UK General Discussion Thread: mayy lmao

[ag]

Could anyone have imagined that Cameron's time as PM would end before Obama left office?

The beauty of parliamentary democracy.

[ag]

With Cameron out, wouldn't the politically expedient thing to do for the major parties be to call a new general election? I mean [inks] is going to hit the fan either way so I don't see what the Conservatives lose for agreeing to it (either they have a new mandate for an even longer term in office or they get to say Labour is at fault when things go awry over the next few years).

You forget that there may be a hung Parliament. SNP has 54 seats, and will not likely lose any. LDP will likely grow big, on the pro-EU electorate.  What are the chances of either Labour or Tories getting a majority?

[ag]

Two Labour MPs submit a no confidence motion against Corbyn

Ugh.

Good. World needs the Labour party that is alive.

[ag]

Hillary Benn is planning a coup.

Honestly, is there anyone in the Labour party up to it?

Dan Jarvis maybe?

I think there are quite a few. Corbyn will not survive till the next weekend.

[ag]

Lib Dems want to ignore the Brexit result

Great! Exactly what I thought would/should happen. There will, at least, be a coherent European voice in Westminster even after Scotland leaves.

[ag]

The key thing to note is the list of people who have not resigned. Not just Burnham; there are some obviously ambitious people who have stayed put today.

Which ones did so because they think this increases their chances to replace Corbyn?

[ag]

Boris now says the vote to leave was "not entirely overwhelming" and Gove wants the exit talks to be informal.

They're  beginning to realise what exactly they've done and they're terrified.

Plan Boris was obviously for a narrow Remain vote and for him to then ride the coattails of anger amongst Tory members in the Shires to no. 10.

What does he do now? Either he becomes PM and starts article 50 and all the economic uncertainty and probable doom that comes with it. Or he decides to sit out the leadership race and gets exposed as an opportunistic charlatan.

I mean, if he has any decency left in him, he will retire from politics NOW.

Of course, he will not.

[ag]

Boris now says the vote to leave was "not entirely overwhelming" and Gove wants the exit talks to be informal.

They're  beginning to realise what exactly they've done and they're terrified.

Plan Boris was obviously for a narrow Remain vote and for him to then ride the coattails of anger amongst Tory members in the Shires to no. 10.

This is what everybody is saying right now, but what I just can't understand. How could anyone supporting a losing side of a referendum immediately be in a good position to become the next Prime Minister?

By becoming the leader of an important - and possibly difficult to control - segment of the party.

[ag]

I'm starting to think of a scenario where Corbyn wins the election, the PLP freaks out and splits and somehow convinces Farron to do a Lib Dem merger 2.0. I just want to see it because I want to see how hilarious it would be if the Lib Dems somehow become the official opposition for four months.

Are you sure it would only be four months? If a major split occurs, we might be in for a serious realignment.

[ag]

I could see an "Alliance" between anti-Corbyn Labour and the LibDems but I doubt the LibDems would get to be dominant.

Well, but if the Labour name is taken by the Corbynites, they will have to think up something new. So, Should it be Liberal Labour Party? I like LLP for the abbreviation

[ag]

Theresa May[be] has finally decided to go ahead with the Heathrow runway expansion; but is putting off a commons vote until 2017.

Zac Goldsmith has resigned to run a by-election on the 'issue' but it will most likely be about Brexit, Brexit and a bit more Brexit. The Liberals will be looking at this seat with high hopes (was held by them from 97-2010) and it's the typical lib dem seat (white, middle class professionals, progressive leaning etc)

Tories not running a candidate

Really hope LibDems get this one.  Would be great on every count imaginable.

[ag]

You know I'm about as pro-EU as a left-winger could possibly be these days, but all those Labour MPs voting against article 50 are pathetic.

They happen to be the only honest Labour MPs.

[ag]

You know I'm about as pro-EU as a left-winger could possibly be these days, but all those Labour MPs voting against article 50 are pathetic.

They happen to be the only honest Labour MPs.

TIL the role of an MP is to rule her constituents, not to put their desires into practice in the best-intentioned and most expedient way possible or any ~populist~ nonsense like that. How Burkean of you!

Aside for the fact that this is, most definitely, the role of an MP in general, a lot of Labour MPs come from constituencies that overwhelmingly voted against the Brexit. For them to vote in favour of this law would be to directly go against the wishes of their constituents. BTW, this also is the case with Madam May herself: clearly, she does not believe in voting the way her constituents want her to.

And, of course, referenda are evil and should never be used.

