He is impartial. This is his role. The speaker of the parliament primary duty, is one and only, to make sure the parliament functions. As far I have read, there were other Prime Ministers and a king two centuries ago, who tried to close down the parliament to pass through their laws. And even had Speakers who opposed it, executed. Those Speakers are now hailed in their history books and called the heroes of democracy. The same exact thing happening now. In the absence of a constitution to protect against tyranny their final solution was to give the duty to the Speaker. The Speaker has the authority and the duty to oppose the government, the prime minister and the monarch if they try to close down parliament. He isn't only in his seat, to direct the discussions. Anyway the british system has enough holes, so Boris Johnson doesn't need to go to such undemocratic extremes. For example apart from one day or so, only the government is allowed to propose new laws. If no new laws are proposed to be voted, then there can not be an amendment to stop no deal Brexit and the rebels can't do anything but vote against him in no confidence motion. With a new law by the government in the table, the Tory rebels would like first to try to pass an amendment to force the government to ask an extension to article 50. If the government refuses to put laws for voting, and instead wants to discuss the colour of the sky for one month, then they can not do anything. However will Boris dare to do that? He can get no deal Brexit if not deposed, but to have no deal Brexit they need to also fill the 20% hole in their laws resulting from leaving th EU, which they are already behind.
Bercow is a Remainer and appears to think it is up to him to make sure that Remain is given EVERY opportunity to succeed here. And while I largely agree with you about the government being the only ones that can propose legislation - and Boris Johnson has already said that his government will not propose any before October 31 - there is still room for shenanigans by John Bercow. Who knows what form that might take. But is the wild card here that is not getting the attention that he deserves.
This simplistic dichotomic identification has nothing to do with the role of the Speaker. He in fact refused to give Grieve the best chance to ammend against no deal before the parliament closed. Maybe after Brexit you will stop paying attention to the UK, but they will still be there. Brexit isn't the end of everything. Democracy is more important than Brexit. A PM closing down parliament to get his way there is a name for it : DICTATORSHIP It's not the Speaker's shenanigans, it's the fullfilment of his role to prevent it as the last guardian of democracy. In fact Bercow is properly an legitimately democratically elected for his role, while Johnson the Prime Minister, is not. But Bercow maybe the last guardian but is not alone. On 6 September there will be a hearing in front of a judge in Scotland, supported by 75 MPs to declare the proroguation of parliament as uncostitutional and ban it from happening. Who was the real culprit who foiled Teresa May's plans to pass her deal? A simple citizen who went to the court and got a ruling that the government is obliged to get a vote from parliament to pass a Brexit deal. Before that the government was planning just to decide and agree on a treaty on their own without a vote in parliament. It's about time the threat of proroguation is put to death. There are many ways for the Tories to get a no deal Brexit without acting like a military junta.
Again, Boris Johnson and the Tories have not been talking about proroguing Parliament. Right now all this talk is just a conspiracy theory being promoted by Remainers and their loyalists in the media. This does not appear to be anything that the Tories are planning on doing.
Interesting that the bipartisan Irish American loby is so powerful that it can stall and prevent any trade deal. https://www.theguardian.com/politic...deal-if-northern-ireland-peace-at-risk-pelosi "There is no chance of Congress approving a US-UK trade agreement if Brexit undermines the Good Friday peace agreement in Northern Ireland, the speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, has said. Whatever form it takes, Brexit cannot be allowed to imperil the Good Friday agreement, including the seamless border between the Irish Republic and Northern Ireland, especially now, as the first generation born into the hope of Good Friday 21 years ago comes into adulthood.” Pelosi said. “We cannot go back.” " Political observers however said it would be very hard to get piecemeal deals through Congress, partly because of the staunch opposition of agricultural and other sectoral lobbies concerned that their interests are being sidelined if they are not included in a broader agreement. For that reason, trade deals, if they are passed at all, often take years to get through Congress. The existence of a powerful bipartisan Irish American voting bloc, adamant that it will not be complicit in any arrangement that undermines the 1998 Good Friday accord, is almost certain to complicate US-UK trade negotiations still further." "Fast track authority gives the president the power to negotiate trade deals which Congress cannot amend or filibuster (stall by extended debate). However, the legislature still has the authority to reject such deals outright."
Then there is no problem with what the Speaker said and when the judge finds it uncostitutional and bans it. Don't forget that there are some senior MPs in the ERG who have recently publicly stated that they want to get a bulldoze and raze the parliament to the ground. So democracy should be protected by all means by such dangerous ideas. Since the PM wasnt planning on it anyway, then all the better.
