Boris the PM - a new beginning
- Thread starter Mudball
- Start date
- Status
Foxholer
Blackballed
Not unlike my attitude. It's the words that are important though, nothing else!
Doon frae Troon
Ryder Cup Winner
It has taken BBC Laura two days to correct her mistaken report on the Scots Court 'nob off' ruling.
Only a few minutes on Scots twitter BTW.
Only a few minutes on Scots twitter BTW.
Grant85
Head Pro
I do like Laura and she is very good at the broadcast stuff, but there is a tenancy of her and colleagues to go completely overboard on trying to be balanced.
Yesterday pointing out that the Government could still send an extension letter and send another one saying we don't want an extension. Despite this meaning non-compliance with the law and at best meaning another day in court for the government almost certainly to lose - but run the clock down by another few days.
Also it is starting to get my goat how many times 'no 10 has said' or 'a downing street source' etc etc is passed off as news. It seems almost an unsaid fact that this is Cummings, but they keep republishing his drivel rather than ignoring it and making them state it more publicly or with a name attached to the quote.
This allows the government to float something that is likely ridiculous / illegal / immoral (or all 3) and at worst test the water with it, then deny it the next day and at best normalise something that then becomes 'part of the plan' that reporters and commentators build into the narrative for them.
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
Quite - very grim indeed...
And Glasgow was a very grim place in the late-60s to mid-70s.
SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
Seems like you never lived through the 1950s. Now that really was a grey time.
The sixties and seventies were a period where young people were better off, there were plenty of jobs they managed to buy cars, wear colourful stylish clothes, music was transformed by the explosion of pop music, it was a wonderful time to be growing up.
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
Maybe - but it didn't stop Glasgow being a grim place. Folks still did what they could with what they had to brighten things up a bit.
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/09/boris-johnson-sabotage-letter-to-eu-would-break-law
https://briefingsforbrexit.com/the-johnson-letter-does-it-violate-the-benn-act/
On this - well I guess we will find out soon enough...my understanding is that some senior legal opinion has it 'just about legal'...whatever that might mean.
Meanwhile ministers and ERGers etc have been saying all weekend that Johnson has not broken his word over 'never sending a letter to request an extension' - because he had not signed it? - and the EU are telling us that they have received a letter requesting an extension.
So what is the truth - has he sent a letter requesting an extension or not? Apparently not - alternative facts are with us - do Johnson, Cummings and the rest of them think we are really stupid.
drdel
Tour Rookie
^^^ The advice from the Attorney General to the PM was that it was legal !!
The letter will have come from the UK govt as a whole. The need for an extension letter did not state that Boris himself had to sign it, he was not singled out personally. That would be daft as if he had resigned then the next PM would not be held to it.
So, the UK govt sent a letter asking for an extension as required. Job done, the law complied with.
Going to court again is just lining the pockets of another barrister. Boy will they be gutted when this is all over.
SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
It would be interesting to know who's bankrolling these legal challenges, it wont be the likes of Cherry.
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
And so the Scottish Court of Session says 'we'll see'
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
They didn't actually go to the court 'again'. The court had said they'd consider the situation after the deadline date. So this is simply a continuation of the previous application to the court - as decreed by the court.
It is still taking up court time, court money.
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
Agreed. But Courts decision. Besides. It's what they are there for.
I think that could be open to question. Some of the questions being put in front of them are more political than legal. The remain side have won one case, a big one no question, but they are down on the rest. All take up time and money.
I'm very uncomfortable with some of the court's involvement in politics. There has to be separation between the judiciary and the govt, and I don't have a problem with the courts ensuring the govt is honest in its application of the laws but I'm very, very uncomfortable with the courts expressing opinions on what it perceives to be hidden agendas. Did Boris really mean x when he said y. This sees the judiciary, a few judges, potentially ruling the UK instead of the elected representatives. Its a fine line and I think its been crossed recently.
Grant85
Head Pro
Seems like the crucial bit was that the EU have accepted the unsigned request as a valid request for an extension. So difficult for a court to rule that he has not made the request, as he was legally obliged to do.
I think the court cases that took place after my post have ensured that the courts kept a very close eye on what Boris and the Gov were doing and have likely tied their hands to some degree over any actions they may have been planning.
Ultimately I believe the EU will grant the extension, but likely they will not say anything this week until it is clearer if Boris's deal is a goer or not. The EU will stand with Ireland and will not facilitate a No Deal exit on 31st October.
I also think it is very likely that the UK will require an extension, even if the Gov find a majority for their deal - which is starting to look possible. i.e. in order to complete the legal / technical bits, it will not be possible to leave on 31st Oct even if things go as well as Boris could hope from this point onwards.
Current thinking seems to be that they are going to get heavily bogged down in the legislation and will likely not have the numbers to prevent any amendments / safeguards being added to the legislation, which could render it meaningless from the Government's point of view and leave us in the same state of impasse.
Foxholer
Blackballed
I agree with the sentiment, but disagree with yout conclusion. There are times when Judges are required to decide on 'intent' BoJo's proguing of Parliament being a case in point. It's the Law that prevents him frustrating Parliament, not Judges opinions. They had to decide, based on arguments from both seide, whether that was his intention. Same actually applies in civil and criminal cases where it's a Judge's opinion. So no real difference if the case is about a political matter imo - they have to make a judgement. That's why becoming a top level Judge is a long road only achieved by a few!
I do agree that making judgements on political issues is fraught with danger though!
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
Which is why they continue to demur from ruling on it. The Court seems to be waiting until they can see whether or not the EU accept the letter as being 'fit for the purpose' that the Benn Act requires of it. And it looks like they will.
Doesn't stop it appearing that Johnson is being rather childish in respect of the letter. Here's what I have been asked to provide - but nah-ney-nah I haven't signed it...
Well if it makes him and his team feel clever then they can feel clever. But to me it most certainly isn't Prime Ministerial or in any way dignified, rather disrespectful to the EU in fact - goodness knows what they think of him - a bit desperate and pathetic probably - and rather supports the accusation that he'll do anything that he thinks deflects responsibility from himself to others.
It's all rather sad but perhaps not surprising behaviour.
- Status