Westminstenders: The Tory Party Spectacular

[RedToothBrush]

A row over parliamentary language and conduct and how MPs are afraid of extremists has over shadowed talk of Brexit.

Cummings has said if you don't want to leave without a deal, vote for a deal.

Yet there isn't a Johnson approved one in front of the Commons and the EU are utterly despairing of Johnson's blank non papers and his full on Trump bullshit.

Then there's the threats to the rule of law.

Apparently there are five known suggestions to bypass the Benn Act and refuse to ask for an extension.
See Twitter Thread Here

This weekend sees the start of the Tory Party Conference. With a parliamentary vote to block a recess, its rather scuppered plans for the rest of the conference. Johnson's planned speech at the conference clashes with PMQ so he may well not attend the Commons.

Expect the conference to be.... Er... Inflammatory...

These threads have been moving so fast that I'm not sure if this article, from a couple of weeks ago, has been posted, about how Cummings is misapplying game theory.

One analogy that I think could have been strengthened within the article was the one about two cars playing chicken. It's not two cars: it's a car (the UK) up against a juggernaut . So while the juggernaut might sustain a bit of damage if neither vehicle swerves, it will still fundamentally be ok. Whereas the car will be smashed to smithereens - as will its passengers

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-dominic-cummings-game-theory-boris-johnson-parliament-supreme-court-a9106926.html

The comments are pretty good too.

A similar article was posted a while back, and I commented at the time that it was all very well, but Cummings isn't actually interested in winning the face off with the juggernaut.

The game of chicken is just to keep everyone distracted while he's across town robbing a bank.

Cummings is after dismantling the state. The bickering over Brexit is merely a tool for him.

Talking of burning effigies even only as a “joke” just sinks us to their level.

I went to that Lewes bonfire once. It creeped me out a little tbh whatever the intentions.

Was just watching that bbc doc on the Cameron years where BJ describes his support for leave as being like a toad under the harrow.

That bloke is obsessed with effing Kipling, remember all that dodgy imperialist stuff as foreign secretary? It did however remind me of this in the Epitaphs of War

A DEAD STATESMAN

I could not dig: I dared not rob:
Therefore I lied to please the mob.
Now all my lies are proved untrue
And I must face the men I slew.
What tale shall serve me here among
Mine angry and defrauded young?

As Marriane Hyde said once you set a mob against Parliament be careful if you then become Parliament.

Just catching up - @Mistigri I am so torn on this and vacillate quite often. I would prefer your approach but am really now just scared by what is happening. I'm in classic appeaser territory really.

I saw the Farage conference booing at the name of Anna Soubry & the level of venom terrifies me. I know it's a small audience but I can't imagine that level of anger unless someone had harmed me personally.

One of the qualities associated with the UK used to be tolerance ( and political moderation). I despair.

I'm struggling with the idea of any Brexit at the moment, as it basically rewards the leave side for their behaviour, which is the worst possible outcome, in my humble opinion. All it would do is send a clear message to all and any that want to try the same trick again to get what they want is as long as they lie, abuse the democratic process, cause untold misery and threaten more along with violence on the streets then you'll get what you want. And with each passing day it seems obvious that was the real motivation behind "Brexit".

Good point perking - I'd forgotten you'd made it (and that I agreed with you )

The hedge funders have already made a fortune from the vacillating £ and the state of the Uk economy. Whether or not Brexit happens, the foundations of UK democracy and society have been rocked, possibly even irreparably damaged , which ties in with Cummings apparent desire to "tear things down".

The observations yesterday that his time in Russia coincided with the rise of the oligarchs and the disaster capitalism picking over the remains of the USSR were illuminating

Remember, Cummings is still meant to have that operation after 31st October - his wife insists!

Thanks for the new thread. They are moving disconcertingly quickly!

This has probably already been mentioned, but is it the case that BoJo asked Cummings to work for him, or was BoJo TOLD that he would be employing Cummings? Could it be the case that rather than working for BoJo, Cummings is actually his handler.

Which begs the question: who does Cummings work for?

This on Reuters today - most of it possibly taken from these threads:

Explainer: Looking for loopholes - How could Johnson avoid delaying Brexit? https://reut.rs/2mePom6]

I wonder who reads these threads outside of MN?

Specifically, in politics.

