. Iain Martin describes you perfectly:
And you might say...why not call a vote of no confidence? Well...
Such great strategy. Outwitted and outplayed.
What an absolute fsck up. I'm not sure what else we could expect from this man?
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
. Iain Martin describes you perfectly:
And you might say...why not call a vote of no confidence? Well...
Such great strategy. Outwitted and outplayed.
Would be interested to know this too, was under the impression that the Royals are supposed to stay out of politics - if she accepts his request could that be seen as taking a political stance, similarly if she refused his request?I am not clued up on UK politics. Can someone explain to me why he needed the bullcrap story about the Queen's speech to suspend parliament. Does he not have the power to suspend it without all that? Also can the Queen tell him to get lost cause she don't feel like it right now?
I am not clued up on UK politics. Can someone explain to me why he needed the bullcrap story about the Queen's speech to suspend parliament. Does he not have the power to suspend it without all that? Also can the Queen tell him to get lost cause she don't feel like it right now?
Would be interested to know this too, was under the impression that the Royals are supposed to stay out of politics - if she accepts his request could that be seen as taking a political stance, similarly if she refused his request?
Would be interested to know this too, was under the impression that the Royals are supposed to stay out of politics - if she accepts his request could that be seen as taking a political stance, similarly if she refused his request?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/may/16/qanda.jubileeThe Queen has two individual powers that could cause a political crisis if they were ever exercised. She may refuse a government's request to dissolve parliament and call an election, if she believes a government can legitimately be formed. She also has the right to choose the prime minister: a formality in the case of a clear majority, but potentially controversial after an inconclusive general election. This almost happened in February 1974, when Labour failed to win an overall majority but the Conservatives considered power-sharing with the Liberals.
Hey REMOANERS...he is really doing it!
Government to ask Queen to suspend Parliament
BoJo/Dominic Cummings is running rings around you
I'm just going to sit back and watch the breakdown from the Left. Going to be glorious.
Such a difference to the dull and lifeless TMay administration.
– Matt Hancock again: “A policy on Brexit to prorogue Parliament would mean the end of the Conservative Party as a serious party of government.”
– Work and Pensions Secretary Amber Rudd during the Tory leadership contest: “I think it’s outrageous to consider proroguing Parliament. We are not Stuart kings.”
– Chancellor Sajid Javid in the Channel 4 leadership debate: “You don’t deliver on democracy by trashing democracy. We are not selecting a dictator of our country, we are selecting a prime minister of our country.”
– Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Michael Gove on the BBC’s The Andrew Marr Show: “I think it will be wrong for many reasons. I think it would not be true to the best traditions of British democracy.”
– Culture Secretary Nicky Morgan on the BBC’s Question Time programme: “Proroguing Parliament is clearly a mad suggestion. You cannot say you are going to take back control … and then go: ‘Oh, by the way, we are just going to shut Parliament down for a couple of months, so we are just going to drift out on a no deal’.”
www.indy100.com
And then there is this idea from some people, you might have heard them, there is this idea from some people, that to deliver Brexit, we should suspend our parliamentary democracy.
That we should prorogue parliament. But that goes against everything that those men who waded onto those beaches fought and died for. And I will not have it
Sounds like you'd be right at home.Cynical, hypocritical liars.
Yeah because Mugabe went to seek approval from his queen after his parliament has demonstrably screwed the pooch on the country's most important topic for well over 2 years ...My goodness. Johnson goes full on Mugabe
Let's check in with Johnson's own Cabinet members' previously stated views on proroguing Parliament.
What Cabinet ministers previously said about suspending Parliament - Jersey Evening Post
During the Tory leadership contest, a series of Cabinet ministers hit out at the prospect of proroguing Parliament.jerseyeveningpost.com
![]()
This clip of Matt Hancock talking about 'suspending parliament' has aged terribly
This clip of Matt Hancock talking about 'suspending parliament' now looks utterly ridiculous. In the clip, which saw Hancock talking in the conservative party leadership election in June the health secretary can be heard saying: And then there is this idea from some people, you might have heard...www.indy100.com
Cynical, hypocritical liars.
Yeah because Mugabe went to seek approval from his queen after his parliament has demonstrably screwed the pooch on the country's most important topic for well over 2 years ...
How about you check your melodrama?
Johnson is a self serving documented liar of note and the rest of them are Tories. What else would you expect?
It's amazing to watch the fan boys clapping like it's some kind of victory in a football match. I mean, can you imagine if CR pulled a move like this here? My god it would be absolute chaos from these same people with cries of banana republic, death of democracy and the next Zimbabwe etc.
Hypocrites indeed.
Democracy was the official referendum on the topic.Yeah, it's only democracy huh.
Nothing to see here.
Democracy was the official referendum on the topic.
Not doing a damn thing for over two years and actively working against the will of the people is NOT democracy, it is a fahking farce.
1) Parliament does this every year.
2) The Ramamessiah is taking away the government protection individual rights by changing the constitution. The worst thing that will happen because of Brexit will be that rich cnuts like Hugh Grant will have to get a visa to go skiing in France.
3) If you read that guardian link I posted, you will see that one of the times this was used was for the UK to join the EEC. The very same thing the remainders are now desperate to keep.
4) Parliament has had 3 fekking years to sort out Brexit. They have not.
5) If Johnson, an elected leader, is pushing the state to follow legislation that Parliament wrote, to implement the results of a referendum is what you are terming undemocratic, then that term has no meaning.
6) The Tory Party is dead already. This is its last grasp before it and labour implode sh!ts it's pants.
If Johnson as PM didn't do this now, it would be Farage in the future.
Democracy was the official referendum on the topic.
Not doing a damn thing for over two years and actively working against the will of the people is NOT democracy, it is a fahking farce.
There are reasons codified all over the world in the laws of many countries for circumventing an inefficient parliamentary process. National emergencies, martial law, executive decisions etc are exactly that: circumvent inefficiencies, not circumvent "democracy".
And let's not pretend we don't already know what the retarded parliament wants to do, things like voting to take hard brexit off the table that have zero effect other than signal to the EU there's no need to concede anything because the UK won't go for hard brexit. Someone must make the EU believe no deal is a reality, say what you want of BJ, but he is doing just that.