Bye Bye Boris!

[Broccers]

Dont worry Donald likes it

[NotoriousREV]

Dont worry Donald likes it

Of course he does, he’s a demented moron too.

[Swervin_Mervin]

Being governed by Europe doesn't sound so bad now, eh lads

This sort of sh1t is their bread and butter

Name one occasion when the Europe Council or the European Commission has either a) prevented the European Parliament from sitting or b) dictated the agenda of the European Parliament.

I’ll wait.

For everyone else, whilst Mike is looking this up, the answer is “never”.

You must know full well that I wasn't being so specific? I simply meant that the "EU" has some history of using nefarious means, be they constitutional tools, loopholes, or simply law breaking, to their own ends.

The most recent that springs to mind is that of Selmayr's appointment as Commission Secretary General by Juncker.

And I'm sure Von Der Leyen's appointment is entirely above board

[NotoriousREV]

Want to point out where the rules were broken?

https://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_M ... 545_en.htm

[NotoriousREV]

Also, did you vote for Sir Mark Sedwill to become Cabinet Secretary and Head of the Civil Service? Obviously you know that this is the equivalent role in the UK of the Secretary General to the European Commission.

Maybe you could name the countries where the equivalent Senior civil servants are voted for, rather than appointed by the democratically elected government?

Oh, and while you’re at it, why not explain how the appointment of the head of the civil service is in any way similar to a Prime Minister who hasn’t faced a general election, with a minority government, suspending the democratically elected parliament to avoid opposition?

[JLv3.0]

Dave - do you sometimes curse the fact it's been some time since you repeatedly smacked your head against a brick wall and that's what sets you off on these quests for answers?! You know full well you're not going to get anywhere!

[NotoriousREV]

I’m not letting this bullshit go unchallenged. What has happened today is pure fascism. There is no other word for it. It is forcible suppression of opposition.

[Gavin]

It is bloody scary. Even scarier was a discussion on FB with a Brexit means Brexit will of the majority type who told everyone else on the post that we had been brainwashed by the MSM and when offered facts he was relying on scaremongering or fake news. What was scary was he really seemed to believe it. He also reckoned he knew some remain voters who now would vote Brexit if they got the chance. I suspect that bit was pure BS fantasy though, I doubt anyone is that stupid.

[Broccers]

Dave - do you sometimes curse the fact it's been some time since you repeatedly smacked your head against a brick wall and that's what sets you off on these quests for answers?! You know full well you're not going to get anywhere!

[Swervin_Mervin]

Want to point out where the rules were broken?

https://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_M ... 545_en.htm

https://www.theparliamentmagazine.eu/ar ... ment-probe

The ombudsman said that "Mr Selmayr’s appointment did not follow EU law, in letter or spirit, and did not follow the Commission's own rules."

The EC agreed to disagree with both the EU Ombudsman and the EP. The EP's subsequent resolution calling for Mr Selmayr to resign was ignored.

I couldn't give a fvck about who votes for such roles in other countries.

"Being governed by the EU doesn't sound so bad now, eh lads" I took as an implications that the EU is some paragon of virtue when it comes to abiding by its own laws and rules. Which it demonstrably isn't.

[NotoriousREV]

OK, so you not liking the way the head of the civil service is appointed is exactly the same to you as parliament being suspended to allow an unelected PM to avoid scrutiny. Gotcha.

[Rich B]

You asked a question and it got answered,

[JLv3.0]

Going to be a long day, I'm guessing.

[NotoriousREV]

Going to be a long day, I'm guessing.

Not for me, I’m going to the Ferrari factory and Fiorano test track.

[NotoriousREV]

You asked a question and it got answered,

The world thanks you for adding this value.

[JLv3.0]

Going to be a long day, I'm guessing.

Not for me, I’m going to the Ferrari factory and Fiorano test track.

No f'ing way!! You're on track* to win the internet today then

* yes, I saw what I did there.

[Nefarious]

Just to throw a couple of additional points of outrage to what has already been said:

- We really have stepped over a line in this "post truth" political environment when the party line is "what? No. We're not forcing Brexit through, this is just normal procedure" (with a bit of a cheeky smirk). Seriously, the current incumbents have now fully learned the Donald Trump technique of "Do whatever the hell you like. If you're called on it, just flat deny it, regardless of the evidence in front of you. If that doesn't work, use distraction".

- Its only weeks, yes weeks, since every single one of the conservative leadership candidates denounced the idea of prorogation as outrageous and promised to fight it tooth and nail. They even defended to legal challenge to prevent it on the grounds that the question was completely academic and would never happen in reality. OK - we're used to politicians lying, but surely it crosses a major line when the very principles of what you claim to stand for are treated as completely disposable.

- I'm completely sick and tired of being told that anything and everything is the "will of the people" based on that day's creative interpretation of the referendum result. There was a vote, and even leaving aside the barefaced lies and false promises, the very most brexity interpretation you could put on it is that the "people" narrowly voted in favour of the elected government finding some sensible way of uncoupling ourselves from EU membership.

[Rich B]

The original porogation they all denounced was the idea of doing it until November 1st though wasn’t it?

[GG.]

Yes - this is nothing in the same vein. They lose 4 days - that's the sum total of it. Treat any opinion written by lawyers before yesterday very cautiously as the prorogation they've most likely written about is one which goes beyond the end of 31 October.

This is also the reason the legal challenges will very likely fail. This action hasn't deprived parliament of any right to take a course of action but just made it marginally more difficult. Given it is a use of a commonly exercised power, in line with prior convention as to how it is used (i.e. for a Queen's speech at the end of an already abnormally long parliamentary session), it is extremely unlikely to pass the threshold for a decision to meet the criteria set out for a Judicial Review (illegality, unreasonableness (tested at a level where no other person would have logically taken that action - so a specific legal gloss to that word), etc.) and also very questionable what remedy would be afforded even if they were successful.

Jacob Rees-Mogg was correct in that the most 'unconstitutional' thing that happened yesterday was Bercow making comments about it as the convention is that the speaker does not do so unless the commons have instructed him to do so.

[duncs500]

If the impact is so insignificant GG, why bother with it in the first place? Why deal with the PR nightmare over such an insignificance?