Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
Mala591
Posts: 1887
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:02 pm
Been Liked: 681 times
Has Liked: 428 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Mala591 » Mon Sep 16, 2019 11:52 am

martin_p wrote:Worryingly there is a stream of thought that means a loophole in the no deal bill means that Johnson can get no deal by getting a deal through parliament!

The thinking goes that the Benn bill only requires parliament to agree a withdrawal agreement for a Johnson not to have to ask for an extension. But what it doesn’t say is that he then has to pass a bill to make the WA law. So in theory he could negotiate an NI only backstop that he knows the EU will agree to, make sure he has full support from the ERG and DUP by telling them he has no intention of making it law, get it through the commons with that support and the Labour DEMOCRATS, then just sit on his hands until 31st October having met the conditions of the Benn bill but with no intention of putting a WA bill through parliament. There’s even a thought he may prorogue again after the WA has received commons support to avoid them forcing a WA bill. 31st October comes, no WA bill agreed, no deal Brexit.
Correction - rebels replaced by democrats

Spijed
Posts: 17112
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:33 pm
Been Liked: 2892 times
Has Liked: 1294 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Spijed » Mon Sep 16, 2019 11:58 am

CrosspoolClarets wrote:A new law should not be passed without the approval of the government, although the legislature normally have the rights to amend.
Well how can laws ever pass if there is no longer a majority in Parliament?

Spijed
Posts: 17112
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:33 pm
Been Liked: 2892 times
Has Liked: 1294 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Spijed » Mon Sep 16, 2019 11:59 am

martin_p wrote:Worryingly there is a stream of thought that means a loophole in the no deal bill means that Johnson can get no deal by getting a deal through parliament!

The thinking goes that the Benn bill only requires parliament to agree a withdrawal agreement for a Johnson not to have to ask for an extension. But what it doesn’t say is that he then has to pass a bill to make the WA law. So in theory he could negotiate an NI only backstop that he knows the EU will agree to, make sure he has full support from the ERG and DUP by telling them he has no intention of making it law, get it through the commons with that support and the Labour rebels, then just sit on his hands until 31st October having met the conditions of the Benn bill but with no intention of putting a WA bill through parliament. There’s even a thought he may prorogue again after the WA has received commons support to avoid them forcing a WA bill. 31st October comes, no WA bill agreed, no deal Brexit.
Surely the media and MP's are wise to this?

dsr
Posts: 15138
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by dsr » Mon Sep 16, 2019 12:02 pm

Spijed wrote:Well how can laws ever pass if there is no longer a majority in Parliament?
The normal way since forever has been that, if parliament is paralysed, to have a general election to appoint a new parliament. Since it appears to be opposition policy to keep parliament paralysed rather than have another election, and this fixed-term parliament bill seems to allow this, then we're in uncharted waters.

But presumably the government being unable to pass laws is what the opposition likes; and this way, they have no need to make any real decisions other than to disagree with everything Johnson wants.

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by martin_p » Mon Sep 16, 2019 12:03 pm

Spijed wrote:Surely the media and MP's are wise to this?
You would hope so!

Lancasterclaret
Posts: 23343
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
Been Liked: 8058 times
Has Liked: 4714 times
Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Lancasterclaret » Mon Sep 16, 2019 12:03 pm

dsr wrote:The normal way since forever has been that, if parliament is paralysed, to have a general election to appoint a new parliament. Since it appears to be opposition policy to keep parliament paralysed rather than have another election, and this fixed-term parliament bill seems to allow this, then we're in uncharted waters.

But presumably the government being unable to pass laws is what the opposition likes; and this way, they have no need to make any real decisions other than to disagree with everything Johnson wants.
As long as the plan is to stop "No Deal" and then have a GE, it does appear though to be the best way out of the current situation.

nil_desperandum
Posts: 7301
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
Been Liked: 1823 times
Has Liked: 3948 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by nil_desperandum » Mon Sep 16, 2019 12:25 pm

dsr wrote:The normal way since forever has been that, if parliament is paralysed, to have a general election to appoint a new parliament. Since it appears to be opposition policy to keep parliament paralysed rather than have another election, and this fixed-term parliament bill seems to allow this, then we're in uncharted waters.

