|
Oct 2019
10:50am, 25 Oct 2019
163 posts
|
TommyK
Non-runner, there's a fair number of MPs have already indicated that they'll be stepping down. I'd also imagine tactical voting and Brexit/UKIP support would see a number of MPs losing their seats, so, there will be fresh blood, even it not all.
Will a futher extension see a Benn Act 2.0 being brought forward?
|
|
Oct 2019
12:16pm, 25 Oct 2019
32,849 posts
|
HappyG(rrr)
It's all about the amendments that will happen to the WAB at next reading.
This "I'll do this, if you do that" is all completely unenforceable. Only amendments which become laws, have any weight (and even then Johnson has just chosen to frustrate (I wish we could just say "break) the law) when it suits him.
Johnson can't "call an election". He doesn't have 2/3 majority to do so. The WAB will proceed, it needs to be amended incredibly carefully to say "there will be a referendum on No Deal/Any Deal vs. This Deal vs. Revoke". And that the government, any government, cannot leave with No Deal at any time until the referendum result.
A GE can happen during that time, sure. It would confuse the shizzle out of things. But it needs to go back to the public as a specific question, not an assumed mandate on back of a GE.
Procedural question - I assume that a law (iincluding amendments) which come in under one government continue to be in force for the next government and beyond. A law doesn't stop applying until it is repealed, right? So we need a law that says "You cannot leave with No Deal" until and unless there is a referendum to the public. That referendum must then state explicitly what No Deal is, what the alternatives are and then that would be the basis to go forward.
That's never happened before (previous referendum didn't explain about Leave with a Deal, Leave with No Deal etc.) so that's why it's right and necessary. Surely?!  G
|
|
Oct 2019
12:28pm, 25 Oct 2019
9,267 posts
|
larkim
I appreciate that the PM has the opportunity to change the date of the election, and that many people don't trust him, but do we really expect that he might say 12th December in parliament and on the TV and then swap to a no deal date? Even my opinion of Boris doesn't sink that low - he went to Brussels, did certainly negotiate in a manner which got rid of the backstop etc. That showed at least some good faith that no deal wasn't the aim of the game.
|
|
Oct 2019
12:30pm, 25 Oct 2019
32,852 posts
|
HappyG(rrr)
Yes
|
|
Oct 2019
12:31pm, 25 Oct 2019
32,853 posts
|
HappyG(rrr)
He would do it. It wouldn't be described in those terms though.
|
|
Oct 2019
12:40pm, 25 Oct 2019
9,652 posts
|
Joopsy
I’m beginning to think Johnson won’t make his campaign pledge of leaving the EU by 31st October, no ifs or buts. He has also gone quiet about the Islamaphobia probe and the raising of the 40% tax threshold.
I’m starting to suspect that our PM might not always be a man of his word.
|
|
Oct 2019
12:48pm, 25 Oct 2019
3,598 posts
|
run free
... but at least he has been entertaining the nation!
|
|
Oct 2019
1:01pm, 25 Oct 2019
9,653 posts
|
Joopsy
And the nation are being led directly by Cummings and Murdoch.
|
|
Oct 2019
1:03pm, 25 Oct 2019
9,269 posts
|
larkim
I can be quite naive at times - do you really think he'd be as brazen as making a despatch box promise of one election date, and then PDQ shifting to another? I'm fairly certain that would be political suicide for him and the Tory Party, even if it might seem like the sort of thing he might feel isn't morally inappropriate.
|
|
Oct 2019
1:10pm, 25 Oct 2019
32,856 posts
|
HappyG(rrr)
But it wouldn't play like that larks.
* EU changed something
* Labour have changed something
* New coalition has been formed with DUP + all those kicked out before, GE no longer required
* New deal requires stability - acting in best interest of country
Yada, yada. He could easily spin it.
|
