-
Yeah, there is that. The reason they abstained was because they knew they were going to lose though, so don't think it makes much difference.
When walking this tight rope, May's strategy has been to make it to tomorrow. At the time, waving a vote through was seen as less bad than outright losing it and so they chose the less bad option.
I don't really care if the advice is published, but as I'm holding out for a people's vote, anything that pushes that closer is all good for me. This is certainly not helping May's cause.
-
Both BBC and ITV are pushing ahead with plans to host a Sunday evening televised Brexit debate between Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn, despite the physical impossibility of the prime minister and the Labour leader being in two different television studios at the same time.
theguardian
-
Possibly - I don't know.
If I worked in a leaky environment, I'd be tempted to keep advice like 'how to break a legally binding treaty that I'm about to sign up to' verbal, or at least away from something that might possibly be of interest to other parties / the press.
-
Cha, if the UK government [so the Tories atm really] is about to do something sneaky, the only friends it will get going forward are sneaky friends.
Which may not be the honourable type either.
See also this dumb move the Tories made by changing from the conservative wing in the EU parliament to the right-wing. That really went down superwell with Merkel.
They also did vote against Hungary sanctions, so that all suggests steering towards the populist and citizen rights be damned right.
All that can damage the UK as well. But OK...
-
Amazing thread here about a Lizz Truss conversation a Green Party member overheard in a restaurant.
Politicians are entitled to have private conversations & in balance particularly those in cabinet have a responsibility to be open & transparent in their views. Liz Truss, Chief Secretary, speaking loudly in a public restaurant at lunch; /Thread 1/13
— Zack Polanski Ⓥ 🏳️🌈🇪🇺 (@ZackPolanski) December 3, 2018
-
despite the physical impossibility of the prime minister and the Labour leader being in two different television studios at the same time.
May to be in the BBC studio, Corbyn at ITV. Each studio to have a TV playing the opposing channel next on a stand next to the debater.
Communication between each other to be orchestrated via the medium of premium rate phone in numbers. -
Honestly, the sooner Andrea Leadsom disappears from the Tory frontbench, the better.
Leadsom says government has complied with the Commons Brexit legal advice motion. This is curious because is it not the argument used by Cox himself in his letter to John Bercow, the Speaker. He said the government could not fully comply with it because the request was too vague.
Sowing confusion then leaves everyone guessing whether it's intentional or not ...
-
Yes, I thought it would be about the backstop, but it remain to be seen how politically damaging that will be. In this atmosphere of constant scandals, I wonder if it's going to be no more than another distracting skirmish.
Also, Geoffrey Cox won't have written that advice, but presumably signed it off to be submitted.
-
Modern politics appears to be about dissembling, distraction, and the ability to reinterpret everything you do at any stage.
Publication of third party advice, on which you purportedly acted, means that you are pinned down and your narrative is restricted.
Or you could just be called out for making unsupported decisions for your own ends.
Interesting. Thanks. I still wonder how politically damaging that is.
-
Yeah, Dominic Grieve, who knows about this kind of thing, was on C4 news last night saying requiring the government to publish advice from their attorney is madness.
Hehe, coming from ultra-Government loyalist Dominic Grieve I can only assume that his intervention means publishing this advice is exactly the right course of action. :)
-
Because the advice will contain a section called "how we could break the terms of the withdrawal agreement" or something similar - and I imagine the government doesn't want the routes that they have mapped out for screwing the EU made public.
Really? I doubt that very much. Obviously, if you were right that would be a most interesting political development--and despite the odds it would certainly have chances of being politically damaging.
-
The most interesting thing yesterday, of course, was the EU's preliminary opinion, which might foreshadow the findings of the ECJ, that Britain can decide to take the A50 notification back unilaterally.
While it's impossible to predict what will happen, should Labour get into Government by some means or other, it would give them a lot more room for manoeuvre.
-
Also, the Supreme Court rejected the Government's appeal against the Court of Sessions' decision to refer the case to the ECJ. I didn't see that reported separately, but there's a mention in this previously-posted article:
-
Truss: My new vision is all about the roads. We need to push to get company sponsorship for the Top 10 motorways. Like they have in the USA where Burger King sponsor pot holes. We'll wait until the New Year though because obviously now everything is consumed by Brexit.
Belatedly, and kinda beside the point but this was actually Domino's and was a fairly successful marketing stunt only - can't even get simple facts right
-
Yes, obviously I don't actually know what he did or didn't write. I just generally assume that ministers present the work of civil servants. That may well be wrong in this case. Geoffrey Robertson writes:
The foghorn voice of our attorney oft resounded at the Old Bailey, but attorneys general are rarely the authors of their opinions on intricate legal matters. Geoffrey Cox’s opinion will have been cobbled together from the advice, not only of lawyers in his department, but from that of Treasury counsel and probably outside QCs retained at public expense.
branwen:
I think Oliver's point was that he might not have actually written the specific clause, not that he wouldn't have been knowledgeable about it
I didn't have any point about the specific clause in mind, just as above that I assumed it was all, or mostly, someone else's work.
Whether or not he wrote it, May's probably just using him as another fall guy. *cue theme of 'The Fall Guy'*
-
Yes, it's just absurd.
Dammit
c00ps
Scrabble
WillMelling
christianSpaceman
JWestland
Oliver Schick
Soul
Brommers
branwen-
Post a reply
About
EU referendum, brexit and the aftermath
Posted by
But that would mean taking Parliament seriously, which isn't what the Tories do.