But presumably the government being unable to pass laws is what the opposition likes; and this way, they have no need to make any real decisions other than to disagree with everything Johnson wants.
But Johnson might not be PM after the Queen's speech. Following the debate that follows, he will most likely lose the vote. Following precedent the Commons will then have 14 days to try to form a viable "coalition" under a credible leader. (Precedent is 1924 / Baldwin incidentally).
In current circumstances it's difficult to see Johnson obtaining Parliamentary assent for the Queen's speech, (he's lost 6 votes out of 6) and Corbyn won't demand an election until after Oct 31st, so the "anti-No deal alliance" will almost certainly stick together under a interim leader to ensure that Johnson can't use any tactic to go against the express will of our Sovereign parliament.
Then beyond that - it's 2nd referendum or Gen Election time.

Spijed
Posts: 17112
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:33 pm
Been Liked: 2892 times
Has Liked: 1294 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Spijed » Mon Sep 16, 2019 12:27 pm

dsr wrote:The normal way since forever has been that, if parliament is paralysed, to have a general election to appoint a new parliament. Since it appears to be opposition policy to keep parliament paralysed rather than have another election, and this fixed-term parliament bill seems to allow this, then we're in uncharted waters.

But presumably the government being unable to pass laws is what the opposition likes; and this way, they have no need to make any real decisions other than to disagree with everything Johnson wants.
But what happens if we still have a hung parliament after the next election, which is a possibility?

summitclaret
Posts: 3891
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:39 pm
Been Liked: 826 times
Has Liked: 1307 times
Location: burnley

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by summitclaret » Mon Sep 16, 2019 12:28 pm

But will they stop at that? What's to prevent them passing a law on a second ref with a fixed question or revoking A50? Although if they did something like those, many of those MPs would surely face being kicked out at the next GE.

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by martin_p » Mon Sep 16, 2019 12:32 pm

summitclaret wrote:But will they stop at that? What's to prevent them passing a law on a second ref with a fixed question or revoking A50? Although if they did something like those, many of those MPs would surely face being kicked out at the next GE.
The fact there won’t be a majority for either of those options in parliament (unless revoking article 50 is absolutely the last resort to avoid no deal).

Lancasterclaret
Posts: 23343
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
Been Liked: 8058 times
Has Liked: 4714 times
Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Lancasterclaret » Mon Sep 16, 2019 12:33 pm

summitclaret wrote:But will they stop at that? What's to prevent them passing a law on a second ref with a fixed question or revoking A50? Although if they did something like those, many of those MPs would surely face being kicked out at the next GE.
Not likely is it?

Its an alliance of wildly differing opinions on everything. The only thing they agree on is stopping a "No Deal" Brexit and that Johnston is acting way beyond his powers.

Highly unlikely that the MPs wouldn't have been able to stop "No Deal" until Johnson made it blatantly obvious that he was perfectly happy to bypass parliament.

summitclaret
Posts: 3891
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:39 pm
Been Liked: 826 times
Has Liked: 1307 times
Location: burnley

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by summitclaret » Mon Sep 16, 2019 12:55 pm

Probably not likely but there are plenty of extremists on Brexit in the SNP and Labour parties amd some LD now like it's leader.

dsr
Posts: 15138
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by dsr » Mon Sep 16, 2019 12:55 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:But Johnson might not be PM after the Queen's speech. Following the debate that follows, he will most likely lose the vote. Following precedent the Commons will then have 14 days to try to form a viable "coalition" under a credible leader. (Precedent is 1924 / Baldwin incidentally).
In current circumstances it's difficult to see Johnson obtaining Parliamentary assent for the Queen's speech, (he's lost 6 votes out of 6) and Corbyn won't demand an election until after Oct 31st, so the "anti-No deal alliance" will almost certainly stick together under a interim leader to ensure that Johnson can't use any tactic to go against the express will of our Sovereign parliament.
Then beyond that - it's 2nd referendum or Gen Election time.
They'll not have 14 days. The opening of parliament is scheduled for 14th October, so if Boris loses then he (presumably) resigns on about the 15th. The PM has to deliver his letter to the EU on the 19th. Not sure how Hilary's bill stands up if there isn't a PM on that date.

