And Suella has been sacked

[WellWellSaidTheRockingChair]

not before time - wonder who will get the poison chalice.

if William Hague is still in the commons, but o don’t think he is, Rishi would be wise to draw in his experience and counsel.

No problem.

Lol at Cameraon, the man who created a wholly unnecessary austerity period (that never actually stopped) and enabled the greatest polarising split the UK has ever known. It's just been progressive uphill fantabulousness ever since - why not bring on some more! Great choice

Or is it that everyone calls leavers stupid, ignorant etc, and the teens of today have grown up with that rhetoric.

I note at this point that since Cameron isn't an MP he can't be held to account as Foreign Secretary by the House of Commons because he can't address the Commons. This is 'somewhat problematic'.

The BBC has covered that - from the Live thingy (technical term):

*15:52
How will Cameron's work be scrutinised?
There's been some commentary about how David Cameron will be held to account in his role as foreign secretary given he is no longer an MP and will sit in Parliament's upper house as a member of the House of Lords following today's appointment.
The Institute for Government's senior researcher Dr Alice Lilly says it is a "highly unusual" situation but Cameron's work will still be scrutinised by his peers.
"The Lords put in place procedures to ensure that Secretaries of State in the Lords would have to answer questions in the Lords in the same way that they would do in the Commons, so I expect that will happen again."
"Obviously there are plenty of other ministers in the Foreign Office who will be able to answer MPs' questions, so it's not like there will be nothing, but it won't be direct from the foreign secretary."

I'd agree. I wouldn't say that. The 'ignorance' thing is decidedly unhelpful and mischaracterised. I find it as problematic as the worse Faragebots (who I don't think were as representative of Leavers as some Remainers like to believe).

I think people had a valid point on a fair number of issues. I just think the solutions and proposals (by all concerned) were arse.

But I do think that WHY is a lot more important than just looking at the WHAT [support for controls to immigration].

I don't think Remain were astute enough to address that. It was easier to shout 'racist' rather than actively engage better. Ultimately failure to engage and instead an attempt to silence was used (we see this again with certain topics of conversation over difficult / controversial subjects today btw which I find intensely frustrating). I dislike this rising authoritarianism of all political shades which ignores the actual problem and goes straight to saying what the 'solution' is.

As I've said before, I ultimately got cheesed off at the ridgedness of the hardline remainers just as much as I felt hardline Brexiteers were totally wrong.

ANYWAY. Looks like Backbenchers aren't terribly happy. It could yet all go somewhat against Sunak's plan (whatever the fuck it is!):

Andrea Jenkyns MP AT andreajenkyns
Enough is enough, I have submitted my vote of no confidence letter to the Chairman of the 1922. It is time for Rishi Sunak to go and replace him with a 'real' Conservative party leader.

I think so many people were disillusioned with politics in the UK. Many still struggling from the 2008 financial crash, a Labour Party that for many life improved but many felt left behind, London in particular retaining most of the power,
influence and money, low wages, poor services years of austerity, MP’s being corrupt and self serving and unions who had less and less influence on getting fair wages for their members and skilled workers being undercut by a cheaper workforce

immigration was certainly an issue the main for many but I think for many it was a combination of issues for many too

I’m not sure if it was a a protest vote or this just isn’t working vote lets try something that might as what we have and had isn’t working

it simply should never ever of happened it’s so complex I don’t claim to know better than everyone who voted leave to understand the complexities of the EU and it was obvious during the campaign neither did our MP’s

Honestly.

I don't think this is really acceptable, because MP won't be able to get an answer direct FROM HIM. He will always have a lacky / stooge to protect him / stop proper accountability because of this 'work around'.

Its not really good enough.

@RedToothBrush politicians don't give direct answers. Giving answers via a nominated route might work better.

There’s a great programme on how to win a campaign on R4. The other DC Cummings was a key player. I question whether Brexit would have won without him

You need to listen, understand what people are saying and simplify

Remain campaign wasn’t great at that

I actually fit neatly into that survey below with my vote, ‘the economy’ was my reason too

Two major things have shifted my thinking from staunch as anything remainer - AI and impact on employment and climate pressures and impact on people movement

On 1922 committee there was some guy from there earlier extolling virtues of DC onboard but I guess we’ll see what happens

It won’t be ‘live’ info, with easy clarifications and options to check scenarios - if it ever is - and MPs might grill a representative less harshly. On the other hand, is it possible that some in the Lords may even understand wider issues better and see some different impacts?

Maybe i don't know, many of the leavers i know were/are very smart but quite a few are either dead or in a home.

We need to move on, young people want the freedoms their parents had, whatever the reasons, they are entitled to have an opinion without others telling them they are wrong etc etc.

On Cameron, he, together with the French, bombed Libya, creating a failed state and a gateway for 100s of '000s to come to the EU... i doubt he is respected abroad at all.

Wasn't he also involved in corrupt money deals too?

He isn't the solution the Tories may hope for

It is odd, having the chap responsible for Brexit through sheer lazy arrogance in charge of foreign affairs. Of course it’s also odd having someone outside of Parliament called in at all. So much for democracy. It used to happen, yes: back in imperial times.

We had Mandelson but he was a relatively minor trade minister, compared to FS, esp considering the world and the problems it faces.

The Tories of course have form, Lord Carrington wasn't an MP and was made F/Sec by Thatcher, though in all fairness, he was very good and resigned over the Govt's handling of the Falklands.

