ChatterBank3 mins ago
Deselect A Tory
// Tory MPs who vote against the government in the Commons this week will be chucked out of the party and banned from standing for the Conservatives at the next election. //
Cummings has gone more bonkers than Momentum. Should be fun :-)
Cummings has gone more bonkers than Momentum. Should be fun :-)
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Gromit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Dannyk13
I think you find there was mention of a deal. And they said the deal would be very easy.
https:/
I think you find there was mention of a deal. And they said the deal would be very easy.
https:/
// ordinarily I'd have a problem with this but these are unusual times. //
I'd prefer it if you stuck to your principles that this is a problem :P Otherwise there's potentially a precedent for misuse of power (eg by prorogation of Parliament) that future politicians will be only too pleased to practise as the primary means of pushing through their pet policies.
I'd prefer it if you stuck to your principles that this is a problem :P Otherwise there's potentially a precedent for misuse of power (eg by prorogation of Parliament) that future politicians will be only too pleased to practise as the primary means of pushing through their pet policies.
Forgive me for being a tad confused. The Tories have the slimmest of majorities yet they are contemplating getting rid of some rebel MPs. So these exiled MPs stand as independents at the next GE and, while the majority will most likely be beaten, one or two may retain their seats. Therefore isn't there a big chance that the Conservatives would not have enough seats to form a government?
"Those who got elected and want the best deal are those sticking to their promises"
Of which there are far too few. When the best deal has turned out to be no deal, yet the PM is still trying to get something better, the whole House should be behind him instead of trying to ensure we don't leave at all in any reasonable definition of leave.
Of which there are far too few. When the best deal has turned out to be no deal, yet the PM is still trying to get something better, the whole House should be behind him instead of trying to ensure we don't leave at all in any reasonable definition of leave.
Calling "no deal" the "best deal" is clearly a contradiction in terms. But leaving that aside...
Ken: indeed. But it just plays into a suspicion that Boris Johnson is expecting, and perhaps even wanting, an early General Election. But the key thing here is that he's probably wanting to look like he was forced into calling it, rather than just try and call it himself.
Ken: indeed. But it just plays into a suspicion that Boris Johnson is expecting, and perhaps even wanting, an early General Election. But the key thing here is that he's probably wanting to look like he was forced into calling it, rather than just try and call it himself.
Ken, yes but at an election it all changes round anyway and the Tories could end up with a bigger majority.
jim: "Otherwise there's potentially a precedent for misuse of power (eg by prorogation of Parliament) that future politicians will be only too pleased to practise as the primary means of pushing through their pet policies. " - yes so it would be prudent to modify the law going forward, if this is indeed considered an abuse of power.
jim: "Otherwise there's potentially a precedent for misuse of power (eg by prorogation of Parliament) that future politicians will be only too pleased to practise as the primary means of pushing through their pet policies. " - yes so it would be prudent to modify the law going forward, if this is indeed considered an abuse of power.
It seems there are already precedents for misuse of power and many think it normal and right. The whole population can't fit into the HoC so they send folk to represent their views, yet those sent can then apparently ignore their duty and attempt to thwart and delay the very act the public specifically voted for. That shows the system is very flawed already.
And anyway didn't I read somewhere that John Major already set a precedent of suspending parliament when it was convenient for him ? Seems it can be called for multiple purposes anyway.
And anyway didn't I read somewhere that John Major already set a precedent of suspending parliament when it was convenient for him ? Seems it can be called for multiple purposes anyway.
At best that makes John Major a hypocrite, but if something was wrong then and it is wrong today then it's still wrong no matter who says so.
Also, what does "represent" mean? The general principle of Parliament is that MPs are not mouthpieces or spokespeople, but free to exercise their judgement on the matters of the day. Then, if necessary, they are held accountable at the end of their term. As far as I can see the problem is that people are confusing representatives with delegates. This is fine if you'd rather have delegates -- although then again if you want a delegate then why have a Parliament at all? -- but that's not what we have.
Finally, even though the country voted for Brexit, somebody has to decide how best to implement it; somebody has to scrutinise the attempts made to do so; somebody has to draft, debate, and pass the necessary legislation. One can't justify throwing away the concept of scrutiny and Parliamentary consent just by saying "this blank piece of paper has "BREXIT" on top of it so you can stop thinking now".
If you want a Deal, find a Deal that commands support on its own objective merits. If you want a No Deal Brexit, then explain why it should command support on its own merits. And if you can't do that, then find a House that will vote for it.
Also, what does "represent" mean? The general principle of Parliament is that MPs are not mouthpieces or spokespeople, but free to exercise their judgement on the matters of the day. Then, if necessary, they are held accountable at the end of their term. As far as I can see the problem is that people are confusing representatives with delegates. This is fine if you'd rather have delegates -- although then again if you want a delegate then why have a Parliament at all? -- but that's not what we have.
Finally, even though the country voted for Brexit, somebody has to decide how best to implement it; somebody has to scrutinise the attempts made to do so; somebody has to draft, debate, and pass the necessary legislation. One can't justify throwing away the concept of scrutiny and Parliamentary consent just by saying "this blank piece of paper has "BREXIT" on top of it so you can stop thinking now".
If you want a Deal, find a Deal that commands support on its own objective merits. If you want a No Deal Brexit, then explain why it should command support on its own merits. And if you can't do that, then find a House that will vote for it.
TTT; "....................and the Tories could end up with a bigger majority." Yes, i understand that but there is no guarantee, is there. And i'm sure Boris doesn't want to be one of the shortest serving PMs in history. Putting rebel Tories on the naughty step may just come back to haunt Boris. We all know how unruly children behave when they're told not to do something. I just think it could be an own goal of significance. Time will tell, i suppose.
//The public voted to Leave in 2016.
And then voted in a majority of Remain MPs the next year. //
and in their turn, the "Remain" MPs, by a huge majority, voted to enact the leave process....
https:/
And then voted in a majority of Remain MPs the next year. //
and in their turn, the "Remain" MPs, by a huge majority, voted to enact the leave process....
https:/
// Otherwise there's potentially a precedent for misuse of power //
lD Denning ( famous judge in 70s: memo to self, hey you are on B!), said basically there is always a first time
( specifically you didnt always follow precedent or else there would never be a first time)
and even Wittgenstein (the famous austrian philosopher in the 30s who came to Cambridge and wrote Tractatus Philosophicus)** wrote
ein mal, alt wien was neue wien (***)
and finally - godwin law alert - remember thta Hitler was democratically elected.....
** hey not too much detail - this is AB you know!
*** forrin alert ! nur-nur! - not very good German for - there was a time that Old Vienna was once New Vienna
lD Denning ( famous judge in 70s: memo to self, hey you are on B!), said basically there is always a first time
( specifically you didnt always follow precedent or else there would never be a first time)
and even Wittgenstein (the famous austrian philosopher in the 30s who came to Cambridge and wrote Tractatus Philosophicus)** wrote
ein mal, alt wien was neue wien (***)
and finally - godwin law alert - remember thta Hitler was democratically elected.....
** hey not too much detail - this is AB you know!
*** forrin alert ! nur-nur! - not very good German for - there was a time that Old Vienna was once New Vienna
Latest Posts
ChatterBank4 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles4 mins ago
Crosswords5 mins ago
Crosswords18 mins ago