Brexit - or Article 50: the Phoenix!

Status
Not open for further replies.
ger147 said:
Cue the James O'Brien references... :)
Click to expand...

Heard JO'B interviewing Rees-Mogg recently. Mogg certainly isn't of my political leaning but having seen a few Mogg pieces in recent times, e.g. him pinning Verhofstadt down in a Commons Select meeting, I thought it might be an interesting battle.

Mogg, like any politician, didn't answer every question but, equally, he was very specific in some of his answers. I'd say Mogg won the battle 60/40, but what it did show was that when JO'B was faced with someone at least his equal in debating he, JO'B, is a snidey little schoolyard bully.

There are far better Remain debaters out there but, unfortunately, they are being increasingly drowned out by the hysterical ones panicking about Johnson's Oct 31st "do or die." For example, I like a lot of what Mark Carney says but, sadly, he's often quoted out of context for effect.
 
Hobbit said:
Heard JO'B interviewing Rees-Mogg recently. Mogg certainly isn't of my political leaning but having seen a few Mogg pieces in recent times, e.g. him pinning Verhofstadt down in a Commons Select meeting, I thought it might be an interesting battle.

Mogg, like any politician, didn't answer every question but, equally, he was very specific in some of his answers. I'd say Mogg won the battle 60/40, but what it did show was that when JO'B was faced with someone at least his equal in debating he, JO'B, is a snidey little schoolyard bully.

There are far better Remain debaters out there but, unfortunately, they are being increasingly drowned out by the hysterical ones panicking about Johnson's Oct 31st "do or die." For example, I like a lot of what Mark Carney says but, sadly, he's often quoted out of context for effect.
Click to expand...
It's an insult to call JO'B a decent debater, he has an interviewing style which is all too common these days. When the interviewee answers strongly or disproves something you talk over them cutting their answer off or slightly rewording the same question. Why LBC employ him is beyond me, doesn't like to hear any argument but his own
 
Parsaregood said:
It's an insult to call JO'B a decent debater, he has an interviewing style which is all too common these days. When the interviewee answers strongly or disproves something you talk over them cutting their answer off or slightly rewording the same question. Why LBC employ him is beyond me, doesn't like to hear any argument but his own
Click to expand...
Sounds like hed fit in well in the forum 🤣🤣
 
Foxholer said:
What 'convention'? Is there a precedent? Or perhaps an 'equivalent situation'?
Click to expand...

My understanding is that whilst there is no written constitution there are conventions set out in the Cabinet Manual

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cabinet-manual

In context of what is written in the Cabinet Manual, Corbyn asked Sir Mark Sedwill in respect of leaving on 31/10 if a GE is called for 1/11.

Purdah guidance makes clear that 'decisions on matters of policy on which a new government might be expected to want the opportunity to take a different view from the present government should be postponed until after the election, provided that such postponement would not be detrimental to the national interest or wasteful of public money'.

Sedwill has said it will be dealt with in accordance with the rules and conventions in the context of the time it arises.
 
Last edited:
Parsaregood said:
It's an insult to call JO'B a decent debater, he has an interviewing style which is all too common these days. When the interviewee answers strongly or disproves something you talk over them cutting their answer off or slightly rewording the same question. Why LBC employ him is beyond me, doesn't like to hear any argument but his own
Click to expand...

Which may be true - sometimes - but most of the time he interrupts is when the caller is talking unfounded or incorrect tripe, and he will continue to ask the salient question when a caller refuses to answer it, and there is noting wrong with that. So his style is more to let such Leave callers 'dig their own grave', or let them argue their own way to the Remain position. And that actually happens quite a lot or the caller gets very angry as he or she finds themselves heading that way.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
My understanding is that whilst there is no written constitution there are conventions set out in the Cabinet Manual

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cabinet-manual

Corbyn asked Sir Mark Sedwill on this in respect of leaving on 31/10 if a GE is called for 1/11.

