What happens if the government loses a Brexit-related HoC vote?

#61
A very few Tories might accept that as the price of stopping Brexit. However, can Corbyn really take a pro-EU stance?
Based on past performance Corbyn can take any stance he likes and then change his mind and deny his first stance was a stance anyway. What he really intends to do if his 'stance' ever became government policy who knows, I doubt he does, you can't nationalise the EU and that's the only thing I think really matters to him.
 
#62
On a defeat of a major Bill, this month or next then a collapse and another election is likely.

However, I've been impressed so far by PMTM's ability to cling on. No-one else wants to be responsible for this disaster.

So, who knows?
I think a master stroke has been pulled with the promise of £billions to the NHS.
A large part of the money, apparently, will come from savings made when we leave the EU.
Seems a case of remain in the EU and sink NHS reforms. I don't imagine any MP would like to be associated with starving the NHS of cash(?)
 
#63
Based on past performance Corbyn can take any stance he likes and then change his mind and deny his first stance was a stance anyway. What he really intends to do if his 'stance' ever became government policy who knows, I doubt he does, you can't nationalise the EU and that's the only thing I think really matters to him.
Exactly, To Corbyn, this is all just background noise that looks as though it might create an opening for him to implement full scale socialism. He knows that the EU might present a barrier to this but also that most of his supporters want to stay in the EU so bets to just keep quiet about it until it all blows over.

I am sure he is getting top advice from Diane Abbott on the home front though.

It seems that the questions are

Should May go?

Keeping her will ensure that we remain on the current trajectory which nobody seems to be happy with

Can she be replaced without triggering a GE?

If she does go will it open the door to Labour?

I have noticed that in the past 24 hours, a range of influential youtube people have just announced that they have joined UKIP (Sargon of Akaad, Count Dankula, Paul Joseph Watson and more to come. This is potentially huge news as they all have far reaching platforms and the ability to elect change in UKIP if they choose to. Having read their entire manifesto last night, they look like ¨the common sense¨ party at the moment and I can see them coming back in a major way should there be another GE in the next 2 years.

It is not beyond possibility that a coalition government could be formed with them in it.
 
#64
I think a master stroke has been pulled with the promise of £billions to the NHS.
A large part of the money, apparently, will come from savings made when we leave the EU.
Seems a case of remain in the EU and sink NHS reforms. I don't imagine any MP would like to be associated with starving the NHS of cash(?)
Look at todays news, that particular claim is unravelling as we speak. TM appears unable to say where this money will be coming from as she still needs to pay the EU for 5 or 6 more years.
 
#65
I think a master stroke has been pulled with the promise of £billions to the NHS.
A large part of the money, apparently, will come from savings made when we leave the EU.
Seems a case of remain in the EU and sink NHS reforms. I don't imagine any MP would like to be associated with starving the NHS of cash(?)
Ah but as Labour have pointed out this has not been fully funded down to the last penny so it's all a Tory lie. Those who recognise black kettles might be amused about this.
 

Wordsmith

LE
Book Reviewer
#67
Dominic Grieve has today said:

"We could collapse the government and I can assure you, I wake up at 2am in a cold sweat thinking about the problems that we have put on our shoulders."

Full story here: Government 'could collapse' over Brexit deal

My question (and I don't know the answer so views welcome) is what would happen if the government lost a Commons vote on Brexit? What does precedent indicate?

Would the government collapse? Would the PM be replaced? Would the Queen become involved, as at a time of national crises? Could there be a National Government?
Thank you.
Some of this is posturing by the different wings of the Tory party trying to bully May to their point of view.

I think it unlikely that the Remain wing of the Tory party will bring the government down and possibly trigger a GE that will let Corbyn into power. And on a personal level, I suspect they'd be deselected by their constituency associations, meaning that bringing the government down would also end their political careers.

What I find interesting is the silence from the Brexit wing of the party. May seems to be following their preferred agenda, suggesting that she's been told there will be a leadership challenge unless they do so. And as the Brexit wing of the party now appears to be significantly greater than the hard core remain one, I suspect that's a threat May can't ignore.

Wordsmith
 
#68
Sortation - starting to look more and more attractive to me.
Sortation would be my preferred option to replace the HoL, but it's failing in government/the HoC is that you are selecting with no measure of competence and poor as we think the average politician is he's not that bad. The moment you select your candidates for sortation then you have some form of dictatorship by the selectors.
 
