I really is. They've given parliament a blank paper and ordered them to sign whatever is on it .This government is a shambles.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
This stuff about the legal advice is frankly bizarre. There's a binding commons motion saying they have to release it, how can they just turn around and say no?
You get the impression May genuinely thinks Brexit is all about immigration.
It would seriously undermine the Tories as they would fail to deliver on Brexit.
It would be political currency for Labour of significant strength. Kind of like Iraq is to the hard left within the Labour party. Whenever Labour are in doubt they can just shout 'you failed to deliver Brexit and the democratic will of the British people'.
They can't and they're (hopefully) about to be taken to task on it. The ERG have just said it's been padded out substantially as the original was only 6 pages long. May has always done this, she tries to deliver whatever the outcome so she'll try to do so even if it means contempt of parliament.
This is proper dodgy dossier territory and it's not only this May is doing it in every forum and official release. It's a huge swindle and when she's toppled we'll hear off all the dirty tactics.
I think they'll do everything they can to drag it out until after the vote.
To most leavers it was. All this bollocks about sovereignty, money and third country trade deals was only the concern of the hard core leavers like Ukip and other eurosceptics. They cynically exploited the plight of hard up people, especially in the East and North East by telling them that the source of all their woes were immigrants. They blurred the lines between EU and non-EU with posters which were frankly misleading at best and disgusting at worse.
Latest figures appear to show that the reduction of EU net migration has been replaced by an increase in non-EU net migration. Which tells you what? As the 5th or 6th largest economy in the world (whatever we are), it is difficult to reduce overall net migration if you want growth to continue. So the whole argument starts to crumble really.
TBH I think if May cant get her deal through she will just switch to saying ok then - will of the people is to leave, will of parliment is not to accept the deal - we leave with no deal
If Labour try to attach an ammendment seeking to prevent no deal then she simplay calls an election and fights it on the basis of an in / out referendum
Basically its her only way to survive I think - deal gets voted down... she switches straight away to hard brexit and gets onside the ERG and DUP to survive the confidence vote
They will say they delivered on the will of the people - and any economic hardship they will say is labours fault for playing party politics and not supporting the deal in the national interest - not saying everybody will side with that - but its a spinable point of view and will be consistently delivered over and over and over again
I believe the convention in UK law is that information and advice from a lawyer to a client can not be forced to be handed over (I guess the UK equivalent of client / attorney privilege) and therefore they feel they are under no obligation to publish the full raw advice - similarly I believe the full advice over the iraq war was not published citing the same rules (and at the time May was saying this was outrageous)
On a personal basis I think its reached the point that its more harmful not to publish - if its not published those against the deal will just assume the worst anyway - it just makes the process look (even more) dis-organised
DUP love all this legal stuff. They are past masters at finding an 'if' instead of a 'when' in a 585 page document and claiming, in the best Rev. Paisley tradition, "WE'VE BEEN SOLD DOWN THE RIVAAAAR"
As far as I'm aware, that kind of privilege has absolutely no power in the face of a binding commons motion. Parliament is sovereign. I could be wrong, but I don't think I am.
At least the country won't be destroyed, I'm rather more worried about that, tbh.
The question then is who is the client? They're acting on behalf of parliament so i find it hard to contemplate parliament not being the client.
I thought the iraq war advice was released eventually?
And if the deal has been agreed it can't damage negotiations which was an earlier argument, I'm not sure what their reason is beyond 'convention'. The client has every right to share
Part of the vote for Brexit was a revolt against austerity so its entirely appropriate
Its supposed to be a debate about how the main two political options in the country would deal with Brexit. Corbyn not approving of austerity while having no clear position on Brexit is not helpful to that debate.
'We will go for a softer Brexit because the problems you've been told are caused by the EU are actually the result of Tory austerity'
released in 2005 I think
as for who is the client - my understanding is that the AG provided advice to the government not the whole parliament?... might need a proper legal bod to confirm but thats my understanding
It doesnt look like anyone in parliament even knows to be honest. He's answerable to the crown but his role (or one of) is government legal advisor so it's arguable. He also has seperate roles to Scotland and NI so I'd be intrigued to find out if they could ask for seperate legal advice.
Going to be a long angry week this
The softer Brexit the EU have already said is unattainable as they’re unwilling to reopen negotiations?
As far as I know the commons only has the right to hold May in contempt of parliment if she does not publish - but can not force the publication
what happens if she is held in contempt - well thats most probably a telling off prom the speaker and thats about it
https://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-information-office/g06.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_Parliament
They've said a lot of things. If the UK gets rid of May's red lines and is willing to join the EEA/Single market the EU will vote to extend A50 negotiations.
So why doesn’t Corbyn want to just focus on putting that forward as the official Labour position? Why the desire to talk about austerity instead? Are there still people who don’t know Labour are anti-austerity?
This is why the head to head debate would be bad.
idk you'll have to ask him
Sorry if I sounded shirty, im just majorly fecked off with Corbyn at the moment.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
the feck happened to pete, at this rate he'll be asking for legalised smack
Exactly, everyone knows making Brexit go away will solve everything. Get that vote overturned and we can all put our feet up and definitely not have to look into why the initial referendum was lost. T'was merely a service station stop on the status quo highway.
Get Brexit overturned and I’ll be right behind Corbyn on his economic platform. But let’s stop this pretense that Brexit is going to do anything other than feck poor people even harder than they’re already being fecked, and that’s true regardless of how hard or soft the Brexit is.
Cox is coming off an arse here keeps saying he doesn't want to be in conflict with the house but he's acting in the public interest in not sharing it. Who the feck is he to make that decision?
Agree with this.
The government would have made the decision and instructed his answer.
The attorney general?
He's a general! Impressive.
We've had a bunch of people whose only thought is overturning Brexit and look at the political dregs who they've made more than welcome. Not a single austerity backing voting record has been too much to gloss over. I have absolutely no faith in any of these 'People's Vote' pricks being even remotely interested in what comes next, looking at what they've been more than willing to overlook.
This is the first time I've seen any (even remotely) high profile politician wishing to talk about what happens next when Brexit isn't an issue anymore, in regards to learning the lessons from it getting to this point in the first place. May will be begging for any of these debates to be about Brexit and nothing else. Just like people like Soubry, Cable and co probably can't believe their luck when the gathered hordes don't bring up what they were more than willing to do with poor people's lives before this came along. Soubry went to a march, with thousands of people who are supposedly concerned about vulnerable people post-Brexit, three days after voting to keep the Universal Credit rollout assessment secret and was welcomed like a hero.
These people have had two and a half years, some of the most media friendly names in politics and an almost guaranteed spot on any medium that they wish, to come up with even a 'back of a fag packet' message or slogan for what comes next. When is the grand reveal?
Last edited:
He's said in this exchange that he's at the will of the house and it can be shared in exception. He knows what it has voted on and he knows the will of the house now.
It appears to me that he's here only to enforce that if they want the information they'll need to pass a contempt motion (which has now been filed).
Perhaps there's something in it for which the goverment wish to avoid the blame of it being made public
Not really... If Mays found guilty she can be summoned to the bar for a telling off right?
It does not change anything
They've just sprung it on the speaker now, very interesting exchange
Cox tried to throw back a delaying tactic of asking the speaker to wait for governments proposala first. Wasn't having it, i do like Bercow
Had to check this was definitely a spoof article.
Nation excited by televised Brexit debate between woman who hates debating and man who won't talk about Brexit
Nation excited by televised Brexit debate between woman who hates debating and man who won't talk about Brexit
This government getting away with murder. How can you just ignore parliament?