Westministenders: Slow News Fake News

[RedToothBrush]

Things have been slow whilst we are in proroguation, ahead of next weeks Queen's Speech and the EU summit.

We've been in full spin mode, from the likes of the far right and an unnamed source at No.10.

People seem to be waking up to the reality that its highly unlikely we will get a deal now, unless something significant. And No.10 has worked out the NI problem. FINALLY.

Anyway, if you have a little time this week and you are interested in the history of where technology change and fake news meet and how where we are now is merely things repeating themselves, Ian Hislop's Fake News: A True History, is essential viewing.
www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m00095hv/ian-hislops-fake-news-a-true-history

I really feel strongly this is stuff that should be being taught in schools somehow as its what protects us from extremism.

I thinks so, too, Arse.

Re. Selections & Labour: I feel very mixed about it.
Scrutiny of MPs is a good thing. But the results have been all too predictable. And the selection of candidates for the ensuing re-selection process has been laughably short of democratic. 🤷‍♀️

And clear from this tweet from @PreetKGillMP that the concern is real

My MP ....

I'm watching What Britain Buys and Sells in a Day (BBC iplayer). Can't help wondering if this is to explain to the die hard leavers still watching BBC why it may be a teensy bit tricky post No Deal.

I'm still not hearing anyone explain how we get a new WA through Parliament before 31st October. I'll be happy if we do but it all just seems too last minute not to cause issues - although I suspect the threat of No Deal will swing some MP's regardless of what is in it. It's the ERG/DUP who I can't see budging on most of it. FWIW I think PV is unlikely; the whole benefit for anyone relies on us not having another voice and MP's fearing No Deal enough to 'get Brexit done'.

I see Starmer is now saying any deal needs to be subject to a ref - which seems to ensure Labour get the blame for No Deal to me. If they don't pass whatever WA comes out this week...

I see Starmer is now saying any deal needs to be subject to a ref - which seems to ensure Labour get the blame for No Deal to me. If they don't pass whatever WA comes out this week...

If there’s a deal brought to the HoC, I can’t see no deal happening. I think BJ will judge that sending the “letter” and then going to the country to get a mandate for the deal is better than “no deal”. With a deal in the offing, he’d split the Tories completely asunder if he didn’t.

Of course, it is possible, probably even, that even if a WA is agreed by the EU/UK and passed next Saturday that a short extension is needed to complete the process.

I would love to think that, despite his rhetoric since he has been in the hot seat, he is sensible. I just don't see any evidence for it.

I still think this is an extravagant way to pass the blame. The Labour party seem to be falling for it by suggesting a PV on anything he comes up with. Now, he may well decide a very short extension to get through whatever he decides this week, although I'm dubious, however a PV isn't going to be factored into that so if Labour pushes for that and a longer extension as a result I can see that being a huge issue which he will say forces him to ND.

Besides, even if he did no deal, there’s the Benn Act...

I don't think he can No Deal now. He's been told his own MPs will revolt.
Even if he tried No Deal, was stopped legally, he'd then be forced to campaign in No Deal. And the backbenchers have told him they don't want that.

So we are still assuming he gives a shiny about the law/Benn Act?

I know i've missed a few pages but he hasn't changed that much in 2 weeks surely...? To me this just looks like running down the clock.

But the Benn Act is just prolonging the agony and damage.
It kicks the can down the road
nothing more
as a "no deal" can happen at the end of that extension

Groundhog Day

I don't think he can No Deal now. He's been told his own MPs will revolt. Even if he tried No Deal, was stopped legally, he'd then be forced to campaign in No Deal. And the backbenchers have told him they don't want that.

I think that depends on the outcome of this week’s talks. People are assuming a deal will
be done. That’s far from certain.... If the EU and UK don’t agree to a deal on Friday, BJ will have little option but to campaign on a no-deal platform in a GE campaign as how could he possibly campaign credibly on the basis that he’d get a deal after the past few weeks... It would be beyond ridiculous.

However running on no-deal would be very damaging for him, and he’d lose large numbers of his MPs. Hence why he’s desperate for a deal whilst all the time pumping out the “do or die” rhetoric.

Nothing can be ruled out at this stage

BJ could give the green light to having another 50 MPs deselected, given that he has already expelled 22.
The local party associations are very much in favour of No Deal and are putting great pressure on some MPs already, including on those who voted for the WA before

Or if he wants to keep them on board, he could offer a PV on WA vs No Deal and demand that every MP candidate sign up to honour the result

Or he could face criminal charges of Misconduct in Public Office and be forced to resign.

Or .....

