web analytics

ALL HEAT, NO LIGHT

By Pete Moore On January 15th, 2019

The Prime Minister’s rotten EU withdrawal agreement is about to be shot down in the Commons. The media is afroth with excitement. You’d think that something important was about to happen.

Tonight is a formality. Everyone knows that the deal will die. All that remains to be seen is by how much. I’m not making predictions, except to say that it will be by a lot of votes. There was a time when a PM would be expected to resign after a heavy defeat. This PM won’t do that. She doesn’t have the honour or decency.

The real fun and games start tomorrow. A Remain Commons is in open revolt against the British people. It is set on cancelling our votes, our words and our wishes. The law – statute law – still says that we leave the EU on 29th March. No motion or amendment can get around that. So the Commons will have to legislated for something else in order to put the final nail into any idea of democracy. Or get Bercow to pull a new rule from his hat.

What’s to come over the next ten weeks will make the last couple of years look sane.

63 Responses to “ALL HEAT, NO LIGHT”

  1. The media is afroth with excitement

    I don’t think that’s the case at all. Most if not all media sources I’ve looked at have stated defeat is expected.

  2. Strewth.

    432 No, 202 Yes. The government loses by 230 votes. That must be some sort of record.

  3. Surely that must trigger a no confidence motion?

  4. No-confidence motion triggered. May even told Corbyn to do it.

  5. Pete.

    Its a circus.

    We’ve been suckered, the establishment and the Globalist’s have won.

  6. Corbyn tables motion of on confidence in government:

    https://twitter.com/SkyNewsBreak/status/1085262302683779072

  7. Apologies Pete. Didn’t catch your 7.51.

  8. I see no point in the no confidence motion. It’s a waste of time. Labour know they won’t win it.

  9. Is not not a bit rich for the government to have lost by the largest numbers in many, many, many years and the Commons to say they still have confidence in it, Colm?

  10. Well yes of course but in reality with every Tory MP and the DUP unwilling to bring the govt down, the motion will not go through. I suppose it acts as a good piece of parliamentary theatre but it isn’t a realistic proposal.

  11. //There was a time when a PM would be expected to resign after a heavy defeat. This PM won’t do that. //

    Her biggest strength is that there’s nobody to take her place. There’s no majority for a no-deal Brexit, no majority for the May deal, no majority for abandoning the referendum result, and there’s certainly no majority for any other captain to steer the leaky ship Brexit.

    It’s a sign of how divided the HoC, and the British nation, is that a PM who lost a vote by probably the biggest margin in parliamentary history still pretty secure in her position.

    She either has to reach across the floor for support from Labour, get a multi-party government in place and proceed or else get parliament to postpone Article 50, which it will be willing to do, and in the interim hold a general election that will hopefully produce some new parliamentary majority.

  12. The DUP have said that they will support the government in a no confidence motion. Whether all of May’s MP’s will should be the question.

    I suspect this isn’t going to auger well for the DUP in electoral terms with their home base.

  13. https://twitter.com/David_Cameron/status/595112367358406656

    @David_Cameron
    Britain faces a simple and inescapable choice – stability and strong Government with me, or chaos with Ed Miliband

    11:26 PM – 3 May 2015

  14. Fews,

    Priceless!

  15. “432 No, 202 Yes. The government loses by 230 votes. That must be some sort of record.”

    It is. The previous record of a government loss was in 1924. Ramsey McDonald’s minority government lost a vote on a Liberal amendment on the Campbell Case. JR Campbell was a Communist who called for the armed forces, or members of the armed forces, to unite behind the Communists and take power. He was charged under Incitement to Mutiny Act. The government decided to withdraw charges against causing an amendment to a motion by John Simon to set up a committee to investigate the decision. The government lost the vote 364 to 198 – a majority of 166.

    While it was no expressly a confidence motion McDonald had declared that it would be treated as a confidence motion and following the defeat he dissolved Parliament and had a general election (which he lost).

