This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Visit the current forum | Forum Rules
|
Originally posted by davidpercival
The point is that the MPs themselves normally decide on the break and how long it is. In this instance the decision has been taken out of their hands and been decided by the Crown. The last tine a King did that he ended up on the block. I can understand some people thinking Johnson's actions are acceptable but don't try to pretend it is anything other than the The Remain politicians were aware that Parliament does not sit from mid Sep to mid Oct due to the conference season. If they were so bothered about parliamentary time why did they not cancel their party conferences so their diaries were clear? I repeat again that amount of extra time that Parliament is not sitting is 3-4 days. Of course it's a tactic by Boris so what were the Remainers doing yesterday? They were planning on how to sabotage the governments timetable. It's politics.
One more point |
|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
Ian Dale has just explained that Parliament doesn't sit mid Sept - mid Oct and hasn't for many years. It all gets technical as some of it is called recess and some prorogation, the bottom line is that Parliament doesn't sit. All Johnson has done is extend this period by about 3-4 days from the normal time. He also pointed out that this session of Parliament is the longest for 400 years and we are overdue a Queen's speech. Much ado about nothing. BS. There were already moves to ensure that Parliament did not recess this year, as they normally do during the party conference season. Johnson has just taken away that option. It won't be the last move in this game of political chess and as Parliament control the rules they will make the last move.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
|
Jeremy Corbyn. Wants to abolish the Monarchy yet is begging the Queen to side with him?
Pro USA & Israel |
|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
BS. There were already moves to ensure that Parliament did not recess this year, as they normally do during the party conference season. Johnson has just taken away that option. It won't be the last move in this game of political chess and as Parliament control the rules they will make the last move. Ha Ha the last whimpers of a desperate beaten man. Three years Parliament have had to sort this out, It's of their own making f*** EM.....
Pro USA & Israel |
|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
When the EU eventually economically collapses being outside limits our exposure.
Edited by Stirlingsays (28 Aug 2019 2.43pm)
Kayla did Anfield & Old Trafford |
|
|
Originally posted by PalazioVecchio
|
|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
I've already answered this thicko. Ah, because 6% of businesses export to the EU? And if I said that 6% actually employs 53.7% of all employees in the UK, would you be able to disprove that? If I then went on to say that many of the microbusinesses and SMEs are suppliers to exporters and will be indirectly strongly affected would you like to argue that one? I think we have already established you have never studied Logic.
|
|
|
Originally posted by steeleye20
For those afficianados of parliamentary democracy, there is an official 'proguration ceremony'. Yes, ermine gowned Lords and Ladies 'doff their head-gear' to each other, wow how kinky...and being totally unelected of course gives a whole new dimension to parliamentary sovereignty. Procreation surely, that's why they have to doff their kit.
|
|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Worried? For myself and my own future, not at all. For my wife's, my children, grandchildren, great grandchild, my country and it's proud democracy yes I am. As everyone ought to be. However, not actually really worried as I believe that our system, which has long stood the test of time, will overcome this and triumph in the end. The more accurate word is disgusted at the opportunist tactics being employed in the interests of a very small elite hiding themselves under a populist cloak. This stinks of Trump. Wow. After all the stunts your side have pulled over the three years, you have some f***ing brass neck.
|
|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
Ah, because 6% of businesses export to the EU? And if I said that 6% actually employs 53.7% of all employees in the UK, would you be able to disprove that? If I then went on to say that many of the microbusinesses and SMEs are suppliers to exporters and will be indirectly strongly affected would you like to argue that one? I've written in it, which is more than your sorry arse has done. Once again, I've answered this.....larger companies will adjust to whatever the new dynamics are. This country will continue to do well economically after an adjustment period....regardless of the EU position. If we have 'no deal'.....which I doubt....it will ultimately be a more competitive trading environment for them. That partly explains your hatred for the US on these boards because you hate it that the UK will continue to be a coveted market regardless of the spectre of the EU.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
|
Originally posted by steeleye20
(Tommy Cooper). Leaving aside Brexit for a moment there is nothing to discuss in Parliament. We have a new PM and he has new legislation he wants to pass he cannot introduce that to Parliament until the Queen's speech. So what are MPs going to be talking about before then? OK back to Brexit until the EU offer Johnson concessions again there is nothing to discuss. Every option has already been rejected by Parliament. If a deal is on the cards the most likely time will be mid October by which time Parliament will be back and can debate and vote. If no deal then the same applies. Of course Johnson has picked the timetable that is most favourable to him that's the perks of being the government. If some how the opposition stop prorogation I hope that the media keeps watch on the HOC and counts how many days during September and October the chamber is nearly empty? There shouldn't be any because the opposition are so desperate to keep Parliament going and debating and voting, yeah right.
