Westminster Politics

sammsky1 said:
Given his personal electoral limitations, I think Corbyn has played a blinder so far.

Everything has gone his way since BJ came to power.
Click to expand...
Well apart from the polls showing Boris is still more popular than Corbyn... And indeed Corbyn has even surpassed foot in the unpopularity polls.

As you say his personal electoral limitations are a big issue And the reason I think he's holding off on a confidence motion (as Corbyn might find even less MP's back him than Johnson if he gets the opportunity to form a majority)

There are some pretty big opportunities to hit Boris in the next week or two that could (should) dent him
Government to be held in contempt for not publishing Cummings etc watsapp messages
Probably forcing the release of more yellowhammer docs
Probably forcing the release of the non papers to the EU
Demanding info ref akari
Probably taking control of the order papers and defeating Johnson again and forcing more no deal obligations
Numerous urgent brexit questions
Possible impeachment
And pretty much every opposition MP demanding he resigns

Problem for Corbyn though is I don't see any of that making Corbyn more popular even if it makes Boris less popular.

Probably great news for farrage and swinson though
 
owlo said:
Ok so I tried to vaguely sketch out what a GNU may look like...

Harman: PM (less controversy than clarke over past voting to Labour/SNP, and possibly on her way to speakers bench anyway as independent)
Clarke: Foreign Secretary - Hugely well known and liked
Grieve: Attorney General
Starmer: Brexit Secretary
Home Secretary: ??? A corbyn loyalist perhaps ???
Chancellor: Very tough one, essentially a technicrat job in a short term GNU.

Where do the SNP and lib dems slot into these front seat slots? Very tough
Click to expand...
Hammond as chancellor? ... On the basis of no changes till there is a referendum and he's done the job recently

Think Clarke would be the choice for pm and his odds are dropping at the bookies to be next pm ... That said he could be an option as chancellor as well

Clarke is 2nd fave for next pm (after Corbyn)
 
Business for Wednesday 25 September 2019
SUMMARY AGENDA: CHAMBER
11.30am

Prayers

Afterwards

Urgent Questions, Ministerial Statements (if any)

BUSINESS TODAY: CHAMBER
11.30am Prayers

Followed by

URGENT QUESTIONS AND STATEMENTS
OP%20button.gif
Urgent Questions (if any)

OP%20button.gif
Ministerial Statements (if any)
Click to expand...

Ifs going to be several hours of calling for Boris to resign... honestly Im not sure hes going to hold up well to todays proceedings - it could actually be quite entertaining though hopefully it does not decend too far or too quickly to the lowest of the yahhh booo type of debate

I do wonder if a member might try to launch an impeachment as well as they could do this independently (with enough backers)
 
sun_tzu said:
Hammond as chancellor? ... On the basis of no changes till there is a referendum and he's done the job recently

Think Clarke would be the choice for pm and his odds are dropping at the bookies to be next pm ... That said he could be an option as chancellor as well

Clarke is 2nd fave for next pm (after Corbyn)
Click to expand...

Maybe, but 3 former tories in key posts would be a lot.

I'm not sure Labour could stomach Clarke for PM, but chancellor certainly possible. Giving him #11 would certainly allay ex-tory fears of a labour power grab. Grieve certainly seems the right choice for AG. You'd need a heavyweight for foreign secretary as that's the one area of government that wouldn't be able to stand still for 4 months. Thornberry doesn't have the gravitas for me.

Overall I think the rebels, labour, and the SNP/Plaid can and will be quite reasonable and flexible to achieve their goals here. Corbyns ego will have to be massaged carefully if it's not him as PM though. And Swineson could be a problem.
 
Swinson will be busy tempting MPs across the floor with cookies.
 
what the feck from Cox? 'this parliament has no right to sit on these green benches' 'it is a disgrace'

This from a law officer. What on earth?
 
owlo said:
I've been thinking about elections and GNU's etc quite a bit and the following seems to hold true -

1) For every party except for the tories and lib dems, a referendum before an election would be preferable.
2) For the 'independent' tories resigning at the next election like Soames and Clarke, this is also the preferred outcome
3) For both Boris and Swinson, it would be an absolute disaster.
4) Corbyn is in a peculiar position. It's good for his party to delay, but not so good for him personally; they could viably move against him in 6 months.
5) Foreign policy would cause tensions.

I can see it happening, but it's a bit touchy.
Click to expand...

There's many a reason why a referendum is not workable without a GE first. There's no majority in parliament for a referendum act. Because it's not just about the concept of the referendum only, but the question in it.

