Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

UK Politics Hamsterwheel MkII

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

UK Politics Hamsterwheel MkII

Old 2nd Sep 2019, 22:45
  #9821 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,431
Originally Posted by VP959 View Post
Does this not change the legal position, such that there is now an obligation on the government to leave, and hence the electorate have acquired a legal right to expect that the government will carry through on the action they have started?
Dunno. If it comes to it I'm sure there will be crowdfunders, so we can each join in on our preferred side of the case.
Gertrude the Wombat is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2019, 22:48
  #9822 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: French Alps
Posts: 272
Originally Posted by NutLoose View Post
if you don't vote then you shouldn't have a say on any political debates etc, one would love to know how many of those bitching about leaving on TV etc actually voted on the referendum. I bet quite a few didn't then objected to the result and are now complaining.
Not to inferfere with a discussion on domestic elections, but as Torquetalk said the right to vote is inseparable from the right not to vote.
Otherwise it is not a right, it is an obligation.
But of course other countries, other ways.

There's a children's game : "You must answer : would you prefer having arms 10 ft long, or rather have teeth made of wood ? Do answer !"
Fly Aiprt is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2019, 22:48
  #9823 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,431
Originally Posted by Effluent Man View Post
As the polls stand it's quite simply a lottery. I think that I would rule out a Labour or LD outright win and almost certainly a Tory one unless they can get Nige onside. The Tory rebels represent a big problem. Rory Stewart, Philip Hammond, Antoinette Sandbach, and Philip Lee to name but four all had 60% of the vote in 2017. I wouldn't get against them surviving as Independents even assuming that the opposition don't go easy on them. I have voted Labour all my life but if one of the Tory rebels represented my constituency then I would support them.
This evening's local party exec had its agenda largely hijacked by general election planning, to nobody's surprise.

You might think it easier to decide what to do about Heidi Allen (the next door constituency to ours) than those you listed ... but if there are cross-party deals being done in Westminster they haven't filtered down to local level yet.
Gertrude the Wombat is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2019, 23:14
  #9824 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Southwold
Age: 67
Posts: 58
Labour just changed the game. It looks as if they have taken Blair's advice and won't agree to a GE. Pundits saying that this puts Pfeffel in a spot.
Effluent Man is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2019, 23:53
  #9825 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 849
Just for information, you are not forced to vote in Australia. You are required to attend a polling station.
The voting paper is given to you, but you can fold it unmarked and put it in the ballot box if you so wish.
As it is a secret ballot, no one sees what you do with the ballot paper.
rjtjrt is online now  
Old 3rd Sep 2019, 00:04
  #9826 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 16,200
As it is a secret ballot, no one sees what you do with the ballot paper.
Is it? The UK one isn't
NutLoose is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2019, 00:18
  #9827 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 849
Originally Posted by NutLoose View Post
Is it? The UK one isn't
Yes, the booth is private, and no one is supposed to see how you vote.
rjtjrt is online now  
Old 3rd Sep 2019, 07:02
  #9828 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,076
Actually all the ballots are numbered and can, if necessary, be traced back to the individual voter if ordered by the High Court......

https://www.theguardian.com/notesand...,-1051,00.html
ORAC is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2019, 09:24
  #9829 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 1,648
A question for our constitutional expert here.

If the rebels get their way this week, and Johnson looks for a general election, but that is rejected by the commons that has to give 2/3 majority (460-odd supporters) for Johnson to get his election, then the government has to, by law, ask for an extension until, as far as we know 31.01.20. Johnson refuses to ask for said extension. Where do we / they go from here?

Do the rebels try and get control of the order paper / government for a period of time long enough for Oliver Letwin (the erstwhile "jobbing prime minister as he was referred to back in March) or someone else to do the job for Johnson. Do the rebels call their own no confidence vote and install a caretaker PM (obviously not Corbyn) to do the deed?

I'm not interested in rehearsing the arguments as to whether a further extension is of any real purpose, but how this all works out constitutionally is intriguing.
ATNotts is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2019, 09:33
  #9830 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 76
Posts: 16,613
Originally Posted by Sallyann1234 View Post
That would only work for me if there was a 'none of the above' option on the ballot form. Why should I be forced by law to vote for a candidate or party that I do not believe is fit to run the country?
Sallyann I would agree that "none of the above " should be an option and go further to say that if NOTA was to win then another election should be held with a completely new set of candidates.

With compulsory voting, all that is compulsory is that you register your vote, you dont have to pin the tail on the donkey, or as Paxo said last night, a pig could get elected in their labour ticket in Liverpool.
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2019, 10:00
  #9831 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Currently within the EU
Posts: 325
Originally Posted by Steepclimb View Post
Well the plan the 'strategy' is now quite clear. As soon as BJ opened his mouth and started making his promises and repeating his lies outside Number 10. You could see it was an election speech. No surprise that. It was strictly aimed at the electorate.
Just thinking about what happened yesterday.
Rumours were spread that Boris might be about to call a general election, and he was to make an announcement in Downing St at 6pm.
All the press duly turned up, and Boris went live on all the news channels.
Boris then proceeded to announce not a GE, but his party policies. Much money to be spent on public services etc.

There are rules about party political broadcasts, but it seems that Boris - or more likely Cummings - has found a way to slip in an extra one and get maximum attention for it.

Not that I have any sympathy for Corbyn, but Labour should really have the right to a similar live slot for his policies in reply. Ofcom should be looking at this.
Sallyann1234 is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2019, 10:03
  #9832 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,076
ATNotts,

I can think of two options.