Purdah guidance makes clear that 'decisions on matters of policy on which a new government might be expected to want the opportunity to take a different view from the present government should be postponed until after the election, provided that such postponement would not be detrimental to the national interest or wasteful of public money'.

Sedwill has said it will be dealt with in accordance with the rules and conventions in the context of the time it arises.
Click to expand...
Thanks for that info.

I had somehow missed the creation/existence of that manual!

Of course, the 'National Interest clause COULD be argued, but I believe that would scupper any Tory aspirations for remaining in Government, so unlikely!
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
Which may be true - sometimes - but most of the time he interrupts is when the caller is talking unfounded or incorrect tripe, and he will continue to ask the salient question when a caller refuses to answer it, and there is noting wrong with that. So his style is more to let such Leave callers 'dig their own grave', or let them argue their own way to the Remain position. And that actually happens quite a lot or the caller gets very angry as he or she finds themselves heading that way.
Click to expand...

Now I've never listened to JO'B, who ever he is, but I really dont want to listen to interviewers who only have THEIR agenda and try and force a committed leavers or remainers to be forced to troll out JO'Bs mantra by badgering or hectoring. Most interviewers I see now on the, deeply one sided, BBC dont let people they are interviewing answer the question if it doesn't fit in with the BBC bias.
 
chrisd said:
Now I've never listened to JO'B, who ever he is, but I really dont want to listen to interviewers who only have THEIR agenda and try and force a committed leavers or remainers to be forced to troll out JO'Bs mantra by badgering or hectoring. Most interviewers I see now on the, deeply one sided, BBC dont let people they are interviewing answer the question if it doesn't fit in with the BBC bias.
Click to expand...

Believe you may be overlooking the pleasures of watching Andrew Neil slicing 'n dicing remainers...
 
Hobbit said:
Heard JO'B interviewing Rees-Mogg recently. Mogg certainly isn't of my political leaning but having seen a few Mogg pieces in recent times, e.g. him pinning Verhofstadt down in a Commons Select meeting, I thought it might be an interesting battle.

Mogg, like any politician, didn't answer every question but, equally, he was very specific in some of his answers. I'd say Mogg won the battle 60/40, but what it did show was that when JO'B was faced with someone at least his equal in debating he, JO'B, is a snidey little schoolyard bully.

There are far better Remain debaters out there but, unfortunately, they are being increasingly drowned out by the hysterical ones panicking about Johnson's Oct 31st "do or die." For example, I like a lot of what Mark Carney says but, sadly, he's often quoted out of context for effect.
Click to expand...

Even worse they have David Lammy on instead today :eek::sick::poop:
 
Foxholer said:
Thanks for that info.

I had somehow missed the creation/existence of that manual!

Of course, the 'National Interest clause COULD be argued, but I believe that would scupper any Tory aspirations for remaining in Government, so unlikely!
Click to expand...

The thinking is that they WILL argue that leaving is in the 'National Interest'...well maybe at some time it might be - but during an election period...little bit harder to argue that just because it is politically expedient to do something does not mean that it is necessarily in the National Interest
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
The thinking is that they WILL argue that leaving is in the 'National Interest'...well maybe at some time it might be - but during an election period...little bit harder to argue that just because it is politically expedient to do something does not mean that it is necessarily in the National Interest
Click to expand...

The counter argument is that the decision to leave on the 31st October has already been taken, as per current UK and EU legislation already in place.

I very much doubt the objection under purdah rules will fly IMO as the opposition want to change current legislation as opposed to stopping the government taking decisions. The HoC's has already voted to leave on 31st October.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Tashyboy
Party holes at golf comps.
2
Replies
34
Views
1K
Pin-seeker
Pin-seeker
Don Barzini
Christmas 2025
14 15 16
Replies
319
Views
8K
kp17
kp17
Lucifer MorningStar
Best clubs of all time (Probably)
2 3
Replies
41
Views
2K
srixon 1
srixon 1
B
Ping 7 wood head shortage.
2
Replies
20
Views
2K
KenL
KenL
VVega
What age is your Seniors?
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
Arthur Wedge
Arthur Wedge
Top