Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Brexit

Westministenders. Boris we wish you a Merry Christmas and a Happy Constitutional Crisis?

990 replies

RedToothBrush · 09/12/2016 00:03

Its twelve days to go until the end of the HoC 2016 calendar and we can already tell that everyone is wishing it was Christmas already. Poor Theresa though, she doesn’t get to play with toys on the last day of term. Instead she has a grilling on the lack of spending on health and social care spending by a commons select committee.

Hopefully the next couple of weeks will calm down a little though as thoughts turn elsewhere.

The A50 case has come to an end. There is no way of telling which way the judges will go but the decision to appeal may yet haunt the government as it will bring the issue of devolution to a head, whether they win or lose. The ruling is due in mid January.

Win and they are going to have to amend the Devolution Acts and potentially impose Brexit on people with certain national identities who voted against it. This is profoundly undemocratic and a betrayal of the principles of Devolution and the expectations of the will of the people.
Lose and they could face a full blown constitutional crisis, with NI or Scotland or both having a veto over Brexit, and the government effectively unable to trigger a50 in line with our constitutional requirement. Which is again, potentially profoundly undemocratic and against the referendum and the expectations of the will of the people.

It was a scenario that predictable and avoidable at several junctions yet the government under Cameron and May ploughed on regardless. It a scenario that we are now locked into, due to deciding to use the courts rather than just go through parliament.

It could also massively restrict the power of the executive under the Royal Prerogative. Ironically this is something that David Davis has campaigned for, for years so I guess he gets a victory however the decision goes.
So the chances of some kind of crisis with regard to our constitutional makeup and the union seem inevitable in the new year.

The government despite a defeat in Richmond Park continues to lean right and characterise anyone with concerns as unpatriotic or not honourable. This is the last resort of the desperate.

They have however, conceded to Labour that they will publish a report on their Brexit plans before a50 is triggered. In return Labour have promised that they will let a50 be triggered by the end of March. Is this a good thing? It remains to be seen. In some ways this is a blinder for Labour.

They are pro-Brexit but anti-lack of plan in theory. This only works if the plan actually has substance. If there is no substance in the plan and its nothing more than empty words then they face having to go back on a commons vote committing them to a deal with the Conservatives. It could therefore be a trap for them. It marginalises the none English Nationalist voices too. Voices that are important and deserve to be heard. Voices that if they are not listened to, will have consequences.

What will the Sleaford and North Hykenham (yep again) by election bring?

A vote of confidence in the government, a new ever growing and rising fear of UKIP or something else. How will this colour the start to the New Year?

I don’t know. 2016 has apparently been the year of gin as people turn to the drink to cope. Everything is now Brexitty and Red, White and Blue.
But whose’s? Britain’s? The USA’s? Russia’s? Or France’s?

We look forward to, or more to the point we fear what 2017 could bring. A feeling we have not felt to this degree in many years. A General Election with a UKIP breakthrough. The end of peace in NI. A repeat of the age old betrayal of Scotland’s by the English. The Welsh damned to irrelevance and marginalisation. Brexit vettoed and the subsequent political fallout. The end of the NHS. A bonfire of rights. A new Italian PM and possibly new Eurozone economic crisis. Fillon or Le Pen and at last a real victory for the far right in Europe. The chance of Merkel’s Last Stand. Putin’s partnership with Assad and a new genocide we are powerless to stop. Erdogan pulling the plug on the EU door and unleashing a new wave of refugees onto European shores. The horror of ISIS both within the West and within the Middle East. Trump’s neo-fascism and rise of a New World Order. There is something in there for everyone to dread.

Which will it be? Probably something we have not yet foreseen such are these times.

Act 2 of Brexit in Westminstenders land is bound to be just as dramatic and of course, we leave 2016 in true soap fashion on a real cliff hanger.

All the more reason to enjoy the holiday period and break whatever your politics.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
18
SwedishEdith · 11/12/2016 11:12

Arron Banks spreading more fake news on Twitter. I wonder why he's so keen to defend Russia?

