Guest Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 31 minutes ago, bwfcfan5 said: The only direct way to answer the question is another referendum. That is needed now more than ever. For no reason at all..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bwfcfan5 Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 Just now, Norpig said: i think the idea of an emergency Government is the best idea, Boris is like a bull in a china shop and can't be trusted to make a rational decision on anything other than what blonde he shags next. There will be plenty of Tory MPs who won't want him leading them into the next GE now. He's had the worst spell I can remember any PM ever having. He gets away with it only partly because the leader of the opposition is useless. But if you are in a marginal seat - especially in the South - as a Tory MP - your leader has lost a string of parliamentary votes, lost his brother's support, lost cabinet members, thrown 21 of his own MPs out, been found to have misled the queen, faces allegations of impropriety with public money in his role as Mayor, and is trying to pit himself against everyone including the courts. Its not a place you'd want to be in a marginal Tory seat. Internal Tory polling suggested they would lose seats overall in a GE - so those MPs will be worried. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Escobarp Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 How do you know so much about everything? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Site Supporter MickyD Posted September 24, 2019 Site Supporter Share Posted September 24, 2019 2 hours ago, Salford Trotter said: He knew exactly what he was doing and that was an attempt to shut up Parliament. My question was whether or not he broke the law given that the rules aren't written down. I didn't ask if he knew what he was doing because given that he's the Prime Minister, i would hope he did. Perhaps he's seen an archaic law which he decided allowed him to do as he did, much like the law which states that a Hackney Carriage is required to keep a bale of hay in the luggage compartment. I reckon if the police acted upon that I'm fairly sure the supreme court wouldn't uphold the law and would therefore deem it unlawful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salford Trotter Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 2 minutes ago, MickyD said: My question was whether or not he broke the law given that the rules aren't written down. I didn't ask if he knew what he was doing because given that he's the Prime Minister, i would hope he did. Perhaps he's seen an archaic law which he decided allowed him to do as he did, much like the law which states that a Hackney Carriage is required to keep a bale of hay in the luggage compartment. I reckon if the police acted upon that I'm fairly sure the supreme court wouldn't uphold the law and would therefore deem it unlawful. You are better off asking the Supreme Court that question as in their view he acted unlawfully. I haven't read the judgement but I expect Attorney General will be forced to publish his advice to Johnson in due course which will give us an insight into his thinking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 12 minutes ago, Escobarp said: How do you know so much about everything? 😆 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 6 minutes ago, MickyD said: My question was whether or not he broke the law given that the rules aren't written down. I didn't ask if he knew what he was doing because given that he's the Prime Minister, i would hope he did. Perhaps he's seen an archaic law which he decided allowed him to do as he did, much like the law which states that a Hackney Carriage is required to keep a bale of hay in the luggage compartment. I reckon if the police acted upon that I'm fairly sure the supreme court wouldn't uphold the law and would therefore deem it unlawful. How can anyone break a law which is unknown? the law is only now established Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MalcolmW Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 26 minutes ago, Jol_BWFC said: And if it’s a hung parliament, what then? The difficulty is that the ability to prorogue at will could lead to the following scenario. Corbyn wins an election but relies on SNP to have a majority. Very soon they demand an independence referendum, so he prorogues Parliament and rules via gatherings of the TUC etc. Far fetched? Yes, but far from impossible. You may remember Major proroguing to avoid discussion of the cash for questions scandal, but Attlee's fancy footwork was probably before your time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bwfcfan5 Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 4 minutes ago, boltondiver said: How can anyone break a law which is unknown? the law is only now established What law was unknown? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent_white Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 2 hours ago, Mounts Kipper said: Aye but in my opinion the judgement was politically motivated and I think many folk will draw exactly the same conclusion. Based on what evidence? Other than you don't like the decision they came to? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Site Supporter MickyD Posted September 24, 2019 Site Supporter Share Posted September 24, 2019 24 minutes ago, Salford Trotter said: You are better off asking the Supreme Court that question as in their view he acted unlawfully. I haven't read the judgement but I expect Attorney General will be forced to publish his advice to Johnson in due course which will give us an insight into his thinking. Supreme Court knows better than Wanderersways? Give your head a snake lad. 