Caroline Lucas calls for an all-women cabinet

I am amazed so many commentators couldn't see my comment about the Queen was tongue in cheek.

But am astonished at the passive acquiescence that what is going on now isn't pushing the (unwirtten) constitution to the edge. We've already had the Speaker manipulating the Commons timetable, and now we have a PM who without going to the country for a new mandate, ie he is merely taking over the mandate of the Tories at the last election, is now pumping out policy decisions without even Cabinet discussion.

And he is doing it to buy votes, because Dominic Cummings (the UK is his petrie dish for experiments in voter manipulation) is running a click bait campaign, to get an election.

If as has been said they intend to call an election for the day after leave date, in contravention of existing protocol, to avoid the consequences of crashing out influencing voters.

And the more I think about it the Queen as an impartial arbitor has about as much credibility as the House of Commons who have spent the past year grooming the egos while the country falls apart.

And a media that ripped in Theresa May for any tiny fault, but not one part of the media is pointing out that what Johnson is doing, just in relation to spending, is totally irresponsible and questions why we ever needed austerity. Imagine if it were a Labour PM was doing this.

What we are seeing is the reality that party politics does not serve the UK voters. They have been play acting in Parliament whilst TM's deal, actually the EU's deal, is probably based on the almost even split in referendum results the logical "compromise". But oh no, it must be wrong. A weak woman let it happen.

So now we have unregulated male posturing playing to the house, egged on by his media buddies who just treat it all as a reality show, and everybodies just shrugging their shoulders.

At the end of this. Whatever it turns out to be, Parliament will be a joke, and everybody will be entitled to say to any jumped up self appointed constitutionalist, well is Boris can do it why cant Corbyn, or Jo Swinson - or Nigel Farrage.

If this was an actual suggestion for a temporary administration, then she's crazy

This is the constitutional process by which a crash out brexit is avoided and a confirmatory vote is affirmed in a parliament of our representatives.

The idea of a cross party group of women MPs trying to sort out the mess that extremist men of all political colours have caused has clearly has triggered quite a few, which has been interesting.

The men are doing splendidly, after all.

It's been a woman driving the bus off the cliff for the last 3 years.

It was a suggestion for a temporary administration to avoid a crash out and secure a confirmatory ballot on a withdrawal deal.

If this was an actual suggestion for a temporary administration, then she's crazy. I'm pretty sure it was just another silly idea to grab some column inches.

You seem genuinely panicked by this BrainFart. I agree it's a dumb idea, but it's hardly "horrific", and it's certainly not novel. You think men don't exclude women from power on purpose? You think it's just a coincidence that politics is dominated by men? The only difference here is that CL has said it in the Guardian, rather than in a private meeting. That and of course the national outcry at the very concept of an all woman cab, rather than the usual no one batting an eye lid at actual all male groups. The idea is, at worst, clumsy and ill conceived, but you're talking like CL is a super villain with a mission to destroy all men!

What 'proper democratic process' is propelling a crash out brexit?

It was inspired partly by the cross community/coss class/ cross religion group of Peace Women who managed to initiate the peace process in NI after years of dreadful war.

I don't think Peace Women would have got very far if they had tried to take over the government without proper democratic process. I suspect that would have gone down very badly in the circumstances.

Lucas was positing an idea.

It was a suggestion for a temporary administration to avoid a crash out and secure a confirmatory ballot on a withdrawal deal.

It was inspired partly by the cross community/coss class/ cross religion group of Peace Women who managed to initiate the peace process in NI after years of dreadful war.

It was based on the idea of bringing a range of women representing a range of view points together to head off the certain catastrophe of a crash out brexit.

But.......as we were.

The men are doing splendidly, after all.

Using sex, gender, race, religion etc... is a discussion which should not be entertained and the person suggesting it should be pilloried. Especially trying to use the cover of a national crisis to enact it

Pretty much what Mr Johnson and his backers are doing to force through an illegal, unconstitutional crash out brexit, with his all white all male brexit committee.

Whatever her intention, I think her inability to address the rather obvious flaw in her plan - how would her government function without the support of 311 Conservatives, Kate Hoey, the Labour MPs who aren't prepared to abandon Brexit because of their constituents, and 10 DUP MPs? - makes her seem incompetent rather than cunning.

BrainFart, you might think she is trying to raise a revolutionary army, but I think it's more likely that she just hasn't thought things through. If she had she wouldn't have made the obvious error of not including BAME MPs.

That is not at all the idea that she was evoking, for her to become PM through garnering the support of a majority. She even said the leader of this motely enterprise would have to be from the Labour Party.

The idea of an MP trying to form a new government by seeking the support of colleagues is perfectly fine. The idea of an MP seeking it on the sole grounds of physical sex, and basing their cabinet choices on it, is abhorrent. The fact that she couldn't do it should mean it should be ignored. Using sex, gender, race, religion etc... is a discussion which should not be entertained and the person suggesting it should be pilloried. Especially trying to use the cover of a national crisis to enact it.

It's evoking the threat of something horrific

Evoking the idea that she could become PM by gaining support of a majority of MPs is not horrific. It's how parliament works. Her proposal is stupid and sexist, but in the unlikely event that she became PM she could choose a cabinet for whatever reason she wanted. However There is no parliamentary support for the idea of an all female cabinet, so for that and many other reasons, she won't become PM.

So the biggest problem is that she couldn't achieve her horrifically sexist proposal ? Do you think if Boris launched a process to prorogue parliament he would actually achieve it ? To me that's a total non-starter. It's evoking the threat of something horrific, which they couldn't do, to make some other faction move a certain, in the same way you explain CL's action as an attempt to budge Labour.

