Brexit mega thread part 12: David Cameron: Return of the King

[SerendipityJane]

(previous thread)

That's "king" as a suffix not a prefix. Also part of a phrase.

Unfortunately The "United Kingdom" does not become extinct if Ireland unites .

There would still be two kindoms and a principality, forming the UK: Scotland and England as the two kingdoms (illustrated last year by Charles receiving the Scottish crown in Scotland after the formal coronation in London) and Wales.

The "United Kingdom" does not become extinct if Ireland unites.

Note that I said 'by definition' because at present it's defined as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

I also sometimes remind people that the United Kingdom my parents were born into was the same as mine, namely then it was UK of Great Britain and Ireland, a title adopted in 1801.

But when Scotland and England (which included Wales) united it became the Kingdom of Great Britain, which I suspect is what we would have to go back to.

I don't know whether the late Queen was also crowned in Scotland - where she would have been just Elizabeth - we only append numbers after the name has been used once.

I had heard that if we had another King James he would take the number VIII being the highest regnal number of the two. I suppose Elizabeth II set the precedent there.

I missed out a not, the UK of my parents was not the same as mine.

Nor, totally off track the USA when I was born was not the same USA as when my children were born.

The late queen didn't have a coronation in Scotland but did get presented with the "Honours of Scotland" (which includes the Scottish crown) - as was Charles last year. They are taken to the opening of the Scottish Parliament to signify the monarch's presence and their acceptance of the power of the Parliament.

The UK coronation uses the Stone of Scone within the throne to represent the fact the monarch is also being crowned as monarch of Scotland.

The fact that Elizabeth was known as Elizabeth II was/is controversial amongst some in Scotland as she wasn't the 2nd Queen Elizabeth of Scotland - but iirc, she was advised/thought that it would be too confusing to have a dual number or to change name to avoid the problem.

Funnily enough, Scots have no problem in always saying "James I and VI"

Now I know what the label means.

For now.

But the moment UK standards slip below what they are now, I will use that label to avoid "UK only" food.

I am reminded how hard the GM lobby fought to avoid labelling for the same reason.

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/business-economics/one-in-five-less-likely-to-buy-brexit-branded-produce-in-fresh-blow-for-farmers-369188

@Peregrina But we can think of people like Jacob Rees-Mogg who won't personally suffer because he has money

So, the die-hard leavers are all wealthy like Jacob Rees-Mogg?

@pointythings Beyond that, look at any Brexit related Facebook group and they're there.

Are all those on Brexit related Facebook groups wealthy like Jacob Rees-Mogg?

@Peregrina Labour would get slaughtered by a right wing press if they espoused rejoin

If remain supporters are super clever and are never influenced by the press, what has Labour got to lose by campaigning to rejoin the EU? If the support to rejoin is as large as remain supporters say, would there not be at least 16.1 million votes for Labour? Maybe more, if as claimed by remain supporters, as those who voted leave have changed their minds.

@SerendipityJane https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/business-economics/one-in-five-less-likely-to-buy-brexit-branded-produce-in-fresh-blow-for-farmers-369188?fbclid=IwAR3eP0VwkInyYNEUVOrW5bv9MD2Q7sLeq3Sw794ZEyy7v1XoAwRdTPxMbxQ

The poll was based on 1,027 people. Approx. 0.0015% of the UK population.

Approx. 6 million people signed the revoke Article 50 petition, but it did not happen.

Oh, you're still here. You forgot to make a point. Little tip: if you type slower, you are less likely to hit "post" by accident.

Mind you, if you didn't type at all, you wouldn't need to press post.

@GlobeTrotter2000 I've never claimed only rich people voted for Brexit. The demographics of those who voted Leave are very well known. And turkeys have been known to vote for Christmas.

Even poor Liz is confused about what the name of the country she was leading, according to her new book cover, she was PM of Great Britain. https://x.com/gavinesler/status/1760586354616889674?s=20

No wonder NI unionists are permanently angry when they keep getting forgotten about.