Lancasterclaret
Posts: 23343
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
Been Liked: 8058 times
Has Liked: 4714 times
Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Lancasterclaret » Mon Sep 16, 2019 12:57 pm

summitclaret wrote:Probably not likely but there are plenty of extremists on Brexit in the SNP and Labour parties amd some LD now like it's leader.
No more than there are on the benches of the Conservative Party.

The difference being is that the extremists who want to stop Brexit at any costs give a lot more of a **** about what happens to you and me than people like Jacob "£7 million pounds a year income" Rees-Mogg.

Lancasterclaret
Posts: 23343
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
Been Liked: 8058 times
Has Liked: 4714 times
Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Lancasterclaret » Mon Sep 16, 2019 12:58 pm

dsr wrote:They'll not have 14 days. The opening of parliament is scheduled for 14th October, so if Boris loses then he (presumably) resigns on about the 15th. The PM has to deliver his letter to the EU on the 19th. Not sure how Hilary's bill stands up if there isn't a PM on that date.
I'd have to find the article, but suggestions that it could be signed by someone else as there is no PM

nil_desperandum
Posts: 7301
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
Been Liked: 1823 times
Has Liked: 3948 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by nil_desperandum » Mon Sep 16, 2019 1:13 pm

dsr wrote:They'll not have 14 days. The opening of parliament is scheduled for 14th October, so if Boris loses then he (presumably) resigns on about the 15th. The PM has to deliver his letter to the EU on the 19th. Not sure how Hilary's bill stands up if there isn't a PM on that date.
I've promised to keep out of these debates, but just to point out that the vote on the Queen's speech would normally be after 5 days of debate. (I'm not sure if this can be shortened without Parliamentary agreement).
But no matter when the vote is, I would imagine that if Johnson resigns, the "anti-No Deal" Alliance would already have a strategy / agreement to put an interim PM in place within hours of his resignation to ensure that Johnson can't pull any stunts. (This is what happens when no one trusts you).
It just needs the proposed PM candidate to agree to stand down on Nov 1st, and there would almost certainly be enough MPs to support this interim PM / Govt.

dsr
Posts: 15138
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by dsr » Mon Sep 16, 2019 1:28 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:I've promised to keep out of these debates, but just to point out that the vote on the Queen's speech would normally be after 5 days of debate. (I'm not sure if this can be shortened without Parliamentary agreement).
But no matter when the vote is, I would imagine that if Johnson resigns, the "anti-No Deal" Alliance would already have a strategy / agreement to put an interim PM in place within hours of his resignation to ensure that Johnson can't pull any stunts. (This is what happens when no one trusts you).
It just needs the proposed PM candidate to agree to stand down on Nov 1st, and there would almost certainly be enough MPs to support this interim PM / Govt.
While Bercow is the Speaker, the anti-Brexit party can have any votes necessary to stop Brexit.

I dare say Remainers do have plans in place for an interim PM, but do they have one single plan or lots of separate ones? I suspect if all parties (or at least, Labour-Liberal-SNP-RemainerTories) had got together and agreed who was to be PM, we would have heard about it by now.

nil_desperandum
Posts: 7301
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
Been Liked: 1823 times
Has Liked: 3948 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by nil_desperandum » Mon Sep 16, 2019 1:32 pm

dsr wrote: I dare say Remainers do have plans in place for an interim PM, but do they have one single plan or lots of separate ones? I suspect if all parties (or at least, Labour-Liberal-SNP-RemainerTories) had got together and agreed who was to be PM, we would have heard about it by now.
So far as I'm aware there were no specific plans for Churchill to replace Chamberlain at virtually a moments notice, but in a time of crisis MPs had to coalesce quickly around a candidate who could command a majority. This is almost certainly what would happen here.
A Clarke / Harman Pact still strikes me as most likely.