#69
Sortation would be my preferred option to replace the HoL, but it's failing in government/the HoC is that you are selecting with no measure of competence and poor as we think the average politician is he's not that bad. The moment you select your candidates for sortation then you have some form of dictatorship by the selectors.
Not sure I go with you on this one.

Firstly why only the HoL - I personally would like to see them abolished and replaced with proper scrutiny at committee level.

Sortation i.e. selecting randomly by ballot would only be the first stage. If, for example, we selected thirty people by ballot for a constituency then a second stage where they meet and vote three of their number to go forward would largely remove the bad, mad, and not interested.

That's a bigger and more representative pool than the parties are drawing from.

Don't understand where you're coming from wrt "dictatorship" - a random ballot drawn from all eligible residents in the constituency would break any capture. Indeed the big advantage of sortation for me is the complete destruction of the party system.

Have a glance at this if you have time. I'd be interested in your reaction.
 

Attachments

#70
Firstly why only the HoL - I personally would like to see them abolished and replaced with proper scrutiny at committee level.
The randomly selected get to prevent but not to propose.

Sortation i.e. selecting randomly by ballot would only be the first stage. If, for example, we selected thirty people by ballot for a constituency then a second stage where they meet and vote three of their number to go forward would largely remove the bad, mad, and not interested.

That's a bigger and more representative pool than the parties are drawing from.

Don't understand where you're coming from wrt "dictatorship" - a random ballot drawn from all eligible residents in the constituency would break any capture. Indeed the big advantage of sortation for me is the complete destruction of the party system.
So we select 30 economic illiterates who pick the least illiterate. If you selected 30 at random, allowed those who didn't want to to drop out [oops all gone select another 30]; then put them up for election in some sort of transferable vote pole you might get an MP who wasn't a complete fool. I'm sure someone seeking to get elected would tell people he was 'labour' or 'tory' as a way of gaining votes.
When quoting Athens as an example you have to remember that the pool had been pre-selected to be only male, citizens, no women, no slaves. That is undemocratic, hence in some way dictatorial.
 
#71
I think a master stroke has been pulled with the promise of £billions to the NHS.
A large part of the money, apparently, will come from savings made when we leave the EU.
Seems a case of remain in the EU and sink NHS reforms. I don't imagine any MP would like to be associated with starving the NHS of cash(?)
It's not a masterstroke as it's patently obvious there is no Brexit dividend. It is a massive fib.
 
#72
So we select 30 economic illiterates who pick the least illiterate.
Still a bigger pool than most parties select from. As to hoping the current lot are economic literates I'm pretty sceptical.

If you selected 30 at random, allowed those who didn't want to to drop out [oops all gone select another 30...
It would have to be attractive in that your job is held for you and it's well paid. Is thirty enough for the first draw I don't know - pick a hundred per constituency if that what is found necessary; it's not an expense.

... then put them up for election in some sort of transferable vote pole you might get an MP who wasn't a complete fool. I'm sure someone seeking to get elected would tell people he was 'labour' or 'tory' as a way of gaining votes.
You'd have, hopefully, the best of the bunch selected from a representative group of citizens which is something we don't currently have. Bringing in a election i.e. using sortation to select candidates at that stage would allow parties back in - I wouldn't be keen on that.

When quoting Athens as an example you have to remember that the pool had been pre-selected to be only male, citizens, no women, no slaves. That is undemocratic, hence in some way dictatorial.
Well since every adult citizen would be entered in the draw that sounds fairly democratic and representative to me. I'm not sure you can apply either of those two terms to our current system. There's a reason we only see the politicans on the street canvassing for two weeks every five years.
 
#73
One would think at this juncture MP's from all sides should put their differences aside on anything related to Brexit and the current Trade War (if it can be called as such yet) and work together for a change, maybe create a bi-partisan 'common goal' committee to come up with the best solution for the COUNTRY and get it sorted.
You would like to think so. Unfortunately, they are politicians who put their own interests before that of the country.
Most of them would argue night was day if it was contrary to what the other party said.
 
#74
Still a bigger pool than most parties select from. As to hoping the current lot are economic literates I'm pretty sceptical.



It would have to be attractive in that your job is held for you and it's well paid. Is thirty enough for the first draw I don't know - pick a hundred per constituency if that what is found necessary; it's not an expense.



You'd have, hopefully, the best of the bunch selected from a representative group of citizens which is something we don't currently have. Bringing in a election i.e. using sortation to select candidates at that stage would allow parties back in - I wouldn't be keen on that.