Daniel ‏@danthompson78 41m41 minutes ago
Daniel Retweeted Arron Banks
Give Arron a break. Russia probably hadn't occupied Afghanistan for 10 years when he was at school learning about Romans.Daniel added,

Arron Banks @Arron_banks
The Russians didn't invade Afghanistan, Iraq , destabilise Libya and cause the utterly predictable backlash of ISIS. twitter.com/montie/status/807860260509720576
2 replies 11 retweets 26 likes
Reply 2 Retweet 11

Like 26

BigChocFrenzy · 11/12/2016 11:16

Leather trousers provide some light relief - I'm sure we prefer to discuss them on TM, rather than on the Boris hindquarters < shudders >

She is probably hoping to shore up support from the public school Tories, by pandering to their S&M fantasies Grin

I hope she realises that leather trews are terrible fart collectors and need a lot of airing between wears Grin

whatwouldrondo · 11/12/2016 11:17

Elf In touch with what? As the article highlights she will brook no debate or challenge, and is entirely incurious about other countries and cultures, which is a major blindspot if you are about to negotiate an agreement with them that will have lasting implications for our country and risks massive economic harm. She is moving to the right, even of some of her own party. She has done nothing for the "Just managing" except fail to articulate just who they are. She is in touch with the Tory right and that is about it.....

whatwouldrondo · 11/12/2016 11:21

Bigchoc Are you manshaming? Wink

BigChocFrenzy · 11/12/2016 11:21

One of the baffling & scary characteristics of the new worldwide political changes is the adoration of Putin by both the far left - e.g. the stalinist Seamus Milne - and the much more visible lovefest with the far right like Banks, Farage, Trump, Le Pen ....

BigChocFrenzy · 11/12/2016 11:29

whatwoudlrindo Wink No, the embarassment that is Boris, representing us in the world, is quite unique.
His flag-waving arse-stuck-on-wire photo is iconic and will be permanently shown in all retrospectvies of this decade. It seems to summarise Brexit for some European newspapers
What fresh hell of embarassment for the UK that our Foreign Secretary could achieve in leather trousers ... just NO.

SwedishEdith · 11/12/2016 11:32

I'm not sure, tbh, that it's baffling - some is clearly ideologically driven to be anti-US (Milne/hard left) and some is clearly funding (Le Pen and UKIP).

whatwouldrondo · 11/12/2016 11:39

Bigchoc I think the mistake people make is to assume that countries like Russia and China have done an about turn from Communism. Communism only ever took root in a countries existing political culture. Mao was essentially just another Emperor, as was Deng, as is Xi and they all operate within the existing Confucian orthodoxy concerning their mandate to rule. Putin too is directly in a line from Stalin. It might suit Putin to encourage facism in Europe and America politically, so he can advance or defend his power (depending on your perspective) but I don't think you can assume his brand of facism is the same.

BigChocFrenzy · 11/12/2016 11:44

US Democrats are always bitterly disappointed when they lose the White House, always worried about further cutbacks to the tissue-thin US safety net, sometimes about agression abroad.

However, this is the first time - and I can remember US politics back to Tricky Dicky Nixon & Watergate - that many Democrats are genuinely frightened of what a Republican President may do within the USA
They are actually keeping their heads down, afraid to provoke him.

Because he is not a Republican or a Democrat, but someone who surrounds himself with the new fascist hard right.
Even before equal rights, no US President deliberately used racially charged language to gain power.
And it seems that the fascist Putin may have played a part, in such a close election, to make him President.
So, what is he ?

whatwouldrondo · 11/12/2016 11:46

Bigchoc No googleble images of Boris in leather trousers you will be relieved to hear, he goes for a more colourful off duty look Blush

Westministenders. Boris we wish you a Merry Christmas and a Happy Constitutional Crisis?
merrymouse · 11/12/2016 11:54

Another good podcast! (This time for anyone wanting to brush up on American history).

itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-radio-3-documentary/id507979960?mt=2&i=118548985

4 part series from radio 3 on civil war. 90 years of slavery, 100 years of segregation, 50 years then Trump. What next? (Podcasts made in 2012 so made from perspective of America under first black president, not recent events).

I agree with other posters. It's very difficult to untangle events in Britain from world events. (And a Trump specific thread would probably be derailed).

SilentBatperson · 11/12/2016 11:56

Nevertheless, when you are in a position of high power and influence, there's no escaping the fact that what you choose to wear may be taken to convey a message.

And yet the men around TM are no doubt wearing suits that are considerably more expensive than those hideous trousers. I agree with your analysis, but can't help noticing that, as per fucking usual, the appearance of women is politicised in a way that the appearance of men isn't. There's a reason suits are considered more neutral.

BigChocFrenzy · 11/12/2016 11:56

Whatwouldrondo My eyes ! Shock

I agree that the form that fascism takes - in particular the type of leader - is very different, depending on the culture & history of a country.

And any country without a recent democratic tradition is ripe for any dictator, especially because far left & far right share so many psychological characteristics, such as authoritarianism.

However, the Tsar Putin form of fascism is helping the full range of fascist leaders around the worlld, while retaining the loyalty of those who sympathised with the old USSR.
Maybe because an ex-KGB fascist has full access to information about friends & enemies of the USSR and knows how to press their buttons.