[ag]

Ken Clarke, of course, is the only remaining Statesman in England today. It is such a pity he is retiring after this parliament. He should just do a Churchill and join the Libs and see if he still has some strength left to go on. He is old, of course, but Churchill at his age was just about to become a PM again.

[ag]

Ken Clarke, of course, is the only remaining Statesman in England today. It is such a pity he is retiring after this parliament. He should just do a Churchill and join the Libs and see if he still has some strength left to go on. He is old, of course, but Churchill at his age was just about to become a PM again.

Well, he is certainly every bit as much of an alcoholic as Churchill.

If I thought that drinking whatever they drink would make me like either one of them, I would drink it.

[ag]

Is the idea that the representatives of the people should abide by the decisions of the majority really that weird?

It is not so much weird, as simply wrong.

And, in any case, an MP is not a representative of the entire people of the UK, but only of his constituency. A lot of the Labour MPs are representatives of the people who abhore Brexit, and who voted against it by humongous margins. So, even going by what I consider to be a misguided idea of yours, they should be voting against Brexit.

[ag]

So if Tony was a member of the Wisconsin legislature in 2007, he would've voted to instate the death penalty? LOL.

There's very little comparison here, it was an advisory referendum, purely symbolical, while Brexit referendum was widely supposed to be biding from day one.

I do not know what it was supposed to be, but it would have been strictly illegal for it to be binding.

[ag]

So Tony, if you were a member of the Wisconsin legislature in 2007, would you fight to instate the death penalty? If you were an official in California's government around 2012 or so, would you fight against legalizing gay marriage?

...seriously?

The analogies fit. Wisconsin voted to reinstate the death penalty in 2006. California voted to ban gay marriage via Prop 8.

No they don't. There is a myriad of differences between those referendums and the Brexit vote and I really don't think it's worth listing them all, but one of the most obvious one is that it was organized through the PM's initiative and the consent of the Parliament.

And why is that at all important?

[ag]

Is the idea that the representatives of the people should abide by the decisions of the majority really that weird?

It is not so much weird, as simply wrong.

Who knew that "modern pragmatic centrists of the 21st century " would be the ones to resurrect Burke and Maistre?

I have always thought of myself as a (small-"c") conservative. It is the conservatism that moved, not me.

Likewise, I have always viewed referenda, especially nationwide referenda, as deeply objectionable within the framework of representative democracy. There is a reason we elect parliaments.

[ag]

We can debate as long as we want about the merits of referenda. However, when a referendum on such a highly salient and fundamental issue is called by the holders of representative democratic legitimacy, when it gives rise to a campaign that dominates all political debates for almost a year, when the basic stakes are made extremely clear (even if the greater implications might not be), then yes, the result of such referendum is morally binding.

On the PM Cameron, yes. So, he did the right thing and resigned. Not on anybody else: and, definitely, not on the opposition. I can see no "moral" reason anybody has to do the wrong thing here.

[ag]

I still fail to see how what ag is arguing doesn't communicate some degree of contempt for democracy

Well, to begin with, I find referenda to be inherently anti-democratic. Should I continue?

[ag]

"Burkean" wasn't intended as an insult as such; I just wasn't sure if ag was aware of the profound conservatism of what he was suggesting.

You can trust that, as a good "small-c", conservative I am

[ag]

If they oust him, I do not think he has many incentives to rejoin the Conservative backbench. Hopefully, he opts for the LD

In any case, once the Conservatives nominate another Speaker from their numbers, they will be down to 328. Ok, there are two UUP and 1 UKIP MPs as well. But we are starting to get into an interesting area

[ag]

If they oust him, I do not think he has many incentives to rejoin the Conservative backbench. Hopefully, he opts for the LD

The normal thing to do would be for him to stand down as an MP and go to the Lords as a crossbencher.  You might hope that the Lib Dems would win the ensuing Buckingham by-election, but I emphasise the word "hope".

It would be kind of hilarious if he decided to stay on as an MP and join an opposition party though.  (The track record of Labour MPs for Buckingham isn't brilliant, mind.)  File under "not going to happen".

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's usually done so that the Speaker and three Deputy Speakers, none of whom vote, are two MPs from the governing party and two not, so that the choice of Speaker doesn't have a partisan effect.

Sure, but the deputy speakers would not change, only the speaker would, and Bercow had been a Tory. So, no matter what happens it would be one Tory less.

There has not been a recent precedent on ousting a speaker: so hard to say what a "normal" thing would be