RingoMcCartney
Posts: 10318
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
Been Liked: 2636 times
Has Liked: 2798 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by RingoMcCartney » Mon Sep 16, 2019 1:37 pm

Spiral wrote:Hello Elizabeth. You'll be pleased to learn I've never personally blocked you, nor any other nutter on this forum, from having their posts displayed. You must be confusing me for someone else. That's not my jam. I'm all for free speech, and I'm not so weak as to make an effort to 'protect' and shield myself from, basically, lunacy. Speaking about which, how about this for a segue! Last week I was banned for using the n-word (tut-tut, quite naughty, *clutch pearls*, etc.) in a blatantly and obviously surrealist, ironic fashion to argue against a post which sought to legitimise and validate racism as an inevitable and, assumedly, ultimately forgivable consequence of economic strife. The poster dsr (hello!) reported this, (because he has a rock on for me), but yet, a while later, another poster, pstotto, posted that "remainers are traitors who should be shot" (paraphrase, post #13307), and, quelle surprise, nobody, not even policeman dsr, batted an eyelid; from which one can only assume that dsr must be completely and utterly passive about literal incitements to murder when it suits his politics, but surrealism? Now that must be a bridge too far.

Alexa: define crypto-fascism.
Why is there never an emoji for yawning when you need one!

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by martin_p » Mon Sep 16, 2019 1:38 pm

dsr wrote:While Bercow is the Speaker, the anti-Brexit party can have any votes necessary to stop Brexit.
You keep missing the words ‘no deal’ out of your sentences.
These 2 users liked this post: nil_desperandum tiger76

RingoMcCartney
Posts: 10318
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
Been Liked: 2636 times
Has Liked: 2798 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by RingoMcCartney » Mon Sep 16, 2019 1:44 pm

aggi wrote:Operation Yellowhammer documents released
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... ns_CDL.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

For those like Ringo who claim that one reason they're for Brexit is helping those who are less well off then point 17 should probably be looked at:

17. Low income groups will be disproportionately affected by any price rises in food and fuel.

Still waiting for a straight forward answer.

You, yourself in the above post admit that "Low income groups will be disproportionately affected by any price rises in food and fuel."

And I asked that, while we've been in the Common Market/ European Union , have the rising costs of food , fuel and goods , disproportionately affected low income groups?

Yes


Or


No?

dsr
Posts: 15138
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by dsr » Mon Sep 16, 2019 1:44 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:So far as I'm aware there were no specific plans for Churchill to replace Chamberlain at virtually a moments notice, but in a time of crisis MPs had to coalesce quickly around a candidate who could command a majority. This is almost certainly what would happen here.
A Clarke / Harman Pact still strikes me as most likely.
She can't be Speaker and PM! (Though I dare say Bercow would be willing to give it a go.)

The difference between Churchill and now is that Parliament was much less involved in those days. Then, it was obviously going to bea Tory because they had a huge majority, and after various under-the-radar discussions between (among others) the King, Chamberlain, Churchill, and Halifax, Churchlii "emerged" as the most credible candidate. If Halifax had pushed for the job, he may have got it instead, with the mistrust of Churchill in parts of the Tory party.

Nowadays, the Queen won't appoint a PM until the HofC has voted for one with a majority vote. With the remaining Tories and the DUP (presumably) voting against all other candidates, they'll need a pretty full turnout of everyone else to get a PM installed. Which is why I agree with you about Clarke. Obviously a dedicated remainer, no threat to try and run a long-term government, and anti-Tory so that Labour and Liberal will be able to grit their teeth and vote for him. Corbyn and Swinson won't get majority support.

And Clarke will be negotiating with the EU, first and foremost, to give the EU what they want. So the question is, what does he do if the EU reject the arrangement? No doubt Clarke will tell the EU in advance what his policy will be in that instance; I bet it's fixed in advance that the EU will reject the extension, then the new PM will either withdraw Article 50 or will sign May's deal.

dsr
Posts: 15138
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by dsr » Mon Sep 16, 2019 1:48 pm

martin_p wrote:You keep missing the words ‘no deal’ out of your sentences.
Yes, I know. The anti-Brexit party are Remainers, almost unanimously. There are few of them who want to leave, some of them would not leave at any price, and the ones who are willing to leave will to do so only if the terms that are more or less identical to what we pay now.

RingoMcCartney
Posts: 10318
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
Been Liked: 2636 times
Has Liked: 2798 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by RingoMcCartney » Mon Sep 16, 2019 1:48 pm

aggi wrote:Yes.

