tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post463417938986813683..comments2024-03-27T09:14:27.496+00:00Comments on All That Is Solid ...: The Miserable Last DayPhilhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06298147857234479278noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-28861113345581967382019-09-12T00:48:47.615+01:002019-09-12T00:48:47.615+01:00"the Tory standing in the polls continues to ..."the Tory standing in the polls continues to rise"<br /><br />Stop telling lies, Boffy.<br /><br />Do you ever do anything but lie?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-7271223826167491552019-09-11T22:33:15.280+01:002019-09-11T22:33:15.280+01:00these are dangerous times.
Its easy for Parliamen...these are dangerous times.<br /><br />Its easy for Parliamentarians to drone on about The Rule of Law when you own the Law. They have ripped up the constitution to make them an elected dictatorship and are no passing laws at a rate of knots, so everything they want they just pass a law and say this is the law you must obey. There is no scrutiny, no restraint. As pointed out here, once you decide to publish mails and communications, what next? I personally am looking forward to the full listing of Ollie Robins mails and the complete set of communications from Dominic Grieve on his meetings with Barnier.<br /><br />Going after Johnson because you suspect the real reason for the prorogation is Brexit is highly dangerous. If it is not actions that are illegal but intentions, then we are very close to introducing a thought-crime. <br />What if the communications go something like this: We want to prorogue parliament to get a No Deal: You cannot do that, you need a reason such as a Queen's speech. Well we need a Queens speech anyway, lets do that. How do you interpret that? Guilty because he wanted to do it for Brexit? Not Guilty because he wanted to do a Queen's speech which is a valid reason?<br /><br />At the heat of this crisis is a Parliament that made solemn and clear promises and has now ripped them up. Until that is addressed we will be in crisis. Dippernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-86551683506737601352019-09-11T19:30:14.712+01:002019-09-11T19:30:14.712+01:00Yet, the Tories standing in the polls continues to...Yet, the Tories standing in the polls continues to rise, whilst Labour continues to wilt. Given Corbyn's reversion to his reactionary pro-Brexit stance, now with the added lunacy of the idea that Labour would negotiate a Brexit Deal, which in advance it has said it will call on voters to reject in a referendum, whilst we have another section of labour following Tom Watson in ridiculously demanding a referendum before a GE, which could then result in the invidious situation where a Labour government elected after that referendum had to implement a No Deal Brexit that voters had voted for in a referendum that Labour insisted be held by Boris Johnson, whilst another fraction of Labour around its reactionary nationalist right-wing axis of Kinnock/Flint,Snell et al demand neither a refernedum nor an election, but implementation of May''s Deal its safe to say that Labour seems to be doing everything in its power to encourage its voters to vote Liberal, SNP, Green, Plaid, or simply to hold their head in their hands in despair at this exercise in insanity. Boffyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08157650969929097569noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-77070853798719528122019-09-11T16:17:02.207+01:002019-09-11T16:17:02.207+01:00I think that Grieve was able to win Parliamentary ...I think that Grieve was able to win Parliamentary support for this measure because of the gap between the claims over the reasons for prorogation, and the gap between the claims on the state of no-deal planning and the perceived position. The legality of prorogation decision was also relevant, as was the sense that it was being used in an arbitrary fashion by the Executive against Parliament (and may therefore have constitutional questions.)<br /><br />The Freedom of Information Act gives enough cover for policy makers having policy discussions, more so when these are covered by a manifesto statement by a party that has won an election. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06647831002973086225noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-68614516963168826672019-09-10T22:25:18.567+01:002019-09-10T22:25:18.567+01:00"How, for example, might the new left wing Tr...<i>"How, for example, might the new left wing Treasury team work out strategies for overcoming opposition of senior civil servants as the government moves to take on the overweening power of the City if, in less than a month, communications can be commandeered by a simple majority vote and published for all to see? It sounds like a recipe for paralysis and timid government that never tries to change anything."</i><br /><br />This was exactly the argument Tony Blair used to disown the Freedom of Information Act!<br /><br />IMHO this is an extraordinary time, with an extraordinary parliamentary situation, concerning extraordinary information. Whether or not the "slippery slope" is a logical fallacy, we shouldn't worry about it as a result of this development.<br /><br />The last time anything remotely like this happened was when there was a hue and cry over Lord Goldsmith's advice to Blair concerning the invasion of Iraq. Again, extraordinary times breed extraordinary outcomes.<br /><br />Any Government that commands a convincing majority in Parliament would be able to brush off frivolous demands for publication of sensitive documents; and surely any Government that doesn't command such a majority would already be "paralysed and timid" to some degree!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com