Reply to: Top Traitors

[BlasterBates]

The speaker has to remain impartial. He has to be careful, given his most recent verbal rhetoric (speeches made in the US), any hint that he favours one side over the other and he could be unseated as speaker. Remember, he always said he would vacate the speakers chair this summer, although absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Absolutely right the speaker can be replaced by a simple confidence vote. If he doesn't get replaced then it's clear where the majority of the MPs are on the debate and in that case:

be afraid
.....be very afraid

[Yorkie62]

The Speaker can find a device to put parliament in the driving seat.

The speaker has to remain impartial. He has to be careful, given his most recent verbal rhetoric (speeches made in the US), any hint that he favours one side over the other and he could be unseated as speaker. Remember, he always said he would vacate the speakers chair this summer, although absolute power corrupts absolutely.

[AtW]

The Speaker can find a device to put parliament in the driving seat.

Guy Fawkes?

[Old Greg]

To exit, yes. To form a Government though needs the confidence of the House.

Worst case scenario, we exit without a deal because there’s no government able to be formed that can do anything about it

The Speaker can find a device to put parliament in the driving seat.

[Mordac]

Seems the people have changed their mind. Leave is no longer larger than remain, at least based on the most recent EU election which was, quite frankly, as pseudo-referendum.

We need what we have been saying for months and months. Westminster agrees a deal (whatever that deal is, could even be 'no-deal') then this is put back to the people to say, do you want this deal or do you want to remain? If it's a moderate leave then it may win. If it's a hard deal, there is a fair chance remain will win.

In your mind, possibly (and I'd have said the same if Brexit had gained 40+% of the vote). Trouble is, if you don't say it's a referendum, you'll still get people voting for the parties they always vote for. It's probably why Labour didn't get quite the same kicking as the Tories. And it doesn't need to be said that both Labour and the Tories should be considered pro-leave parties, based on their previous manifestos.

[meridian]

Govt already formed, they'll just change leader end of July, waste some time trying to "negotiate" with EU and before you know it will be 31st Oct with all legislation in place.

A successor to Theresa May might not automatically become PM

For that to happen, the new leader would have to be called upon by the queen to form a government. That will not happen unless she is advised that they can 'command a majority in the House'. But this will be a very open question.

The advice to the queen would come from two sources. The first would be the outgoing prime minister, who could probably be relied on to recommend her successor. The other would be her own private secretary, Edward Young, and the Cabinet secretary, Mark Sedwill. Their advice will be crucial. Above all they will not want the queen to be dragged in to deciding who forms a government between contending claims.

[AtW]

To exit, yes. To form a Government though needs the confidence of the House. Worst case scenario, we exit without a deal because there’s no government able to be formed that can do anything about it

Govt already formed, they'll just change leader end of July, waste some time trying to "negotiate" with EU and before you know it will be 31st Oct with all legislation in place.

[meridian]

There is already legislation in place for exit, Parliament voted for it in huge majority - it’s all set, all legal.

To exit, yes. To form a Government though needs the confidence of the House.

Worst case scenario, we exit without a deal because there’s no government able to be formed that can do anything about it

[AtW]

Hope so. That would open up an interesting constitutional question: if the Conservatives elect a leader that is explicitly “no deal”, and no deal has no majority in the House, then can the Conservatives claim to have enough support of the House to form a Government?

There is already legislation in place for exit, Parliament voted for it in huge majority - it’s all set, all legal.

[darmstadt]

Boris the moron changes his mind once again:

Writing in the Daily Telegraph, the former foreign secretary said: "No one sensible would aim exclusively for a no-deal outcome.

"No one responsible would take no-deal off the table."
...
The column came on the same day the Times reported that Boris Johnson had been accused of pocketing a five-figure sum for a speech in Switzerland in which he said the UK should prepare to leave under a no-deal scenario.

[BlasterBates]

Hope so. That would open up an interesting constitutional question: if the Conservatives elect a leader that is explicitly “no deal”, and no deal has no majority in the House, then can the Conservatives claim to have enough support of the House to form a Government?

That will be tested after the new PM has taken charge. Labour will table a motion of no confidence.

[Old Greg]

Hope so. That would open up an interesting constitutional question: if the Conservatives elect a leader that is explicitly “no deal”, and no deal has no majority in the House, then can the Conservatives claim to have enough support of the House to form a Government?

Depends if they can win a confidence vote and get a budget through.

[meridian]

It’s going to be “hard Brexit” by Boris, big mistake to view fragmented “remain” vote as able to unite - so are totally against Brexit, supporting LibDems - these voters will find it unacceptable to support Labours “soft Brexit”, and if Labour rejects Brexit they lose voters to Brexit party or Tory scum

We are fooked.

Hope so. That would open up an interesting constitutional question: if the Conservatives elect a leader that is explicitly “no deal”, and no deal has no majority in the House, then can the Conservatives claim to have enough support of the House to form a Government?

[AtW]

It’s going to be “hard Brexit” by Boris, big mistake to view fragmented “remain” vote as able to unite - so are totally against Brexit, supporting LibDems - these voters will find it unacceptable to support Labours “soft Brexit”, and if Labour rejects Brexit they lose voters to Brexit party or Tory scum

We are fooked.

[Whorty]

It doesn't matter who is in power, the mandate as dictated by the majority is to leave. The fact that some MPs in their arrogance(infinite wisdom) feel that leaving isn't what we really want, they have to fulfil the will of the majority.

Seems the people have changed their mind. Leave is no longer larger than remain, at least based on the most recent EU election which was, quite frankly, as pseudo-referendum.

We need what we have been saying for months and months. Westminster agrees a deal (whatever that deal is, could even be 'no-deal') then this is put back to the people to say, do you want this deal or do you want to remain? If it's a moderate leave then it may win. If it's a hard deal, there is a fair chance remain will win.