Lib Dems and SNP would support a referendum of May's Deal vs Remain. Corbyn might, but he wants his own deal so unsure. Hard Brexiteers would call that a betrayal because
a) it could reverse previous result before it's taken place and
b) they see it as Remain vs BINO (Brexit in name only) removing the option of "clean break"

The Tories could perhaps coalesce around a referendum of May's Deal vs No-Deal. But there's no way LibLabSNP would lend support for that. There would be no compromise between these sides.

Even if LibLabSNP + Indies succeed in passing an act for Remain vs May's Deal referendum, the Tories and Farage would simply ask brexiteers to abstain to undermine its legitimacy. Then promise to ignore the result if they get reelected since it's only an advisory referendum, against their agreement, that has been undermined as well. Parliament can't bind it's successor anyways.

So really we need a GE and a parliamentary majority first, in order to return to some semblance of normality.
 
owlo said:
what the feck from Cox? 'this parliament has no right to sit on these green benches' 'it is a disgrace'

This from a law officer. What on earth?
Click to expand...
comedy gold which will play well to his echo chamber.

 
MadMike said:
There's many a reason why a referendum is not workable without a GE first. There's no majority in parliament for a referendum act. Because it's not just about the concept of the referendum only, but the question in it.

Lib Dems and SNP would support a referendum of May's Deal vs Remain. Corbyn might, but he wants his own deal so unsure. Hard Brexiteers would call that a betrayal because
a) it could reverse previous result before it's taken place and
b) they see it as Remain vs BINO (Brexit in name only) removing the option of "clean break"

The Tories could perhaps coalesce around a referendum of May's Deal vs No-Deal. But there's no way LibLabSNP would lend support for that. There would be no compromise between these sides.

Even if LibLabSNP + Indies succeed in passing an act for Remain vs May's Deal referendum, the Tories and Farage would simply ask brexiteers to abstain to undermine its legitimacy. Then promise to ignore the result if they get reelected since it's only an advisory referendum, against their agreement, that has been undermined as well. Parliament can't bind it's successor anyways.

So really we need a GE and a parliamentary majority first, in order to return to some semblance of normality.
Click to expand...

We absolutely don't need a GE before a referendum. Assuming there is a majority under a GNU [and I think there is now], the technical issues can be resolved.

- They don't need the brexiteers.
- A referendum doesn't need to be advisory
- A simple revoke on the result of a remain victory would take under a day to complete before handing over for a GE. Mays deal would take a month or so, and no deal wouldn't take long

As I said above, this makes sense for every party except for the tories and the lib dems.
 
owlo said:
what the feck from Cox? 'this parliament has no right to sit on these green benches' 'it is a disgrace'

This from a law officer. What on earth?
Click to expand...
Was an appalling display.
 
Think Hilary Benn is a decent shout for a big post.
 
owlo said:
what the feck from Cox? 'this parliament has no right to sit on these green benches' 'it is a disgrace'

This from a law officer. What on earth?
Click to expand...
Fortunately we don't live in a world where politicians are targets for violence otherwise his words might cause someone to, I don't know, kill a sitting MP.
 
owlo said:
We absolutely don't need a GE before a referendum. Assuming there is a majority under a GNU [and I think there is now], the technical issues can be resolved.

- They don't need the brexiteers.
- A referendum doesn't need to be advisory
- A simple revoke on the result of a remain victory would take under a day to complete before handing over for a GE. Mays deal would take a month or so, and no deal wouldn't take long

As I said above, this makes sense for every party except for the tories and the lib dems.
Click to expand...

My understanding is that referendums are only ever advisory under current laws. It requires a subsequent Act to turn its result into a binding law, if Govt and Parliament are willing. You could revoke under a GNU (with or without a referendum) and then a subsequent Tory Govt will re-trigger A50 after it has undermined the result via non-participation. You'll only make politics more divisive and not solve the problem.

And sure, any subsequent government could re-trigger A50 anyway. But we're talking about having an election before the end of this year. Not even 5 months down the line, never mind 5 years. A GNU-driven referendum won't buy you any peace until a GE is done.
 
Last edited:
Why so many empty seats? Thought everyone would have turned up. At least on the opposition benches.
 
WensleyMU said:
Why so many empty seats? Thought everyone would have turned up. At least on the opposition benches.
Click to expand...

Was busier for Cox's questions. Would imagine it will get busier again later. I think Gove and Johnson are making statements at some point today
 
Maybe it's the traffic.
 
MadMike said:
My understanding is that referendums are only ever advisory under current laws. It requires a subsequent Act to turn its result into a binding law. You could revoke under a GNU (with or without a referendum) and then a subsequent Tory Govt will re-trigger A50 after it has undermined the result via non-participation. You'll only make politics more divisive and not solve the problem.