Each of those MPs was voted for by the public. That's where their mandate comes from. That's how a representative democracy works.
Ok so just point me to which labour or Tory MP became an elected representative based on a 2017 manifesto pledge that stated they would stop the PM from being able to walk away from a bad deal and force him to request an extension?

Name one labour or Tory who was given an electoral mandate saying he/she were going to do that.

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by martin_p » Mon Sep 16, 2019 1:48 pm

dsr wrote: Nowadays, the Queen won't appoint a PM until the HofC has voted for one with a majority vote.
That’s evidently rubbish as Boris Johnson hasn’t won a single vote in the House of Commons. Plus, every PM appointed by the Queen after a general election is appointed before parliament has even been opened.

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by martin_p » Mon Sep 16, 2019 1:53 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:Ok so just point me to which labour or Tory MP became an elected representative based on a 2017 manifesto pledge that stated they would stop the PM from being able to walk away from a bad deal and force him to request an extension?

Name one labour or Tory who was given an electoral mandate saying he/she were going to do that.
Every single Labour MP stood on a manifesto of rejecting no deal which is what the PM is saying will happen if he can’t negotiate an acceptable deal. If a bill to stop him doing that is the only way then MPs who stood on a ‘reject no deal’ manifesto have been given little choice.

dsr
Posts: 15138
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by dsr » Mon Sep 16, 2019 1:55 pm

martin_p wrote:That’s evidently rubbish as Boris Johnson hasn’t won a single vote in the House of Commons. Plus, every PM appointed by the Queen after a general election is appointed before parliament has even been opened.
The specific instance of Johnson hypothetically resigning is not the same circumstance as every other time a PM has left office, so you can't assume the same actions will apply. Johnson's hypothetical resignation is nothing like May's.

To make it clear, if a sitting PM resigns is forced out by losing a vote of confidence, then the House of Commons has 14 days to appoint a new PM by majority vote. Only after that majority vote will the Queen appoint a new PM.

On the other hand, if a PM resigns while the government has a majority, and that majority party appoints a new leader, then the Queen will appoint that new leader as PM. As she did with Johnson. Similarly, after a general election, the leader of the majority party (if there is one) will more or less automatically be appointed PM; if there isn't a majority, like in 2010, there will be a delay for some time until someone (in that case, Cameron with a Tory-Liberal coalition) can get a majority.

RingoMcCartney
Posts: 10318
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
Been Liked: 2636 times
Has Liked: 2798 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by RingoMcCartney » Mon Sep 16, 2019 1:57 pm

martin_p wrote:I missed the question.
No they don’t have a mandate
. No one has any mandate for a specific form of Brexit which is what’s causing all the issues. But under those circumstances you expect our elected politicians to work it out based on what they think is best for the country. Parliament has decided that a no deal Brexit definitely isn’t best for the country in a democratic way. Democracy, sometimes you lose!
I expect our elected representatives to honour the manifesto pledges on which they were elected.


If they wont, then they should allow voters to replace them with elected representatives that will.

I'm old fashioned that way.

nil_desperandum
Posts: 7301
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
Been Liked: 1823 times
Has Liked: 3948 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by nil_desperandum » Mon Sep 16, 2019 1:58 pm

martin_p wrote:Every single Labour MP stood on a manifesto of rejecting no deal which is what the PM is saying will happen if he can’t negotiate an acceptable deal.
I think every MP - except Conservatives and DUP - stood on this manifesto pledge.

RingoMcCartney
Posts: 10318
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
Been Liked: 2636 times
Has Liked: 2798 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by RingoMcCartney » Mon Sep 16, 2019 2:04 pm

martin_p wrote:Every single Labour MP stood on a manifesto of rejecting no deal which is what the PM is saying will happen if he can’t negotiate an acceptable deal. If a bill to stop him doing that is the only way then MPs who stood on a ‘reject no deal’ manifesto have been given little choice.
martin_p wrote:
No they don’t have a mandate

This is what meeting yourself coming back looks like when you're having a personal, shooting yourself in the foot, mini contradicting your own argument fest!

:lol:

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by martin_p » Mon Sep 16, 2019 2:24 pm

dsr wrote:The specific instance of Johnson hypothetically resigning is not the same circumstance as every other time a PM has left office, so you can't assume the same actions will apply. Johnson's hypothetical resignation is nothing like May's.