Trying to conflate a trade deal between the UK and Us - Post Brexit - as somehow being complicit in undermining the Good Friday agreement, is just nutty. If these people want to try to use that as a reason to oppose Brexit, then OK I guess. Nobody on the UK side wants to do that, so it really is not an issue. But after Brexit is done, whatever trade agreements are negotiated will not have any bearing on the status of the Good Friday agreement, one way or another. Good try, though.
Why would a US-UK trade deal have no bearing, since there can be pressure by the lobies in the UK's desperate time of need? If the bipartisan Irish American loby is so organised and united as it seems - no idea if it's true or not- then of course they can blackmail the UK. As for a trade deal with the EU of course it will have a bearing on the GFA since our outer borders will be in NI. You can't do trade without strict border controls which negates the GFA. Not to mention that a significant part of the NI citizens have chosen the Irish nationality. This means that they are EU citizens and their rights must be protected. In Northern Ireland by law, even if you are born and raised on UK soil all your life, you have the right to choose your nationality. You can reject the British nationality if you wish. So there will be Irish citizens born and raised there and any deal must protect their right of self determination and their priviledges as eu citizens. Otherwise there will be no trade deal.
Well, that is what this is, too. It is Nancy Pelosi trying to help out the Remainers by trying to undermine the expectation of the possibility of a UK-US trade deal. Ok, that is fine for now. But once Brexit is finished and the UK is out of the EU, assuming that happens, this linkage will no longer exist.
Former Conservative Chancellor and leading Remainer Philip Hammond said today that he would not support voting down Boris Johnson and his government, and he would also not support a "National unity government". From the UK Guardian: Philip Hammond: MPs can stop Boris Johnson delivering no-deal Brexit However, he suggested he would not support moves to vote down the government and install a unity cabinet that would negotiate an extension with the EU – a move which has been privately proposed by some other rebel Conservative and opposition MPs. “I don’t agree with that at all, I don’t think that’s the answer. We have a Conservative government under Boris Johnson,” he said. “I want to see government be a success not just in delivering Brexit but across the whole spectrum of domestic and foreign policy. But I do want it to listen to what parliament is saying.” If not even Philip Hammond is going to be willing to turn his coat around and end his political career supporting the 'resistance,' then what Tory will? For those who did not know, any Tory who supported a no confidence motion against a Tory Prime Minister will be immediately dismissed from the party straight away. When the next general election is held - expected by many in early November - then he would not be on the ballot.
This has got to be the Remainer's plan, if they are going to actually have one. Jeremy Corbyn is proposing to stand as Temporary Prime Minister for the purpose of holding a general election. Jeremy Corbyn: Back me as temporary PM to block no-deal Brexit, then I’ll call general election Jeremy Corbyn has made a dramatic bid to secure a Commons alliance to block a no-deal Brexit by pledging to be prime minister for a few weeks only – if other parties agree to put him in No 10. The Labour leader has abandoned a plan to head a minority government to implement his manifesto if Boris Johnson is toppled in a no-confidence vote, and promised to call an immediate general election instead. The move is designed to break the parliamentary deadlock that threatens to wreck attempts to stop the UK crashing out of the EU on 31 October. He has also dangled a promise of a Final Say referendum on Brexit, if Labour wins the general election after his “strictly time-limited” caretaker government. Mr Corbyn hopes to convince the Liberal Democrats, the Scottish Nationalist Party and rebel Tories that he can be trusted to be the leader sent to Brussels to delay Brexit by agreeing an Article 50 extension. However, the Lib Dems have already rejected this offer, claiming he is not the man to build a majority against a no-deal Brexit in the Commons. A few difficulties with this, even though this really does appear to be the Remainer's best approach. This is the second part that comes after a no-confidence vote. First they have to win that and it is not clear that even many Leave district Labour MP's are going to support it. In addition to the other parties that would have to agree - including the Lib Dems, who have already rejected the idea of supporting Corbyn as PM - a number of Tories would also have to vote for Labour and Jeremy Corbyn. This would be the end of their political careers and it would mark them with a permanent political stench, that it is not likely they would recover from during this lifetime. This really is a lot to ask, even from a devout Remainer Tory MP. If I understand how this works correctly, it seems that Boris Johnson will have the first option to call a general election. And he gets to pick the timing. Johnson appears to be comfortable with the idea of a general election coming up soon, as long as it is not before October 31. He will do everything in his power to delay - just a week or two is all he needs - and then it is off to the polls. After Brexit is already finished, if he is successful. But if Corbyn can muster the support, this is the best and most likely way for Remainers to have a chance to succeed. Despite the fact that the Lib Dems already said no to Corbyn, they might change their minds. And don't forget about that pesky John Bercow. There is no telling what sort of shenanigans he might be willing to assist Mr. Corbyn and the Remainers with during their efforts.