Firstly, if Royal Consent is not requested (and it won’t be because it would be refused by the government), then the PM can refuse to obey any bill passed as it illegally infringes on the Royal Prerogative in international treaties and also in passing legislation which has financial ramifications, which can only be initiated by Ministers.

Doubtless any such refusal would end up in the Supreme Court - but the constitution would be in his side.

Secondly he can, of course, refuse to ask the Sovereign for Royal Assent for the bill. A major step, but then so is bringing forward the bill.

Doubtless any such refusal would also also end up in the Supreme Court, but again the constitution is on his side.

The Opposition cannot put aside the PM, it is the role of the PM to resign and ask ER to appoint a successor. If he doesn’t, he remains in post. See link below paragraphs 60 and 50.

What it means is that BJ, if he wishes, remains PM until an election removes him.

https://publications.parliament.uk/p...m#footnote-010
ORAC is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2019, 10:13
  #9833 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 1,648
Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
ATNotts,

I can think of two options.

Firstly, if Royal Consent is not requested (and it won’t be because it would be refused by the government), then the PM can refuse to obey any bill passed as it illegally infringes on the Royal Prerogative in international treaties and also in passing legislation which has financial ramifications, which can only be initiated by Ministers.

Doubtless any such refusal would end up in the Supreme Court - but the constitution would be in his side.

Secondly he can, of course, refuse to ask the Sovereign for Royal Assent for the bill. A major step, but then so is bringing forward the bill.

Doubtless any such refusal would also also end up in the Supreme Court, but again the constitution is on his side.
Are you talking with regard to the rebel's bill ruling out no deal? If so, I listened to two constitution pundits on Marr last Sunday, one the former Black Rod", the other a former clerk in the House of Commons (the word "former" could be key I suppose) saying that by default all bills that have passed through the Commons and Lords on the date of proroguing parliament automatically (my word not their's) get signed into law. Surely that removes a lot of Johnson's wriggle room.

When either scenario you describe winds up in the Supreme Court, do that suspend proroguation (spell checker doesn't think there's such a word!) or the validity of bills, general election declarations and the like whilst they are deliberating. It couldn't surely freeze parliament in time stopping no deal by default on 31st October, if they were still deliberating beyond that date. Moreover, if the rebel's felt so aggrieved by the actions (or non action) of the PM, is there, whilst we remain in the EU, any recourse to the European Court of Justice, or even, on human rights grounds? It appears as though our courts have a very broad interpretation of what it, and what isn't a "human right"!

With regard to the calling of election / vote of confidence, then I guess if the incumbent won't carry out the instructions of parliament, the opposition could lay a vote of no confidence, and if they won' have 14 days to form a new government. As I understand it, were Johnson to win his vote and be permitted to call an election, no such 14 day period would apply.

Last edited by ATNotts; 3rd Sep 2019 at 10:17. Reason: Saved in error
ATNotts is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2019, 10:18
  #9834 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,076
ATNotts,

Are you talking with regard to the rebel's bill ruling out no deal? If so, I listened to two constitution pundits on Marr last Sunday, one the former Black Rod", the other a former clerk in the House of Commons (the word "former" could be key I suppose) saying that by default all bills that have passed through the Commons and Lords on the date of proroguing parliament automatically (my word not their's) get signed into law. Surely that removes a lot of Johnson's wriggle room.
Only if they are given Royal Assent.......

https://beta.parliament.uk/collections/KMBNw26C
ORAC is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2019, 10:50
  #9835 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,076


Tim Shipman:

“As the Sunday Times revealed a week ago, you can get around the 2\3rds majority needed for an election in the Fixed Term Parliaments Act by passing a one line bill that says “notwithstanding the FTPA, we will have a general election on X date”

Laura Kuensserg (BBCPolitical Editor):

”Yup - and crystal clear No 10 will introduce that immediately if election is blocked by Parliament on the first try”.....



ORAC is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2019, 11:31
  #9836 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,903
Meanwhile Labour have used all the above to slip in announcing their wealth redistribution agenda: billions of pounds worth of company shares confiscated to be handed to employees. Enforced sales of private rented houses. I say sale: but as the owner has no choice and the price is set below market value, seizure is a more appropriate word. There’s been much debate here on the economic cost of Brexit. These Venezuela-style proposals will cause far more damage than even the most alarmist Brexit fears.
ShotOne is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2019, 11:48
  #9837 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Richard Burtonville, South Wales.
Posts: 1,823
Originally Posted by ShotOne View Post
Meanwhile Labour have used all the above to slip in announcing their wealth redistribution agenda: billions of pounds worth of company shares confiscated to be handed to employees. Enforced sales of private rented houses. I say sale: but as the owner has no choice and the price is set below market value, seizure is a more appropriate word. There’s been much debate here on the economic cost of Brexit. These Venezuela-style proposals will cause far more damage than even the most alarmist Brexit fears.
Linky please...

CG
charliegolf is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2019, 12:25
  #9839 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Currently within the EU
Posts: 325
Originally Posted by ShotOne View Post
Meanwhile Labour have used all the above to slip in announcing their wealth redistribution agenda: billions of pounds worth of company shares confiscated to be handed to employees. Enforced sales of private rented houses. I say sale: but as the owner has no choice and the price is set below market value, seizure is a more appropriate word. There’s been much debate here on the economic cost of Brexit. These Venezuela-style proposals will cause far more damage than even the most alarmist Brexit fears.
True, but why do you compare the two? Brexit and Labour are not alternatives.
Sallyann1234 is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2019, 12:46
  #9840 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,903
Only to highlight that the economic risks of Brexit (which you’ve commented on at length-and I agree with many of your points) are far less than the financial carnage if Labour gets in; one has to look to Venezuela or Cuba to see any policies which come close.
ShotOne is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.