  16. Don’t you just have 2 months to go? That’s a really tight schedule!

  17. That was May’s plan. Get so close to the deadline that she will scare a few people who opposed her deal into supporting it. Get the Brexiteers on board by threatening no Brexit, get the Remainers on board by threatening a no deal Brexit.

    Over the last week or so, including one constitutionally questionable move, the backbenches have largely removed no deal as a viable option (firstly by defunding the government in the event of a no deal not approved by Parliament – and secondly by forcing the Prime Minister to come back to the Commons with an alternative should she lose the vote). By doing that they largely took May’s threats (certainly May’s threats to the Remainers) out of the equation.

  18. Seamus –

    the backbenches have largely removed no deal as a viable option

    It is statute law that we leave the EU – a World Trade Brexit – on 29th March. No amount of amendments can change that.

    The great pity is that the PM has no sense of humour. A well rounded PM in her position would go full shithouse and prorogue Parliament till April.

  19. Beyond all the talk, this remains the situation tonight –

    @timothy_stanley

    Not sure why Remainers cheered. As of tonight, Britain is scheduled – legally – to leave the EU on March 29 without a deal. The Government will probably not fall; May remains in place; she & the EU have implied there’s nothing to renegotiate. Right now: it’s out without a deal.

  20. “It is statute law that we leave the EU – a World Trade Brexit – on 29th March.”

    Statute Law can be changed.

  21. “It is statute law that we leave the EU – a World Trade Brexit – on 29th March. No amount of amendments can change that.”

    A no deal Brexit (or World Trade Brexit to use your silly terminology) would defund some government functions. No amount of anything is going to allow the government to allow that to happen.

    As Fews states – statute can be changed. And a minor amendment is all that it would need to change it. One that would command the majority in the House of Commons.

  22. Seamus –

    All is subject to the whims of Theresa May. She is like Blair in that she can believe many contradictory things at the same time. But statute law cannot be changed without the government willing to see it changed.

    Bercow believes that he is the embodiment of the constitution, so he might yet make up some new rules. Nevertheless it’s the case that backbenchers alone cannot repeal or amend statute law.

  23. In reality May’s deal should have been defeated by a slightly, slightly larger margin. There are 650 MPs. 4 by convention abstain as they are the Speaker and his deputies. 7 do not take their seats. That leaves 639.

    On face value 634 voted. Technically 638 voted as the two tellers in each lobby are not counted (but are supporters of where they are tellers for). So it isn’t 432-202 but actually 434-204. Same margin.

    That would be 638. That leaves 1 MP who could vote who didn’t. His name is Paul Flynn. Flynn is 83 years old and is severely ill. Rules don’t allow him to vote unless he is physically there. He is publicly in favour of a second referendum (and of the other 115 MPs on my list who were in favour of a second referendum all 115 – including 8 Tories – voted against the deal). If Flynn had been able to vote, or vote via proxy, then May would have lost by 231 votes, not 230.

  24. “But statute law cannot be changed without the government willing to see it changed.”

    Not entirely true. Any MP can propose a law. And MPs are then free to vote on it. It is just unlikely to get sufficient support or time for passage without government support.

    So it could be done without the government – it just likely won’t.

    The most likely scenario, regardless of final outcome, is that the government and the EU agree to extend Article 50 and the government support amendment of such in statute law.

  25. But statute law cannot be changed without the government willing to see it changed

    Not true Pete. All it needs is to get through the Commons.

    […] would defund some government functions. No amount of anything is going to allow the government to allow that to happen.

    Interesting point Seamus. I must admit, that angle passed my by.

  26. May needs 319 votes to win tomorrow. Assuming that the same 638 MPs vote. If it is 319-319 then the Speaker casts the deciding vote and (assuming the Speaker abides by convention – which I think he will but wouldn’t put the mortgage on it) will vote to maintain the status quo – thus vote for May.

    204 MPs backed her today. Of those 6 were opposition MPs. It is possible that those 6 may have backed her today but will vote against her tomorrow. I don’t see it happening. Half of them are Independent former Labour or Liberal MPs who left their parties primarily due to Brexit. So I could see her getting all of the 204 who backed her today. That means she needs 115.

