sdanseo wrote: » Sounds like a matter of basic interpretation of the term "reasonable". No doubt he was being pressured into saying 4-5 weeks was reasonable. Supreme court quite rightly found it to be "perfectly clear" that it is unreasonable. He's either been leaned on to say what he said deliberately so that he could be scapegoated or he's a gob****e.
BonnieSituation wrote: » Well it is GUBU! I'm in Japan at the minute so catching up with the goings on is not as fluid as it is when I'm home. Anyone want to post some links to clips from parliament today? Danke.
Pedro K wrote: » Does anybody know what time Johnson is due to make a statement to the HoC? I've been tuning in and out periodically and heard some of Cox's questioning. Thanks.
An Ciarraioch wrote: » Significant development at the Labour conference, where members have voted to support freedom of movement - given that had been the party's principal objection to the Single Market, a motion proposing remaining in the European Economic Area could have the numbers to pass in the Commons:https://twitter.com/labfreemvmt/status/1176809015893995520
Bambi wrote: » Oh man, they're toast in the next election.
L1011 wrote: » Did the Scottish courts not find he had lied to the queen, with that ruling upheld?
weemcd wrote: » Strange spin, considering they campaigned on ending free movement in 2017. It's still incredibly difficult to gauge where Labour stand on everything. Which to me has been their number one problem.
blackwhite wrote: » On a fairly important point - that kind of argument is responsible for so much of the partisan and populist BS we see in democracies around the world at the moment. The role of opposition is to hold the Government to account; to scrutinise Govt policy, and oppose any policies or actions that they see as not in the best interest of the country. A decent opposition party will show support for things that they see as being good policies - albeit with attempts to tweak or amend elements to more suit their own ideologies. Blanket opposition of everything for the sake of it should never be the role of any responsible opposition party.
prawnsambo wrote: » Interesting that when asked about it, Cox said that what he said in July about a prorogation being unconstitutional, was in relation to one from 1st September to 31st October. So his opinion seems to be that the duration of the prorogation makes it unconstitutional (and implicitly denying parliamentary oversight of the government) yet at the same time saying that the Supreme Court decision amounts to 'new law'. If he felt that the principle existed prior to the judgment, then he can't be too surprised by it.
SeaBreezes wrote: » It's a play for the viewers. He knows most of UK will tune in for the first half hour so he has to get his piece in. No coincidence his voice posture and rhetoric is very like Churchill all he's missing is the cigar...
Imreoir2 wrote: » Leaving the Customs Union is not the will of the people, leaving the single market is not the will of the people, leaving the EU with no-deal is not the will of the people. Anyone who says otherwise is lying.
The motion also opposed immigration systems based on a person’s income or “utility to big business” and any caps or targets on the numbers of people moving to the UK.
BarryD2 wrote: » May well be the case, but then can anyone say what is the 'will of the people' as regards their Brexit referendum? You're caught up in the same old rhetoric of saying what the UK doesn't want, but what do they want?
BarryD2 wrote: » can anyone say what is the 'will of the people' as regards their Brexit referendum? You're caught up in the same old rhetoric of saying what the UK doesn't want, but what do they want?
interlocked wrote: » Good luck campaigning on that in the Labour heartlands that voted Leave.
Zubeneschamali wrote: » Polling shows that Labour Leave voters will not shift to the Tories no matter what, so where will they go? To Farage?? Worse again.
Shelga wrote: » Michael Gove blethering on about exit preparations. Not sure if this is relating purely to no-deal prep or not, I missed the beginning. His voice makes me want to claw my face off though.
Imreoir2 wrote: » They have no idea. They want the unicorn that a conman sold them. They want a Brexit that is good for Britian where no such Brexit exists in reality. They want what they can't have and are on the verge of throwing a tantrum about it.
BarryD2 wrote: » Yes, but we don't really have any ideas either. Other than them having another referendum and choosing to stay in. There's a lot of talk of division but how much of that is just hype and talk? Even if you judged by street protests, there were massive Remain crowds on the streets of London back in March, whilst the Leave marchers were relatively tiny in number. With a bit of leadership, I think Remain would be carried easily with a significant majority. But maybe that's just wishful thinking.
