Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Stop moaning ffs · 10-07-2019 09:58AM

She’s always been tight lipped on her opinion of her PMs but I can’t see any universe where she has anything but contempt for Johnson.

Loafing Oaf · 10-07-2019 10:03AM

Banned.

Professor Moriarty · 10-07-2019 10:03AM

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

She’s always been tight lipped on her opinion of her PMs but I can’t see any universe where she has anything but contempt for Johnson.

I think you're spot on. I've haven't had the chance to discuss it with her yet, but I get the sense she would be very anti Brexit.

Lackadaisical · 10-07-2019 10:05AM

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

She’s always been tight lipped on her opinion of her PMs but I can’t see any universe where she has anything but contempt for Johnson.

She's actually been remarkably reserved and pretty much has carried out the office without ever going anywhere near politics. She's been the model of absolutely hands of, purely ceremonial constitutional monarchy and really hasn't set a foot wrong or even had a hair out of place for her entire career. She's the single reason why the brush monarchy remained popular, despite a lot of turbulence.

That being said, she's also never faced anything approaching a serious constitutional crisis before either. It's the first time that one's prime minister might be a disappointment.

It would say a lot for her if she (as an unelected monarch) actually stands up for parliamentary democracy. Although you can guarantee the Brexiteers wouldn't see if that way.

She could end up making on of the biggest statements of her career in her 90s.

Peregrinus · 10-07-2019 10:11AM

The queen's personal opinions about the qualities of the Prime Minister or the wisdom of his policy are irrelevant here; they would not represent good reasons for refusing to act as advised by him.

I think the only constitutionally-permissible question she could ask herself is this; does the Prime Minister enjoy the confidence of the House in advising me to prorogue Parliament? If he does, she cannot reject his advice without provoking a constitutional crisis that could well end the monarchy.

On the one hand, you could argue that the whole reason the PM would be asking her to prorogue is that he does not enjoy the confidence of the House - if he did, he wouldn't need a prorogation. On the other hand, you could argue that the House could have held a vote of confidence in the PM at any time up to that moment and, if it chose not to, it's not for the monarch to decide that the PM no longer enjoys the confidence of the House. And Parliament could also have legislated at several points to prohibit a no-deal Brexit; each time, it chose not to. Who is the monarch to decide that Parliament would prevent one, if Parliament itself hasn't decided that? Plus, prorogations are a regular occurence, and in fact one is overdue; if the PM denies that he is doing this in order to implement a policy that he knows Parliament would oppose, and instead offers some more constitutionally respectable reason, who is the monarch to call the PM a liar?

If there's one thing the UK monarchy is heavily invested in, it's the survival of the UK monarchy. And the course of action less likely to lead to the collapse of the monarchy is acting on the PM's advice. So odds are she would act on it. She might counsel against it, she might warn against it, but if the PM persists in advising her to prorogue, I think she would.

Leroy42 · 10-07-2019 10:12AM

Remarkably reserved? When you entire existence is predicated on saying nothing and turning up to events to wave I think anybody would be able to do it.

Well anybody that realises that opinions and being right are worth a hell of a lot less than the state funded palaces, money and deference she and her entire family is given.

What does she care? EU, NATO, WTO, Trump, Mugabe. Just another gold cutlery event to attend and be feted as the greatest thing ever. Why would she get involved, and put her position at risk? No matter what happens she'll be perfectly fine

Lackadaisical · 10-07-2019 10:20AM

Well previous monarchs weren't as reserved. She's almost like a Disney creation of what a queen should be. It's easy to forget that she took on that office extremely young and has been moulded into a very dutiful character who was a big part of the symbolism that was very fundamental to nation building in the aftermath of WWII and during the wind down of the empire. Everything about the symbolism of the office is extremely deliberate.

FrancieBrady · 10-07-2019 10:31AM

InTheShadows wrote: »

Extremely undiplomatic. Something like that will hopefully to massive damage to how the EU are still viewed in the UK.

What was 'undiplomatic'?

We saw their real reactions, but when they were actually dealing with the British they were impeccably diplomatic.

What this programme underlined was that these are human beings under intense pressure, and human beings with a myriad of opinions and political positions. But they managed, because they are a team working for a 'unified' goal to coalesce as a single point of view, without any single voice being louder than another.
That's a triumph of democracy and diplomacy imo.

