Corbyn as caretaker

MaizieD Thu 15-Aug-19 18:43:51

"The Lib Dems /Greens do not want an extention to Article 50. They want a Refendum but preferably NO Brexit.

Of course they'll support an extension to A50. Why wouldn't they? By September there will be barely any time to organise a referendum or a GE."
----

My point was the Lib Dems/Greens want to ' REVOKE' Article 50 not extend it.

Maybe they would agree to an initial extention of Article 50 but only to prolong the opportunity of getting Parliament to Revoke Article 50 which Parliament has rejected.

I agree winterwhite

As it happens Ken Clarke is the Father of the House, the longest serving male MP and Harriet Harman the Mother of the House, the longest serving female MP.

Both come from the more moderate wings of their parties , both have held high office and each of them could well have become PM at different times.

They are both widely respected and most importantly utterly opposed to a no deal brexit.

We know that Boris Johnson and his ERGs would never accept either of them but the key question is whether Corbyn could step back and put the country before his personal ambition and tell his colleagues to do the same. He might then go down in history as a statesman with his reputation greatly enhanced.

Is that possible under our rules of democracy WW? How many MPs would support them?

I think the Lib Dem suggestion of either Kenneth Clarke or Harriet Harman to lead a government of unity is sensible - both have experience of government in power, which JC lacks, neither has any ambition to lead a government after the next GE. The Lib Dems have most to lose in such an arrangement with JC.
Many posters seem to have forgotten how in 2010 the Lib Dems were urged to put country before party and go into coalition, only to be blamed for ever after with Tory cuts without getting any credit for anything that went right. If I remember rightly the numbers would not have stacked up for a coalition with Labour, who were not offering coalition but looking for a commitment to support their minority. government. That seems to be forgotten too.

I'd like to think that LP and LD could sit down together and agree on a less contentious way forward, as it looks as if this may be the only realistic hope of stopping BJ

I do wonder at Corbyn's diplomatic and uniting skills since he was the one who wouldn't stay at a meeting of party leaders because Chuka Umunna had been invited. A cup of tea and a chat was far off his agenda that day. We do need everybody to come together to avoid a disastrous no deal exit, but I don't know who would be acceptable to most who can lead the way.

Reading some of your posts I think Johnson has got it made. I personally feel that unless someone has a mental condition, seeing them as all bad is just as disproportionate and fraught with problems as seeing someone as all good. If all those who want to stop a no-deal Brexit can't work together and are not encourage to do so, it will just not happen. Perhaps that is just what those expressing such extreme views actually want and they are trying to feed dissension into discussions for that very purpose.

Two faced Weasels, both of them !

Last week MacDonald was in Scotland speaking of ‘the English government ‘ and labour would support a second
Scot referendum.

This week Corbyn wants the support of the SNP

Gosh, Ken Clarke in the frame? Perhaps Tarzan ( who seems to talk a lot of sense) and John Major could join in?

Migs, interesting post.

I certainly do not trust Corbyn, if he said today is Friday I would check the calendar

Those are my thoughts WadesNan Locally we have an elected Labour Mayor, he promised he would run a rainbow council with people from all parties - he has gradually got rid of those in other parties and only councillors in the Labour party are in positions of any influence. At least we know he is term restricted and he can be voted out.

He wouldn't be able to do that Wadesnan, if all this did come about, as there would be another vote of no confidence which he would lose, as MP's returned to voting for their own parties.

I do not think it likely that we will see a coalition but a " confidence and supply" arrangement which could come to an end at any time, if necessary by a vote of no confidence resulting in a GE

If this should happen - and I sincerely hope it doesn't - who will decide when the "limited period" will come to an end? What will stop JC (or anyone else the Labour party appoint in his place) saying they need to continue as "interim" PM? He may start with a coalition but how long before he appoints fellow LP members in positions of greatest power and influence

I might emigrate rather than see this disgusting man in power

Grandad1943 we actually agree on something. Yay!
?

I think that the Lib Dems will come aboard eventually with JC. As for someone saying Corbyn is only out for himself, that must be a joke when we have me me me Boris as PM.

Its interesting times.

