Jump to content

The now-enacted will of (some of) the people


blandy

Recommended Posts

Just now, snowychap said:

By 'not much less insulting', I meant that any comparison by Boris of Hollande to a Japanese camp guard (as opposed to a German camp guard) would have been not much less insulting to Hollande (or Europeans more widely).

If it came across as I meant that your comment was insulting then that's a result of me constructing my sentence badly in the previous post.

Ah .. now I feel stupid :blush:

more so as you'd explained it in a post before I made mine (I genuinely missed it )

sorry ... have a picture of a cute cat by way of apology

cutecat.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When the spokesman for No 10 is qualifying Boris' remarks by saying "there is not a Government policy of not mentioning the war", you know humour is returning to politics. 

Good on Boris, if we can't appease them (and we can't) there's no harm in shaking them up a bit.

Non Brexit factoid: more Frenchmen fought for the Axis than the Allies in WW2. They were also the only participant to surrender twice.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, hippo said:

When was that ?

I think most politicians would like access to the single market. But know they won't get it unless we accept free movement - which in the current climate is political suicide.

 

A couple of years ago, defo pre referendum.

I did know exactly what the date was when I posted it. You have to have more detail than Tony H or he picks off liberals with his mis-remembered daily heil titbits.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

A couple of years ago, defo pre referendum.

I did know exactly what the date was when I posted it. You have to have more detail than Tony H or he picks off liberals with his mis-remembered daily heil titbits.

meh , I'm just making sure people are not making things up  .. see Theresa May saying she wanted her cake and to eat it that she is being quoted as saying in this thread even though Corbyn seems to be the actual politician that said it (about May, obviously)

but rest assured if I check this and find it was outside of a reasonable time frame of a couple of years , I shall be back

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-news-germany-angela-merkel-theresa-may-speech-senior-economic-advisor-michael-fuchs-a7533076.html

 

Quote

Brexit: Angela Merkel's senior economic adviser says Theresa May's plan is impossible

'You can't eat a cake without paying for it', says German leader's ally

  •  
  •  

German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s senior adviser has warned that Theresa May’s proposed Brexit plan is impossible.

Ms May used a speech on Tuesday to tell international leaders that she would take the UK out of the single market, but still wanted to negotiate access to it.

Yet German politician Michael Fuchs said the Conservatives plan was "not possible" because "you can't eat a cake without paying for it".

Least shocking news I've ever read... 

Edited by PieFacE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

meh , I'm just making sure people are not making things up  .. see Theresa May saying she wanted her cake and to eat it that she is being quoted as saying in this thread even though Corbyn seems to be the actual politician that said it (about May, obviously)

but rest assured if I check this and find it was outside of a reasonable time frame of a couple of years , I shall be back

Johnson said it, a few months ago.

It was also discussed in a meeting between officials and aides.  The government line was that the aide whose notes were photographed was not an official.  The conclusion we are meant to take from this is presumably that no such phrase was used in the discussion she had annotated, and presumably that she made it up from her own fevered imagination.

The phrase is of course being used by very many people, here and abroad, as a shorthand term to characterise the UK government's demand for something they should know to be impossible.

1476.jpg?w=620&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&f

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

meh , I'm just making sure people are not making things up  .. see Theresa May saying she wanted her cake and to eat it that she is being quoted as saying in this thread even though Corbyn seems to be the actual politician that said it (about May, obviously)

but rest assured if I check this and find it was outside of a reasonable time frame of a couple of years , I shall be back

In all fairness to Boris, I’m sure there will be youtube clips out there of him saying he likes the single market, hates the single market, invented the single market, wants two single markets, single market pasty freedom phwoar! ,single market made me a world war two hero, I’m just an ordinary single market chap hoping to be king tory one day depending how the wind blows.

The clip was less than three years before before the referendum, so technically it was a couple of years. October 2013. 
 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, snowychap said:

The Beeb rolling banner says that the Supreme Court ruling on invoking Article 50 is due to be delivered next Tuesday.

Help me out here, isn't this now an irrelevance after Parliament voted in December to trigger A50 by end of March, i.e. May won't try to use the Royal Prerogative anyway?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Awol said:

Help me out here, isn't this now an irrelevance after Parliament voted in December to trigger A50 by end of March, i.e. May won't try to use the Royal Prerogative anyway?

