He actually clarifies elsewhere that Labour (and also himself) does not support a Scottish independence referendum. He only said that Labour would not seek to block one. It is a subtle difference, but an important one. This is Labour trying to do what it can to induce the SNP to support Jeremy Corbyn's plan to be the next Prime Minister, and for the SNP to sign on to be a part of that coalition. Without their support, this is almost assuredly not happening. And it does not appear that the SNP or the Lib Dems are going to support this.
Please read the article. Like this part : " In a statement emailed to party members on Tuesday, Corbyn made no reference to what stance Labour would take in the event of a general election in the near future, or whether Labour could enter such a contest saying it would still go ahead with leaving the European Union. But he made clear that if a referendum was called on the Brexit deal negotiated by the incoming Conservative prime minister – or on whether to go ahead with a no-deal Brexit – Labour would support remain." Does it mean to you that Corbyn would support remain unconfditionally? No. Only if the alternative is no deal or a new Johnson deal. It's basically bullshit because there's no way the Conservatives would initiate a second referendum with their own WA. But what would Corbyn support when he is the PM? Of course the deal he has negotiated. Pay attention. Corbyn is being critisised and burned every day from the Remainers because he isn't officially and clearly pro Remain. What he clearly is is No No deal Brexit. Also the shadow Cancellor said that he supported the Scottish Independence himself but there are other views in his party. Of course there are. Laughable! Like the main difference is the independence issue between Labour and SNP lmao it is ridiculous . The things that can come out of politicians mouth to secure their seat in power are outright preposterous! That's why he can say that about Corbyn but when the seat gets tight to secure the unity government there will be a technocratic bland remainer MP as the interim PM. There are already candidates proposed. And why won't the other remain parties accept Corbyn btw? It's because he is not clearly a Remainer. There are Tories MPs saying that this is the plan they are working on right now. In any case without a constitution no matter what happens it could go to court. If Johnson doesn't resign after losing a no confidence vote, and refuses to obey the parliament, to secure no deal Brexit according to most experts that is against their "constitution" and will be challenged. That's what happens when you don't have it all written down into laws. You need experts saying their opinions and stuff , what a mess!
And while this mess is going on in England everyone is ignoring what is going on in Nothern Ireland. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...t-police-in-stand-off-over-republican-bonfire Youngsters using women and children as human shields against riot police, to light a bonfire in the colours of Ireland to commemorate an event that galvanised IRA recruitment in the height of the Troubles. We can safely assume that these people are IRA supporters. How is this region going to deal with a no deal Brexit? Peacefully? Don't accuse me of fear mongering, when there are supporters of a terrorist organisation in broad daylight in the centre of Belfast clashing with riot police. There is a motive for the English to keep ignoring it, but the international community should at the very least recognise that there will be riots and fights in the street if not deaths.
Corbyn's biggest problem is not with Remainers thinking he is not doctrinaire enough about supporting their key issue. It is that the Leave voters in the Labour party - and there are a lot of them in the northern part of England - realize that there is no plausible scenario left where Labour is actually going to support Leaving. Please, if you can, describe for me a plausible scenario - one that could actually happen - where Corbyn passionately supports the UK leaving the EU and helps that to happen. I will try not to laugh too hard at whatever you come up with. I promise. In fact, Jeremy Corbyn has fashioned himself a political Gordian knot that he cannot untie. It is a political pile of dogmess. So what this means is that the last thing that Corbyn or Labour really want right now is a general election, because their party is very badly positioned for it. They will not do well, either among Remainers or Leavers, and they know it. But they have no choice, because if Boris Johnson succeeds in taking the UK out of the EU on October 31, then Jeremy Corbyn will be consigned to the opposition for the rest of his career. This is Corbyn's chance to be the Prime Minister of the UK. It is not a very good chance, but it is the only chance he is likely to get. As far as the "National Unity Government," that means that Labour is abandoning its chance to lead the next government - assuming a no confidence vote actually succeeds, which is no sure thing - in order to support a leader from where? The Lib Dems? Maybe the SNP? Bwahaha. Can you say Brexit with no deal on October 31? I know you can.
