Prevarication, Def: See UK Parliament.

Well, talk about mixed messages... last night Parliament said they liked Boris's deal, but.... then voted to delay implementing it until at least January.

And who among us believes that Parliament will agree to implement the deal in January?

Who amongst us believes that Parliament will instead request yet another delay if the EU haven't included the UK the new phase of the Lisbon treaty that comes into force in 2020?

Who among us are suspicious that the delay to January allows the full force of the Lisbon treaty to come into force and nullify article 50 and keep us in the EU indefinitely?

What I'm alluding to is the change that comes about in the Lisbon treaty in 2020. Instead of a country leaving unilaterally by implementing article 50, the method of exit changes to a country having to request an exit and the EU voting to allow the exit.

Despite the protests to the contrary by pro-EU websites, I suspect that this is the case and that the part of the backstop that removed the ability to exit unilaterally and instead required us to be subject to a unilateral vote in the EU was actually in place to align us with the Lisbon treaty post-2020.

It changes to being a permissive system: the country has to request permission to leave, which would almost always be refused.

Guess what? Although we have triggered article 50, we're still in the EU. Not only that, we are still in the EU well past the article 50 deadline of two years.

Now it can be argued legally that although we triggered article 50, we never (as a country) intended to leave, as witnessed by the multiple requests to extend and stay inside the EU.

So legally it can be argued that our article 50 request is null and void, thereby committing us to continued EU membership without a unilateral exit procedure.

Without a Hint of Irony....

The SNP in Parliament yesterday tabled an urgent question asking members to condemn the jailing of the Catalan politicians who held an illegal (in Spanish law) referendum and tried to abide by the democratic result.

The same SNP who went to court and continue to fight in Parliament against the democratic result of a legal referendum in the UK.

Now what words would you use to describe such an action? Irony probably isn't correct. Hypocrisy maybe?

Topsy-Turvy: Flipping the EU Debate on its Head Gives Clarity.

I've said before that all this turmoil over the Brexit referendum is better if we just for a second imagined that the result was 52/48 in favour of remain.

Would we still be talking about the result three years later? Would Parliament actively be working against the Government to secure an exit from the EU on behalf of the referendum losers?

No, absolutely not. The losing voters would have been told that the matter is settled, we were staying in the EU and a mere few months after the referendum, government process would have turned away from the question and life would have continued as before. The Status Quo would very much be in place.

Any losers would have been told vehemently to "suck it up" and just carry on as if nothing had happened.

Of course because the result was the opposite, we have had the opposite reaction: a Parliament that has time and time again conspired against the Government, and who is now taking about not settling the matter with an election, but going to the lengths of deposing the incumbent government and anointing the leader of the opposition as Prime Minister in order to defer the exit from the EU.

For three years we have had obfuscation, delay, chicanery and bending of laws and precedents in order to oppose leaving.

For what purpose? What sunlit uplands do those that conspire to keep us in the EU see in the UK's future as part of the EU? We know that remainers say there will be catastrophyThere is very little said about what a future for the EU looks like with the UK as part of it. All we hear is how bad exiting the EU will be, we never hear of the real tangible benefits of staying in the EU.

For instance, there is no mention of the stronger European Defence Force envisioned for the future of the EU, no mention of the harmonised income tax regimes planned for the future, no mention of harmonised national budgets. No one on the remain side is putting forward the positive effects of these at all. just that the status quo is better than the unknown quantity of change. I wonder why, is it possibly that those things are precisely what made UK voters vote to leave the EU? Are they net benefits after all or not? From the actions of the remainers and their reluctance to offer tangible benefits, I suspect not. All was talked about briefly during the referendum, but due to Brexit have been put on the back burner by the EU whilst we thrash out a possible deal.

And in that last sentence is the clue certainly to what a future EU would look like without the UK is a member. So frit are they of rocking the boat, the most ambitious plans of the EU have been put on hold for three years, with only moderate advances in those areas. Where before the referendum there were great and ambitious plans coming from Brussels.

Without the UK, the EU would collapse. So desperate are they to have us as a member, they are willing to forestall all major plans so that those in the UK that plan to keep us in the EU don't have anything adverse happen that could give ammunition to the leavers. Nothing that could allow a leaver to say "Aha! Told you so!".

