Cookie Notice

WE LOVE THE NATIONS OF EUROPE
However, this blog is a US service and this site uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and analyze traffic. Your IP address and user-agent are shared with Google along with performance and security metrics to ensure quality of service, generate usage statistics, and to detect and address abuse.

Friday, 20 September 2019

Schrödinger's Weekend

The HoL Supreme Court will keep us on tenterhooks until Monday (I think) for the prorogation ruling so enjoy the next three days. I always regarded this time, between the conclusion of submissions and the finding of the adjudicator in construction disputes, as a Schrödinger's Holiday; you don't know whether you've won or lost, so both states exist, you can do nothing more, there are no more deadlines, no more lengthy case conferences, so you might as well chill and do some leisure.

It seems Dave's gob has ended any hopes that Sam Cam may have nurtured at ever becoming Lady Cameron. Silly chump. However, Fraser Nelson  in the Telegraph reckons that Dave's Brussels experiences should have made him a Leaver anyway -
Once inside its inner circle, he was exposed to the horrors. The directives, the stitch-ups, the knives always out for the City of London. He found Silvio Berlusconi advising a table of EU leaders to take a mistress in Brussels, because it was the only way to survive the late-night summits. The purpose of these meetings, he discovered, was to grind everyone into submission. Including, eventually, him.
He found the EU to be "peacenik" on security, unable to respond to threats on its doorstep. He vetoed one of the eurozone bailout packages that threatened to suck in Britain, only to see the rules changed so the UK veto would not count. When the UK tried to go its own way, it "wasn’t simply a disagreement with the others, it was a heresy against the scripture".
We were early here in blogging about the deep need for democratic housekeeping in the UK and certainly over the months and years posts about reform and renewal, legal and electoral systems generate deeply felt and high quality participation. I'm wondering whether constitutional reform could be another Europe - let me explain.

Before the referendum, the political wisdom was that no-cared about the EU except a small and vocal group of fanatics. June 2016 brought a Damascene revelation - suddenly the entire nation was galvanised into passionate interest. Who knew? Well, today the political wisdom is that an election can be fought on the old ground of education, law and order, the NHS. To suggest that local government or constitutional reform might be a manifesto issue seems as absurd as suggesting in 2010 that the nation would polarise over the EU.

25 comments:

r_writes esq. said...

Yes Raedwald, despite my possibly juvenile rants about direct democracy, in my heart I know that nothing much is likely to happen.

We probably won't even leave the EU in the end.

The ship of state in this place runs so slowly, that it is still deliberating over the Sykes-Picot agreement from the Great War.

DeeDee99 said...

I think a manifesto commitment to deliver significant Constitutional reform would prove to be a vote winner.

The problem is we really don't want the current anti-democratic, pro-EU, bubble-dwelling Establishment to reform it. They will only ever "reform" it in their own interests and to retain power.

Dave_G said...


DeeDee - hasn't your experience of existing manifesto pledges coloured your opinion on their practicality? The Parties run whatever manifesto they think will garner the support they need - then drop it when it suits them.

Unless Party manifestos are made legally binding there is zero chance that turkeys will ever vote for Christmas.

John Brown said...

If the Supreme Court decides it can adjudicate on the workings of Parliament and the motives of the PM, then I would expect the government to take the Speaker to court for “creative Parliamentary procedures” and partiality with a view to cancelling the bill to block leaving the EU with “no deal” (on WTO terms).

Such a decision by the Supreme Court will also initiate calls for judges to be elected.

Anonymous said...

The only reform that is urgently needed is to update the boundaries of constituencies.

The rest can wait until the dust of Brexit dies down.

Don Cox

JPM said...

JB. It is not judging Parliamentary procedures.

It is trying to decide whether the Queen was misled, and in turn whether that invalidated the process of prorogation.

It has other related deliberations, but that is the basis of the successful Scottish claim.

Mr Ecks said...



The time for remainiac bullshit is passing. BoJo should arrest the fucking beaks for high treason in their own court if they rule against us.

Ignore their cockrot---re-pero' until 5th Nov and go No Deal.

Any trouble from remainiac scum--well after 3 years of their evil and lies many of us would be glad to ensure it doesn't go their way.

John in Cheshire said...

The EU is the enemy of our country.
The Remainers are enemies of our country.
We are at war with our enemies. A war they declared against us.
What does a nation do in times of war? Doesn't it defeat the enemy?
And once defeated, doesn't the victor; ie. We, the people of England; ensure that the enemy cannot trouble us again; at least for a very long time?
So, Prime Minister Johnson, I hope, realises this; or at least his team do; and make a plan to defeat our enemies and implement it with extreme prejudice. Because it the enemy win, they will punish us for trying to break free from our chains.

JPM said...

Who here has actually raised a family, just out of interest?

Mark said...

What relevance is that?

If you are trying "think of the children", you really are done here.

Anonymous said...

JPM said @ 10:25

'It is trying to decide whether the Queen was misled, and in turn whether that invalidated the process of prorogation.'

The purpose of prorogation is to put forward a legislative program under a new prime minister, thus one session ends and new one begins. It's irrelevant if judges in Scotchland think this 'stymies' parliament because the act of prorogation is political and the Queen's involvement constitutional:

'a body of fundamental principals or established precedents according to which a state or organisation is governed'

These are affairs of state and no matter what you think the rules have not been broken.