I could be completely wrong, but not quite, I think. Assumign the law judge people say that the complaint is valid, then (IIRC) what's happened is that the woman complained to the law, next, the Labour party did a motion (um...) in parliament saying "Gov't should consult us", then the Gov't submitted an amendment to that motion which said "an then trigger A50 by end March".

Te law appeal thing (if the result is as expected) will deem that the Gov't (not the opposition) is required to put a motion before the house regarding being authorised to invoke article 50 and for that to be voted on, by parliament.

So, it's symbolic to an extent, but it will still require the Gov't to properly set out what they aim to do and get parlaiment to agree.

I suspect the threat of the court ruling has led to the complete change in May's approach. Which has been a good thing (or less bad, anyway).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Awol said:

Help me out here, isn't this now an irrelevance after Parliament voted in December to trigger A50 by end of March, i.e. May won't try to use the Royal Prerogative anyway?

It depends on their ruling, I think. Not only on whose side they come down but also, if they rule against the government, what they say constitutes sufficient action from Parliament regarding Article 50. There have been reports that they may say that some form of (primary) legislation needs to be enacted in advance of Article 50 being enacted but whether that's just people thinking out loud or a really possible outcome, I don't know.

Also, as you posted earlier, don't they have to rule on the arguments made by the devolved assemblies?

Edit: Largely covered by blandy above re: government actions.

Edited by snowychap
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Awol said:

Help me out here, isn't this now an irrelevance after Parliament voted in December to trigger A50 by end of March, i.e. May won't try to use the Royal Prerogative anyway?

An important issue is whether A50 can be revoked by the state that issues it (ie without the consent of the 27).  There is discussion of that here.

Quote

What happens if Article 50 is found to be revocable?

In her Brexit speech of 17 January 2017 Theresa May promised:

the Government will put the final deal that is agreed between the UK and the EU to a vote in both Houses of Parliament, before it comes into force.

Michel Barnier has said that the negotiations with the UK will need to be concluded within 18 months of the trigger date to allow time to ratify the deal. And David Davis agrees this is achieveable. So there will be ample time after the deal is concluded for Parliament to consider whether it wishes to accept the deal and act accordingly.

Parliament is supreme and sovereign. Should MPs or the House of Lords reject the deal they would have the (theoretical) so-called ‘cliff-edge’ option of leaving the EU without a deal. But they will also have the (viable) option of remaining in the EU. Or (more likely) putting the question back to the electorate in the form of a Referendum on the Final Deal.

A ‘Final Deal’ referendum has previously commended itself to a number of prominent Brexiters, including Dominic Cummings.

Whether one is likely to happen will be a function of the prevailing popular mood at the time Parliament is required to consider the question. As I explained here, it would be a mistake to assume that the mood today (which is broadly static since the referendum) remains static over time. We have not, after all, at the time of writing, even triggered Article 50 and many things can and will change.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Davkaus said:

I wouldn't put it past the tories for this latest occurance of Boris putting his foot in his mouth to be an orchestrated attempt to dominate the headlines.

It does seem to be rather convenient to have someone saying things that can be disavowed by Downing Street as not official government policy or 'just Boris'.

I wonder how long the shelf-life of that is, however. At some time, it'll go from being a distraction for others to a distraction from governing and I'm not sure what happens then. Is May confident enough to be able to bin him as soon as, does she stick with him in an 'enemies closer' type deal or does a story get leaked about Boris banging someone?

Edited by snowychap
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, PieFacE said:

Brexit: Angela Merkel's senior economic adviser says Theresa May's plan is impossible

'You can't eat a cake without paying for it', says German leader's ally....

True enough,  maybe we should forget cake and go wild and design a family sized car that's a bit bubble shaped and shit,  maybe design it at Longbridge ? Then sell it to the EU citizens a "collect the tokens basis" and then ....we can buy the bakery instead and have loads of cake if we want or invade someone and then only pay half of the people back and give them no cars at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Quote

Brexit: Angela Merkel's senior economic adviser says Theresa May's plan is impossible

'You can't eat a cake without paying for it', says German leader's ally

Well, maybe not in the fourth reich, Fritz, but this is Great Britain. Give us two years, and there'll be free cake for everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â