I’m not sure if they’re making “mistakes” or dealing with an impossible conflict of responsibilities.
Interesting that you say that. The last time — and I think the only time — such a power has been relied upon was by a guy called Kerr, and not everyone thought that he did the right thing.
The problem with codifying powers is that no matter how simple and clear it may seem when it’s done, other interpretations will emerge.
And the real problem with elections is this. There will be a contest. Debates and campaign speeches. And what are the candidates going to say? “I’ll put more meaningless platitudes in my speeches when I open bridges? I’ll stay out of public notice more than my opponent?”
No. The candidates will say what candidates always say. They’ll promise to do things. They’ll promise to make the role of president more meaningful and relevant.
And whoever gets elected will then consider that he or she has been given a mandate to do what they promised. They’ll flex their muscles, test the limits of their powers. And because they’ll be politicians, they’ll get involved in politics. Which I think most people would agree is the last thing they want.
I agree with what was said above: the role of the president should be ceremonial and formal. And the way to make as sure of that as possible is by appointing the president in what is practically the same way as it’s done now, ie by consensus among members from all sides of politics.
Knowing that said person has the power to dismiss them and a notional loyalty to something other than the parliamentarians. That’s important.
Dammit. I keep saying to keep it on Brexit and then add to the republican thing!
So do as I say and not as…
Well, except that you’re saying that no deal wouldn’t be off the table, it would just be further towards the back. And the extension idea assumes that the EU would agree, with would require all members to consent.
And the problem with your second proposal is that the second referendum it would need to get broad support. And so far nothing has managed to get broad support.
I never said Corbyn (it’s spelt with a Y) had any power to do anything except sit down at a table with everyone else and see if somehow they can come up with a solution.
And it’s not Teresa May’s farkup. It’s the referendum’s farkup. The referendum at which a small majority voted to leave for a whole variety of reasons, and without any common idea of how the leaving would be effected.
As I understand it, it’s not within the UK’s power to extend the deadline. They can only ask and the EU is currently saying they’ll decline it unless a plan with unanimous UK parliament support can be shown. Which seems counterintuitive because if such support existed there’d be no need to extend.
It IS within their remitt to abandon Brexit entirely but there seems no political will to go against the Ref vote without another one.
The rest is problematic because the DUP could crash the government, Labour aren’t exactly United on a Brexit strategy, there doesn’t seem to be a consensus on a 2nd Ref, some want Custom unions, some free market unions, etc etc. Most of the bigger parties appear to be split.
most of the MP’s oppose Brexit. It was never viable and I always thought they were never going to leave. People can think May is hopeless but she has done a good job in pretending to get a deal to buy time and until it was clear that a second referendum would win by a reasonable margin. They dont want to make the same mistake twice. The EU has already said it would agree to an extension which will be taken and assume it will be until october. I can only see an election on Brexit as an option to get Corbyn to commit one way or the other and then a dont leave win will make it necessary for a referendum which will be a gauranteed win. There may be a referendum before any election but would think the conservatives would do better to go to elections first
Well Comrade, I think your hero Gough may be turning in his grave
I REALLY hope this is true and a second referendum will occur. But the craziness I’ve seen makes me wonder if actually, no, this is truly just a car crash in slow motion we’re watching.
EU haven’t said they’d extend the time - at least publicly- , and something one of their senior officials said was along the lines of " and even if we did, we’d want it sorted before the European Parliament Elections" which I think is in May? They don’t want a new UK contingent of officials in the next Euro parliament if they’re still trying to Brexit (yea, verily, it’s now a verb!) soon after.
this is from EU ministers
They are saying they will accept an extension which is the logical path for them as they dont want brexit either so giving Britain time to reverse it is in their interests
I can’t read that behind the firewall, but it says " may…with conditions". At the moment, it is unclear if UK can meet those conditions - if the EU maintain their stance.
you can google it as I did and then read it. think it is reasonably clear that they will agree to an extensions and the conditions are obvious, that the time isnt used to get concessions from the EU but rather to get consensus in Britain, which to my mind is another referendum but it s open of course
Corbyn is Leader of the Opposition, and it is not his job to sit down with a Tory PM and get her out of the ■■■■■.
And this mess is Mays to fix, the referendum was clear, and she accepted the job as PM and must get it done. What the EU want is not that hard.
Sorry, but it isn’t a mess May made either. She voted Remain.
Corbyn has presented himself to the UK as an option to be their next leader. That should create responsibilities to the nation that go beyond naked self-interest. He’s had the opportunity to try and save his country from committing harakiri. Instead, he’s joined in the right’s madness by promising pink unicorn after pink unicorn, to try and keep everyone on side. He’s shown absolutely no ability to take a side, because he knows if he showed his true colours he’d lose the leadership and/or two thirds of labour voters, but if he did what his party’s platform is and his voters want, he’d be going against his own views and the other third of labour voters. So its just string along, string along, promise everything, and help May obfuscate the issues all in the hope that there can be a vote of no confidence and he’ll win the subsequent election.
He has systematically failed to show any leadership, and has contributed to his country as a minimum wasting millions of pounds on Brexit discussions, and at worse making the worst economic decision of any country in living history.
Yep, I’m not pro-monarchy at all but the Republicans failed miserably at selling any real reason to change. Deep down I would agree that most Australians’ would prefer to sever the official ties to the Queen but we don’t really see the Monarchy as any more than figureheads who have little to no actual impact on the way the country runs. The natural fear is that changing the system makes it worse.
Sorry Ants, but that is Frogshite.
Firstly it is not relevant how May or Corbyn voted on Brexit, they are just one vote like the rest. Neither are to blame for a democratic result.
However May accepted being PM when the other Coward quit. It is her Governments mess to fix, and no-one else but the Government has the power.
Corbyn is Leader of the Opposition in the Westminister system, but can only continue to highlight the issues and keep pressure on her Majesty’s Government to perform. He is not to blame for any of this.
Your argument follows that Bill Shorten is somehow responsible to help ScoMo fix his Governments fark ups ! Just not the way it can work.
Rubbish. His responsibility is to the people he wants to lead, and the nation as a whole. He’s just used it for his own benefit. And plenty of people know it, which is why his figures are so bad despite what the Tories have been up to.
This isn’t a “government fark up”, this is the most defining event in the UK’s history since the end of WWII. Yes he ■■■■■■ well should be working with the government to create a real solution, rather than hoping it all goes to hell and he gets in power.
Between Corbyn’s labour and the people who voted for May’s deal they have the votes to pass anything they want. To fob off his responsibility and the fact he has deliberately contributed to the false information around Brexit and failed to do anything to try and resolve it in a positive fashion such a skewed viewing of events that it seems pretty biased.
What don’t you get ? Corbyn is Leader of the Opposition, and has no say in Government. He is exactly doing the job he is paid to do. I have no real interest in his “figures”, as whoever is in Government in UK is largely irrelevant to us.
Failure to negotiate the exit from the EU is the British Government’s fark up, who else is responsible ? May cannot even get her Party to support her, and you are blaming Corbyn ! As I said Frogshite.