UK General Discussion: 2019. Blackadder goes Brexit.

[brucejoel99]

Meanwhile...

https://twitter.com/jaredomaramp/status/1153742493034438656?s=19

http://archive.ph/TdYVn

Nick Clegg getting booted out for this waste of space was one of the stupidest results of the 2017 election.

[brucejoel99]

I, for one, cannot wait to see the Johnson government inevitably implode in the next few months.

Too bad they'll take the country down with them.

[brucejoel99]

Corbyn says he'll bring up a no confidence vote after sh**t hits the fan.

Which will be a failure. 

Not if it's after BoJo commits the government to no-deal. Remainer Tories may very well come back to bite him in the ass.

[brucejoel99]

Along with the resignations, more than half of Theresa May's cabinet are no longer in their roles. Here's a summary of the reshuffle:

Sajid Javid is chancellor, Priti Patel is home secretary, Dominic Raab is foreign secretary & first secretary of state, & Jacob Rees-Mogg is leader of the Commons.

Michael Gove is the new chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster & has been replaced as environment secretary by fellow Brexiteer Theresa Villiers.

Jo Johnson is the new minister of state at the department for business, energy & industrial strategy & the department for education.

Gavin Williamson is education secretary, Andrea Leadsom is business secretary, Ben Wallace is defence secretary, Liz Truss is international trade secretary, Mark Spencer is the new chief whip, & Robert Jenrick is secretary of state for housing, communities & local government.

Grant Shapps is the new transport secretary & Stephen Barclay, Matt Hancock, & Amber Rudd are keeping their jobs as Brexit secretary, health secretary, & work & pensions secretary, respectively.

Former chief whip Julian Smith is the new Northern Ireland secretary, Alister Jack is Scottish secretary, & Alun Cairns will keep his job as Welsh secretary.

James Cleverly is the new Conservative Party chair while Rishi Sunak is the new chief secretary to the Treasury.

Robert Buckland is the new lord chancellor & justice secretary, & Nicky Morgan is the new secretary of state for digital, culture, media & sport.

[brucejoel99]

Michael Gove is the new chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster

Does this carry any importance (since Gove is apparently not going to be Minister for the Cabinet Office) or has Boris essentially sacked him without sacking him?

It's still a senior role within the Cabinet Office, & it looks like it's preparation for a no-deal scenario, considering they're gonna need all hands on deck if/when that were to happen.

This might be the worst Cabinet of all-time. Raab and Patel has to be some kind of practical joke, surely?

I'm afraid that this is all so terribly true.

[brucejoel99]

https://twitter.com/itvnews/status/1154782412557168643

MP for the 19th Century strikes again!

"Use imperial measurements"... Jesus wept.

[brucejoel99]

Jared O'Mara to resign as Sheffield Hallam MP

By far the best thing that he's done for his constituents & the Labour Party. I imagine this'll go back to being a Lib Dem seat, though I wonder who they might put up? I doubt Clegg will wanna come back, now that he's only recently started at Facebook, not to mention the fact that he lost it in the first place.

[brucejoel99]

I wonder what happens if Johnson simply refuses to send a letter to Brussels with a request for another delay. Actually I hope that happens, as I'm sick and tired of Brexit. Take the negotiated deal or just get out.

If he refuses to send the letter ahead of time, he'll be VoNC'd & a caretaker PM will be installed who will send the letter. If the stalls & stalls & stalls & the deadline passes without him sending it, he'll be sent to prison for contempt.

And as sick & tired as we all are of Brexit right now, it's nothing compared to the madness that would be a no-deal.

[brucejoel99]

I wonder what happens if Johnson simply refuses to send a letter to Brussels with a request for another delay. Actually I hope that happens, as I'm sick and tired of Brexit. Take the negotiated deal or just get out.

If he refuses to send the letter ahead of time, he'll be VoNC'd & a caretaker PM will be installed who will send the letter.  If the stalls & stalls & stalls & the deadline passes without him sending it, he'll be sent to prison for contempt.

And as sick & tired as we all are of Brexit right now, it's nothing compared to the madness that would be a no-deal.

Would one though? Last time the issue came up, Corbyn insisted on himself as temporary PM and the Lib Dems/Tory Rebels insisted on anyone but him. The issue went away when a different avenue to attack Brexit arose, but it wasn't really resolved.

He insisted on it being him at first but then changed his tune to leaving the door open re: supporting an alternative caretaker PM, which tells me he'll end up falling in line if a caretaker PM actually ends up looking necessary.

[brucejoel99]

I wonder what happens if Johnson simply refuses to send a letter to Brussels with a request for another delay. Actually I hope that happens, as I'm sick and tired of Brexit. Take the negotiated deal or just get out.

