Jump to content
BANGKOK
snoop1130

Unveiling government plan, Queen says priority is to exit EU on Oct. 31

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Is the implication re: Article 51 that the 'threat' of legal consequences against the PM should he not send the letter is sufficient to invalidate the letter because he would be acting under duress? 

I believe so RR, If I understand the Benn act correctly BJ in effect is 'walking the plank'.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Slip said:

He cares about his country.  She will feel the same I'm sure, but she has no choice over this.  She should send some people to The Tower.  It's been a while since we have had a public execution and Cummings would definitely cry for the crowd.  Boris too.

Why? For giving the people what they voted for?? I thought that was democracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, DaRoadrunner said:

The expression on Prince Charles face says it all.

ooops, and I thought that Prince Philip looks sprucely for his age ... 
but I am not from the UK and possibly will be forgiven.

Edited by KKr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JAG said:

An election will be allowed once certain conditions have been met?

 

I am reluctant to draw the comparison, but a number of posters on TVF (you and me both perhaps) commented unfavourably on the reluctance of the previous government here in Thailand to allow an election until certain parameters had been established and conditions met. It is not a direct comparison, nevertheless...

Difference being, the UK Parliament is a democratically elected one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NanLaew said:

 

 

still clutching...

Truth hurts eh...

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JAG said:

What an absolute brahma of an idea - we can have ab election and let the citizens choose their government!

There was a election, and there is an act of Parliament governing when the next election is due together with the circumstances under which the term of an elected Government can be brought to an earlier close.

 

Foresight excluded the PM choosing the term of a Parliament.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Basil B said:

Who wants more months in limbo while a new referendum is set up...

 

Stop wasting time...

 

Revoke Article 50 now.

On what grounds?

 

(I know, I know, but I'm bored already)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Basil B said:

The Queens speech is irreverent anyway, wast of her time, wast of money for the days pomp and ceremonies that will be repeated in a few weeks when we rid ourselves of this incompetent Tory ERG government and Buffoon of a PM...

...and replace it with... with... ummm.... er..?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Corbyn opened with the fact that the Tories have a majority of minus 45 and a 100% success rate when it comes to parliamentary defeats, the first question that sprung to my mind was how, as a leader of a once powerful and historically significant opposition party, could you let the 'farce' of a Conservative government happen on your watch?

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NanLaew said:

What? No desperate, last-ditch Remainer's clamour for a people's vote to ratify the deal?

 

Hold on till I get my tape recorder.

I have never called for another vote. Please quote the post you have based your misleading statement upon. 

Edited by Bluespunk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Basil B said:

take out the Brexit stuff as it might not happen, there was some "better late than never" bills proposed in the speech added by the Tories in an attempt to make them more electable and they can blame the others parties for killing them off, but then other parties in voting down the Queens speech could highlight a lot of what was in the Queens speech promising to reintroduce in their own QS if elected to govern, pointing out the Tories were the wrong party to introduce it, much of which the Tories must be hoping would fail anyway.

 

I mean do you really think the Tories are serious about raising taxes to fund care for the elderly who can not afford private care???

 

The Queen's speech was little more than an election campaign speech by the Tories who do indeed expect to get much of it's pledges killed off.   Typical of Johnson and his gang to promise much knowing they won't be in a position to deliver it.

 

However there seems to be a glimmer of a hope of a deal and that is surely a step in the right direction.  Let's just see how many more concessions Boris is prepared to make to get a deal agreed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

I have never called for another vote. Please quote the post you have based your misleading statement upon. 

OK, you're different.

 

I retract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...