I honestly don't understand where the political world is going. Utterances that should horrify everyone on all sides because they threaten the principles and order upon which our society is built are now fair game as "strategy" in mainstream political thought, rather than being confined to the rantings of the lunatic fringes. I honestly can't imagine anyone 20 years ago saying "we'll just suspend Parliament" or "we make a cabinet of only blokes / women, because they are better for the job" who wouldn't have been thought of as a crackpot or super-annuated.

It's like all meaning has just stopped and nothing matters. All-women cabinets are progressive. Proroguing parliament to reclaim our sovereignty. Advisory referendums are binding. Campaign fraud can be ignored in the interests of democracy. If you have a dick, you can just say you're a woman, and people are legally compelled to indulge you in your madness too.

when Boris Johnson or JRM suggest proroguing parliament

The difference is that Johnson is PM and could actually attempt to prorogue parliament. Caroline Lucas is the only member of the Green Party in parliament.

If she were able to win the support of the majority of MPs, there is no reason why she shouldn't be PM. That is how parliament works. The Queen chooses as her PM the person who has the support of the house.

The problem isn't that that what she is suggesting is undemocratic, it's that she has no hope of getting the necessary support to carry it out and the all female cabinet suggestion is stupid and patronising.

To those of you who are taking a sanguine "just strategy, nothing to see here" approach, do/did you maintain the same sang froid when Boris Johnson or JRM suggest proroguing parliament, or UKIP or The Brexit Party make whatever horrific dog-whistle policy suggestion as "just a strategy" ?

"The Tories are cleaving right to ward off UKIP, say they're going to hold an EU referendum"

"Nothing to see here, just a strategy"

"Oh, bum... look where that strategy led us"

Cobynistas obviously didn't like it and their outwoking her has holed this whole enterprise below the waterline before it even got off the slipway.

Still, it meant the sole Green MP was the lead story on the Graun website for a while so there's that.

This is a political strategy by Lucas, nothing more, to apply pressure to labour who refuse to consider any option other than Corbyn as PM.

I used to admire Caroline Lucas prior to the Challenor debacle. There is no point in saying that women will do this better if at the same time your definition of women is meaningless.

Agree with dolorsit, this is an attempt to split the Labour vote. I recognise that she has to do what's best for the Greens but I don't think she can pretend that this is what is best for the country.

It is about women who will not put party before agreeing a solution.

And which MPs would those be?

If they exist wouldn't they have made themselves known by now? This has been going on for over 3 years.

Kwasi Kwarteng,Dominic Grieve, Kier Starker, Heseltine, there are lots of really good men MPs. There are as many crap women MPs as men . I was with Caroline Lucas till she added the only women bit ....so stupid.

Also, people arent looking at it through the lens of UK party politics, they are looking at it through the lens of "Holy fuck, a leading politican has just suggested in 2019 that political power should be divvied out based on sex, and refused to those of a certain sex."

She did apologise for not included BAME women though, because that is WRONG . Excluding men is still perfectly a-ok though.

Confused. What wars was mrs thatcher responsible for?
Ps if you say the falklands I will call you a massive tit. Don’t say I don’t give fair warning.

So now we've gone from a women-only cabinet to a non-elected women-only body to override the HoP and the Brexit vote, the checks and balances on whose decisions would be, what exactly ? As a Brit living in the EU, I would literally rather see a catastrophic Brexit, democratically-applied, than this oestrogen-soaked Soviet secret commission nightmare you conjured as being the possibly the only way out.

Boy, I don't particularly enjoy hyperbole. That escalated quickly...

However, were the Queen to set up a special counsel of all women advisors (not party aligned) on the basis that politicians (as she has reportedly said) have not managed to follow through on the ADVISORY referendum results, that might be the only way out.

The Queen would not do that because it's not enough to show that Boris Johnson isn't doing a good job, or even that he has lost a vote of no confidence. Somebody else, male or female, has to demonstrate that they have the support of the house, otherwise we are stuck with Johnson till the next election.

I am not saying I think Caroline Lucas is comparable to this but there is extensive research that when looking for a unified solution, particularly in areas of strife women are far better able to suceed and put forward proposal that reflect real lives.

Just google women peace makers.

And look at the number of economists who said we wouldn't have had the financial crash is women had been running the big banks.

The problem here is that everyone is seeing it through the lens of UK party politics.

And just reeling off lists of names of hardline women misses the point.

It is about women who will not put party before agreeing a solution.

But of course to have got a position in UK politics probably means you have been indoctrinated into working on the basis of party loyalties, in the same way that had more women been running big banks they would probably have done so by enacting the (aggressive, macho) culture of banking.

However, were the Queen to set up a special counsel of all women advisors (not party aligned) on the basis that politicians (as she has reportedly said) have not managed to follow through on the ADVISORY referendum results, that might be the only way out.

Better this constitutional crisis than Boris Johnson projecting fantasies dreampt up by his Fleet Street cronies who think the general public are all stupid and easily tricked by drum thumping and waving the union jack, to use calling an election to let a no deal happen by default.

Not quite what she had in mind when she floated this sexist nonsense.

It's all nonsense anyway. I don't think she honestly believes that Kenneth Clarke and Dominc Grieve are about to unite behind a Green Party PM. It's all just a PR stunt.

...Or Mrs Gandhi, Eva Peron, Golda Meir etc.