If he refuses to send the letter ahead of time, he'll be VoNC'd & a caretaker PM will be installed who will send the letter. If the stalls & stalls & stalls & the deadline passes without him sending it, he'll be sent to prison for contempt.

And as sick & tired as we all are of Brexit right now, it's nothing compared to the madness that would be a no-deal.

The main problem for Parliament is The Tories still lead in the polls by a good amount despite all of this so using traditional means won’t work . And vote of no confidence will just trigger a new election which is what Boris wants

The polls are quite literally useless right now as people who'd vote Tory post no-deal but wouldn't in the case of an extension are basing their vote on a complete fantasy where exiting the EU will bring them whatever kind of unicorn Brexit they've dreamt of. It's literally useless information considering the reality of no-deal would make them less enthusiastic about the party that caused it.

And a VoNC only triggers an election if an alternative government can't be formed within 14 days of the VoNC being passed. If a caretaker PM is already lined up, though (as is expected), then automatically triggering an election isn't an issue. Now, of course, said caretaker PM is still guaranteed to call an election (which would now be supported by Parliament this time) after successfully requesting the extension, but an election held after an extension would likely not be good for the Tories.

[brucejoel99]

BoJo asks opposition parties to table a motion of no-confidence. Opposition says "lol no".

*When you're so weak & incompetent that you've left yourself in a position where you can't even collapse your own government.*

[brucejoel99]

You know, I'm beginning to get the impression this might not be a very good government

Not a very strong & stable government indeed. Still, could be worse... we could always have chaos with Ed Miliband, after all.

[brucejoel99]

#JoSwinsonIsATory trends on Twitter after Lib Dems say that they would not vote for Corbyn to become the PM of a government of national unity.

The Lib Dems won't back Corbyn, Corbyn won't back anybody not named Jeremy Corbyn, & it doesn't really matter either way because even if every single Lib Dem backed Corbyn, the Tory rebels certainly wouldn't.

[brucejoel99]

Lol So asking the queen to progue parliament is unconstitutional but asking the queen to topple a PM isnt


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-09-30/johnson-s-foes-plot-a-humble-attempt-to-oust-him-as-premier

... yes. Those two situations aren't in any way comparable.

[brucejoel99]

Lol So asking the queen to progue parliament is unconstitutional but asking the queen to topple a PM isnt


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-09-30/johnson-s-foes-plot-a-humble-attempt-to-oust-him-as-premier

... yes. Those two situations aren't in any way comparable.

Harper prorogued  the Canadian Parliament for a similar amount of time and parliament has been prorogued in the UK as well .


On the other hand having the Queen unilaterally oust the PM is completely unacceptable and this request is only doing good because the opposition has been too scared to call an election and are unable to form a coalition. The queen should not intervene

The Canada situation involved a governor general who felt bound to comply with ministerial advice that was controversial & widely regarded as improper, but it never went to court, so it was never legally ruled to have been improper. In this case, however, the Queen complied with ministerial advice that was so controversial & widely regarded as improper that it did actually go to court this time, & the judiciary ruled it as having been unlawful, so the Canadian & British prorogations aren't comparable.

Moreover, this Humble Address scenario wouldn't be unilateral intervention on the Queen's part; if 326+ MPs were to clearly & formally identify an individual (other than the incumbent PM) in whom a majority of the Commons has confidence, then why should the Queen not invite that individual to form a new government? That's just a straightforward application of constitutional convention right there.

[brucejoel99]

Lol So asking the queen to progue parliament is unconstitutional but asking the queen to topple a PM isnt


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-09-30/johnson-s-foes-plot-a-humble-attempt-to-oust-him-as-premier

... yes. Those two situations aren't in any way comparable.

Harper prorogued  the Canadian Parliament for a similar amount of time and parliament has been prorogued in the UK as well .


On the other hand having the Queen unilaterally oust the PM is completely unacceptable and this request is only doing good because the opposition has been too scared to call an election and are unable to form a coalition. The queen should not intervene

The Canada situation involved a governor general who felt bound to comply with ministerial advice that was controversial & widely regarded as improper, but it never went to court, so it was never legally ruled to have been improper. In this case, however, the Queen complied with ministerial advice that was so controversial & widely regarded as improper that it did actually go to court this time, & the judiciary ruled it as having been unlawful, so the Canadian & British prorogations aren't comparable.

Moreover, this Humble Address scenario wouldn't be unilateral intervention on the Queen's part; if 326+ MPs were to clearly & formally identify an individual (other than the incumbent PM) in whom a majority of the Commons has confidence, then why should the Queen not invite that individual to form a new government? That's just a straightforward application of constitutional convention right there.

That's 100% different than unilaterally asking the queen to fire a PM. If they cant form a coalition then its their problem

Did you even read the article that you yourself shared? Because that's literally the plan that it discusses.

