• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

Robspur12 said:
It is unprecedented though for a PM to work to force a no confidence vote! I have never known a government to have no confidence in itself. As for the will of the people? That would have been served by voting for May's deal. Something which several of those ministers sitting next to Boris voted against. This isn't about securing the will of the people. This is about the Tories securing a majority for their brexit. For once a largely spineless parliament developed some courage and actually stood up for the people.
Click to expand...

The fixed term parliament act is the reason for that though, isn't it? In which case it isn't actually as staggering as it sounds at face value.
 
Gutter Boy said:
It only needs to work for the next 6 weeks. Win the battle against the remainer parliament, and he will be able to live off that popular goodwill for years. I imagine the London mayor version of Johnson will return once this particular exceptional confrontation is over

Although he'll probably still get dumped in a post brexit election, like Churchill in 1945
Click to expand...
The war is over mate
 
Gutter Boy said:
There wasn't merit in their judgement. They assessed motives against convention, not fact against law. It was political to make any ruling - it was outside the scope of their function
Click to expand...
The merit of the decision is clear. A ruling for the government would be to give the executive the power to styme parliment at a whim. Imagine that power in the hands of Corbyn, say. This is new law.
 
Robspur12 said:
It is unprecedented though for a PM to work to force a no confidence vote! I have never known a government to have no confidence in itself. As for the will of the people? That would have been served by voting for May's deal. Something which several of those ministers sitting next to Boris voted against. This isn't about securing the will of the people. This is about the Tories securing a majority for their brexit. For once a largely spineless parliament developed some courage and actually stood up for the people.
Click to expand...
That's only the case because of the FTPA, which was created to hold together a fragile coalition.

I don't imagine the Lib Dems would have argued over a clause that killed it at the end of the coalition, so it's merely an oversight that has locked us into this with the biggest pussy the world has ever seen as leader of the opposition
 
Rorschach said:
The merit of the decision is clear. A ruling for the government would be to give the executive the power to styme parliment at a whim. Imagine that power in the hands of Corbyn, say. This is new law.
Click to expand...
Parliament can always remove the PM/government. If not, the people can.

The only reason the SC were needed in this decision is that parliament couldn't take this to the people because they're actively conspiring against them.
 
Parliaments voice being to styme the government at every opportunity, but offer no actual release to the situation? That voice?



Robspur12 said:
It is unprecedented though for a PM to work to force a no confidence vote! I have never known a government to have no confidence in itself. As for the will of the people? That would have been served by voting for May's deal. Something which several of those ministers sitting next to Boris voted against. This isn't about securing the will of the people. This is about the Tories securing a majority for their brexit. For once a largely spineless parliament developed some courage and actually stood up for the people.
Click to expand...

When the opposition dont want a deal, dont not want a deal, dont want an election, and also dont want the goverment in place - what choice do they have?
 
scaramanga said:
Parliament didn't lose its voice - it sat on its hands because it knows full well that any vote going to the electorate would back Johnson.
Click to expand...
Have you already forgotten that this case was an unlawful proroguing of parliment?

Or to borrow an argument from the brexit side, you lost stop moaning.
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
Parliaments voice being to styme the government at every opportunity, but offer no actual release to the situation? That voice?





When the opposition dont want a deal, dont not want a deal, dont want an election, and also dont want the goverment in place - what choice do they have?
Click to expand...

get an extension, or get the great and easiest deal in history that they promised in 2016, why did they never talk to the German car manufacturers?
 
Rorschach said:
Have you already forgotten that this case was an unlawful proroguing of parliment?

Or to borrow an argument from the brexit side, you lost stop moaning.
Click to expand...
It was a case of proroguing parliament that was illegal in the eyes of a Remainder SC.

Parliament didn't shut down immediately and never does when prorogued to my knowledge. There was plenty of time to stop it using the measures they already had.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back