I'm afraid I think that, rather like the leader of the Liberals, your pronouncements are rather over the top Jura. Corbyn has said nothing which could be seen as either blackmailing or opportunistic. He has simply made a suggestion. It strikes me that the opportunistic, and excessively strident comments are coming from elsewhere.

Whatever anyone may thinks of J Corbyn, he is the democratically (and for once that is the correct use of this word) elected leader of the largest opposition party. I wanted to give Jo Swinson a fair wind but, at a point where careful negotiation is required, it seems she has listened to too much of her own propaganda rather than understanding that the first requirement to give the Liberals any hope of achieving a "remain" outcome is to stop a no deal Brexit.

What we need at the moment is diplomatic negotiators not strident name callers. There may well be a person who would lead a cross-party government better than Corbyn could, who could keep enough MPs together and sensitively get us though this but JS needs to be very careful not to over-reach herself and scupper any chances we may have in doing that.

He said ‘for a limited period’,

I'd certainly prefer Corbyn to Johnson - and he has said it would be for a limited period.

Perhaps a cup of tea and a chat is preferable to ramping up hostilities and bringing about yet another disastrous conflict.

Urmstongran, in regard to your post @ 22:42, for once we agree. Just as those MPs that wish for Britain to remain in the European Union could not unite behind the Theresa May withdrawal agreement, so it is with the Jeremy Corbyn appeal for a very temporary government of national unity.

Indeed, those divisions within the remain MPs ranks should they continue, will hand Boris Johnson the no-deal Brexit that he and the ERG group within the Tory party so desperately want for their own self serving benefit.

When I was young I thought Scottish independence would be a great thing.
In the 1980's I lived in an area run by the SNP. They were a disaster. Literally could not run a town council.
Scotland is a tiny country. Our strength lies with being part of the UK. If we ever get independence we will be like Greece but with worse weather and more debt.
Most Scots are mortified by the way the SNP behave in Westminster. In Edinburgh it is a shambles.
Hard to see who can govern though. No wonder kids don't see the point in voting.

After Swinson initially sounded a hostile note towards Corbyn’s plan, saying it was “nonsense”, the Lib Dems were widely urged to reconsider and found themselves isolated among anti-no-deal groups!

Labour’s Angela Rayner branded the Lib Dem leader “childish”,
the SNP leader, Nicola Sturgeon, criticised her position as “daft”,
and Caroline Lucas, the Green MP, made a personal appeal for Swinson to rethink her position.

At this rate, with all the in fighting, Boris’ no deal Brexit will sail through on 31st October as the Remainers cannot coalesce behind one strategy or idea.

A General election IS now the only way to resolve the Brexit crisis that now exists.

There is not sufficient time to hold a second referendum prior to Britain leaving the European Union on the 29th of October. Therefore to hold that second referendum this Tory government would have to ask (or be forced to ask) the European Union for a further extension to article fifty.

In the above, do those who fervently believe that Britain must not leave the EU also believe that those of equal opposite fervent belief would just sit back and accept the overruling of the result of the first referendum.

Of course they would not, and if anyone wishes to witness widespread disorder on the streets of Britain, the above is the way to bring that about in my humble opinion.

However, a General Election would allow each participating party to "set out their stall" in regard to their policy on Brexit.

The Liberal Democrats would be able to campaign with the message that should they be elected to government then Brexit in any form would not take place.

The Labour Party would campaign on their policy that should they be elected to government then an attempt would be made to get better terms on sections of the withdrawal agreement. However, whatever the outcome of those negotiations (good or bad) then that would be placed before the British electorate in a further referendum.

The Conservative Party could campaign on the policy they are pursuing at present, which would seem to be demanding a complete withdrawing of the Irish Backstop by the EU, if not Britain would leave the European Union with no agreement whatsoever.

In the above, the choices would be clear, and a month assured to question all and carry out debate. For, I believe there is little alternative to such an election, such is the divide in this nation in regard to Brexit now.

Reports of violence breaking out in workplaces, especially where employers have stated that Brexit could affect employment numbers continue to increase. Overruling the result of the first referendum and instituting a second I believe could well bring that violence on to the streets of Britain.