THAT is the great tell, the thing that you look for in a Poker game when sizing up the hand of your opposition.

In another Poker analogy, the EU has a weak hand and they are bluffing.

The EU are busily working under the table to garner support. There are already reports of MPs working with EU representatives to table legislation in the UK Parliament. We already have reports of UK civil servants working with their EU counterparts as well.

Sadly Boris Johnson's government is too weak to propose legislation to outlaw this. But at least the civil servants conspiring against government policy and working with the EU should be removed from office. MPs will face their voters and be made to defend their actions.

But as the title states, by turning things on their head, you can see more clearly why the actors in the Brexit saga are playing the roles they do.

I suspect the EU has more to lose if we leave without any agreement. I suspect those that clamour for us to remain and the organised protests to do the same are a good indication that the EU and their supporters are desperate for us to stay not for our sake, but for the EU's.

As the clock ticks closer to the 31st of October, the lengths that the EU supporters in Media, Parliament and now the judiciary are stooping to is a great indicator if you can step back and see the big picture.

I suspect that things will escalate further as the month progresses without a capitulation to the EU.

I just wonder if so petitioned by the public, the Queen could announce the dissolution of Parliament instead of giving a speech announcing governmental policy. After all the government can request a dissolution and they are classed as the voice of the public in Parliament. Could the public have the power to petition the monarch directly I wonder?  It would be wonderful to see the massed ranks of members of Parliament be dismissed and told to put their case to the voters.

Prorogation is deemed unlawful in Scotland

Not sure how it affects the British Parliament in Westminster, but a Scottish court has declared the prorogation of Parliament unlawful.

They say that are convinced the prorogation was for the "improper purpose of stymying Parliament".

Completely ignoring the fact that Prorogation happens every year at conference time anyway and the extension to allow the Queen's speech is a mere four days. I bet her Madg' isn't impressed one of her courts is playing fast and loose with the constitution, the government's intent and context.

But then again, Scottish courts have a habit of ignoring context and making up the intentions of defendants. Re: Count Dankula.

Interesting: does that mean all the Scottish MPs can return to Parliament to sit and twiddle their thumbs while the English MPs stay away as commanded by the Queen?

This really is the mother of all constitutional fuckups.

So really, what this all says is: you can vote for anyone you want, but if someone has the money to pay the court costs, they can stymy any government voted into power and even worse reverse the democratically voted intention of the population.

Okay:

I want the details of where I can find a bunch of guys that know how to operate challenger tanks and where the ammo is stored. They also need to know where the small arms are and their ammo. I want a people's army. No fucking about, I want heavy armour and I want a properly equipped Army.

We may need to go to war with these cunts. A proper, fighting war....

Indeed we need tanks on the Westminster lawn.

Democracy only works with the consent of the losers. They have refused to consent. It seems now is the time to enforce democracy.

Prorogation

Prorogation

Noun

meaning:

the action of discontinuing a session of a parliament or other legislative assembly without dissolving it.

The media has worked itself into a frenzy over the prorogation of Parliament. The fact is that prorogation is an entirely legitimate mechanism of Parliament.

The other salient fact is that Parliament hasn't had a Queen's speech (and with it any new legislation) for THEE YEARS.

For the past two years critics have been saying that Parliament has been paralysed by Brexit and they are right. No new legislative proposals have come out of government for three years. Current legislation harks back to a time when the Maybot scraped through the election. That's before article 50 was enacted, before any deals had been done, before chequers, before the Olly Robbins stitch-up, before the withdrawal agreement, before the backstop.

All we have had in the intervening time, is Parliament and private individuals like Gina Miller attempting to stop Brexit and thwart the role of the government enacting the very thing the people had told them to enact. .i.e. leaving the EU.

It's been Brexit, Brexit, Brexit. It's time to settle the matter and move on.

The media is calling it a government coup.
How can it be, when all the government are doing is suspending Parliament until the Queen's speech. There are no tanks on the lawns of Westminster, there are no soldiers barring MPs entry to the Houses of parliament. They will have plenty of time to debate whatever new agreement comes out of talks between Boris Johnson's government and the EU.

What they won't have time for is unnecessary shenanigans like votes of confidence and other delaying tactics put in place by MPs.
 The media are calling it undemocratic. How can it be undemocratic to move ahead and leave the EU when commanded by the people? The referendum was the biggest democratic exercise in UK history. The biggest ever vote. The people spoke. How can it be undemocratic to follow their instructions?