To make it clear, if a sitting PM resigns is forced out by losing a vote of confidence, then the House of Commons has 14 days to appoint a new PM by majority vote. Only after that majority vote will the Queen appoint a new PM.

On the other hand, if a PM resigns while the government has a majority, and that majority party appoints a new leader, then the Queen will appoint that new leader as PM. As she did with Johnson. Similarly, after a general election, the leader of the majority party (if there is one) will more or less automatically be appointed PM; if there isn't a majority, like in 2010, there will be a delay for some time until someone (in that case, Cameron with a Tory-Liberal coalition) can get a majority.
There doesn’t have to be a vote, just some indication that a new MP would have the confidence of the house. That could be through some agreement between opposition parties for example. Incidentally, if Johnson did resign as PM and Tory leader then any new Tory leader wouldn’t have the numbers to guarantee confidence even with the DUP. Withdrawing the whip from the Tory rebels may come back to bite him on the bum again.

dsr
Posts: 15138
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by dsr » Mon Sep 16, 2019 2:57 pm

martin_p wrote:There doesn’t have to be a vote, just some indication that a new MP would have the confidence of the house. That could be through some agreement between opposition parties for example. Incidentally, if Johnson did resign as PM and Tory leader then any new Tory leader wouldn’t have the numbers to guarantee confidence even with the DUP. Withdrawing the whip from the Tory rebels may come back to bite him on the bum again.
No idea why you think he would resign as Tory leader - I haven't heard that suggested at all. He wants to resign as PM and have a general election.

And withdrawing the whip of someone who won't vote for you makes very little difference. I don't know who the ex-Tory 21 would vote for as PM, but it wouldn't be Johnson.

The Queen, as I understand it, will only appoint a new PM if it is clear that he (or she) has the support of a majority of the House. In the current position, I would have thought there would have to be a H of C vote to establish who that is, if anyone.

nil_desperandum
Posts: 7301
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
Been Liked: 1823 times
Has Liked: 3948 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by nil_desperandum » Mon Sep 16, 2019 3:17 pm

dsr wrote:No idea why you think he would resign as Tory leader - I haven't heard that suggested at all. He wants to resign as PM and have a general election.
.
You've gone off topic. The point was that if he failed to get the Queen's speech through the House, precedence says that he steps down and the house has 14 days to replace him. Currently the commons won't agree to a GE. They'll install an interim PM to ensure we get beyond the 31st deadline.

Lancasterclaret
Posts: 23343
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
Been Liked: 8058 times
Has Liked: 4714 times
Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Lancasterclaret » Mon Sep 16, 2019 3:45 pm

Our inspirational leader has chickened out of joint press conference because of some "booing".

He's certainly suddenly become very camera shy now everyone knows he's useless and a fraud.
This user liked this post: longsidepies

Quickenthetempo
Posts: 17914
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:35 am
Been Liked: 3841 times
Has Liked: 2065 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Quickenthetempo » Mon Sep 16, 2019 4:15 pm

With the remainers playing dirty, if I was Boris I would give the Scots another referendum and hope they leave.

Then he can have a 2nd referendum on leaving the EU and win comfortably.

AndyClaret
Posts: 1349
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 2:08 pm
Been Liked: 217 times
Has Liked: 543 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by AndyClaret » Mon Sep 16, 2019 4:18 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Our inspirational leader has chickened out of joint press conference because of some "booing".

He's certainly suddenly become very camera shy now everyone knows he's useless and a fraud.
Come off it, it was a staged, rent a mob stunt that has badly backfired on the no-mark Luxembourg PM.
This user liked this post: KateR

Lancasterclaret
Posts: 23343
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
Been Liked: 8058 times
Has Liked: 4714 times
Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Lancasterclaret » Mon Sep 16, 2019 4:21 pm

AndyClaret wrote:Come off it, it was a staged, rent a mob stunt that has badly backfired on the no-mark Luxembourg PM.
You can always rely on getting the Brexit spin from you Andy.

By "rent a mob" I assume you mean British citizens in the EU who have been sold down the river so people like you can feel a bit better?

