spacecoyote wrote: » You may well be right, but one word in your statement is pertinent, English Polling in Wales, Scotland & NI shows they don't want Brexit, with even the Welsh starting to talk independence. In depth data reviews showed that Welsh speaking areas voted strongly to remain, with the Wales vote skewed by older English who have moved there. So basically England dragging everyone down with them
Kermit.de.frog wrote: » He also said discussions would have to be entered in to with the Irish government. i.e veiled threat to unionists.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » Yeah you could read it either way. It could be a threat or an inducement.
Call me Al wrote: » There was speculation in the last week or two (after he visited schools there) that he was going to run in Dominic Grieve's constituency. His own seat was at risk.. This seemed a safer bet.
devnull wrote: » He'll be parachuted into another seat if that's a danger.
sondagefaux wrote: » Apart from London, and many, not all, towns and cities with universities. For example, both Newcastle and Durham city (both with universities) voted majority Remain while the rest of the north-east of England (including Sunderland and Middlesborough, which both have universities) voted majority Leave. Liverpool also voted Remain, partially down to the fact that most newsagents etc in the city don't stock The Sun. If England outside of London left the UK, the rest of the UK could remain in the EU. I don't think England minus London's wealth and Scotland's oil would have much of a chance economically...
Letwin_Larry wrote: » most of these poorer areas voted LEAVE. these areas have been ignored and neglected for decades, certainly since Thatcher destroyed them. so along comes the referendum and for the first time in ages they have come out and engage with the political process and vote, but the LEAVE side is desperate to ignore/twart their vote. it's no wonder they are cheesed off.
A Dub in Glasgo wrote: » I think you mean the Remain side? If not, I agree the Leave side are ignoring their plight and twisting their vote to suit their own ends
Rjd2 wrote: » GM228 wrote: » You have to admire Bercow, he is well able for what is thrown at him and gives well reasoned replies unlike others in the HoC, he will be missed when he goes. Until their is an investigation into those bullying allegations aimed at Bercow, I really wish people would stop putting him on a pedestal.
GM228 wrote: » You have to admire Bercow, he is well able for what is thrown at him and gives well reasoned replies unlike others in the HoC, he will be missed when he goes.
Letwin_Larry wrote: » most of these poorer areas voted LEAVE. these areas have been ignored and neglected for decades, certainly since Thatcher destroyed them. so along comes the referendum and for the first time in ages they have come out and engage with the political process and vote, but the REMAIN side is desperate to ignore/twart their vote. it's no wonder they are cheesed off.
GM228 wrote: » Some light reading.The Withdrawal Agreement Bill.There's loads to pick out, but first thing which really stands out is the lack of an ability for Parliament to request an extension to the transition period.
Joe_ Public wrote: » Read something about gov needing to give 21 days notice before a vote on a treaty bill which this is. So they are obviously using some dastardly fiendish loophole to get around it, but question is, will it work?
GM228 wrote: » A treaty can not be ratified until 21 sitting days have passed under the terms of the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010, but there are exceptions such as for exceptional circumstances.
Enzokk wrote: » I guess, "just get it done", would not count as exceptional circumstances. Seeing that an extension has been applied for as well you would assume there is no need to rush this through, right?
Joe_ Public wrote: » Thanks. Are these truly exceptional circumstances though? Why does it need to be rushed as we know EU will grant a technical extension if required (well 99 % sure anyway!)?
Section 20 of the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 (treaties to be laid before Parliament before ratification) does not apply in relation to the withdrawal agreement (but this does not affect whether that section applies in relation to any modification of the agreement).
Professor Moriarty wrote: » Gove just said that direct rule will have to return if Stormont isn't up and running after Brexit. Hope the EU picked this up.
Capt'n Midnight wrote: » A wee bit more on the DUP's latest cunning plan to get Stormont up and running. And they might have gotten away with it if they hadn't left the original date on the letter they sent to the NI Attorney General yesterday asking about legislative competence. Typos happen. But typing June when you mean October ? It completely undermines the stunt at Stormont earlier because it implies they've been actively not sending that letter for the last four months. So yeah the executive will be reforming any day now :rolleyes:
Professor Moriarty wrote: » The sight of Foster saying how sad she was that SSM legislation was coming in made her look like an old biddy from the 60s.
briany wrote: » Yes, Foster has really gone against her modern, hip, fresh & funky image on this one.
weemcd wrote: » It's quite stunning how long the list of failures run for Arlene Foster's tenure as DUP leader, since 2015: RHI Stormont collapse Loss of overall Unionist majority Brexit Irish Language Act Gay Marriage Abortion rights Every single one a monumental failure on her and her party. I've surely forgotten another half a dozen.
weemcd wrote: » It's quite stunning how long the list of failures run for Arlene Foster's tenure as DUP leader, since 2015.....
