May's Brexit deal in chaos as Speaker sparks 'constitutional crisis'

[evadgib]

2 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

Ah the irony, someone who no longer resides in the U.K. demonstrating for a course of action that impacts upon those who do live there. 

Brits are right to voice their opinion regardless of geographic location especially if they're fare paying passengers.

 

To get back on topic here's Bercow today:

 

[Grouse]

18 minutes ago, evadgib said:

Brits are right to voice their opinion regardless of geographic location especially if they're fare paying passengers.

 

To get back on topic here's Bercow today:

 

Handled by Bercow with assured aplomb. I must look up where he was educated! 

 

Bercow graduated with a first-class honours degree in government from the University of Essex in 1985.^[13] Professor Anthony King said "When he was a student here, he was very right-wing, pretty stroppy, and very good. He was an outstanding student."^[1

[dunroaming]

He is an obnoxious little sh*t isn't he ????

 

I met his wife a few years ago at a function and she is much more fun. 

[malagateddy]

The Arsenal school for losers[emoji23]

Handled by Bercow with assured aplomb. I must look up where he was educated! 

Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Spidey]

10 hours ago, malagateddy said:

If that is indeed the case and dhe revokes article 50..methinks there is the possibility of massive unrest in the UK.

 

Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

 

Massive relief, more like.

[Nigel Garvie]

7 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

Of course it's not.  But sadly there are zero 'papers that are unbiased.....

 

Edit - But I'm still at a loss as to why leavers are unhappy at bercow's decision!

 

PLEASE, PLEASE can a leaver explain it to me?

Actually I have some sympathy with this question. As a remainer I'm not quite sure any longer why this should be a good or bad thing for anyone (Although if it turns out to be bad for the DUP that would of course be wonderful). This whole business has been going on so long that I'm loosing touch with all the ramifications, old age rears it's head I guess. 

Meanwhile to cheer someone up it appears that the march is going better again.

 

"Nigel Farage’s Brexit Betrayal March has been given a new lease of life after hiring two-hundred Polish walkers to boost their flagging attempts to march on London.

Just four days into the march, numbers have dwindled to such an extent that the entire march was able to take cover from the rain under a single bus shelter.

A spokesperson for the march told us, “Yes, numbers are pretty thin, but that was always the plan. By making the march embarrassingly small, it keeps you liberal elites talking about it – checkmate libtard!” But the march will now move on with renewed vigour after organisers were able to find Europeans willing to do the work that British nationals seemingly couldn’t be bothered with."

[Spidey]

9 hours ago, sidgy said:

The majority in HoC may want that ballot choice but perhaps the majority of the people would prefer "May's deal/ No deal" as the choices on any ballot paper


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

Only hard Brexiteers, who's number are dwindling by the day.

[david555]

13 hours ago, vogie said:

John Bercow knows the rules, but he only uses them for his own agenda. He is an europhile with 'blox to brexit' on his car. The speaker should remain impartial, but he is anything but. In his defence he knows many big words, so may be better suited chairing 'The Good Old Days'

 

Here the real situation , about ON HIS CAR ….????

[vogie]

3 hours ago, Kadilo said:

Bercow is a breath of fresh air. 

Of course the bullies dislike him because he won’t be intimidated. 

Well there's one thing about it, he is so biased and undemocratic there will always be a job for him in the EU council.

[jpinx]

10 minutes ago, Nigel Garvie said:

  8 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

Of course it's not.  But sadly there are zero 'papers that are unbiased.....

 

Edit - But I'm still at a loss as to why leavers are unhappy at bercow's decision!

 

PLEASE, PLEASE can a leaver explain it to me?

It's very simple:

1. Bercow has always been a remainer.

2. Previous votes in HoC have produced a reducing resistance, and Bercow sees that.

3. The solution for him was always going to be the use of his referee's powers to call Time on the debate - he only needed the excuse.

 

UK's system of confrontational politics will never keep everyone happy, but no-one has come up with a suitable alternative.

[vogie]

4 minutes ago, david555 said:

Here the real situation , about ON HIS CAR ….????

Check out my post #22. 

[david555]

4 minutes ago, vogie said:

Check out my post #22. 

I did not see the whole tread …, but as soon you made your early comment , I posted this very pointed and accurate kill from him ,keeping even the reply in tension ,and then strike …. marvelous reply  …, right man on right place ….he is right to stop May playing the H.O.C. as fools ...