BigChocFrenzy · 11/12/2016 12:01

Scathing assessment of May's Brexit muddle & its dangerous consequences by Ann Applebaum (Pulitzer Prize–winner for writings about communism & the Gulag):

" The prime minister has created exactly the sort of vacuum that nature and government abhor.

Her cabinet members offer different proposals on different days"

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/britain-has-no-idea-what-to-do-next-and-thats-dangerous/2016/12/01/1cb38ad2-b7dd-11e6-a677-b608fbb3aaf6story.html?utmm_term=.0cae0b343eef

HesterThrale · 11/12/2016 12:02

Well Jo Maugham's crowd funder for the court case in Ireland has reached its first £70,000 target in a day and a half, so that should go ahead:
www.crowdjustice.org/case/brexit-for-the-100/

whatwouldrondo · 11/12/2016 12:09

The leather trousers spat though does make you question No 10s leadership style

The subsequent text spat between TM's chief of staff and Morgan has leaked (though by MoS so could be the subject of a microscopic retraction next week..... ) . I don't think that I have worked in especially enlightened and polite workplaces but this would be entirely out of order

^"Don’t bring that woman to Downing Street again,” Hill texted Burt, the paper said.

This prompted an equally furious reply direct to Hill from Morgan: “If you don’t like something I have said or done, please tell me directly,” she wrote. “No man brings me to any meeting. Your team invites me. If you don’t want my views in future meetings you need to tell them.”

Hill’s response in turn was: “Well, he just did. So there!”

merrymouse · 11/12/2016 12:13

Re Appelbaum article, I agree that May hasn't explained what on earth Brexit is, but it was Cameron who pretended that 'leave/stay in EU?' was a simple question with a simple answer.

merrymouse · 11/12/2016 12:14

I agree ron, it doesn't inspire confidence.

SilentBatperson · 11/12/2016 12:29

The spat over the leather trousers says nothing good about May's leadership style, but the fact that her 1k trousers were an issue in the first place when male politicos 3k suits aren't is sexism.

Kaija · 11/12/2016 12:32

Perhaps May is trying to harness some of that alt-right "Fascie" chic that seems to be popular in certain circles lately.

www.google.co.uk/amp/www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/london-life/from-milo-yiannopoulos-to-tomi-lahren-meet-the-faces-of-americas-young-altright-pack-a3415301.html%3Famp?client=safari

Mistigri · 11/12/2016 12:52

The spat over the leather trousers says nothing good about May's leadership style, but the fact that her 1k trousers were an issue in the first place when male politicos 3k suits aren't is sexism.

I don't think this is necessarily true - if May wore a £3k skirt or trouser suit I don't suppose anyone would notice.

It certainly is sexist that women's dress is subject to more scrutiny than men's, but I suspect that if Cameron had done a newspaper interview dressed in leather trousers there would have been something of a reaction. As I mentioned above, Cameron's sartorial decision making was much discussed at the time of the royal wedding.

Mistigri · 11/12/2016 13:00

the appearance of women is politicised in a way that the appearance of men isn't.

Where does criticism of Corbyn's dress sense fit into this narrative?

I'm no Corbyn apologist but men are hardly immune from this type of criticism.

SilentBatperson · 11/12/2016 13:13

I don't think this is necessarily true - if May wore a £3k skirt or trouser suit I don't suppose anyone would notice.

Well, the reality is that there's nothing a woman can wear that is as neutral and default as man's business suit. The attention given to Hilary Clinton's trouser suits tells us that, and that's for a form of clothing that is intended as the female equivalent of male business dress. And there is no getting away from the fundamental point that there is widespread shitstorming about a woman wearing an item of clothing that is almost certainly cheaper than the suits worn by her male colleagues. If criticism were simply related to the leather trousers being seen as inappropriate in themselves, the price wouldn't have come into it.

As for Corbyn, he is merely one example of a male politician's attire being scrutinised, alongside dozens of others who go unremarked on. There's can be no denying that women get it more. Their appearance is fair game in a way that's not true of male politicians as a group (although saying that, the crustier lefties are seen as fairer game than most other men in politics- remember Foot?)

whatwouldrondo · 11/12/2016 13:14

I completely agree and the way a politician dresses is part of the brand. Cameron's socks and sandals and oft worn washed out polo shirt sported whilst having a coffee on holiday in Cornwall was as much of a statement, and commented on. Had he turned out in gold leather trousers it would of course have had a resonance around the world only exceeded by Boris on a zip wire or bare chested Putin on a horse..... (Very fortunate my dyslexic brain did the rare thing of spotting a typo and corrected in to on there Blush )

SilentBatperson · 11/12/2016 13:18

Yet Cameron's holiday clothing attracted nothing close to the level of comment that May's trousers have. Or those kitten heels.

Swipe left for the next trending thread