What? You are confused again. Who said that the leader of the SNP or the Lib Dems will be the PM? A national unity government is different than a coalition government. In a national unity government any MP can become the PM, and that's what happened in the last two national unity governments in Europe that I am aware of. It doesn't have to be the leader of the party and in fact it's counterproductive in most cases if it is unless in cases of war, because national unity governments are for emergencies and often have to take unpopular or controversial measures. Also national unity governments are short term to get through the emergencies, in which time there are always general elections called. You just have to have any MP- usually from the leading party so as to get the most MPs behind them, that has the widest approval or is deemed the most qualified. The leading candidate right now is a woman MP from Labour I forget her name, who as far as I know hasn't done anything noteworthy. But there are also Tory MPs who are candidates for the new PM, like the father of the house, Clarke. Now Corbyn and his people prefer of course not a national unity government but a proper coalition government with him as the PM. BUT they don't have the numbers. There are 14 days to form a govenment after Johnson loses the no confidence motion. In the first days, Labour will try to form a coalition government. After this fails, then they will have to compromise on a national unity government with a person of wide approval as PM. They will sign a paper and send it to the Queen and she will approve of the new government. But a national unity government is only one option, the last extreme option if Johnson refuses to appoint a new GE before 31 October. The other options are to make an ammendment to sit through the autumn recess and taking over the proccess or to even pass a bill to block article 50. As long as the opposition of no deal has the vast majority of MPs there are 5 different ways. You dont even have to say "if there is a no confidence motion" because it is set in stone and guaranteed there will be one, and the only way it isn't is if Johnson himself calls for a GE before it happens. As for Corbyn's policy being a gordian knot that satisfies noone and is set to fail, I agree. That's why many Labour MPs are complaining about it and they have quit the party going independent because of it. A plausible scenario that Corbyn supports Brexit? This isn't even hard to do, it's his clear aim right now, he wants to negotiate and pass through a new withdrawal agreement without May's red lines. Here are the 5 different ways for parliament to prevent no deal, a law professor has listed : https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/06/mps-thwart-boris-johnson-no-deal
"Backbench Conservative MPs were highly alarmed about the idea of an election just days after an unpredictable no-deal Brexit, possibly in the midst of food shortages, travel disruption and trade difficulties. One former cabinet minister said they believed Tory prospects would be dire in a post-Brexit election anyway, because of the under-appreciated threat from remain voters. “We shed Scotland MPs, demographically die in London, get killed in the south-west by the Lib Dems and lose south-east heartlands because of jobs loss worries. Where is the core? It’s madness, and all predictable,” they said. Several Tory MPs said they were sceptical about whether No 10 really would pursue such a risky move, and regarded it as a possible ploy to scare would-be rebels away from voting down the government in a confidence motion and triggering an election that could put Corbyn in No 10. The cross-party group plotting against a no-deal Brexit is already nervous about holding a confidence motion without being completely sure of having the numbers to support an alternative government, in which a compromise candidate such as Ken Clarke or Yvette Cooper would request an extension to article 50. They are increasingly nervous after the Labour frontbench said they would not support an alternative government and the rebels would have to get behind Corbyn as a temporary prime minister if they wanted to stop a no-deal Brexit. McDonnell quipped on Wednesday that he would send Corbyn in a taxi to Buckingham Palace to see the Queen if Johnson lost a confidence motion and refused to resign. One Labour MP involved in cross-party discussions said there was a preference among many Tories to try legislative routes for stopping no deal, before going for the more radical option of replacing the government. Even some pro-Brexit supporters of Johnson were highly alarmed about the idea of an early November election. A senior Tory close to Conservativecampaign headquarters said the party would obviously be ready for any eventuality but he was “highly doubtful” that Johnson would risk such a move." @MojoMan As you can see, it is only you who believe that in a no deal Brexit general elections, the Tories will enjoy a comfortamble majority. Even the most avid Brexiteers MPs, believe that when people don't have food to eat, can't find their medicine, or can't do their business, they will not rush to cast their votes in favour of Johnson who lead them in that situation. That's why there is a very real possibillity that Johnson himself calls a general election BEFORE 31 October and before he loses the no confidence motion. And the national unity government route, will only be the last measure taken when there aren't any other alternative options.
You make the days immediately after Brexit sound like an episode of "The Walking Dead". LOL. And that you guys are frantically parsing through different scenarios regarding a "National Unity Government" is clear proof that the Remain side is scraping the very bottom of the barrel in search of desperate, last-ditch, hail Mary, long-shot solutions that are in all likelihood, not going to be successful.
