Westministenders: The Return of Parliamentary Sleaze?

[RedToothBrush]

Brexit is quietly going round and round in ever decreasing circles.

The story is that the European parliament will not agree to a transition period beyond 1st January 2020.

The third minister responsible for getting the Repel Bill through the Lords has quit. There are now nearly 400 amendments. It is scheduled for 6 days parliamentary time in the Commons from this coming week. With another 2 possible the following week. Rather bravely AFTER the budget. Bored with May, CVs are being submitted for the position of Chancellor.

Interest Rates are looking likely to rise next week too with the message being 'this is as good as it gets'.

Another team of MPs has gone to the EU to see if they can check up on May and her team. This is unlikely to work as Nicola Sturgeon came across a brick wall.

And then there are the many many distractions from it all.

Catalonia has declared independence, which will consume EU time and energy.

There are rumours that the first prosecution in Trump Russia will be Monday (Guess who is currently in the US. Yep, the gurning one). And there are increasing muttering about Russia over here, with Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg being called to respond to a Select Committee investigation into Fake News.

And then there's the sleaze. Jared O'Mara seems to be the first in the queue. There are rumours more will be outed in several parties. Suggestions include May's right hand man Damien Green who was previously named in 2008. And the Tory Whips have a 'sleaze list' which suggests they know whats going on, but have done nothing.

This morning we have Gove making ill advised jokes about Weinstein in this political climate. With Neil Kinnock laughing heartily in response.

Anything that happens will be political to discredit opponents not because there is a change of attitude towards the treatment of women. We know this, because of who is leading the charge on this. The skeletons are being dusted off out the cupboard rather than exposed for the first time in dramatic fashion.

Things, could take a very unexpected turn against this background.

Don't bet against it.

Law and Policy‏*@davidallengreen*
So: UK ministers do not know whether they are bound or not to publish Brexit reports which they say are damaging but have not read.

Right.

Maybe impact study is already obsolete?

Food is already “rotting in the fields” of East Anglia due to a shortfall of seasonal farm workers – making the vital supply of labour the most urgent issue to address for Brexit policymakers

www.edp24.co.uk/business/farming/food-is-rotting-in-the-fields-nfu-deputy-president-minette-batters-demands-urgent-action-on-seasonal-labour-shortfall-1-5259925?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Social_Icon&utm_campaign=in_article_social_icons

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has launched a legal challenge to block the publication of a series of reports into Universal Credit.

www.politics.co.uk/news/2017/11/01/dwp-fights-to-block-publication-of-universal-credit-docs

Don't get too excited. Starmer has proposed a 'summary' of the impacts, and left it to the (govt-majority) Brexit Select Committee to decide what can be left in or out of a summary... plenty of scope for foul play there.

Food is already “rotting in the fields” of East Anglia due to

the upside-down breaking through ?

What the deputy speaker said about motions of this kind normally being seen as binding

And here is the full quote from Eleanor Laing, the deputy speaker, when she said that in the past a motion of this kind was seen as binding

A motion of this kind has in the past been seen as effective or binding. That does not mean that I am making a ruling at this point about the nature of the motion before us today. I will reiterate that what I said before, that while it is correct for the chair to make a ruling on what happens here in the chamber, it is for the government to decide how the government will proceed having considered the opinions of the House

It would of course be quite wrong for the government not to pay any attention to a decision taken by this House. But the way in which the minister interprets what he and his colleagues should do after the House has expressed an opinion is a matter not for the chair, but for the minister

Would be wrong go the government. That'll be a no then.

'wrong of the government'

Walker suggests Brexit impact reports could be published in summary or redacted form

Here is the key quote from Robin Walker, the Brexit minister, where he suggested that the Brexit impact assessment reports could be published in summary, or in redacted form, if the Labour motion is published. (See 4.38pm.) He told MPs:

If this motion were to pass, we would need to reflect on these various constraints and conflicting responsibilities [ie, the need not to release information that might undermine the government’s negotiating position] when it comes to passing information to the committee for exiting the European Union. And I take note of the points [Keir Stamer] made about looking at redaction and summary as an approach. And I think, given the generosity of the approach that he has taken in that regard, we will not be opposing this motion today

Absolute bollox.

As soon as this article went live, the byline site went down.

Will there be anything left after the redaction?

@JolyonMaugham
Look, this stuff is arcane and complicated. Like writing sonnets in Aramaic. So treat this thread with care. #SecretBrexitStudies
The following extracts are from Erskine May: the Bible of Parliamentary Procedure. And concern Labour's funny not funny motion. /1
The first thing to note is that the decision whether to release the Secret Brexit Studies is one for the Executive to take. /2
And the Executive is basically borrowing the Queen's power. /3
What Labour seems to be doing is asking the Queen to exercise her power to release the Secret Brexit Studies. /4
And if Parliament agrees - as we know now it will - to ask the Queen, the Queen will have to respond. /5
So the question seems to be whether the Queen will ignore Parliament and refuse to take back her Executive power from the Government. /6
That would (seem to me to) create something of a constitutional crisis. /7
It also seems undemocratic. By announcing they are not going to oppose the vote the Tories are accepting the Commons supports it. ENDS

LH Boris is a demogorgon.

We're all rooting for you, MrsHoolies

@J_amesp
I can confirm @Byline_Media has been hacked, deliberately. The site has been taken completely offline. We are working on a fix right now.

pointythings

@paulwaugh
I'm told Govt have asked Labour to pull their motion if they agree to Brexit papers being published in redacted form.

@tnewtondunn
I understand the Govt will now agree to publish the 58 impact assessments - but redacted of anything that prejudices the negotiation.

?

The more they haven't wanted to publish them the more I have wanted to see them.

If they are redacted I suspect nothing of any substance will be left. Then there will be a petition to release the unredacted versions and so it will go on.

This will likely be a massive anticlimax.

@faisalislam
Shadow Dexeu minister Paul Blomfield refuses to withdraw Brexit motion - reiterates demands for full unredacted reports for Dexeu Committee

I've never heard of Paul Blomfield before but I'm liking his style .

@faisalislam
Motion to force Government to publish the Brexit impact assessments to Dexeu Committee is passed unanimously

Kudos to Bercow.

I quite fancy John Bercow

Wow (to forcing publication of the impact assessments and mrsreynolds's last post ).

Mrs R