Wednesday 11th September 2019
Posted: Wed 11 Sep, 2019 7:03 am
Morning all.
Just imagine if something came along that drove Watson off the front page....PorFavor wrote:Breaking news (Sky): Scottish Court in Edinburgh rules that the prorogation of Parliament is unlawful.
Speaking of front pages, Nigel Farage has bought the "Express" for the day.adam wrote:Just imagine if something came along that drove Watson off the front page....PorFavor wrote:Breaking news (Sky): Scottish Court in Edinburgh rules that the prorogation of Parliament is unlawful.
There. Is. Not. Going. To. Be. Another. Referendum. Without. An. Election. First.refitman wrote:Slow hand clap for Watson.
stage frightPorFavor wrote:The cast list is a bit sparse this morning.
I know. His whole stance is so much gibberish. The only way we can have a referendum before a GE is if the government decides to pursue that option, which isn't likely to happen, but even if it did isn't it already Labour policy to support one so how does that put Watson at odds with the leadership?AnatolyKasparov wrote:There. Is. Not. Going. To. Be. Another. Referendum. Without. An. Election. First.refitman wrote:Slow hand clap for Watson.
Seriously, how hard is this to understand?
Anything related to Watson obscurely reminds me of what I've observed in our local Labour party branch. While sharing Labour party membership, community, sisterhood/brotherhood and in the end, love in common, some don't share much else but their overriding conviction another at the table is a bonehead. Not all of us are going to like one another. I'm not everyone's cup of tea. That's totally fine. Keep all the Jaffa cakes; give me the flapjacks. Okay, fine. I won't eat a thing just loudly slurp my coffee and scowl.AnatolyKasparov wrote:There. Is. Not. Going. To. Be. Another. Referendum. Without. An. Election. First.refitman wrote:Slow hand clap for Watson.
Seriously, how hard is this to understand?
Yes, agreed. Hopefully, someone will explain this again to Watson. Maybe he just wanted some attention. I'm not condescending, I've just sat around tables with a lot of different people at different times discovering people are fundamentally the same, sometimes irrational and fractious, other times capable of being perfectly reasonable and helpful.Willow904 wrote:I know. His whole stance is so much gibberish. The only way we can have a referendum before a GE is if the government decides to pursue that option, which isn't likely to happen, but even if it did isn't it already Labour policy to support one so how does that put Watson at odds with the leadership?AnatolyKasparov wrote:There. Is. Not. Going. To. Be. Another. Referendum. Without. An. Election. First.refitman wrote:Slow hand clap for Watson.
Seriously, how hard is this to understand?
And although there is some merit to the idea of resolving Brexit separately, outside a GE campaign, we've had nearly a year to do that since May secured her WA and it's clear the current parliament is not capable of doing that.
Personally I have no idea if a GE will make things better. Quite possibly not. But given the impasse and Johnson's lack of a majority, the only correct and democratic way forward is for the PM to ask for an extension in order to hold a GE and hopefully the opposition will stay united in their plan to try to make that happen.
cJA stands abruptly, chair knocked over by the force of the move, points a finger at AK and ominously utters: "Now. Let's don't get ugly."AnatolyKasparov wrote:I mean even the new LibDem line of "Revoke A50" not only makes more sense, but is less unrealistic.
Isn't there something in Article 50 obliging governments leaving the EU doing so in compliance with constitutional norms?The Inner House of the Court of Session has ruled that the Prime Minister’s advice to HM the Queen that the United Kingdom Parliament should be prorogued from a day between 9 and 12 September until 14 October was unlawful because it had the purpose of stymying Parliament.
All three First Division judges have decided that the PM’s advice to the HM the Queen is justiciable, that it was motivated by the improper purpose of stymying Parliament and that it, and what has followed from it, is unlawful.
