Current Affairs EU In or Out

[orchard]

Amazingly they are digging themselves in even more now:



This is absolutely unprecedented in modern times for a Government to openly defy the Commons like this.

Just to add, any MP worth their salt ought to bring this government down for this, whichever side they sit on.

 

[Old Blue 2]

well, I could drive you to the point of rage where you get angry and insulting and then try to pass it off as humour, but what's the point.

Can't be arsed with you any more and your continual snide comments directed at me...

 

[tsubaki]

Scary, now add the Henry powers into the mix :|

It is, but I'd be amazed if they keep defending it - for a start it will make everyone think the legal advice must be absolutely damning (which it almost certainly is) and even the people who aren't already appalled by the PM will (or should) be utterly appalled by her trying to set a precedent of the Government being able to ignore what the Commons has told it to do.

If they keep it up until the meaningful vote (and if this isnt stamped on now how meaningful will it be?) the margin of defeat is going to be 300-400, never mind 100 and MPs would be entirely right to vote that way.

 

[Joey66]

There is no vote in the HOC for that to be passed the groans yesterday when it was fetched up- Corbyn playing to the audience there as he knows it will get voted down...... plus no time for the legislation to organise such a vote my they woukld take an age on what went on the ballot paper - for instance how about May's deal or No deal........

 

[roydo]

Feel like just giving up on this shambles. The HOC rightly voted for access to the legal advice before their meaningful vote, (do they have unmeaningful ones?), and the PM has blocked that, for a no doubt heavily edited version of her view instead.

Which at a stroke makes the meaningful vote meaningless.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

It is, but I'd be amazed if they keep defending it - for a start it will make everyone think the legal advice must be absolutely damning (which it almost certainly is) and even the people who aren't already appalled by the PM will (or should) be utterly appalled by her trying to set a precedent of the Government being able to ignore what the Commons has told it to do.

If they keep it up until the meaningful vote (and if this isnt stamped on now how meaningful will it be?) the margin of defeat is going to be 300-400, never mind 100 and MPs would be entirely right to vote that way.

That's what people wanting to take back control voted for (or something)

 

[orchard]

It is, but I'd be amazed if they keep defending it - for a start it will make everyone think the legal advice must be absolutely damning (which it almost certainly is) and even the people who aren't already appalled by the PM will (or should) be utterly appalled by her trying to set a precedent of the Government being able to ignore what the Commons has told it to do.

If they keep it up until the meaningful vote (and if this isnt stamped on now how meaningful will it be?) the margin of defeat is going to be 300-400, never mind 100 and MPs would be entirely right to vote that way.

I really don't think many citizens are noticing the despotic nature of this government. I hope you're right, but they've gotten away with a lot so far without being held to account.

 

[tsubaki]

I really don't think many citizens are noticing the despotic nature of this government. I hope you're right, but they've gotten away with a lot so far without being held to account.

That is true, though most of that stuff - Windrush, the Henry VIII powers, refusing to honour independent pay awards etc - had some basis in precedent or legislation.

This doesn't, and if they keep defending it they should really be thrown out of office and arrested for this act alone. It is contemptible.

 

[orchard]

That is true, though most of that stuff - Windrush, the Henry VIII powers, refusing to honour independent pay awards etc - had some basis in precedent or legislation.

This doesn't, and if they keep defending it they should really be thrown out of office and arrested for this act alone. It is contemptible.

Quite, what was the response in the house?

 

[orchard]

That is true, though most of that stuff - Windrush, the Henry VIII powers, refusing to honour independent pay awards etc - had some basis in precedent or legislation.

This doesn't, and if they keep defending it they should really be thrown out of office and arrested for this act alone. It is contemptible.

Also, what do you reckon to Clockwork Orange?

 

[tsubaki]

Quite, what was the response in the house?

No idea, I think someone said they are waiting for the Speaker to rule on a point of order (which probably means they are trying to find out what he can actually do about it, then raise the point of order).

 

[orchard]

 

[roydo]

As the days go by, with the PM still promoting the "only" deal on offer despite the tidal wave of evidence saying it will never get through the HOC, and now this legal advice nonsense, maybe my tongue in cheek comment that May is making either a 2nd vote, or a return to the EU her preferred choice was actually true.

I fail to see any other reason why she is doing what she is doing.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

As the days go by, with the PM still promoting the "only" deal on offer despite the tidal wave of evidence saying it will never get through the HOC, and now this legal advice nonsense, maybe my tongue in cheek comment that May is making either a 2nd vote, or a return to the EU her preferred choice was actually true.

I fail to see any other reason why she is doing what she is doing.

Because we're the 5th biggest economy in the world, ready to strike a bold new path into a self-governed nirvana where everyone will drink tea at 4 and we'll never have to see gulas on our streets again.

 

[roydo]

Because we're the 5th biggest economy in the world, ready to strike a bold new path into a self-governed nirvana where everyone will drink tea at 4 and we'll never have to see gulas on our streets again.

Joking aside, (and her deal wouldnt deliver that anyrate!), politically, why on earth is she persisting with this deal, saying its ace, when patently, A. it isnt, and B, wont get passed the HOC anyrate?

Using a metric that a PM of the UK cant be totally thick, I can arrive at only one conclusion.