Noone said there will be zombies. And that's the main difference. And " I " make it sound? LMAO Johnson's government itself let alone all the other institutions make it sound like that. It's called forecasting and making educated projections based on facts. That's why even them, pale at the prospect of having a general election in the days after a no deal Brexit. There won't be any time to make any trade deal, before the people are rushed to ballots. Remember Johnson may have the power to choose the date of GE but he can't have it months later there is a limit to how much time he can postpone and the start of November already is at the end of that alloted time. Of course it is scrapping of the barrell, since they don't have a constitution to really protect their democracy from despotic politicians.
No, that is not correct. There is not a maximum limit, only a minimum limit. There is nothing stopping Johnson from scheduling a general election for, say, November 7 or 14, 2019. That is for sure. And I think this might be just about what he and his government have planned.
How do you know this, do you have a link? What you are saying means he can also appoint an election on January 12 if he so wishes. One week, still won't be enough time. BTW, Johnson as a caretaker PM at that point won't have the authority to complete any trade deals- according to their laws. I read a very interesting article recently that suggests that the Tories and Cummings might be aiming to have the GE the day after Brexit. So the consequences will still not have affected the people and won't affect the vote.
Probably not the very next day, but within the next week or two. That has been mentioned a number of times. The earliest possible day would be October 25, IF Boris Johnson agrees to try to do things as fast as possible. But he has already made it clear he has no intention of doing that. From the BBC: How soon could a general election happen? Even with a successful no confidence motion, it would be extremely tight to organise a general election before 31 October. MPs did not call a confidence vote before Westminster went on its summer break. That means 3 September, when Parliament next sits, is now the earliest opportunity to do so. Assuming the confidence vote is held and passed the next day, the 14-day period the government has to win back support would expire on 18 September. If that happens, the prime minister could choose to call the election the next day. That would mean dissolving Parliament on 20 September, signalling the start of the five-week campaign. The House of Commons Library told the BBC, that such a scenario would leave Friday 25 October as the earliest possible election day - less than one week before Brexit day. To hold an election on a day other than a Thursday would be extremely unusual. In fact, you have to go back to Tuesday 27 October 1931 to find the last time this happened. Could the prime minister speed things up? A compliant prime minister could speed things up. Instead of having a 14-day period after losing any no confidence motion, the prime minister could decide to call an election. He would still need the votes of at least 66% of MPs, but that would trim two weeks off the election timetable. Could the prime minister hold the election after 31 October? If, on the other hand, the prime minister was determined to leave the EU on 31 October, he could try to delay things. "Even if a vote of no confidence was successful, it doesn't guarantee the election will happen before Brexit day," says Catherine Haddon, from the Institute for Government think tank. That's because the prime minister controls the timetable. "For example, they could extend the wash-up [the period where some unfinished Parliamentary business is dealt with] before Parliament is dissolved," she says. By doing this, the election could be pushed into November - by which point the UK would have already left the EU.
I find it impossible to believe that the UK law doesn't have a maximum time for a new general election to be called. That would border on criminal negligence. A crazy PM (and there have been some in the past two centuries) could delay it for years. So there should be one but no news site finds it noteworthy to mention it. I don't blame you if you can't find it because apparently one must have a master degree on UK law, to understand all the details at this point. BTW, this BBC article assumes that everything goes according to the due proccess in place. However some MPs are planning to just vote to change it and sit through the reccess which makes the 3rd September date less important. Or even have an outright vote to take down article 50. BUT and this is very important, this CANNOT happen if a vote of no confidence is lost. And who can call a vote of no confidence? Only the leader of the opposition = Corbyn. So they will have to make thorough plans and coordinate because if a vote of no confidence is called then the only option is either a national unity government, or a Labour coalition government. At least that's how I understand the situation. It is convenient that they have so much time during the summer reccess to make plans. 2 months. If they can't cooperate and coordinate their actions after 2 months planning then they have noone to blame. Usually these vote of no confidence don't happen after so much months long available time to plan.