The sad thing I wanted to share with you is that, no matter what we think and hope now, real damage to the fabric of the society has been done already. There is no going back exactly where we were before 2016, some things can’t be unsaid or unheard. When a country goes through a war with an external enemy, the peace process is often long and complicated, particularly (as the Brits haven’t experienced in large numbers, but the rest of Europe has) the enemy was IN your house. When the war isn’t an external war but a civil war, the wounds are deeper, and the enemy probably shared your school, your GP, your swings at the playground. Ask anyone in Yugoslavia or in Africa or Syria. Peace is possible, but IMO it takes a much greater effort of self-analysis and forgiveness because essentially you were at war with your next door neighbour or your brother in law.
We’re not there yet, but the signs are pointing towards that direction, to me. Not a fully fledged civil war, I hope it’ll stay “just” a constitutional and “war of wars” but I’m very worried

(Words. War of words!)

I think the PV is going to happen.

It'll be Remain versus something else.

I'll be voting Remain.

I won't be voting for 'the other' option because, frankly, at this stage, no 'other option' is going to please all of the 52%. So voting for 'the other' option is a pointless compromise.

@cherin I get where you are coming from :(

My first thought of a controversial effigy at Lewes was Prince Andrew. I don't think Boris, Farage etc would be seen as controversial though I think in this climate it's really not wise to have a politician.

I've just thought of this, so it might well be stupid, but what about an extension which then decides on having a PV and how to have it. Have a variety of options. But no remain option????

I'm still a remainer, don't want to leave, think it could be damaging, would rather have a people's vote with remain but... I could see the no remain option working. But is that hopelessly naive still?? 🤔

Robert Peston @Peston

^Lots of people think Cummings wants to blow everything up. For what it is worth, I think he sincerely believes that a second referendum would lead to much greater civil disorder and damage to the fabric of UK than a no-deal Brexit. He may be wrong, possibly grotesquely...
Robert Peston so. But I talked with him about this long before he joined government. And I am in no doubt this is his conviction. I raise this because we need a rational debate about the costs and benefits of the limited choices we face, before it is too late^

Let’s not forget this was @theresa_may’s position throughout her time as prime minister. Until recently it was a mainstream view

There are three obvious options for a third referendum:

1. WA vs Remain
2. WA vs No Deal
3. No Deal, WA and Remain on a Single Transferable Vote

All have their problems of legitimacy and popular acceptance.

You then have the question of the franchise: 16 & 17 y/o's, UK Expats in EU (as in a general election), EU expats in UK (an in an EU election), other territories in addition to Gib; Channel Isles, IoM, dependent tys such as Anguilla, Montserrat and BVI, all dependent on frictionless trade with neighbouring French & Ducth EU islands.

Then the campaign and its rules. Will there be an 'unofficial' Leave.EU campaign again alongside the official Vote Leave. Will ASA rules be enforced. Will the government take a stance of be neutral.

It's a bugger.

UK Expats in EU (as in a general election),

Most U.K. in EU won't get a vote. Either disenfranchised by the 15 year rule or by the unreliability of postal voting. Proxy only works if you still have ties to your old constituency.

If there wasn't a 'remain' option what would the other options be? So far there is the W.A or no deal. Don't need a PV for that - if that was all that was on the table the remain politicians would suck it up and vote for the W.A - no public vote needed.

You can't put on options like Norway ++, Canada+ etc because these deals have not been negotiated. It is no further along than the 2016 referendum when people voted for whatever they imagined leave meant. A referendum with these options would have to be held far in the future when precisely what each of these options means and what is possible has been hammered out and then adequate information given to the people (assuming this is a referendum done in good faith attempting to end to the impasse - and not another botch job that solves nothing). This would require a lengthy extension. At which point your 4 years down the road from the original referendum but still insisting that the answer given four years ago must be upheld so no option to actually change your mind ... why?

And of course a referendum on various brexit options that doesn't include remain disenfranchises the 48% completely. I will never vote for any form of brexit - I'll spoil my ballot. Not in my name. Not ever. Not for any reason. If we're going back to a public vote because we are at an impasse 4 years down the line* then you can't just write off the preferred option of 16.8 million people. (It would have been different if they had held this vote immediately after the original one ... though even then including a remain option would have been more democratic, because a democracy which cannot change its mind ceases to be a democracy.)

*This is different to not including no deal on a ballot and so disenfranchising no dealers. No one was ever promised a no deal brexit (indeed we were told no such thing could ever happen). Leavers would still have a leave option to vote for. It is not disenfranchisement if the thing you want is impossible (in the sense that we can't have no deal forever - one day there will have to be a deal) and unsustainable and therefore left off the ballot.

Thats why I think Labour has the only credible version on offer

Thanks for that reply pretzels. Looks like a pretty comprehensive answer.

I certainly know that trying to get people to understand all the Remain options would be pretty difficult for most people (me definitely included) if this could have happened at any point in the process.

My question came out of desperation and answering the question where people say "why should Leave have to win twice, it's not best of 3, yada yada"

It all takes me back to why it was such a stupid question to ask voters in the first place. But that doesn't get us any further along.