To clarify: I didn't use ignorance as a general descriptive term for Leave voters. I said that the specific argument that we should vote Leave in order to reduce immigration because of its draining effect on the economy and public services was a lie, so the Leave votes cast for that reason were cast in ignorance. If those voters genuinely understood the economics involved (or just weren't lied to about them so thoroughly and determinedly) they wouldn't have voted Leave for that reason. (They may well still have for other reasons).

I get that the name calling during this divisive period (in BOTH directions, btw) has been negative and unhelpful. But some people (particularly Leavers with buyer's remorse) interpret that to mean we can't acknowledge when things are true or false.

Some arguments are invalid, and when you're taken in by them you make wrong decisions that have negative consequences. Sorry, that's not my fault. Like many I tried to argue against them at the time.

1) the majority of UK adults don't pay income tax

@TheThingIsYeah 60% of UK adults pay income tax, which is more than don't.

RedToothBrush
May COULD easily have said we should leave on much softer terms then she actually proposed which would have been less divisive and would have had more broad support. Instead she shocked even the right of the Tory Party, who weren't expecting the tone and content of the October Speech

I don't see why the right of the Tory Party would have been shocked other than the fact that Theresa May voted remain:

19 April 2016
Today, in a lengthy, cerebral and frequently humorous speech, Michael Gove ate his cake. He announced that the UK would not apply for membership of the single market but would instead seek a free trade agreement with the EU.

https://www.newstatesman.com/business/economics/2016/04/michael-gove-gambles-he-rejects-single-market-membership

June 12 2016
David Cameron confirmed that he will pull Britain out of the single market if there is a vote to leave the European Union at the upcoming referendum.

He said the Brexit campaign had made it clear to voters that voting to leave also meant pulling out of the single market.

The prime minister said: “What the British public will be voting for is to leave the EU and leave the single market.”

https://www.politico.eu/article/david-cameron-bbc-andrew-marr-ill-pull-uk-out-of-the-single-market-after-brexit-eu-referendum-vote-june-23-consequences-news/

House of Commons Debate 15 June 2016

Nigel Adams
Selby and Ainsty)
Q14. I congratulate my right hon. Friend on honouring our manifesto pledge and delivering this historic referendum. Unfortunately, however, we have heard some hysterical scaremongering during the debate, and there are those in this House and the other place who believe that if the British people decide to leave the EU, there should be a second referendum. Will he assure the House and the country that, whatever the result on 24 June, his Government will carry out the wishes of the British people—if the vote is to remain, we remain, but if it is to leave, which I hope it is, we leave?

The Prime Minister [David Cameron]
I am very happy to agree with my hon. Friend. “In” means we remain in a reformed EU; “out” means we come out. As the leave campaigners and others have said, “out” means out of the EU, out of the European single market, out of the Council of Ministers—out of all those things—and will then mean a process of delivering on it, which will take at least two years, and then delivering a trade deal, which could take as many as seven years. To anyone still in doubt—there are even Members in the House still thinking about how to vote—I would say: if you have not made up your mind yet, if you are still uncertain, just think about that decade of uncertainty for our economy and everything else, don’t risk it and vote remain.

Alexandra2001
We had Mandelson but he was a relatively minor trade minister

Lord Mandelson was First Secretary of State under Gordon Brown;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Secretary_of_State

Blair had Lord Falconer (his former flatmate);

On 14 May 1997, just after Blair became Prime Minister, Falconer was created a life peer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Falconer,_Baron_Falconer_of_Thoroton
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2003/jun/13/uk.constitution3

@SayingwhatIreallythink
because it should have been more decisive - 60/40 for example, not a simple majority for a win

After doing the Brexit threads I am confident in my original position that everyone was shocked.

I am fairly sure that if you went back to the real time threads you would find links to various newspapers articles expressing that exact view. And why.

But I wouldn't expect anything less than a rewriting of history from you...

RedToothBrush
After doing the Brexit threads I am confident in my original position that everyone was shocked

Remainers were shocked certainly.

RedToothBrush
Before she became PM NOT ONE, not even Farage was seriously considering exiting the customs union and the single market

MONDAY 22 FEBRUARY 2016

Leader of the UK Independence Party Nigel Farage has said that he doesn't want the United Kingdom to be a part of the the European Single Market, but instead wants the UK to "stand on its own two feet".

"I don't want to be part of the European Single Market, I want Britain to leave the European Union, be an independent country and trade with the world," Farage said on the BBC, arguing you can have a free trade deal without being part of a political union.

https://www.cityam.com/eu-referendum-ukip-leader-nigel-farage-says-he-doesnt-want-to-be-part-of-the-european-single-market/

I learnt a wise lesson several years ago about certain posters.

Goodnight.

RedToothBrush
But I wouldn't expect anything less than a rewriting of history from you...

19 April 2016
Michael Gove sets out post-exit UK-EU trade vision

Analysis by Laura Kuenssberg, BBC political editor

They want access to trade with the rest of the EU, but would not try to keep Britain inside the single market, the EU's trading territory where goods, services and people can move freely across the continent.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36074853

*Passepartoute · Yesterday 14:42

Saying how happy she would be to see a planeload of refugees on their way to Rwanda? Spending a fortune on the legionella barge rather than housing refugees in cheaper hotels or processing their claims efficiently? Wanting to take tents away from homeless people? Saying she can't see anything wrong with sending gay refugees back to countries that persecute homosexuals? Making a massive fuss about a march that was never going anywhere near the Cenotaph or at a time when remembrance events would be held? Constant lying?

Yeah, but like, what's she done wrong?

Not sure it matters. Britain is doing fuck all to help the situation in the ME, it’s just for show.