Lancasterclaret
Posts: 23343
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
Been Liked: 8058 times
Has Liked: 4714 times
Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Lancasterclaret » Mon Sep 16, 2019 4:22 pm

In the unlikely event anyone believes that Andy is telling the truth

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/ ... 2016184320" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Our PM chickened out when he heard the booing and ran for it with a crap excuse.

And if he was as close to a deal as he likes to portray, no way he'd have missed this chance to show how strong and stable he is.

Lancasterclaret
Posts: 23343
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
Been Liked: 8058 times
Has Liked: 4714 times
Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Lancasterclaret » Mon Sep 16, 2019 4:27 pm

And the Luxembourg PM gives both barrels to any idea that we are negotiating in good faith.

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-st ... -1-6272785" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status ... 8289231873" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/ ... 3335758848" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

We are an international embarrassment, and as long as people in this country continue to pretend its all going to end well, this will continue.
This user liked this post: longsidepies

AndrewJB
Posts: 3808
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:20 pm
Been Liked: 1159 times
Has Liked: 754 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by AndrewJB » Mon Sep 16, 2019 4:54 pm

CrosspoolClarets wrote:Apologies aggi, but no, it isn’t.

We have a parliamentary democracy under a constitutional monarchy, and the executive power that the Queen would normally wield is delegated to her Government, “the Executive”. That is the way our constitution works.

Our elected representatives have legislative power, but not executive power. This is where Bercow and the rebels are twisting things to get their own way. A new law should not be passed without the approval of the government, although the legislature normally have the rights to amend. That’s why I don’t think the rebels have a democratic mandate. That, and the moral view that they are working with all of the losers in the last election so how can that be a mandate to do anything because the public have already rejected those parties (other than the SNP which is a minority country rather than gaining a minority vote)?

Compare and contrast to the US, where Congress can provisionally pass a law but Trump (the Executive) has to sign it for it to become law. There is complete separation of powers - in the UK that is getting muddied.

I read Prof Vernon Bogdaner talking about this. If my memory is right he is a Lib Dem supporter normally who taught Cameron politics at Oxford. I don’t think he approves of what Bercow has done and he also said prorogation is perfectly constitutional even if done for opportunistic reasons.
I think what you're confusing is what happens normally, when a government has a majority, and what is happening now, when a government doesn't. In normal times our executive has a lot more power than a president of the United States. And that power comes from having a majority in parliament - so when you say "our elected representatives have legislative power but not executive power" you need to consider that the executive is made up of elected representatives. And law doesn't only come from the government, but anyone in parliament can put forward a bill. In normal times the executive will control the business of the house, and allow into law bills it agrees with (stopping bills it doesn't agree with); but as our current executive got rid of twenty-odd MPs, he's thrown away the support he needs to have Parliament run the way he wishes. That was his choice.

The mandate for each MP comes from their constituents. There is no parliamentary obligation for MPs to follow their party's manifesto, because Parliament sees only MPs (not their parties or other groupings). If we had proportional representation, it might end up that parties could replace serving MPs for various reasons (because those MPs would have gained their seats via a list).

From a moral standpoint, proroguing parliament for political ends is a more odious thing than anything done by Bercow as speaker (who has been consistent in direction from when the Tories were in opposition until now).

Spiral
Posts: 5005
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 12:37 am
Been Liked: 2518 times
Has Liked: 333 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Spiral » Mon Sep 16, 2019 5:04 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Our PM chickened out when he heard the booing and ran for it with a crap excuse.

And if he was as close to a deal as he likes to portray, no way he'd have missed this chance to show how strong and stable he is.
There's always the possibility that his braggadocious disregard for procedure, courtesy, rule of law etc is simply him playing to the gallery in order to nullify Farage - a sort of bombastic, recalcitrant, Trump-style of international 'diplomacy' - but his public appearances from his leasership bid onwards have been much, much weaker than I ever expected from him. Remember the accepted wisdom surrounding Theresa May; from day one of her leadership right through to the 2017 election, she was supposed to usher in a Tory reich, but this otherwise-serviceable stateswoman, up against bloody Jeremy Corbyn! cracked under the pressure and scrutiny of a GE. I'm calling it now: six months from now we'll be discussing how Johnson had the worst election campaign in living memory.