It proves U.K. have still some  good politicians ..

Not so much a rabbit in the headlights of a car as you described him ….. more like the white rabbit out of the hatt…. 

Would like see him in replacement of Farage in European parliament ...

[Bluespunk]

3 hours ago, nontabury said:

Throughout these Brexit threads, a number of posters have championed the remain side. From my observation many of them, if not the majority,not only do they not reside in the U.K. but more telling is the fact that they are not even British.

 They are like a man,whose wife has left him for someone younger,more virile, richer and with the prospect of providing her with a better life. Yet the husband refuses to accept the inevitable.

 

 I do in fact live in the U.K. and I can assure you that people are very angry,and not only these who support leaving this so called union.This of course also applies to many who no longer do live in the U.K.

As an example- 

 

I confess to not being interested in politics but, in the Brexit fiasco, my understanding from afar is that the people of the UK voted to leave and the members of parliament have a job to represent them. It’s not a Party v. Party fight but an obligation to work together and deliver the will of the people.

I don't live there anymore so have not voted or campaigned on the future of the country.

 

I feel it would be wrong to do so.

 

I support the right to call for another referendum, but have not personally called for one as such.

[Caledonia Boy]

I would imagine that the majority of the people in Scotland will be rejoicing at this turn of events.

[Bluespunk]

1 hour ago, evadgib said:

Brits are right to voice their opinion regardless of geographic location especially if they're fare paying passengers.

 

To get back on topic here's Bercow today:

 

Well, as you can guess my view on those who vote on issues that effect a country they don't live in, are very different.

[jpinx]

5 minutes ago, Caledonia Boy said:

I would imagine that the majority of the people in Scotland will be rejoicing at this turn of events.

Why?

[Spidey]

2 hours ago, gamini said:

But isn't it ridiculous that May has had her deal defeated in Parliament by a huge majority twice that she still wants to have it put them further time? Threatening all sorts of things. If they don't

The real irony in that is that Brexiteers shout, "Undemocratic. The people have spoken. etc. etc." when a remainer suggests that we should have a second referendum, now that people understand what they are actually voting on.

 

Yet the same people are equally outraged that May is debarred from calling for a third and fourth vote on something that everyone understood the first time and voted down by a much larger majority than Brexit won the referendum.

 

Selective outrage, the province of Brexiteers.

[Spidey]

1 hour ago, evadgib said:

Brits are right to voice their opinion regardless of geographic location especially if they're fare paying passengers.

I have lived, full time, in Thailand for several years and I voted in the 2016 referendum.

 

And I voted remain!

[Caledonia Boy]

6 minutes ago, jpinx said:

Why?

Whether right or wrong. Two reasons really.

1) The majority of the Scottish people voted to remain in the EU

2) This Brexit chaotic shambles coupled with the gross incompetence of the Conservative government will almost certainly boost support for Independence.

[nauseus]

5 minutes ago, Spidey said:

The real irony in that is that Brexiteers shout, "Undemocratic. The people have spoken. etc. etc." when a remainer suggests that we should have a second referendum, now that people understand what they are actually voting on.

 

Yet the same people are equally outraged that May is debarred from calling for a third and fourth vote on something that everyone understood the first time and voted down by a much larger majority than Brexit won the referendum.

 

Selective outrage, the province of Brexiteers.

I'm not outraged. But, if so many remainers didn't understand so well the first time, then the leave vote might be bigger in the case of another referendum then?  

[cleopatra2]

36 minutes ago, jpinx said:

It's very simple:

1. Bercow has always been a remainer.

2. Previous votes in HoC have produced a reducing resistance, and Bercow sees that.

3. The solution for him was always going to be the use of his referee's powers to call Time on the debate - he only needed the excuse.

 

UK's system of confrontational politics will never keep everyone happy, but no-one has come up with a suitable alternative.

Apologies I don't understand your rationalle

If as Implied he acted due to remainer bias , why did he not allow the deal to be resubmitted , given as you note a number of MPs including staunch Brexiteers had pledged to back the deal.

 

I think the more plausible explanation is that the issue of resubmitting the same motion could not be ignored , due to some MPs raising the issue in Parliament the previous week.