Oops. I should have kept reading. The Lib Dem leader Jo Swinson has already responded. And some others. The extent to which Corbyn is despised by other MP's is hard to get a feel for over here in this USA. But some of these quotes really seem quite decisive and strong: Responding to the letter, Ms Swinson said: “Jeremy Corbyn is not the person who is going to be able to build an even temporary majority in the House of Commons for this task – I would expect there are people in his own party and indeed the necessary Conservative backbenchers who would be unwilling to support him. It is a nonsense. “This letter is just more red lines that are about him and his position and is not a serious attempt to find the right solution and build a consensus to stop a no-deal Brexit. I am committed to working in a credible way with those in other parties, and none, across parliament to stop a no-deal Brexit.” That sounds like it may well be more than just a negotiating trick. These people really do not seem to like or respect this man very much at all. and then this: Potential rebel Tories have warned they were being driven away from supporting a no-confidence vote by Mr Corbyn’s insistence he must be prime minister, one putting the chances of forming an alternative government at “nil”. And Chuka Umunna, the Labour defector to the Liberal Democrats, said he must be “open to other suggestions”, with even “a substantial minority of Labour MPs” opposed. Labour defector Chucka Umunna is indicating that a substantial minority of Labour MP's are opposed. How can they get this done if a substantial number of Labour MP's are opposed? They are already in the minority.
The SNP appears to be willing to support Jeremy Corbyn as the interim PM in a temporary arrangement in a leadup to a general election, for the stated purpose of blocking Brexit. Also, the C Letters show Plaid Cymru and SNP could be open to Corbyn’s plot SNP’s leader in Westminster, Ian Blackford, said: “I will be pleased to meet with the Labour leader and others at the earliest opportunity to work together.” The Westminster leader of Plaid Cymru, Liz Saville, said “the crisis we find ourselves in goes beyond personalties”. She also said: “We are very much open to the idea of a Unity Government. It doesn’t matter who leads it, but its number one priority must be stopping Brexit”. Likewise, Tory MP's Dominic Grieve and Guto Bebb are open to discussing ways to block Brexit with Corbyn, although Grieve seems to be a bit shaky on the prospect of Jeremy Corbyn successfully leading such an effort Tory Bebb backs Corbyn's bid for Number 10 Tory MP Guto Bebb has said he would be willing to back a “short-term” Government led by Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn to prevent a no-deal Brexit. Grieve agrees to to work with Corbyn Conservative former attorney general Dominic Grieve said a national unity government led by Jeremy Corbyn is a "most unlikely way forward", noting the Labour leader has views which are "entirely abhorrent" to him. Mr Grieve told BBC Radio 4's PM programme: "The idea that Jeremy Corbyn could provide leadership for what would effectively be a government of national unity seems to me to be rather improbable. But Lib Dem leader Jo Swinson is still pushing back hard against the idea of Jeremy Corbyn leading the Remainer resistance as even temporary PM. Swinson: Corbyn "does not have support of enough Tories" Liberal Democract leader Jo Swinson has tweeted her letter of reply Jeremy Corbyn's plans to stop a no deal Brexit - suggesting he lacks the necessary support among Conservative MPs to make the proposal viable. Ms Swinson said: "All the evidence is that Jeremy Corbyn does not have the support of enough Conservative MPs to command that majority, so I would urge him to be open to supporting alternative candidates for that role." I am obviously not "in the loop" on any of this. But the path of least resistance here is for the anti-Brexit crowd to line up behind Jeremy Corbyn. He leads the largest opposition block and many members of Labour are coming out to support Corbyn's proposal. If not him, then who? Swinson is complaining that Corbyn will not have sufficient support from Conservatives, not to mention members of his own party. But will that not also be true of anybody else who is proposed?