🤣 23 minutes ago, boltondiver said: How can anyone break a law which is unknown? the law is only now established My line of thinking Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mounts Kipper Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 (edited) 6 minutes ago, kent_white said: Based on what evidence? Other than you don't like the decision they came to? What actual evidence was offered that BJ prorogued to stop parliament debating Brexit? None whatsoever, only an admission from BJ or Cummings could prove that conclusively. Therefore without any concrete evidence I can only conclude it was politically motivated. Edited September 24, 2019 by Mounts Kipper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leigh white Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 8 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said: What actual evidence was offered that BJ prorogued to stop parliament debating Brexit? None whatsoever, only an admission from BJ or Cummings could prove that conclusively. Therefore without any concrete evidence I can only conclude it was politically motivated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leigh white Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 Jezza making a cracking speech now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mounts Kipper Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 (edited) 3 minutes ago, leigh white said: Jezza making a cracking speech now. Fucking hell! really! do you believe in leprechauns. 😂 Edited September 24, 2019 by Mounts Kipper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 33 minutes ago, bwfcfan5 said: What law was unknown? The law that has just been established Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent_white Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 10 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said: What actual evidence was offered that BJ prorogued to stop parliament debating Brexit? None whatsoever, only an admission from BJ or Cummings could prove that conclusively. Therefore without any concrete evidence I can only conclude it was politically motivated. That's not how it works. The government had to produce evidence that there was a convincing reason to prorogue parliament for the length of time it did. It wasn't able to - because there isn't a more plausible reason other than to prevent it from being held to account. You've got to be mightily blinkered to believe anything else as far as I'm concerned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent_white Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 And by the way - I was (stupidly with hindsight) predicting BJ might just be able to pull Brexit off a couple of weeks ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mounts Kipper Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 1 minute ago, kent_white said: That's not how it works. The government had to produce evidence that there was a convincing reason to prorogue parliament for the length of time it did. It wasn't able to - because there isn't a more plausible reason other than to prevent it from being held to account. You've got to be mightily blinkered to believe anything else as far as I'm concerned. Thought in British law you had to be conclusively proven guilty.... seems not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darwen_white Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 Can someone explain what's actually changed today with regard to us leaving the EU? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nowack Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 (edited) He has admitted it though by saying the judgement was all about frustrating Brexit. Can't be one without the other. This moves quickly. The above was in response to MK saying no evidence prorogued for Brexit. Edited September 24, 2019 by Nowack Clarity Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leigh white Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 2 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said: Fucking hell! really! do you believe in leprechauns. 😂 Rather have a mythical oirish mon in power than a proven lying twat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mounts Kipper Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 (edited) 3 minutes ago, leigh white said: Rather have a mythical oirish mon in power than a proven lying twat. Corbyns just lied his way through that speech, shame he won’t get in power so we can hold him accountable for the lies he’s just spouted for the last hour. Edited September 24, 2019 by Mounts Kipper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulhanley Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 We need a written constitution in this country now. We can't carry on with things like this being as open to interpretation as they are regardless of whose side you are on in the Brexit debate. None of what has happened today, however affects the very thing our friends in remainia hate to be reminded about. Leave 52% (17.4m) // Remain 48% (16.1m). We either leave the EU or we no longer live in a democracy. If you disagree, you don't believe in democracy either - which means you're well suited to an organisation like the EU. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Site Supporter Spider Posted September 24, 2019 Site Supporter Share Posted September 24, 2019 Corbyn’s speech was piss and wind to keep the unions onside Standard Labour stuff really. Mounts, BoJo acted unlawfully according to the highest court in the land. 11-0 on the judge count. You simply have to accept they are right and move on. You’re being undemocratic otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.