The chances of a new WA being agreed are slim, going by reports of what actually happened the last couple of days

It really looks more like the EU wanting to show Ireland that it is going to the outermost limits to avoid No Deal
and BJ wanting to show the UK electorate ditto

I was wrong about the Comres margin of error
its higher than I thought
www.comresglobal.com/our-work/margin-of-error-calculator/
"for 19 out of 20 polls, the error rate will be within the following"
and most of their polls are less than 2000 people
so its around 7%

It's one of the reasons the numbers are now there in Parliament for a PV.

(Of course, that changes if he does get a deal.)

His backbencher know he might win a GE- they might well save their seats - but many of them genuinely fear the consequences for themselves and their families of No Deal.

They've gone public in a couple of cases, but most are making their discomfort clear quietly.

That's one of the main reasons the numbers are there for a PV.

So we are still assuming he gives a shiny about the law/Benn Act?

It’s irrelevant whether he gives a shiny or not, it’s the Law, and if he doesn’t comply there will be consequences. If he persistently simply refused to sign, he would be in contempt of court and it’s no exaggeration that he would be given a prison sentence.... The court would likely empower someone else to sign on his behalf. I can’t see how BJ could possibly remain PM inside HMP Pentonville!

Oaken
How many years would that lot take ?

It’s irrelevant whether he gives a shiny or not, it’s the Law, and if he doesn’t comply there will be consequences

But what could happen is that the poor EU will be stuck having to make a decision assessing where the PMs actions stand legally. Then the Leave lot will use that as reinforcement of the myth of subservience to the EU in all respects, which was always false.

Exactly lonely - he runs down the clock and we No Deal because our systems are far too slow to stop anything on the day if he suddenly pulls out of any other apparent WA.

What happens next is anyone's guess, but we will have Brexited.

I still think this is an extravagant way to pass the blame. The Labour party seem to be falling for it by suggesting a PV on anything he comes up with

The thing is - no govt should be reliant on opposition votes to get their legislation through. And no opposition party should be expected to vote for that legislation. In a hung parliament they need to operate with consensus and compromise. Not drive the country over a cliff because they don't have the power to do what they want. The reason they don't have this power is because the country voted in 2017 to reject this vision. Currently they're not managing to compromise or build consensus - and they haven't ever since the election. The idea that - following the passing of the W.A - a tory led hung parliament (currently the likeliest outcome) - will suddenly start compromising 'because they have to' is frankly laughable. They already 'have to;' they're not. Hence the stalemate. Passing the W.A just means exactly more of the same stalemate until we end up back on the cliff edge this time next year as the transition period runs out.

Keir Starmer saying 'yes we'll pass the w.a if you put it back to a public vote' is compromise They will allow something in return for something else. That is exactly what compromise is. If the tories won't do that - then it is not labour who are allowing no deal because the people who caused this from start to finish refuse to put the gun down and meet in the middle. It's the tories refusing to meet in the middle and preferring to drive the country over the cliff.

then I expect the only campaign will be a GE one, with Tories promising to Invoke again immediately

Assuming a GE is immediate (by no means assured or necessary - FTPA) they can run on that. Thing is - the vast majority of the general public are 'bored of brexit'. When they say they want it done - they mean they want it to go away, they want to stop hearing about it - not they desperately actually want to leave (even people in that comres poll saying they support just leaving on Oct 31st will be saying it out of boredom rather then being a true beleaver). So if it is canned and we don't have to hear about it any more - the tories can try and resurrect it in their manifesto ... but it might not get them very far. Add in the fact that the brexit party will also be doing the same thing and can point out that the tories have already had three years and failed on brexit ... you're looking at a split vote. And they won't win enough remainer or even soft brexit tories back to them on that manifesto to make up the difference.
The Lib Dems will reap the rewards of that.

Meanwhile Labour campaigns on the NHS and nationwide regeneration after a decade of punishing tory austerity...

How many years would that lot take ?

It would happen in days. The Act is clear. If he didn’t sign, he’d be summoned back to court very quickly and a judge could impose an immediate sentence.

Not complying with the Benn Act would be dealt with in the civil, not criminal, court. Most likely the Scottish court which will PP the letter for BoZo.

If he's guilty of misconduct in public office, this is a criminal charge and he'd have to go through the usual timescales for investigation / plea / trial etc.

We don't really have days. All BoZo has to do is "play nice" for a couple of weeks and then suggest Labour are the ones to blame (possibly by holding a long extension over him meaning he can't sign the WA) because they won't agree to it without a PV. All he has to do is make the last day as confusing as possible and it will take any Court weeks to get a case with real evidence against him. For all we know he could be in US on the 31st on some 'urgent' matter (oh look we are helping them muchly with war!) and claim someone didn't send the paperwork.

And yes, he shouldn't be allowed to do it, but he can with the lag in our systems. At what point to our police force recognise him as a criminal? Does he have weeks of still being PM even though he has acted illegally? If we don't know the minutiae I can bet BoZoCum does.