One more point |
|
|
Originally posted by Jimenez
Ha Ha the last whimpers of a desperate beaten man. Three years Parliament have had to sort this out, It's of their own making f*** EM..... Me being "beaten" is of no consequence. It happens about 25% of the time on the bowling green. Democracy won't be beaten. 3 years is but a blink of an eye for our democracy.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
|
Originally posted by davenotamonkey
Wow. After all the stunts your side have pulled over the three years, you have some f***ing brass neck. What "stunts"? I see none at all. I see plenty of attempts to rightly assert Parliamentary supremacy.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
|
Originally posted by davidpercival
You seem to have delusions of grandeur. Who appointed you the spokesperson for "the majority". Anyone applauding Johnson's actions in closing down parliamentary debate need to answer the question if they would feel the same if Corbyn was PM and he wanted to force through a policy as controversial as this one. When the referendum was held nobody was voting on leaving the EU without an agreement. Quite the opposite in fact. We were told a deal would be easy to achieve and we could have the Norway option if we wanted. The only question was in principle whether we wanted to stay or go and Johnson and Farage are re-writing history about what they said at the time. Let's see shall we. Under your hypothetical "question", you are missing the small nugget that Corbyn would already have an ACT OF PARLIAMENT that encodes this very policy, in law, in black and white, with Royal Assent granted. Corbyn would have in fact won the vote 494-122 to put this on the statute books. Now, to come back to your question. If the MPs felt so strongly about this "controversial policy", perhaps they shouldn't have voted in full knowledge that this is a permitted, viable and legal outcome of that act. It would sound to me then, that MPs "didn't know what they were voting for" (oh, the irony) when the bill was presented for: - a first reading If that were the case, in your hypothetical question, then I would have little sympathy with myself, or those MPs moaning that it is "THE END OF DEMOCRASSY!!z! ZOMG!!" when the HOC overwhelmingly voted for the bill to become law. But then, I imagine I have a somewhat skewed take on the whole democracy thing, being a thick, racist "Brexs***ter".
|
|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
What "stunts"? I see none at all. I see plenty of attempts to rightly assert Parliamentary supremacy. ...and this is exactly why I stopped posting on this thread. What's the point in engaging when you come up against this level of denial.
|
|
|
I hate dictators and Bojo is doing his utmost to become one.
|
|
|
Originally posted by davenotamonkey
Let's see shall we. Under your hypothetical "question", you are missing the small nugget that Corbyn would already have an ACT OF PARLIAMENT that encodes this very policy, in law, in black and white, with Royal Assent granted. Corbyn would have in fact won the vote 494-122 to put this on the statute books. Now, to come back to your question. If the MPs felt so strongly about this "controversial policy", perhaps they shouldn't have voted in full knowledge that this is a permitted, viable and legal outcome of that act. It would sound to me then, that MPs "didn't know what they were voting for" (oh, the irony) when the bill was presented for: - a first reading If that were the case, in your hypothetical question, then I would have little sympathy with myself, or those MPs moaning that it is "THE END OF DEMOCRASSY!!z! ZOMG!!" when the HOC overwhelmingly voted for the bill to become law. But then, I imagine I have a somewhat skewed take on the whole democracy thing, being a thick, racist "Brexs***ter".
Parliament is sovereign. Prime Ministers are not.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
|
Originally posted by gerry theagle
I hate dictators and Bojo is doing his utmost to become one. Well, we had treaty after treaty signed by Prime Ministers on EU unions which never had majority support from the wider public as when we had an actual vote....which had been denied for forty years....The establishment signing these treaties lost. And since the same establishment has been fighting that vote to leave ever since. Yet Johnson is the dictator?.....He's ensuring we leave with the only method the gravy train parliament left him with. Edited by Stirlingsays (28 Aug 2019 10.17pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2025 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.