Well since every adult citizen would be entered in the draw that sounds fairly democratic and representative to me. I'm not sure you can apply either of those two terms to our current system. There's a reason we only see the politicans on the street canvassing for two weeks every five years.
Sounds like gerrymandering the electoral process to me.

It's been done before. Stalin's Russia, Mao's China, Hitler's lot and it's still happening in some parts of the world like Venezuela, Syria and elsewhere.
 
#76
It's not a masterstroke as it's patently obvious there is no Brexit dividend. It is a massive fib.

Not really a massive fib. Money saved from leaving the EU will be used. Also (whispers) possible tax rises and a review of NHS spending may be needed to cover shortfalls.
 
#77
In what way is randomly selecting your candidates from every eligible citizen in a constituency gerrymandering ?
At the moment, every eligible citizen has the franchise. What you are suggesting removes that franchise from everybody and replaces it with a process.

There are a whole raft of issues such as who runs the process? How do you guarantee that the process won't be taken over by somebody and abused?

So rather than given everybody a chance to participate in a democracy including the opportunity not to take part if they choose as such, you seem to want it to become a matter of you can participate if you are "lucky" enough to.

How would you spot the difference between "luck" and behind the process "deliberate design" as to whom was chosen to participate.

It's ridiculous and if adopted would most likely be the end of democracy in this country.

I think there is some scope to tinker with our current system such as introducing some form of proportional representation but it's vital that all eligible voters have the franchise.

If they don't, then whether you claim otherwise or not, the UK won't be a democracy!
 
#78
At the moment, every eligible citizen has the franchise. What you are suggesting removes that franchise from everybody and replaces it with a process.

There are a whole raft of issues such as who runs the process? How do you guarantee that the process won't be taken over by somebody and abused?

So rather than given everybody a chance to participate in a democracy including the opportunity not to take part if they choose as such, you seem to want it to become a matter of you can participate if you are "lucky" enough to.

How would you spot the difference between "luck" and behind the process "deliberate design" as to whom was chosen to participate.

It's ridiculous and if adopted would most likely be the end of democracy in this country.

I think there is some scope to tinker with our current system such as introducing some form of proportional representation but it's vital that all eligible voters have the franchise.

If they don't, then whether you claim otherwise or not, the UK won't be a democracy!
Fair enough - we disagree
 
#79
Fair enough - we disagree
Yes we do and I had a very quick gander at the PDF file you posted looking at the Athenian model of democracy. I am not a historian and my knowledge of the past, particularly Ancient Greece, is cursory.

That said, I don't see how the modern UK can be compared with how ancient Athens governed itself for many reasons both because of how Athens was as a place at that time and also how the outside regions that Athens dealt with in that period of history were at that time.

It couldn't be more chalk and cheese. I won't wish you good luck but I will wish you good health.
 
#80
Lovely mealy-mouthed stuff. She is very good at that, holding the differing views of a broad church together.

However, the problem for the UK is that Brexit is increasingly a side-show panto for the EU which has other fish to fry.
You are absolutely correct, the reason the UK is becoming a sideshow is because the member states have had enough of the uncompromising principals of a few fanatics in Brussels! One by one, the liberal left socialist leaning govts in Europe are being voted out and the peoples who have seen their so societies and traditions breaking down under forced mass migration and protectionist trade policies have quitte simply had enough!
- I just wish our media would properly report what's really going on in Europe wrt to the massive argument going on between Germany/Austria/France/Italy wrt immigration and border control (Schengen is in tatters!) the Visograd countries on-going battle against EU interference, Merkhel on the brink of being kicked out, the downgrading of the German economic forecast (last week), Deutche bank being on the brink (last 6 months) and the imminent end of European Central Bank QE programme which will add to the already steady drop off in Eurozone Growth which was being artificially supported by it at the cost of 2Bn Euro's a month.
Once people in the UK start to be briefed on what's going on in Europe I believe that en more people will want to leave before we get caught up in the deteriation and eventual disintegration of the EU back to what it should always have been - 5 major northern countries with similar economies.
Sadly, 99% of all Brexit news presented to the UK public only looks at it from internally within the UK giving the impression the enemy's side is all a bed of roses and going swimmingly! which must be a deliberate ploy of the media - even an ardent Remainer needs to understand the full picture to understand what they are trying to tie us in to.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top