Wednesday 23rd October 2019

[refitman]

Morning all.

[citizenJA]

Good morning, everyone.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

Morning.

Fake news all around.

Suddenly being allowed a third reading means a bill has passed.

What a joke.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

Credit where it's due, Katy Adler at the BBC seems to be giving a relatively balanced account.

Compare and contrast LauraK.

[citizenJA]

Morning.

Fake news all around.

Suddenly being allowed a third reading means a bill has passed.

What a joke.

I know. It's frustrating.
My own understanding of UK politics is a work in progress. It's often difficult following procedures; it's not straightforward. I didn't grow up in the UK. What I still don't know is a lot. My first language is a compilation of English dialects.

[RogerOThornhill]

Morning all.

Government lied over fracking clean-up

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/gove ... -530nc2clz

Fracking sites could become a permanent blot on the landscape because of a weakness in decommissioning rules, according to the public spending watchdog.

The government made false assurances that the Environment Agency would be able to pursue fracking companies and landowners for the costs of restoring sites, the National Audit Office (NAO) has said.

Its report, published today, also questions the government’s claims that fracking will yield economic benefits and be consistent with Britain’s climate targets. The report is a further blow to the shale gas industry, which has already warned that fracking may not be viable in the UK unless limits on earth tremors caused by the process are relaxed. Fracking is suspended while regulators investigate a tremor in August at Cuadrilla’s site near Blackpool that was far larger than the company had predicted.

Who'd have thunk it eh?

[Willow904]

Morning.

Fake news all around.

Suddenly being allowed a third reading means a bill has passed.

What a joke.

This is the government line. "We had the numbers but the vote against the program motion has prevented us from delivering Brexit"

Except Ken Clarke made a real point of standing up in the Commons yesterday to say Parliament only needed an extra 3 or 4 days to scrutinise the bill properly and Corbyn confirmed Labour would be willing to agree a slightly longer timetable, so the only person thwarting the bill at this time is Johnson by be unwilling to leave on, say, 5th Nov, rather than 31st Oct.

His cheerleaders don't want the public to realise that, clearly. Of course Johnson is concerned that when his bill is looked at properly a majority of MPs will be unwilling to support it, which is why this whole thing is a charade and just the last in a line of extreme and provoking actions designed to push the Commons into voting for an election, which I'm now starting to feel is the only thing he has ever wanted and probably before Brexit rather than after. It will now work, I suspect, purely because it's the only legitimate course of action in face of a perpetually paralysed Parliament.

[adam]

Except Ken Clarke made a real point of standing up in the Commons yesterday to say Parliament only needed an extra 3 or 4 days to scrutinise the bill properly and Corbyn confirmed Labour would be willing to agree a slightly longer timetable, so the only person thwarting the bill at this time is Johnson by be unwilling to leave on, say, 5th Nov, rather than 31st Oct.

It seems that the date plucked from the air by Macron in March is sacrosanct.

[Willow904]

Although I think Johnson really wants a pre-Brexit election, I also feel trying to hold out and get past this arbitrary Oct 31st date before allowing him to have one has been important, not least because it was so arbitrary.

Hopefully we'll be offered an extension to Jan 31st and at least will now have a clear idea of the kind of Brexit we would get from the Tories under Johnson, having seen the kind of deal he's actually agreed, with internal customs borders and the introduction of friction into our previously frictionless trade with the EU.

I fear voters will still be persuaded to vote for him, but at least now no one can claim they didn't know what they were voting for when Johnson eventually concludes his trade deal with the US, selling our souls and our NHS down the river. Indeed, there may even be a chance that being forced to reveal his hand may put some otherwise credulous voters off.

We live in hope.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

@Willow

Indeed

[GetYou]

A good thread listing the Government's lies about the deal:

https://twitter.com/Hugodixon/status/11 ... 7176402945

[gilsey]

Today Sean O'Rourke
@TodaySOR
"The real worry for Boris Johnson's government now, is that some of these amendments will go through, to the extent that the government itself cannot support the Bill". - Sammy Wilson, DUP
@EastAntrimMP
tells #TodaySOR

[gilsey]

I agree with most of this, from Goodall.
https://news.sky.com/story/sky-views-an ... e-11842604" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

for the first time, an election as a means of resolving the Brexit malaise is a truly credible prescription. Before this moment, the parties' relative confusion over their respective positions meant that any mandate from that election would be too diffuse and refracted to do much good.