There has been a lot of talk over the last few days about who will lead the UK government after the impending no-confidence vote is completed during the first week in September. Of course the prerequisite for that happening is the opposition WINNING the no confidence vote. It is not at all clear that they will. In fact, UK Energy Minister Kwasi Kwartengs today clarified that the opposition does not have the numbers to win this vote. Boris Johnson's Government would win no confidence vote, says Minister Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s government would win a vote of no confidence put forward by the opposition Labour Party, said energy minister Kwasi Kwarteng speaking to Sky News. Earlier this week opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn urged rebel Conservative MPs to help block a no-deal Brexit by bringing down Johnson’s administration and allowing him to form a caretaker government before a general election. “I’m strongly of the view that the government would win a vote of no confidence, I don’t see Jeremy Corbyn being able to come together with the numbers, nor do I see any prospect of him leading a so called national unity government,” Kwarteng told Sky News. He’s the most unpopular leader of the opposition we’ve ever had and the idea that he’s going to lead a unity government I think is ridiculous,” he said. If the no confidence vote fails to pass, then Boris Johnson is affirmed as PM. If I understand the rules of Parliament correctly, he will then be immunized from being confronted with another no-confidence motion for the following year. So that would mean no Jeremy Corbyn opposition government, no "National unity government". Just the same government that they have now, steady as she goes. And will there be anything left that the UK Parliament can do to stop the UK from leaving the EU on October 31, without some shenanigans from John Bercow? Someone please tell me if they know of any plan B still under consideration by the Remainers in this instance. But I have been following this pretty closely and I am not aware of one. And time is running out. Tick tock.
It will not fail to pass for the simple reason he won't call it if he doesnt have the numbers. Also the latest news say that it will not happen in the first week of September but on 9 September. Why I mention this is because Labour wants to call a no confidence motion, only when the Brexiter Labour MPs, and the rebel Tories have used every other avenue and have failed to block no deal. So they will give them days to try to pass a motion to block it and when this fails, they will have no option but to fall the government. There are about 20 Labour MPs who are Brexiters but oppose no deall and about 40 rebel Tories who are against no deal by all costs. If it isn't obvious the reason the SNP is supporting Corbyn is because he has made the consession to support a second referendum for Scottish independence.
There is apparently only one Tory who is indicating a willingness to support a no-confidence motion against Boris Johnson. The rest have indicated that they will work with anyone in Parliament on blocking a no deal exit, if a way can be found. But it does not appear that they are going to be willing to end their political careers to do it. Which is what will happen to any Tory MP who votes against Boris Johnson in a no confidence vote. Also, with regards to the pro-Brexit Labor MP's, their careers are on the line here as well. Their constituents realize that there is no situation in which the Labour Party is going to help the UK leave the EU with a real Brexit (not in name only). This no confidence vote is mostly just a proxy vote for or against Brexit. Do not be surprised to see a good number of these MP's abstain in a no confidence vote. Om the SNP support for Corbyn, I think you are completely right. It was obvious at the time he made his statement about not blocking a second Scottish independence referendum that this was what he was trying to do. And virtually everyone in the UK knows it.
There are many former Tory MPs who rebelled against the govenment, were kindly kicked out and their political carreer hasnt finished. Only this year and a half there have been like what? 6-7? I have lost count. They either go independent, or join the Lib Dems. In some cases like Rory Stewart right now he fits much more with the Lib Dems than with what has become of the Tory party. It isn't the party of business anymore. Also there are many who dgaf and are determined to vote on consience to prevent what they see as the destruction of the country. Do you think that someone like Ken Clarke cares? And their constituents will boycott them? Do you understand that there are so many Tory MPs whose constituents voted to Remain or voted to Leave by a majority of less than 2%? Some of the most avid Brexiteers are like that. Not to mention that in the referendum the Leave option was presented as leave with a deal and never nowhere was it mentioned no deal. The one who should think about getting boycotted should be the DUP who support Leave while their constituents voted to Remain at 60%. The ones who should be scared are the Tory MPs of rural farming areas. Also most rebels don't refuse to fell the government their main objection is who will be the new PM- Corbyn. And they would prefer to find a legal alternative and will decide to take that step only when all other avenues are exhausted. There are still 2 weeks and we will see a lot of public flirting Corbyn with the Tory rebels. Consessions and negotiations until by september they have decided on the way to go forward.
Like you say, there are a couple of weeks for posturing and negotiating left before reality sets in and we see where everyone really stands when it comes time to vote. That being said, here is an article at one of your favorite British newspapers, the UK Guardian, that analyses and discusses where Tory Remainers are in this process and how far they are going to be willing to go. {Spoiler: probably not very far when it comes to a no confidence motion, or voting to put Jeremy Corbyn in at 10 Downing Street}: How far will they go? The Tory tribes opposing Brexit