Joanna Cherry QC MP and others for Judicial Review
http://www.scotland-judiciary.org.uk/1/0/Home" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Yes, but I think it's aimed more at the proper holding of a referendum etc prior to triggering article 50. I'm not sure it would cover the nitty gritty of parliamentary democracy throughout the article 50 period. Parliament did vote to trigger article 50 and crashing out with no deal was a foreseeable risk when they did so. I think we're going to have to sort this one our ourselves!citizenJA wrote:Isn't there something in Article 50 obliging governments leaving the EU doing so in compliance with constitutional norms?The Inner House of the Court of Session has ruled that the Prime Minister’s advice to HM the Queen that the United Kingdom Parliament should be prorogued from a day between 9 and 12 September until 14 October was unlawful because it had the purpose of stymying Parliament.
All three First Division judges have decided that the PM’s advice to the HM the Queen is justiciable, that it was motivated by the improper purpose of stymying Parliament and that it, and what has followed from it, is unlawful.
Joanna Cherry QC MP and others for Judicial Review
http://www.scotland-judiciary.org.uk/1/0/Home" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Isn't it more just that there's something in the EU's Acquis that member countries always act within constitutional norms? (Edited to add - so what are they going to do if we don't? Throw us out?)Willow904 wrote:Yes, but I think it's aimed more at the proper holding of a referendum etc prior to triggering article 50. I'm not sure it would cover the nitty gritty of parliamentary democracy throughout the article 50 period. Parliament did vote to trigger article 50 and crashing out with no deal was a foreseeable risk when they did so. I think we're going to have to sort this one our ourselves!citizenJA wrote:Isn't there something in Article 50 obliging governments leaving the EU doing so in compliance with constitutional norms?The Inner House of the Court of Session has ruled that the Prime Minister’s advice to HM the Queen that the United Kingdom Parliament should be prorogued from a day between 9 and 12 September until 14 October was unlawful because it had the purpose of stymying Parliament.
All three First Division judges have decided that the PM’s advice to the HM the Queen is justiciable, that it was motivated by the improper purpose of stymying Parliament and that it, and what has followed from it, is unlawful.
Joanna Cherry QC MP and others for Judicial Review
http://www.scotland-judiciary.org.uk/1/0/Home" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Paul Mason in the Guardian - Chaos is being normalised. It is all part of Boris Johnson’s pernicious planWe need now to reach across party loyalties and demographic differences to explain face to face: what we’re living through is not normal, nor accidental. It’s a fabricated chaos. And the road back to normality lies through getting Johnson out of Downing Street.
Well, they haven't thrown Hungary out yetadam wrote:Isn't it more just that there's something in the EU's Acquis that member countries always act within constitutional norms? (Edited to add - so what are they going to do if we don't? Throw us out?)Willow904 wrote:Yes, but I think it's aimed more at the proper holding of a referendum etc prior to triggering article 50. I'm not sure it would cover the nitty gritty of parliamentary democracy throughout the article 50 period. Parliament did vote to trigger article 50 and crashing out with no deal was a foreseeable risk when they did so. I think we're going to have to sort this one our ourselves!citizenJA wrote:Isn't there something in Article 50 obliging governments leaving the EU doing so in compliance with constitutional norms?
I think she's in semi-hibernation. It's a bit parky here.citizenJA wrote:Someone wake up Constance, please.
HindleA wrote::-
(cJA edit)adam wrote:---
Paul Mason in the Guardian - Chaos is being normalised. It is all part of Boris Johnson’s pernicious plan
citizenJA wrote:(cJA edit)adam wrote:---
Paul Mason in the Guardian - Chaos is being normalised. It is all part of Boris Johnson’s pernicious plan
I don't typically like Mason's work but this piece is persuasive and sound.
Willow904 wrote:Seems to be a bit lacking on foolproof tactics to foil Johnson's pernicious plan, though. Chaos s a lot easier to achieve than order.citizenJA wrote:(cJA edit)adam wrote:---
Paul Mason in the Guardian - Chaos is being normalised. It is all part of Boris Johnson’s pernicious plan
I don't typically like Mason's work but this piece is persuasive and sound.
Granted, this strategy isn't without potential drawbacks. What I came away with is to look beyond the confected chaos. Don't rise to the bait. Don't panic. Stay together."...[G]et down to a pub this Friday night, in a place you know there’s going to be support for Johnson, and calmly argue the toss."