Enzokk · 10-07-2019 10:35AM

Seems like the UK is still trying to negotiate even now.

https://twitter.com/JenniferMerode/status/1148850634227113985

But as the next tweet points out that the conditions of the extension was that the withdrawal agreement would not be open for re-negotiation.

https://twitter.com/JenniferMerode/status/1148851611936141312

I think Boris Johnson can get away with not knowing what was agreed by the government as he was not in government when it was agreed, but Hunt has no excuse. He was in the cabinet when this extension was agreed so with collective responsibility, he agreed to that position and should not even consider going to the EU to try and talk about the WA.

As for the article in the tweet, we have the Brexit secretary once again using us and a reason why the EU want to go back to the negotiating table.

Britain’s Brexit secretary has urged the EU to come back to the negotiating table on Brexit – warning that the UK would take Ireland’s economy down with it if went ahead with a no-deal.

Stephen Barclay, who is backing Boris Johnson for leader, said EU chiefs should recognise the fact that British MPs had rejected the withdrawal agreement three times.

Declaring that “no-deal is better than no Brexit” after a meeting with Michel Barnier and Ireland’s EU Commissioner Philip Hogan in Brussels, Mr Barclay said 40 per cent of Ireland’s exports went through Dover and would be caught up in the ensuing chaos.

...

“I think the impact of no-deal is greater to the Irish economy than it is in the UK. So the EU want to avoid no-deal.”

The quotes part is from Stephen Barclay, more evidence that we are back at the start.

trellheim · 10-07-2019 10:35AM

I think the only constitutionally-permissible question she could ask herself is this; does the Prime Minister enjoy the confidence of the House in advising me to prorogue Parliament? If he does, she cannot reject his advice without provoking a constitutional crisis that could well end the monarchy.

Per as I am sure you know they have no written constitution so the question of permissibility makes it all very vague ... as does a Constitutional crisis

Compare to our own Bunreacht Art 13.2

2° The President may in his absolute discretion refuse to dissolve Dáil Éireann on the advice of a Taoiseach who has ceased to retain the support of a majority in Dáil Éireann.

Sam Russell · 10-07-2019 10:40AM

Just a small point.

The current PM, TM, has yet to resign as PM and advise Her Maj on her replacement. Now her advice is predicated by her belief that her successor can command a majority in the HoC and can form a Government.

Now if a significant number of Tory MPs tell her privately that they will not back Bozo if he becomes PM, and will quit the Tory Party, or resign the whip, then she cannot advise Her Maj that he should become PM because .

So what is her advice? Call for someone else? Who? Or call a GE? A GE would appear to be the only choice.

Now to go off piste - or try and get a National Government to form - but who could head such a government? Perhaps a Lord might do - or a Tory grandee still in the HoC - Kenneth Clarke (79)? Not many names spring to mind - maybe Michael Hestletine (86) or John Major (76) or Chris Patten (75)? Although they are in the Lords, it would not exclude them.

John Major is not a lord so would not be possible without a safe seat.

Nody · 10-07-2019 10:52AM

Enzokk wrote: »

The quotes part is from Stephen Barclay, more evidence that we are back at the start.

You're saying that like we ever left in the first place; yes a deal was struck only to have May turn around and directly promise something else to her own parliament (i.e. amendments etc.) and then go back and try to re-negotiate it. It's nothing new; it's no progress and it's UK default of agreeing to something only to directly turn around and claim they did not agree to it and try to change it. No progress; never left start.

Hermy · 10-07-2019 11:02AM

Igotadose wrote: »

That'd be dramatic if it happened. I wouldn't put it past Elizabeth either, she's got some spine and put her life on the line for the UK during WWII. Her actions would shut up the kind of Brexiteer mentioned in that article yammering on about WWII.

Just curious but how exactly did she put her life on the line during WWII?

Sam Russell · 10-07-2019 11:04AM

Hermy wrote: »

Just curious but how exactly did she put her life on the line during WWII?

She was a motor mechanic.

trellheim · 10-07-2019 11:10AM

Yes she is the only WW2 veteran still on the active list even Phil retired last year

Enzokk · 10-07-2019 11:13AM

Hermy wrote: »

Just curious but how exactly did she put her life on the line during WWII?

She also stayed in London, or at Windsor Castle for the majority of the War when it was suggested she and her sister should have been evacuated to Canada. Her mother refused as she was not going to leave the King and he was not going to leave the country.

Hermy · 10-07-2019 11:15AM

Sam Russell wrote: »

She was a motor mechanic.

Really. I didn't know that.

EDIT: According to Wikipedia that was in '45 so not exactly the front line.