    There are 128 Tory (or DUP) MPs who opposed her deal. She needs 115 of the 128. Of the 128, 11 favour a softer Brexit (or a second referendum). The remaining 117 favour a harder Brexit. Most of the hard Brexiteers (including the ERG, Boris, and the DUP) have rolled in behind May. If she gets the 117 then she wins. If she doesn’t then she needs some of the 11 MPs who voted against her deal in the hopes of a softer Brexit or some of the opposition MPs who favour a hard Brexit (Kate Hoey, who is pretty much a DUP MP now, for example) to back her.

    Most likely she wins, but it won’t be overly comfortable, and all it takes is a few people to go off script to completely change the outcome.

  27. O/T, here in the States, a Federal judge rules that essential Federal employees must work unpaid or risk being sacked…

  28. Seamus, Paul –

    Without government support a Private Members’ Bill won’t get any time.

    It might be that Article 50 could be extended, but that requires the unanimity among the EU27 and cannot be done simply for convenience. It’s not simply a case of the government extending it.

  29. Without government support a Private Members’ Bill won’t get any time.

    As no timetable is set for the PMB it can be, to use an Americanism, ‘fillibustered’ but there are mechanisms for the PMB proposer to push for its debate. This isn’t of course to say it would be there, only that theoretically it’s possible.

    But that requires the unanimity among the EU27 and cannot be done simply for convenience.

    I’d be surprised if that weren’t fortcoming Pete.

  30. Let’s see where the Magic Grandpa is going with his shameless opportunism.

  31. “Without government support a Private Members’ Bill won’t get any time.”

    I agree. My point was mostly semantic – the difference between it can’t pass and it won’t pass. A bill can pass without government. It just won’t pass without it.

    “It might be that Article 50 could be extended, but that requires the unanimity among the EU27 and cannot be done simply for convenience. It’s not simply a case of the government extending it.”

    True, so any plan to simply reopen negotiations will not be accepted by the EU I would imagine. However the EU member states will likely say yes if it is simply to give Parliament enough time to decide what it wants.

    “O/T, here in the States, a Federal judge rules that essential Federal employees must work unpaid or risk being sacked…”

    The judges decision, while morally wrong, is legally correct. Employees who miss work without a valid (legally valid) reason are subject to disciplinary procedures. And the judicial branch can’t authorise spending. Only Congress can appropriate the funds to pay federal employees.

  32. It’s not entirely true that they would be working unpaid

    They will be paid, but not paid on time; Which yes is a disgrace

    I passed through JFK airport Saturday and again today- The TSA and customs and immigration people are working
    Hard, as usual-

  33. It is a real mess and those who voted for Brexit are responsible.

  34. NY

    The only clean way to do brexit would be to go back in time before the first EEC agreements were signedBy the UK I believe in 1973

    Doing it all these years later Was going to be a leap into the unknown no matter How prepared they tried to be
    to be

  35. Jesus, of the 10 posts listed in the side bar, 5 relate to US issues (including the shutdown), can you Yanks not put your US political comments in one of those five??

  36. The (((Usual Suspects))) are doing what they do……

    https://diversitymachtfrei.wordpress.com/2019/01/13/a-very-jewish-coup-the-plot-to-stop-brexit/

    The newspapers in Britain are full of stories about a conspiracy to thwart Brexit being led by Conservative MPs Oliver Letwin, Jew. and Dominic Grieve, who once boasted of his Jewish ancestry. Its success would require facilitation by the House of Commons speaker, John Berkowitz (aka John Bercow), also a Jew.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/revealed-commons-plot-to-seize-control-from-theresa-may-ahead-of-brexit-vote-6zp62hh57

    May’s team got wind of the plot on Thursday evening when one of the conspirators — a former cabinet minister — was overheard by the government chief whip Julian Smith discussing the plan in the MPs’ cloakroom. He commissioned written advice from legal experts, who warned May her government’s future was at stake.

    Smith briefed May on Friday on the explosive document, which says: “Such an attempt represents a clear and present danger to all government business.

