be let in.No Speaker since Speaker Thomas has faced amendments on key legislation that stand a serious chance of winning, given that the Maastricht rebels opposed rather than amended.
0
reply
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#100
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#100
(Original post by nulli tertius)
I think on amendments Bercow is on safe ground. Amendments either make a political point or have a serious prospect of success.

“Political” amendments should only be granted sparingly to anyone other than the Official Opposition because they don’t generally attack the Government but seek to distinguish minor parties from the Official Opposition.

Any amendment likely to win should be let in.No Speaker since Speaker Thomas has faced amendments on key legislation that stand a serious chance of winning, given that the Maastricht rebels opposed rather than amended.
Yes, I was thinking of the way he let in amendments at crucial moments like the Letwin one on Saturday and the ones that allowed the House to take over control of the order paper. I don't personally think any of them indicate any other bias than allowing the will of the House, but the Tory Right continuously accuse him of bias on these grounds.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

what's your favourite season?

Summer (65)
32.18%
Spring (37)
18.32%
Autumn/Fall (51)
25.25%
Winter (38)
18.81%
I love them all equally (11)
5.45%

Watched Threads

View All