Pa ElGrande · 10-07-2019 11:56AM

Here is an interesting interview from Sir John Curtice on why why Brexit is not a Left/Right wing issue. It is an issue between social conservatives and social liberals so it cuts across both main parties. The initial part of the discussion is about why election polls get it wrong. The second part on Brexit starts about 16 minutes in.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPEFp9oIZ-0

Professor Moriarty · 10-07-2019 12:04PM

British ambassador to US has resigned. I wonder will May choose his successor.

Enzokk · 10-07-2019 12:41PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

British ambassador to US has resigned. I wonder will May choose his successor.

So much control, a leak from one of only a few people that was supposed to see the handwritten letter from the ambassador. Then a tweet from Trump and the ambassador not being able to do his job. The next PM not backing the civil service last night and this leading to his resignation. Boris Johnson is going to be a disaster for the UK, either he will be in the job a matter of hours before a no-confidence vote succeeds against him. Or he will turn the UK in a vassal state of the US in his desire to leave the EU. It is a grim state of affair.

https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1148913015586250752

Professor Moriarty · 10-07-2019 12:45PM

Enzokk wrote: »

So much control, a leak from one of only a few people that was supposed to see the handwritten letter from the ambassador. Then a tweet from Trump and the ambassador not being able to do his job. The next PM not backing the civil service last night and this leading to his resignation. Boris Johnson is going to be a disaster for the UK, either he will be in the job a matter of hours before a no-confidence vote succeeds against him. Or he will turn the UK in a vassal state of the US in his desire to leave the EU. It is a grim state of affair.

https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1148913015586250752

It's almost as if Johnson and Trump are kindred spirits. Crucial test for British democracy over the next four months.

Call me Al · 10-07-2019 12:54PM

Enzokk wrote: »

So much control, a leak from one of only a few people that was supposed to see the handwritten letter from the ambassador. Then a tweet from Trump and the ambassador not being able to do his job. The next PM not backing the civil service last night and this leading to his resignation. Boris Johnson is going to be a disaster for the UK, either he will be in the job a matter of hours before a no-confidence vote succeeds against him. Or he will turn the UK in a vassal state of the US in his desire to leave the EU. It is a grim state of affair.

https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1148913015586250752

And then some wonder will he think twice about throwing Ireland, (both parts), under the bus.

He will do it in the blink of an eye. It won't cost him a thought as long as it serves his purposes. And a large minority of UK voters will stand right behind him as he does it. They are destroying their own country so they certainly won't care about destroying ours.

MrMusician18 · 10-07-2019 12:56PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

British ambassador to US has resigned. I wonder will May choose his successor.

In guess back me or sack me isn't in the tradition of the foreign service

Professor Moriarty · 10-07-2019 12:58PM

Call me Al wrote: »

And then some wonder will he think twice about throwing Ireland, (both parts), under the bus.

He will do it in the blink of an eye. It won't cost him a thought as long as it serves his purposes. And a large minority of UK voters will stand right behind him as he does it. They are destroying their own country so they certainly won't care about destroying ours.

He's a very ambitious, populist, elitist, English nationalist. So a glorious England with Churchill Johnson as its saviour is all that matters.

Professor Moriarty · 10-07-2019 12:59PM

MrMusician18 wrote: »

In guess back me or sack me isn't in the tradition of the foreign service

He had to go. It's damaging for democracy but that's how it is.

trellheim · 10-07-2019 01:02PM

theres 'resigned' and there's sacked but resigned for the good of the service ...see Garda Commissioners etc wonder which one this was

MrMusician18 · 10-07-2019 01:02PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

He had to go. It's damaging for democracy but that's how it is.

I agree he had to go, but he could've forced Johnson to make that decision.

He's essentially let Johnson off the hook, and let the leaker win.

Silent Running · 10-07-2019 01:04PM

MrMusician18 wrote: »

I agree he had to go, but he could've forced Johnson to make that decision.

He's essentially let Johnson off the hook, and let the leaker win.

Could well be that it's the same person.

L1011 · 10-07-2019 01:04PM

Sam Russell wrote: »

Not many names spring to mind - maybe Michael Hestletine (86) or John Major (76) or Chris Patten (75)? Although they are in the Lords, it would not exclude them.

I've some memory that Patten is in extreme ill health?

ambro25 · 10-07-2019 01:05PM

I may well be connecting unconnectable dots here, but...

Oakeshott gets the leak and publishes it.

Oakeshott is a known accolyte of Farage (recent pics all over Twitter yesterday).

Farage is well ingrained with the Trumpian sphere Stateside.

Boris doesn't back up Sir Darroch last night, notwithstanding his own, well-publicised rethoric against Trump.

...Boris names Farage as UK ambassador to US?

Controversial, sure. Highly so. But too controversial for Boris? Mmm.

Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Comments