    “Without control of the order paper, the government has no control over the House of Commons and the parliamentary business and legislation necessary to progress government policies. The government would lose its ability to govern.”

    A senior government source said that May and her aides were “shellshocked” and declared: “This could be game over for Brexit.” Another added: “This sounds very like a very British coup — and one that has profound implications for democracy.”

    Crucially, Commons sources say the Speaker, John Bercow, is likely to allow the gambit to proceed. It can now be revealed that one of the rebel ringleaders, the former attorney general Dominic Grieve, visited Bercow in his official residence on Tuesday, the day before the Speaker tore up Commons rules to help remainer MPs.

    Last night, Grieve refused to deny he was examining plans to seize control of the Commons timetable. He said: “I have no doubt that lots of people may be looking at all sorts of ideas since we are in a deepening national political crisis.”

    Britain will leave the EU on March 29 unless there is a new act of parliament overturning existing Brexit legislation. Senior Brexiteers assume this is not possible as the government controls the timetable of Commons business. The plot, which May’s aides believe is being orchestrated by Sir Oliver Letwin, an ally of David Cameron, would torpedo that assumption.

    …Last week, the Speaker tore up parliamentary precedent to allow another amendment by Grieve that set May a short deadline to return with a plan B — in defiance of the advice of the clerk of the Commons, who is guardian of the rules.

    Jews are a-jewin’

  37. Phantom

    I think you are saying they should not have signed up for the EEC in the first place. The UK derived many benefits by being member for many years. I think they made the right decision in the 1970s on Europe.

    Now many voted for Brexit apparently without considering how it would be implemented. They voted knowing it would be handled by the Tories and names such as David Davis, Boris Johnson, Liam Fox and others would be involved in its implementation. It is no wonder it is such a mess with such incompetents involved.

    Brexiteers like to trumpet democracy but when they vote they vote for something that any reasonable person could predict would be a disaster. Voting has consequences and the present mess is an example.

  38. NY

    I am not saying that, or I am not saying exactly that

    The British never for one minute had the enthusiasm for the European project that say the French or the Irish did and do have. And some here will say that for that very reason EEC was sold as a trading arrangement, When all along it was meant to be a whole lot more than that

    But regardless of the merits of the decision that was made in the 70s, There have been So many Entanglements and they intervening 40 years plus . This is such an impossibly complicated issue. The only good outcome is one in which the UK and EU are both happy enough with. I don’t know what that agreement Might ever be

  39. Phantom

    I agree that in general the British were and are not very enthusiastic about the European project, although I know many Brits who are very pro Europe.

    I also agree that leaving the EU is a very complicated matter. But, if the right people and plans were involved perhaps not impossible. The wrong people were involved and there was little, if any, planning. In a way I think the other Europeans are not too sad to see them go.

  40. Allan

    Even if as you say, the ‘Jews are a-jewing’ I say well done to them, carrying out a mature and responsible duty to save the U.K. from the dogs Brexfast that we’ve got ourselves into, Long may they keep a Jewing 😊

  41. Phantom and NY

    The problem with our membership of the EEC / EC / EU is that it was all based on lies. We were not offered a referendum on joining and, no political party stood on a manifesto of becoming part of an EU Federal State. Ergo We, the people, never knew what our political class and establishment were getting us into. Ironic, but true !

    We find ourselves here today because the Westminster and Whitehall bubble, read London bubble, were not listening to the rest of the country, particularly North and Eastern England which was receiving the brunt of EU policies. So the people revolted against what they came to see as a truly nasty political project. A political project that engineered the downfall of an Italian and Greek government and oversaw the ruination of many in the rEU27.

    There was no planning for Leave because the above thought, quite arrogantly, that we would believe all their lies and do as we wanted to. No they find themselves with the situation of actually being forced to do the job we pay them. ie Make our laws, listen to our grievances and act for and on our behalf. The prospect for these people who, to be quite honest are mediocre , and it now shows, really frightens them. Hence why they do not want to Leave the Wet Nurse of Mother EU.

    The side benefit of BREXIT, which was predicted as far back as 2012 on Dr. North EUReferendum site, was that it would expose our so called democracy as a complete sham and, split the Tories right down the middle.