And sure, any subsequent government could re-trigger A50 anyway. But we're talking about having an election before the end of this year, not 5 years down line. A GNU-driven referendum won't buy you any peace until a GE is done.
Click to expand...

This is incorrect. All it needs is a line in the act like "The prime minister must make an order bringing x into effect if more referendum votes are cast yes than no." (This was done in the alternative vote referendum)

And no, you can't just retrigger after revocation, especially if it was revoked in line with a referendum act.

It won't buy any peace (There is no peace coming any time soon on this issue), but it'll bring the matter to a decision and let them run campaigns based on other stuff. This will be beneficial for all (except for the lib dems for whom it's their only policy, and the tories who will get crushed by the brexit party.)
 
MadMike said:
It was busier earlier. Also, no PMQs today.
Click to expand...

Still nearly half didn't turn up this morning apparently. I can understand some might have struggled at short notice to get down to London but I would have expected a near full house.
 
WensleyMU said:
Why so many empty seats? Thought everyone would have turned up. At least on the opposition benches.
Click to expand...

One would hope they are all queued up outside the Lord Chancellors office demanding the resignation of the disgrace that is our countries 'Attorney General.'

One can dream.
 
WensleyMU said:
Still nearly half didn't turn up this morning apparently. I can understand some might have struggled at short notice to get down to London but I would have expected a near full house.
Click to expand...
Nobody really turns up for the support acts. The venue only really fills up when the Teletubbies start performing.
 
owlo said:
One would hope they are all queued up outside the Lord Chancellors office demanding the resignation of the disgrace that is our countries 'Attorney General.'

One can dream.
Click to expand...

Surprised he wasn't found under a bus already.
 
owlo said:
Ok so I tried to vaguely sketch out what a GNU may look like...

Harman: PM (less controversy than clarke over past voting to Labour/SNP, and possibly on her way to speakers bench anyway as independent)
Clarke: Foreign Secretary - Hugely well known and liked
Grieve: Attorney General
Starmer: Brexit Secretary
Home Secretary: ??? A corbyn loyalist perhaps ???
Chancellor: Very tough one, essentially a technicrat job in a short term GNU.

Where do the SNP and lib dems slot into these front seat slots? Very tough
Click to expand...
I think you would need to keep Harman out of it if she was to be speaker. You would also need some involvement from SNP And Plaid to be a true GNU.

PM - Clarke - continuity of "ruling party"
Foreign secretary - Kier starmer
Home secretary - David Gauke
Chancellor - Blackford SNP

I think the most positive outcome would be to take brexit out of the parliamentary agenda. Set up a people's commission to investigate brexit and EU reform and agree a 3-5 year extension with the EU. It's a deal they offered early on and we could have retained influence within the EU chamber rather than being a billy no mates.

The commision would be totally indepependant of parliament and would put brexit back where it belongs, as part of an ongoing reform process for the EU, rather than some holy sacrifice or constitutional hallowed turf for the extremists to fight over.
 
Not one of my main complaints with this government but the attorney general has one of the stupidest voices I've ever heard.

He's from an 80's Fry and Laurie sketch.
 
buchansleftleg said:
I think you would need to keep Harman out of it if she was to be speaker. You would also need some involvement from SNP And Plaid to be a true GNU.

PM - Clarke - continuity of "ruling party"
Foreign secretary - Kier starmer
Home secretary - David Gauke
Chancellor - Blackford SNP

I think the most positive outcome would be to take brexit out of the parliamentary agenda. Set up a people's commission to investigate brexit and EU reform and agree a 3-5 year extension with the EU. It's a deal they offered early on and we could have retained influence within the EU chamber rather than being a billy no mates.

The commision would be totally indepependant of parliament and would put brexit back where it belongs, as part of an ongoing reform process for the EU, rather than some holy sacrifice or constitutional hallowed turf for the extremists to fight over.
Click to expand...

This all strikes me as somewhat silly - Jeremy Corbyn's Labour quite rightfully aren't going to let a staunch Tory become PM, and an SNP MP is not going to be accepted as Chancellor of a country he wants to leave. Nor will he accept the post...because an SNP chancellor working under a Tory PM would be electoral suicide, and would piss off portions of the base who would see it as the SNP being far too conciliatory to Westminster.
 
Cheesy said:
This all strikes me as somewhat silly - Jeremy Corbyn's Labour quite rightfully aren't going to let a staunch Tory become PM, and an SNP MP is not going to be accepted as Chancellor of a country he wants to leave. Nor will he accept the post...because an SNP chancellor working under a Tory PM would be electoral suicide, and would piss off portions of the base who would see it as the SNP being far too conciliatory to Westminster.
Click to expand...