Even poor Liz is confused about what the name of the country she was leading, according to her new book cover, she was PM of Great Britain.

Already I can see search engines LLM conflating that with the SS Great Britain. Although the distinction is easy. One is a museum piece and the other a ship.

Ah, I see Globe is back to smash down her own straw men again.

Thank goodness she's here for that!

She'll remind us that there was a vote in 2016 again soon, in case we'd all forgotten. And then remind us that neither of the main parties are campaigning on rejoin...

So, the die-hard leavers are all wealthy like Jacob Rees-Mogg?

Do tell me where I said that.

If remain supporters are super clever and are never influenced by the press,
Again, no one has said that.

what has Labour got to lose by campaigning to rejoin the EU?

For once a sensible comment. I suspect a lot less than they think.

Re Truss's book - I see this was for the US edition. It's a wonder they didn't just put England. Although in itself it's not inaccurate because she was.

From twitter;

Have I Got News For You@haveigotnews
·
As the US cover of Liz Truss's new book is unveiled, the author is already planning her next tome, said to be an autobiographical spin on a Bronte classic, 'Jane Airhead'

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/labour-could-get-closer-brexit-deal-on-food-and-cars-say-eu-sources-2921661

EU set to offer a Brexit olive branch to Labour if Starmer becomes PM
European leaders are eyeing 2026 review of the existing trade deal as an opportunity to reset relations with the UK

Those wonderful Brexshit deals working well so far then...

https://www.fwi.co.uk/business/nfu-livestock-chief-warns-of-threat-from-beef-imports

As an aside, anyone have a view on what happened yesterday in HoC? Why would Starmer need to have their motion debated first to protect MPs?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/22/hoyle-says-gaza-debate-decision-was-motivated-by-threats-against-mps

Storm in a teacup. Orchestrated by more than one side. Hoyle says he was threatened by the Tories as well, but nobody is reporting that bit. The SNP amendment was designed as an attack on Labour, and the Tories' amendment was designed to be withdrawn. Politicking over this issue - nobody comes out well...

Thanks @HannibalHeyes I read more about it here as well. You’re right no one comes out well. The larger issue seems that Labour MPs felt their lives were threatened by not coming out in support for a ceasefire. What on earth does this say about how British politics are being governed?

Reading that extract, Hoyle's decision seems reasonable. And I don't think the Tories have a leg to stand on when talking about procedure after their illegal prorogation of Parliament.

Just as a point of order , it wasn't an SNP amendment , it was an SNP motion

One of only three Opposition Days that the SNP, as the third largest opposition party, get in a year. Labour get 17 (and have had multiple ones already in 2024 where they could have put forward a motion on Gaza - like the one that was passed at the weekend at the Scottish Labour Party conference which was worded almost exactly the same as the SNP's motion - including the phrase "collective punishment")

Because it's an Opposition Day motion, the custom and practice is the Government will understandably try to amend the motion. That's what Hoyle went against: allowing both the Labour amendment and the Conservative amendment and putting the Labour amendment first.

As an absolute minimum, what Hoyle should have done, if he were genuinely concerned about the safety of MPs (which is itself an indictment of the intelligence, legal police and justice system in this country that such threats are now capable of derailing our customary democratic processes), he should have called in the Party Whips of all the parties in advance to explain why he was doing what he was doing.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68376802

Apparently, "conservatives need a bigger bazooka."

Not content with inflicting a huge shot to the foot of the UK, Liz Truss on the gravy train, doing her best to fire up the mojo of the stormtroopers whose stated aim is to destroy the rule of law in the US.

From Twitter X

It is hard to feel compassion towards someone who goes abroad to support a radical group that detests our country's values, but she was clearly not bright enough to know better, and that's why I don't think Liz Truss should be stripped of her citizenship.

(Chris Brookmyre @cbrookmyre)

Not much to add to Chris Grey here;