  42. MarkB

    Good post..

    The side benefit of BREXIT, which was predicted as far back as 2012 on Dr. North EUReferendum site, was that it would expose our so called democracy as a complete sham and, split the Tories right down the middle.

    And that is precisely what has happened.

    The entire bunch of self-serving charlatans have been exposed.

  43. //it would expose our so called democracy as a complete sham and, split the Tories right down the middle.//

    Why don’t the right-wing or the Brexiters form a new party?

    Well, for the same reason that they won’t vote no-confidence in May and force her resignation – they are afraid.

    Some risky venture like Brexit doesn’t suit a naturally cautious and conservative people like the British, and you could see the results yesterday. After dilly-dallying for two years, they are back at square one and nothing has been achieved.

  44. Noel

    Actually its been two and a half years.

    Yep, they are that useless.

  45. Noel

    Why don’t the Left-Wing of the Tories form their own party, since most of the actual membership is Right-Wing.

    Cameron and all his predecessors, Like William Hague started out as Eurosceptics. They became Europhiles once it no longer mattered. ie They knew that the masses would never vote for a Europhile Tory Leader.

  46. We were not offered a referendum on joining

    No but that was only because referenda were seen as ‘unconstitutional’ at the time. There have only been three ‘national’ referenda held in the UK and two of them were to do with EU membership. The first ever UK wide referendum was the United Kingdom European Communities membership referendum in 1975, which dealt with Britain staying in the then EC. It was passed by over 34%

    So while there may not have been any ‘unconstitutional’ democratic mandate to join there was certainly an overwhelming democratic mandate to stay.

    The side benefit of BREXIT, which was predicted as far back as 2012 on Dr. North EUReferendum site, was that it would expose our so called democracy as a complete sham and, split the Tories right down the middle.

    What does that rubbish even mean? Who or what has been exposed and how is democracy a sham?

    That Brexit would polarise politics and British society? That there would be political realignment caused by probably the biggest British political decision after entering two world wars? No shit Sherlock?

    The only ‘exposure’ I can see is the hypocritial double standards of multi millionaire Rees Mogg agitating for Brexit and then setting up a subsiduary of his investment company in Dublin after the referendum and advising his clients to put their mone there because of ‘Brexit uncertainty’. Where do you thing Rees Mogg has his multi million pound assets? My bet is it’s not on shore UK anyway.

  47. “We were not offered a referendum on joining and, no political party stood on a manifesto of becoming part of an EU Federal State.”

    Firstly referendums have no place in UK political history. The 1975 EEC referendum was literally the first ever referendum. They simply were not a consideration before then. And that was largely a good thing. Referendums are appalling ideas that have the overwhelming impact of making bad decisions.

    “We find ourselves here today because the Westminster and Whitehall bubble, read London bubble, were not listening to the rest of the country, particularly North and Eastern England which was receiving the brunt of EU policies.”

    Actually the North of England receives, comparatively, more EU benefits than most other regions of England. Draw a line from the mouth of the Severn to the Fens and north of it did comparatively better from the EU than south of it. Not least because EU benefits tended to be targeted more towards areas with higher need (so the South of England has less need of it due to already existing prosperity).

    “There was no planning for Leave because the above thought, quite arrogantly, that we would believe all their lies and do as we wanted to.”

    Not really. Firstly there was a belief that you wouldn’t all believe the lies of the Leave campaign. Clearly you were all thought to highly of. Secondly most polling was tight and historically speaking, throughout many countries, there is a status quo benefit in referendums. If the two sides are 50/50 in polling then the status quo will normally actually win (as it gets closer to polling day the thought of change spooks a few horses). You saw it, for example, in the Scottish referendum, and in the recent referendums in the Republic on gay marriage and abortion. Scotland appeared tight and ended up not being tight, and the Republic looked like there would be absolute romping victories for both referendums (which still happened but not by the extent predicted by pre-referendum polling).

    So the expectation, based on the polling – which suggested it was tight, some going Leave, some going Remain but generally close to 50/50 – would be that because it was so close it would break towards the status quo. That didn’t happen.