AndyClaret
Posts: 1349
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 2:08 pm
Been Liked: 217 times
Has Liked: 543 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by AndyClaret » Mon Sep 16, 2019 5:10 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:And the Luxembourg PM gives both barrels to any idea that we are negotiating in good faith.

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-st ... -1-6272785" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status ... 8289231873" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/ ... 3335758848" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

We are an international embarrassment, and as long as people in this country continue to pretend its all going to end well, this will continue.
So your 3 sources are: The New European, remoaner set up newspaper, The biased "i've never seen so many white people" channel 4, and chief remoaner Faisal Islam who salivates over brexit doom stories but is strangely quiet when the jobs figures come out #despite brexit.

You've been radicalised Lancaster.

Lancasterclaret
Posts: 23343
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
Been Liked: 8058 times
Has Liked: 4714 times
Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Lancasterclaret » Mon Sep 16, 2019 5:16 pm

AndyClaret wrote:So your 3 sources are: The New European, remoaner set up newspaper, The biased "i've never seen so many white people" channel 4, and chief remoaner Faisal Islam who salivates over brexit doom stories but is strangely quiet when the jobs figures come out #despite brexit.

You've been radicalised Lancaster.
Jesus, every single news source apart from the Brexit ones saying the same thing.

You need to get out of your Brexit bubble occassionally

AndyClaret
Posts: 1349
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 2:08 pm
Been Liked: 217 times
Has Liked: 543 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by AndyClaret » Mon Sep 16, 2019 5:55 pm

The BBC and Theo Usherwood of LBC say different, or are they "Brexit ones" ?

Murger
Posts: 4206
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 12:55 pm
Been Liked: 1235 times
Has Liked: 844 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Murger » Mon Sep 16, 2019 5:58 pm

Pretty obvious it was all setup to make Boris look a knob. What's also pretty obvious is why Luxembourg (Luxembourg) are acting like *****. As 2nd highest recipient of EU funds, they'll feel the pinch more than most.

Clarets4me
Posts: 4948
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 9:31 pm
Been Liked: 2307 times
Has Liked: 1033 times
Location: Ightenhill,Burnley

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Clarets4me » Mon Sep 16, 2019 6:36 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:In the unlikely event anyone believes that Andy is telling the truth

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/ ... 2016184320" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Our PM chickened out when he heard the booing and ran for it with a crap excuse. And if he was as close to a deal as he likes to portray, no way he'd have missed this chance to show how strong and stable he is.
There is no way that the British Government, of any hue, would try to force a visiting President/Prime Minister to conduct a press conference under those conditions.

Extremely bad manners, and a complete set up ....

Lancasterclaret
Posts: 23343
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
Been Liked: 8058 times
Has Liked: 4714 times
Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Lancasterclaret » Mon Sep 16, 2019 6:45 pm

Murger wrote:Pretty obvious it was all setup to make Boris look a knob. What's also pretty obvious is why Luxembourg (Luxembourg) are acting like *****. As 2nd highest recipient of EU funds, they'll feel the pinch more than most.
Hahahahaha!

You need to look that up and read it properly!

Lancasterclaret
Posts: 23343
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
Been Liked: 8058 times
Has Liked: 4714 times
Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Lancasterclaret » Mon Sep 16, 2019 6:51 pm

So any of you Brexiteers read anything apart from Brexit spin?

Anyone read what Luxembourg have said?

Clarets4me
Posts: 4948
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 9:31 pm
Been Liked: 2307 times
Has Liked: 1033 times
Location: Ightenhill,Burnley

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Clarets4me » Mon Sep 16, 2019 6:56 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Hahahahaha! You need to look that up and read it properly!
I think what " murger " is referring to is Luxembourg's contribution of 300.7 m Euro's, as opposed to EU spending in Luxembourg of 1.87 bn Euro's ( 2017, according to EU figures ) ....

Lancasterclaret
Posts: 23343
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
Been Liked: 8058 times
Has Liked: 4714 times
Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Lancasterclaret » Mon Sep 16, 2019 6:58 pm

And is that the 2nd highest amount of EU aid?

Per pop it might be, or per capita

Guessing the site he read it off didn't know that either.

Locked