Steve

Jock Ular said...

Expecting a large order for passport-blue paint to fob off the gullible folks as that Irish border transpods itself to the Irish Sea. Beam it across Scotty!

Boris vin Chaud said...

Almost at the end of the 30 days to complete his homework for Frau Merkel.

Are any of his Brexit friends free to come over an complete it for Boris over the weekend?

JPM said...

Steve, I bet that Her Maj spat out the Earl Grey when Al told her that, don't you?

It's notable, that one of Farbage's favourite squawks, and that of his thralls, against the European Union's Parliament was that it has no such thing as a Private Member's Bill.

All the hair-tearing and garment rending, by the same poor loves now, is precisely because the UK's does, apparently.

Happy days.

Mark said...

"it has no such thing as a Private Member's Bill"

This is a good thing?

Go on, answer (I dare you!)

Anonymous said...

I think the Slog nails it:

https://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2019/09/12/overwhelming-evidence-of-eu-perfidy-evokes-this-daft-question-from-remoanoids-did-boris-lie-to-the-queen/

Boris Johnson insists he did not lie to the Queen when asking her to prorogue Parliament. I can well believe this, and would imagine the tete-à-tete went something like this:

BoJo: Well mum, it’s like this: a rabble of power-mad Communists not dissimilar to those who wiped out your Romanov great-cousins have formed an unholy alliance with bought federalist sympathisers determined to ensure that your head disappears from the currency, and we become the Angleland multicultural Alcatraz gulag for those who dare to oppose the will of Franco-German Brit haters.

QE2: Oh dear. So what exactly do you want to do about it Prime Minister?

B: Much as it pains me mum, I should like to stop these power and money corrupted Trojans by a little perfectly legal constitutional subterfuge, and prorogue this Parliament, whose long sitting demands it. This will, as a happy by-product, enable me to ensure that the wishes of your subjects to remain independent shall be carried through by a Parliament whose MPs promised so to do.

Q: Sounds like a no-brainer to me. Carry on Prime Minister….

If you can see something misleading in that approach to Her Maj, do tell.

Span Ows said...

Anon 01:07 21st Sept. The Slog (John) is always worth a read, much like Raedwald.

I imagine it went very much like that, or at least MORE like that than the Queen being duped by a lying BoJo. It is simply pathetic to imagine such a thing...I mean if her Majesty was senile, didn't read the papers, didn't watch TV ot listen to radio, didn't have any advisers etc then one may imagine a slight possibility but...not so. Ridiculaous of these twats to even think so. In fact she should have them arrested for saying such tosh out loud.

JPM, I have 4 children, mostly raised by a very competent mother but also me involved, ranging from 18 to 29...please elaborate on a point, if you have one.

JPM said...

If the European Union had party political government, with government and opposition benches in its parliament, then the absence of private member's bills would be very serious, as there would be no way for laws representing other popular movements to be considered.

However, it does not, and so it is open to all MEPs, to make submissions to the Commission to be considered for implementation on the same consultative, consensual basis as all the rest. It is in fact open to all the people of the EU, not just to MEPs to do this, via the Citizen's initiative - kept secret by the BBC etc.

The European Union does not really have government at all, in the sense that most would understand it.

I've answered. Now why do you think that UK MPs should be prevented from submitting Private Member's Bills, as you clearly do?

JPM said...

Span, your family position is similarl to mine. Just interested. You'd appear to be one of the few others here.

Mark said...

@Cheerful

I don't think that MPs should be prevented prevented from submitting private members bills and why on earth do you think I do? Utterly moronic attempt at deflection even for you!

The European "parliament" is a rubber stamp talking shop so why would it need a private members bill? What purpose would it serve in such an edifice?

Well you fell for it, but I didn't think you would actually confirm for all to see that MEPs ARE irrelevant!

Citizens initiative? Have to confess I hadn't heard of it. Thanks for pointing it out though. For those with a love of the surreal, look it up. Can't believe you cite this to support your - I suppose I must use the word - case!

Any more such pearls to cast before us swine?

JPM said...

The European Union's "rubber-stamping" Parliament refused to rubber-stamp TTIP, didn't it? And quite right too. The UK will have to bend over and take it on steroids, on the other hand.

Because of the consultative, and not adversarial nature of lawmaking there, laws don't get put before Parliament until all of the foreseen problems are ironed out as far as possible.

So Farbage can make his silly, groundless caricature, and his witless followers will buy it, along with the rest of his tripe.

It would be astonishing if they did otherwise.

Glad to see that you approve of the recent private member's bills here though, though that does surprise me rather.

Mark said...

Ha ha ha,

The more you try to adopt this air of snotty, haughty superiority!

So you also now confirm that this "parliament" does simply have things put before it to rubber stamp.

Very interesting variant of Tourettes you have. Compels you to gurn "Farage" totally at random.

JPM said...

Mark, the MEPs have already been involved in wide-ranging consultation before the measures are submitted for formal approval, so it is absolutely not a rubber-stamper. They tabled about a hundred and fifty amendments to TTIP, and it was slung out.

That is completely different from a party political adversarial system as we have in the UK.

But you're only interested in time wasting anyway, so that'll do for now.

Mark said...

@Cheerful

Go on, skulk away as usual.

Mark said...

@Cheerful

Go on, skulk away as usual!