No longer. Now, both parties have credible and realistic Brexit prospectuses from which the electorate can choose.

Labour's position is not nearly as opaque as many commentators would lazily characterise. It is essentially a new referendum in any circumstances. According to the polls, these positions mirror the two basic positions of the electorate - of leaving with a deal, or a new referendum.

I know the polls are terrible for Labour but I can't see what would change that, other than an election campaign, so if not now, when?

[AnatolyKasparov]

There is a case for saying Johnson should have to try and pass his Brexit deal first, given that it did get a majority at second reading.

But it seems the government has now revived the Queen's Speech (remember that?) and a vote there in the next few days will be very close.

If they lose it, the argument for an election only gets stronger.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

Corbyn and Johnson meeting in Downing St

[AnatolyKasparov]

At which it appeared not that much happened.

Johnson apparently wanted to know what Labour would do if an extension is rejected

Despite all the posturing from Macron, That. Is. Not. Going. To. Happen.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

In genuine shock news, LauraK pointed out that Johnson was lying at PMQs

[AnatolyKasparov]

Must have been bad, then?

[Sky'sGoneOut]

My favourite bit of fuckwittery yesterday came from Owen Patterson.

In the aftermath of Johnson losing the programme motion vote some of the remaining tories in the house were discussing Labour filibustering any further debates. At which point Patterson went on a sneering mini-rant about how Labour MPs would be incapable of filibustering because none of them could speak properly or at any length because they were all too thick. Coming from Patterson this was obviously laugh out loud funny and indeed he did get quite a few laughs. From the Labour MPs he was attempting to mock and belittle.

What a twat.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

From the Express (sorry)

Speaking on BBC Politics Live, Laura Kuenssberg picked on the Prime Minister's statements during the Commons weekly debate and accused Boris Johnson of lying twice. She argued the Prime Minister did not win a majority in Parliament in favour of his Brexit deal on Tuesday evening as Mr Johnson claimed to have done, and also pointed out there will be some form of checks on the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland under his deal - in stark contrast to what Mr Johnson declared.

[AnatolyKasparov]

If parliament really "backed the deal" then we can leave on Halloween after all, no??

[gilsey]

I think 'minimal administrative processes' could be the new 'economical with the truth'.

Adam Bienkov
@AdamBienkov
I asked Boris Johnson’s spokesman why the PM keeps saying there will be “no checks” between Northern Ireland and GB after Brexit, when the government’s own impact assessment says there will.

Johnson’s spokesman says these aren’t checks but “minimal administrative processes.”

[citizenJA]

Goodnight, everyone.
love,
cJA

[AnatolyKasparov]

Early night, then?

Hopefully a few others will show up for the late shift, though.

[tinyclanger2]

Just got a message from the Labour Party vis a vis "the general election"

[adam]

I have delivered 500 'we need to get these out before an election is called or we will have wasted them' clp newsletters in the last two evenings. And I am tired.

[AnatolyKasparov]

DUP have announced they will vote *for* the QS tomorrow, if the government win that vote an immediate election maybe becomes slightly less likely?

[Sky'sGoneOut]

Ok so I was wrong again in my despair the other night. Put it down to my ignorance of parliamentary procedure rather than any inate miserableness. In fact, and you probably won't want to hear this because I keep getting shit wrong, I suspect Labour will do better in a GE than many predict. For a start equal coverage will have to be given and Labour's policies are popular, and we were told last time the election would be all about Brexit but it wasn't, far from it in fact. We all know elections end up being fought on national issues that are condensed down to the local and the personal. And brexit is like this shitty umbrella over everything that's looking a bit tired with holes in it. But is it the concern of the majority of voters? I'd suggest not. Ask them about their buses or trains or bin collections or gas bills or care for their elderly parents.

I know what trying to persuade people on the doorstep is like, and I strongly suspect any Tory in a Labour leave seat will soon find themselves discouraged.