That is pretty close to right. I do not think the maximum time thing is going to be a concern here. Achieving Brexit is an existential issue for the Tories at this point, so they will do pretty much anything to make sure that this is accomplished before the general election is held. But once Brexit is achieved, it is in the Tories interest to hold the election pretty soon after that, as passions will be high, and the celebration will be on, at least among those who support Leaving. So sometime in early November (on a Thursday) will meet all of these criteria. And like the BBC article above states, they would really have to work hard to squeeze this in before October 31. So doing this in early November really is pretty reasonable as far as the timing.
The only linkage this has to Brexit or the future of the EU is the involvement of Nigel Farage. Please bear with me. I am going to post it here anyway. Prince Harry's popularity has 'fallen off a cliff' because of Meghan Markle, Nigel Farage says Prince Harry's popularity has "fallen off a cliff" since the start of his relationship with Meghan Markle, Nigel Farage has said, after describing the Queen Mother as an "overweight, chain-smoking gin drinker". Speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Sydney, the Brexit Party leader said the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's declaration that they would only have two children was "irrelevant", but praised Prince Harry's "boisterous" early years. Mr Farage, who disagrees with Prince Charles on climate change, said he hoped the Queen lived long enough to stop him becoming king. That is three low blows in three sentences by Nigel. He is on a real tear against the Royals here lately. What is up with that?
According to the latest ComRes poll, Boris Johnson has the support of more than half of the UK public to shut down parliament if he needs to in order to get Brexit (with or without a deal) done. Boris Johnson has public's support to shut down Parliament to get Brexit over line, exclusive poll suggests Boris Johnson has the support of more than half of the public to deliver Brexit by any means, including suspending Parliament, according to a poll. The ComRes survey for The Telegraph found that 54 per cent of British adults think Parliament should be prorogued to prevent MPs stopping a no-deal Brexit. The poll suggested the Prime Minister is more in tune with the public’s views on Brexit than MPs, following his promise to deliver Brexit by October 31 “do or die”. So surely Boris and the Tories will be pleased and encouraged about this result.
Today another ComRes poll, this time reporting that the UK public is resoundingly opposed to the Queen intervening in politics, and that especially goes for Brexit. The numbers were 62% opposed, 19% in favor, and 19% had no opinion. Queen should STAY OUT of Brexit - shock poll results says UK against Royal intervention In an opinion survey by pollster ComRes, 62 percent of participants said they believed the Monarch, 93, should not have a say in British politics - namely Brexit. Up to 19 percent of the 2,011 polled said they thought the head of the royal family should have some involvement and another 19 percent neither agreed nor disagreed. The question asked was: “Do you agree or disagree with the following statement - The Queen should remain above politics and refuse to get involved in Brexit.” That is very interesting. I would have thought that might have been a little bit closer. A 43 percent gap is pretty decisive. And you know all of the politicians will take notice of this. So, is it down to a hail-Mary attempt at a no-confidence vote against Boris Johnson, and then a motion in favor of a Jeremy Corbyn led government, supported by a coalition including the Lib Dems, the Greens, the SNP, and a number of other smaller parties? It looks like it just might be.
Speaker of Parliament is insisting that he will do everything within his power to stop Parliament from being prorogued in advance of Brexit. John Bercow vows to fight any attempt to close parliament The Prime Minister has insisted the UK will leave the EU on October 31 “come what may”. But during an on-stage interview, Mr Bercow made clear he will stand in the way of any attempt to close parliament. He said: “The one thing I feel strongly about is that the House of Commons must have its way. And if there is an attempt to circumvent, to bypass or - God forbid - to close down parliament, that is anathema to me. I will fight with every breath in my body to stop that happening. We cannot have a situation in which parliament is shut down. We are a democratic society and parliament will be heard. Nobody is going to get away, as far as I’m concerned, with stopping that happening. Nobody should be afraid to say what he or she thinks.” Asked by one audience member if parliament can stop a no-deal Brexit, Mr Bercow simply replied: “Yes.” So the UK has an activist Speaker out holding pep rallies against Brexit. I thought the person in this role was supposed to be impartial and objective. Apparently not. Because this guy clearly is not. To be fair, this does not appear to be a central element of Boris Johnson's plans, or at least he and his team have not suggested that it was. But he has not ruled it out - nor should he. I suspect he will make every effort to avoid this path. It certainly would make him look weaker if this was what he had to do to get Brexit over the line. In any case, it is up to the opponents of Brexit to stop it at this point. It is not at all clear that they can.
