Westminstenders: It's like a bloody aviary

[RedToothBrush]

From Flamingos to Yellowhammer and Black Swans.

The Tory Remainer is now a Dodo. Instead the party in inhabited by disaster capitalist Vultures. Jeremy Corbyn, meanwhile, has been labelled by the right wing press as a Chicken. The SNP would very much like Boris Johnson to be a Jailbird. The LDs are keen to sing like Canaries about the contents of BlackSwan. The Br

And the Tower of London is starting to get very jumpy about the whereabouts and location of its Ravens.

I would not, however, advise eating urban wild pigeons if things get desperate, from what I know of their health.

Re Johnson pissing off the ERG if he doesn't No Deal on Oct 31st, and them ditching him, am I wrong in remembering rumours that Disaster Capitalist ERG creatures actually only wanting to take us to the very brink of No Deal to make money, and pulling back,* just in time, to make the real money* ?
🤔🤔Anyone???

I’m sure all eventualities will be covered Tobee.

Comments on this please.
DGS 14 brought a letter home yesterday about a school football team trip to Ireland next April. Deposit has to be paid before 31st October.
Cross Holyhead to Dublin. Some of the time spent in Belfast also. Travelling by coach. 3 nights, 4 days in all.
I’m not particularly worried that he will be harmed but do think it’s strange of the school to arrange this trip now.
I’m going to ask on Monday if they have a contingency plan.
Anything else I should think of ?

#BritishIndependance

is trending on twitter

Mr Lewis is in charge of an enormous spreadsheet tracking no deal planning.

You don't do complex project planning on a fucking spreadsheet.

These people are such amateurs.

Pmk

Even if the EU is asked for an extension, what is the chance that they would give it to us?

Even if the EU is asked for an extension, what is the chance that they would give it to us?

Thé EU can see what the opposition alliance is trying to achieve with extra time: WA version / GE. They are not going to refuse because they do not want to be responsible for a No Deal Brexit.

Mr Lewis is in charge of an enormous spreadsheet tracking no deal planning.

He sounds like one of these managementspeak morons who confuses the tools with the job that needs doing. The sort of twat who thinks buying an expensive motorbike and leathers suddenly makes him Barry Sheen.

How likely do you think it is the idea that did the round a few days ago of them coming back to us saying “we give you an extension, but a couple of years, instead of this 3 months by 3 month slow death, get yourself together, and at the end of the 2 years with whatever government/referendum/plan of action. Or you can leave now”.
This should call the Tory bluff out, because actually I don’t think they have the guts to do no deal...but it would also shift a lot of votes to the brexit party. I’m not sure it’s a real party and would last 2 years, still....

If Private Eye are to be believed, the idea for the Queen to remain in Balmoral was actually hers - rather than travel to London which would have immediately looked out of the ordinary (and thus run counter to Boris "this is everyday parliamentary procedure" bollocks).

Personally I can't see where the Queen was when she signed the prorogation off makes any difference. If it does I can only imagine it's because she was signing it as "Queen of Scotland, not of England", but (as I think we've established) my knowledge of law - any law isn't that detailed.

However, in the event it does make some sort of legal/material difference, then it raises the game massively. It is inconceivable that Her Majesty could be unaware of such a fact. Which means that either Boris and chums (JRM in particular, since it was he who actually delivered the request in person) have been spectacularly ill-advised, or they were aware there was a significance but in keeping with the "fuck Scotland" theme of Brexit decided to ignore it.

Has anyone any idea what is going on with the SCOTUK case as regards timing ? Are they deliberating it as we speak and are going to deliver a verdict on Tuesday ? Or is Tuesday just the first day of the case ?

I was involved in a discussion today with people with a range of views. Someone was saying that a reason he voted to Leave was because the EU drafted laws that were badly written and that it was impossible to change them once they had been ratified.

I was under the impression that it was up to our MEPS to play their role if a law / directive was deemed to be 'bad law' - or a law that people needed changing. In the UK, we can elect politicians in a party who can change laws - but his argument was that it was impossible to change laws once they had become law.

Does anyone know a counter argument to this? It's not something I know about really - I was under the impression that was what we had MEPs for.

@woodpigeons , ask them about health insurance because the EHIC card won't be valid. Obviously in Belfast they will still be covered by NHS. My dd is going to France on a school trip next year.

Thanks Bellini I’ll do that. When my children have gone to the eu without us I’ve always taken out an extra insurance to top up the EHIC. Doesn’t cost much and covers them for all eventualities.

choma Our MPs can and do update / correct the laws coming from the EU
e.g. often gold-plate them to add things they want and then blame the EU

I was involved in a discussion today with people with a range of views. Someone was saying that a reason he voted to Leave was because the EU drafted laws that were badly written and that it was impossible to change them once they had been ratified.

If you can provide the examples they gave, it would be easier to comment. But absent that (as we should know) the mechanism to enforce EU laws is not that strong. Hence France thumbing it's nose at the UK over beef.

It's also something that the UK is (or was ?) uniquely protected from, because our upper/second chamber actually has access to judges as members. If we bothered to listen to them.

In fact, to be precise, does the EU have "laws" ? I thought it was better described as having regulations which members states are then expected/required to sign into national law (because each member states internal constitution is unique and sovereign). E.g the smoking ban (which the UK chose to make the most stringent in Europe).

The EU doesnt have laws. They have regulations that ALL members states have to include in their onw laws.
So what happens is that each state will then make the EU regulation a law the way that works for them (aka they might want to make it more stringent but they cant make it less stringent).
They also have about 7 years, if i remember well, to do so which means that every time people are surpised at a new 'law' from the EU, they shoud never have been.

At least thats my understading. Maybe someone can correct me/give more information on that one?

I think one thing that came from the discussion was the real lack of knowledge about the role of the EU, how it works, how directives and regulations work and its link to Governments.

I don't know a lot about it - and it was easy for people to exploit this in the referendum campaign.

Btw the eu cant have laws because its not a country. Each country part of the EU keeps its independance on a legal pov.

So what happens is that each state will then make the EU regulation a law the way that works for them (aka they might want to make it more stringent but they cant make it less stringent

And if people think that a regulation is too stringent and is unworkable, can a regulation be changed down the line at EU level - and who would have the power to change regulations?

I know that I can vote for a political party and they can change UK law, alter regulations in the UK if they think they're bad.

I was under the impression that an MEP could do the same, if they can get enough votes together. But I am unsure as to how the European Parliament works.

Does anyone know a counter argument to this?

As I said, without an example, no.

To be honest, now my brain has caught up with my fingers, I'm suspecting that gem is a slightly more sophisticated (I am being liberal with my language if not views today) version of "taking back control". It sounds clever - almost true. But will never be backed up with any hard evidence, as usual. If it starts popping up a lot, then it's a sign that Leavers have upped their game in the 3 years we've spend not leaving the EU.

I've read about the location of the Queen thing discussed elsewhere, and have been assured it makes no legal difference where she is. She's always above the law, and the law of both Scotland and England applies to the PM's advice because he is giving it to the monarch of both nations. I think.

I also think that the message, Corbyn won’t last forever but this madness will has resonated with some people.

I’m hearing this from people too. My
Mum is a Remainer but has always voted Conservative, she’ll be voting Labour this time.