I suggest that the Johnson government needs to let dissenting anti-Brexit MPs in leave-voting constituencies understand in no uncertain terms that they will not get the PMs full support and they will be left to fight against the Brexit party on their own.

Where MPs have voted in accordance their leave-voting constituency, I believe that the Brexit party should leave well alone.

The rump of remain constituencies should feel the full force of a Brexit party PR campaign, blasting out the message that despite them voting to remain in the EU, the majority voted to leave. The majority decision, like all previous majority decisions in political history, should be carried by the government of the day and those that voted leave have no mandate to thwart the view of the majority.

The result of the referendum was clear, with no ambiguity: the people of the UK wish to leave the EU. The government has leeway in HOW they leave the EU, but leave it they must. And leave it in a way that satisfies the electorate, otherwise they will not be in government after the next election. Boris Johnson understands this and is trying his best to move forward with the will of the people.

Its something that Theresa May, the House of Lords, Gina Miller and all the anti-Brexit MPs in the commons fail to understand.

Parliamentary Paralysis: Time us the people acted?

Last night PLP meeting and their decision to back Gordon Brown proved Labour's total disregard for the democratic process.

We were denied the election after Brown became leader and so his mandate is forefeit.

We were denied the referendum on the Lisbon Treaty and so Labour's mandate on Europe is forefeit.

We have been denied our place in the democratic process to comment on MP's abuse of expenses, so Parliament's mandate is forefeit.

The time has come I am starting to believe, if we are denied a democratic voice by Parliament, then us the people should undemocratically remove Parliament from power.

I'm with Old Holborn. Its time the people made their voice and actions ring loud and clear.

Parliamentary Paralysis Continues

Well, it seems Gordon Brown has, with his reshuffle, paralysed his whole Parliamentary Party. The knives were out just after Thursday, but now seem firmly sheathed as I assume, the plotters regroup and form a new strategy.

They will find it difficult to formulate, now that arch-plotter-in-chief Lord Mandleson is sat at Gordon's right.

But what do you expect of self-serving scum-suckers like the ones we see seated as Labour MPs?
What a state has come to pass when there is no one, NO LEADER IN THE LABOUR PARTY, who will take the reigns, rally the troops and rid us of the festering political sore that is Gordon Brown. They dither and prevaricate, forever pushing each other to enact the deed, like schoolchildren daring each other.

This is not the time to think of the interests of the party, its time IN THE INTEREST OF THE NATION GORDON BROWN GOES ASAP.

You know it, I know it and those veterans who risked their lives on D-Day to protect this nation know it too, thats why they booed him today. If only Labour MPs were as brave. Yes, it may be they lose their political jobs, but it is far from ultimate sacrifice our soldiers paid on those French beaches.

We cannot and will not stand by as this sore festers on for another year before us the voters are allowed our say.

Maybe its time we boorowed something from our American cousins and declared Saturday the 4th of July OUR independance day: the day we declared independance from the political incompetants that run our country. The day we marched on Parliament and demanded its dissolution and the chance for us to have our say on the whole sordid mess.

Gordon Brown Gets Told the Truth.

Dan Hannan MEP (who deserves a medal) tells Gordon Brown what everyone else in the country wants to tell him. All Gordo does is smirk, looking all the world like the buffoonish madman everyone thinks he is.

Well he would smirk wouldn't he, he's ruined the country and still gets a fat pension. Remember Gordon, there should be no reward for failure.

This video is doing the rounds on the blogosphere, but hat-tip to Guido Fawkes where I saw it first.

I saw Dan Hannan on the Daily Politics a couple of weeks ago. He was the most lucid politician I've heard in a long time. Maybe thats a result of being in the European Parliament and not Westminster, maybe he's better able to talk without the withering machinery of state we have here, but his speech just shows what OUR Parliament should be, without the bollocks of protocol thats been hijacked by New Labour in order to stunt true debate and discussion.

Update:

In contrast, the Labour propaganda machine that is the BBC has this report on Gordon Brown's visit to the European Parliament. No mention of the Dan Hannan speech at all. It just confirms for me the bias in BBC reporting.
Lets see if the newspapers do report on it in the morning.