    “No they find themselves with the situation of actually being forced to do the job we pay them. ie Make our laws, listen to our grievances and act for and on our behalf. The prospect for these people who, to be quite honest are mediocre , and it now shows, really frightens them. Hence why they do not want to Leave the Wet Nurse of Mother EU.”

    Almost all UK laws are made by Parliament. Despite shrill claims to the opposite the EU doesn’t actually make a lot of UK law.

    And Parliament is acting on your behalf. It isn’t beholding to your whim, but it is acting on your behalf.

    “Why don’t the right-wing or the Brexiters form a new party?

    Why don’t the Left-Wing of the Tories form their own party, since most of the actual membership is Right-Wing.”

    The answer to both isn’t due to fear, or the traditional British desire for small ‘c’ conservatism. The principle reason is that in the Simple Plurality (First Past the Post) electoral system new, and smaller, political parties will likely do quite badly. Likely speaking should the hard-right break off from the Tory Party they could command maybe 20% of the vote in a general election. Likely speaking that will translate into only a handful of MPs.

    There is also a party present to have those views. Truth be told a right-wing of the Tory party breakoff is nothing more than a glorified UKIP, and a left-wing of the Tory party breakoff is nothing more than a glorified Liberal Democrats. Neither are particularly enticing options.

    If the UK had a PR system then these parties would have split decades ago. But Simple Plurality rewards large parties, and catch all coalition parties, at the expense of smaller, or single issue parties.

    Both have their merits. The UK is hardly a shining example of good governance, or good party systems. But then the extreme version of the other side is Israel, who’s politics are beyond fucked up and have become more fucked up in the last month than most systems do in decades.

  48. I agree that referendums are a poor solution to complex problems

    If things are to be settled by referendum, why have an elected Parliament/Congress?

  49. Pete Moore.

    I’m surprised you haven’t done a post about the Gillette advert yet.
    You’re slipping mate.

  50. Mark B

    “There was no planning for Leave because the above thought, quite arrogantly, that we would believe all their lies and do as we wanted to.” Yet a majority voted for Brexit. If people knew there was no planning for it, why did they vote for Brexit? The politicians are not without fault for the present mess, but the major responsibility lies with those who voted Brexit even knowing, as you note, there was no exit planning.

  51. Dave Alton –

    You’re right. Colm should apologise. He likes to point out that “I knew Pete would post about blah blah .. ” The reality is that 99 per cent of the madness out there doesn’t get a mention.

    Frankly I don’t have the time. I get about an hour online each evening. It’s almost 7pm now. I’m about to wash up, have a shower, make tomorrow’s lunch and then be in bed by half nine.

    Some others sit in front of PCs all day. Maybe they can chip in.

  52. charlesintexas, on January 15th, 2019 at 9:59 PM Said:

    O/T, here in the States, a Federal judge rules that essential Federal employees must work unpaid or risk being sacked…

    Federal judges in the US seem to have rather more power than they should have, and there are many layers of them.

    https://dailystormer.name/kike-federal-judge-cockblocks-trump-from-asking-about-citizenship-on-the-census/

    Huffington Post:

    A federal judge blocked the Trump administration from adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census, a win for critics who say the question is unnecessary and would cause fewer immigrants and minorities to respond to the decennial survey.

    The Trump administration is expected to swiftly appeal the Tuesday ruling from U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman of the Southern District of New York.

    The obvious reason they don’t want the illegals on the census is because Congressional districts are based on census numbers, and if illegals count as “people,” then you’re going to get extra congressmen for Democrat districts flooded with illegals.

    So in the UK we have Bercowitz and his (((co-conspirators))) just prepping the Brexit torpedo – see link at 11.57pm…..

    Crucially, Commons sources say the Speaker, John Bercow, is likely to allow the gambit to proceed. It can now be revealed that one of the rebel ringleaders, the former attorney general Dominic Grieve, visited Bercow in his official residence on Tuesday, the day before the Speaker tore up Commons rules to help remainer MPs.