[brucejoel99]

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/article-stephen-harper-endorses-boris-johnson-at-conservative-party-conference/


The best Western Leader of the past decade gives his thoughts

The guy who used a shady reason to prorogue Parliament to screw over his rivals endorses a guy who used a shady reason to prorogue Parliament to screw over his rivals.

What a shocker!

[brucejoel99]

So... BoJo's new "I-Can't-Believe-It's-Not-A-Backstop" plan is pretty much DOA. It will be either no deal or another extension.

The Tories just put up an ad for a Tory MEP internship in Brussels that starts on November 1st, so it seems like the behind-the-scenes presumption is that BoJo's gonna take the plunge &, as mandated by law, request the extension that he so desperately wants to not request.

Funnily enough, this reminds me of when the Tories were officially saying that they wouldn't hold the EU elections whilst simultaneously sending word out behind-the-scenes to their constituency associations to tell them to prepare for the EU elections.

[brucejoel99]

Lol So asking the queen to progue parliament is unconstitutional but asking the queen to topple a PM isnt


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-09-30/johnson-s-foes-plot-a-humble-attempt-to-oust-him-as-premier

Even if its unusual for the Humble Address process to be used in this way: if the Prime Minister both loses the vote on the Queens Speech (traditionally a matter of confidence although not officially one under the Fixed Term Parliament Act since its a terribly flawed piece of legislation) and Parliament passes a Humble Address basically saying "we want xxx to be Prime Minister" then the impact of that would be to basically say that Parliament has confidence in someone else.

Besides Parliament explicitly has the power to remove a Prime Minister: I imagine that this is all coupled with a FTPA-compliant Confidence Vote; and if one of those passes plus a Humble Address saying "we would like Jeremy Corbyn to be Prime Minister" or whoever they choose then the Prime Minister constitutionally has no choice but to go to the Palace to tender his resignation.  The executive serves at the will of Parliament and if Parliament elects to request that someone else takes control then that is the power that they have.

LOL good luck trying to convince OSR that parliamentary-based executive power is actually how things sometimes work outside of the U.S.

[brucejoel99]

Can any EU country veto a brexit extension?

Yes, a veto would only require one of the EU27 countries as the agreement to extend must be unanimous. But no country in their right mind would do so, however, as it wouldn't be in their interests.

[brucejoel99]

Can any EU country veto a brexit extension?

I hope they veto it at this point I support Hard Brexit over no Brexit which is what I think other side really wants.

For the umpteenth time: a 👏 Hard 👏 Brexit 👏 would 👏 be 👏 horrific 👏 for 👏 the 👏 UK!

[brucejoel99]

Can any EU country veto a brexit extension?

I hope they veto it at this point I support Hard Brexit over no Brexit which is what I think other side really wants.

For the umpteenth time: a 👏 Hard 👏 Brexit 👏 would 👏 be 👏 horrific 👏 for 👏 the 👏 UK!

Then would you support a referendum between these two options : The May Deal or Hard Brexit .

I don't see why my personal views on the subject (as an uninvolved American) are at all relevant but since you're asking, sure. The people already voted for Brexit, so democratically speaking, at least this would let the people dictate the kind of Brexit they get. They'd be stupid to go for a hard Brexit over a deal, but hey, that's their prerogative.

[brucejoel99]

No small EU country will veto an extension for the UK, its simply not in their long term interests to do so.

This is why Hungary (let alone any EU27 country) shooting themselves in the foot because Boris batted his pretty eyelashes at them has always been a huge stretch for my credibility. Just think of it from Hungary's point of view: risk alienating themselves amongst the trading bloc they're a relatively small member of, or risk basically nothing by not backing a country leaving said bloc who are going to be politically & economically weaker after they leave. They have nothing to gain & a lot to lose.

[brucejoel99]

https://www.ft.com/content/2d8aee46-e42f-11e9-9743-db5a370481bc

The last time a British prime minister was dismissed was in 1834, when William IV dismissed Lord Melbourne.

Looks like I was right when I said Queen firing Boris is different from a VONC taking him down.

This article is paywalled.

[brucejoel99]

https://www.ft.com/content/2d8aee46-e42f-11e9-9743-db5a370481bc

The last time a British prime minister was dismissed was in 1834, when William IV dismissed Lord Melbourne.

Looks like I was right when I said Queen firing Boris is different from a VONC taking him down.

This article is paywalled.

To dismiss a prime minister and his or her government on the monarch's own authority. This was last done in Britain in 1834 by King William IV.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserve_power

Okay, yes, the Queen can't willy-nilly decide to dismiss BoJo. But nobody's been suggesting that. A potential dismissal will only come into play if it's been made clear that BoJo no longer has (& somebody else has gained) the confidence of a majority of the Commons. And yes, in that instance, the Queen would have a duty to dismiss, let alone the ability to do so.