A generous interpretation. It's pure centrist fan-fiction without any grounding in reality.
 
owlo said:
This is incorrect. All it needs is a line in the act like "The prime minister must make an order bringing x into effect if more referendum votes are cast yes than no." (This was done in the alternative vote referendum)

And no, you can't just retrigger after revocation, especially if it was revoked in line with a referendum act.

It won't buy any peace (There is no peace coming any time soon on this issue), but it'll bring the matter to a decision and let them run campaigns based on other stuff. This will be beneficial for all (except for the lib dems for whom it's their only policy, and the tories who will get crushed by the brexit party.)
Click to expand...

Point accepted on the binding referendum.

Anything to back the bolded statement up? I haven't read any legal opinions on preconditions for triggering a50. There's nothing mentioned about a requirement for time elapsing since a previous invocation or revocation.

First off, "the decision to revoke an Article 50 notification must be done in Good Faith, and following proper constitutional processes" according to the ECJ's ruling. If a GNU (therefore an unelected one) revokes A50 on the back of a referendum where one side abstains, then it's debatable of whether that revocation will be deemed legal by the ECJ in the face of an appeal by Brexiteers.

Secondly, in a General Election where the Tories campaign on activating A50 again and win... it's very hard to argue that this isn't proper constitutional procedure. Especially after what's transpired for revocation. There is no easy way for the EU to stop a democratically elected government, with a leave mandate, from withdrawing from the EU without appearing dictatorial. If it can even prevent it, that is.

The suggestion that an upcoming election would be about other policies and not Brexit, or that Lib Dems are a single policy party... are so far off reality they're not even worth discussing.
 
Last edited:
BobbyManc said:
A generous interpretation. It's pure centrist fan-fiction without any grounding in reality.
Click to expand...

It's also really weird considering a lot of the same people would (arguably fairly) say that Boris' legitimacy is undermined by the fact he's not won a General Election to obtain his position.

If a Boris-led government lacks legitimacy, why would a government not only not led by someone who was voted in as leader of the country - but as leader of their party - be altogether more legitimate?
 
So Gove is now just telling barefaced lies (automobile and retail industries are ready for no deal) and refusing to answer questions about the base case/worst case heading of Yellowhammer. He needs to be held to account.
 
Kentonio said:
So Gove is now just telling barefaced lies (automobile and retail industries are ready for no deal) and refusing to answer questions about the base case/worst case heading of Yellowhammer. He needs to be held to account.
Click to expand...
yes - hes quite effective at avoiding questions and chucking back party political jibes - in some ways hes everything that is wring with politics - but hes well suited to the commons
 
Cheesy said:
It's also really weird considering a lot of the same people would (arguably fairly) say that Boris' legitimacy is undermined by the fact he's not won a General Election to obtain his position.

If a Boris-led government lacks legitimacy, why would a government not only not led by someone who was voted in as leader of the country - but as leader of their party - be altogether more legitimate?
Click to expand...

The antipathy that some people possess regards Corbyn allows all logic and rationality to fly out of the window. Whatever people think of him, his party won 40% of the vote share at the last election. The idea that some kind of national unity government should or could form that completely bypasses the leader of the opposition while the vast majority of its support would come from him and his party is absurd.
 
BobbyManc said:
The antipathy that some people possess regards Corbyn allows all logic and rationality to fly out of the window. Whatever people think of him, his party won 40% of the vote share at the last election. The idea that some kind of national unity government should or could form that completely bypasses the leader of the opposition while the vast majority of its support would come from him and his party is absurd.
Click to expand...

There's also just no reason for him to accept this. If his party are opposed to Brexit, or at least to a hard Brexit, then as the leader of the biggest party opposing the government's plans he's obviously going to demand he leads the government. To do otherwise would involve him ceding his position of strength for no discernible reason whatsoever.
 
Cheesy said:
There's also just no reason for him to accept this. If his party are opposed to Brexit, or at least to a hard Brexit, then as the leader of the biggest party opposing the government's plans he's obviously going to demand he leads the government. To do otherwise would involve him ceding his position of strength for no discernible reason whatsoever.
Click to expand...

Indeed. And yet the press and many of the Remainers have tried to depict Corbyn as unreasonable for his natural opposition to this, whereas Swinson has largely received a free pass for her stance that any arrangement that involves the democratically elected leader of the opposition is out of the question (admittedly, it probably is the wisest position for her to adopt for now, but that does not mean it should be devoid of scrutiny and I genuinely do worry that she is serious about it in all circumstances).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.