    Last night, Grieve refused to deny he was examining plans to seize control of the Commons timetable. He said: “I have no doubt that lots of people may be looking at all sorts of ideas since we are in a deepening national political crisis.”

    Britain will leave the EU on March 29 unless there is a new act of parliament overturning existing Brexit legislation. Senior Brexiteers assume this is not possible as the government controls the timetable of Commons business. The plot, which May’s aides believe is being orchestrated by Sir Oliver Letwin, an ally of David Cameron, would torpedo that assumption.

    …Last week, the Speaker tore up parliamentary precedent to allow another amendment by Grieve that set May a short deadline to return with a plan B — in defiance of the advice of the clerk of the Commons, who is guardian of the rules.

    and in the US, one of Bercow’s co-ethnics is blocking a measure that would facilitate proper representation of Americans in Congress.

  53. BERCOW BECOMES FIRST JEWISH SPEAKER OF UK HOUSE OF COMMONS

    https://www.jpost.com/Jewish-World/Jewish-News/Bercow-becomes-first-Jewish-speaker-of-UK-House-of-Commons

    Oy vey!

  54. I’m baffled. What do I have to apologise for. I never mentioned anything about the silly Gillette advert ?

  55. Pete Moore,

    Frankly I don’t have the time. I get about an hour online each evening. It’s almost 7pm now. I’m about to wash up, have a shower, make tomorrow’s lunch and then be in bed by half nine.

    You make yourself tomorrow’s lunch! Isn’t that a job for the little woman? 😁
    I know what you mean. I don’t get that much free time either.
    You must have an early start if you’re in bed by 9:30 mate.

  56. Harri,

    BERCOW BECOMES FIRST JEWISH SPEAKER OF UK HOUSE OF COMMONS

    Oy vey!

    You must be very pleased about that Harri, what with your Jewish ancestry.

  57. Colm –

    You often say “Oh I knew that Pete would post about this when I heard the news. So predictable.” What you never say is that most of those times when you think I’ll post about something, I don’t.

    Dave –

    I have a very early start and a long day. From Sunday I’ll be in bed at 9pm. Looking at the world, that’s the best place to be.

  58. Bloody hell Pete, is it your time of the month or something.. 😉

  59. Jewish or not, Bercow has certainly added to the entertainment value of all that carry-on over the past two days.

  60. Pete Moore,

    I have a very early start and a long day. From Sunday I’ll be in bed at 9pm. Looking at the world, that’s the best place to be.

    Oh come on mate, cheer up. Even the Daily Mail says we living in the best times ever.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6591351/Seven-metrics-prove-world-better-longer-life-poverty-better-health-outcomes.html

  61. Brexit or no Brexit , we’re all gonna die some day There’s a cheery note to end the evening on. 😋

  62. A clear policy emerges from the incoherence

    Paul McMahon, on January 16th, 2019 at 11:23 AM Said:

    The side benefit of BREXIT, which was predicted as far back as 2012 on Dr. North EUReferendum site, was that it would expose our so called democracy as a complete sham and, split the Tories right down the middle.

    What does that rubbish even mean? Who or what has been exposed and how is democracy a sham?

    A@A links to The Times……

    A senior government source said that May and her aides were “shellshocked” and declared: “This could be game over for Brexit.” Another added: “This sounds very like a very British coup — and one that has profound implications for democracy.”

    …Last week, the Speaker tore up parliamentary precedent to allow another amendment by Grieve that set May a short deadline to return with a plan B — in defiance of the advice of the clerk of the Commons, who is guardian of the rules.

    The plot continues…..

    Colm, on January 16th, 2019 at 5:46 AM Said:

    Allan

    Even if as you say, the ‘Jews are a-jewing’ I say well done to them, carrying out a mature and responsible duty to save the U.K. from the dogs Brexfast that we’ve got ourselves into……

    As we see, the result of a referendum is being overturned because the result was wrong and those who wanted the other result are OK with the result being overturned – by any way that is necessary to overturn it.

  63. Yes Allan, I genuinely agree with your final sentence. The adults should lead the children back to safety.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.