 

It's quite extraordinary  to state that he acted with willful bias , when his actions were praised by 2 leading Brexit MPs

 

 

[nontabury]

18 minutes ago, Caledonia Boy said:

Whether right or wrong. Two reasons really.

1) The majority of the Scottish people voted to remain in the EU

2) This Brexit chaotic shambles coupled with the gross incompetence of the Conservative government will almost certainly boost support for Independence.

 

If the 2014 Scottish referendum had resulted in a vote for seperation of 52%-48% rather than the actual result of  55% - 45% .Would you have expected that decision to have been acted on. And if so, why do you disagree that the E.u referendum should not be.

 

Regarding your 2nd point, I suspect that many Brits are now very angry and ashamed of the antics of M.P’s who have simple disregarded the Democratic vote of the whole country. 

 

[Spidey]

13 minutes ago, nauseus said:

I'm not outraged. But, if so many remainers didn't understand so well the first time, then the leave vote might be bigger in the case of another referendum then?  

Fine by me. Let's find out then.

[Caledonia Boy]

8 minutes ago, nontabury said:

 

If the 2014 Scottish referendum had resulted in a vote for seperation of 52%-48%. Would you have expected that decision to have acted been acted on. And if so, why do you disagree that the E.u referendum should not be.

 

My apologies if you misunderstood my post. I made no reference to any disagreement regarding the EU referendum.

[vogie]

21 minutes ago, Spidey said:

The real irony in that is that Brexiteers shout, "Undemocratic. The people have spoken. etc. etc." when a remainer suggests that we should have a second referendum, now that people understand what they are actually voting on.

 

Yet the same people are equally outraged that May is debarred from calling for a third and fourth vote on something that everyone understood the first time and voted down by a much larger majority than Brexit won the referendum.

 

Selective outrage, the province of Brexiteers.

"The real irony in that is that Brexiteers shout, "Undemocratic. The people have spoken. etc. etc." when a remainer suggests that we should have a second referendum, now that people understand what they are actually voting on."

 

So help me out here, the remainers say that referendums are not legally binding, but you want one. But OK we have one and should the leavers win again, are we expected to believe that the same shower of MPs would suddenly honour the result this time, are you beginning to see the flaw in your arguement.

 

[nauseus]

2 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Fine by me. Let's find out then.

OK. You want it, you organize it! 

[jpinx]

15 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said:

Apologies I don't understand your rationalle

If as Implied he acted due to remainer bias , why did he not allow the deal to be resubmitted , given as you note a number of MPs including staunch Brexiteers had pledged to back the deal.

 

I think the more plausible explanation is that the issue of resubmitting the same motion could not be ignored , due to some MPs raising the issue in Parliament the previous week.

 

It's quite extraordinary  to state that he acted with willful bias , when his actions were praised by 2 leading Brexit MPs

 

 

"backing the deal" is the next, big step in getting out of EU, and Bercow could easily see that fewer MP's were refusing to back the  deal. 

 

Everyone is playing chess here, and many moves are made for reasons that do not become clear immediately.

[surangw]

decision makers and/or their cronies profiting from dragging this out?

 

[Spidey]

12 minutes ago, vogie said:

"The real irony in that is that Brexiteers shout, "Undemocratic. The people have spoken. etc. etc." when a remainer suggests that we should have a second referendum, now that people understand what they are actually voting on."

 

So help me out here, the remainers say that referendums are not legally binding, but you want one. But OK we have one and should the leavers win again, are we expected to believe that the same shower of MPs would suddenly honour the result this time, are you beginning to see the flaw in your arguement.

 

No but I can clearly see the flaw in your argument. I was juxtaposing May's deal being put through parliament a possible 4 times, with a second referendum. Your argument doesn't mention Mays's deal, just bangs on about not having a second referendum. Kinda proves my point.

[mfd101]

The effect seems to be that there are now really only 2 cards left on the table: (1) No-deal exit which, amongst other fascinating anxieties, would presumably mean a hard Irish border (so much for the Irish, not to mention the Ulsterpersons!) or (2) extension of stay (so to speak) for an indefinite period while the Brits try to sort out what if anything they are collectively in favour of, and that could have any number of outcomes - referendum & leave, referendum & stay in, stay in the customs union, a new deal ...

 

It would be nice to think that the current PM is learning in the meantime that obstinacy & leadership are not the same thing ...