33 days to go .... What’s the Brexit plan?

You accuse leavers of using a few words you don't like, when remainers are behaving so aggressively the Police have to protect an MP and his child. These pictures are appalling. Sun 20-Oct-19 09:12:18

I cannot take this seriously Chestnut. It was unpleasant but everyone was safe which is more than can be said when the out and out thugs, from the far-right but attached to "Brexit" are attacking people.

Ah! Of course! I forgot that.

growstuff roads were closed

According to German tv

2.2 million people on the march yesterday

I wonder how often so many high level Tories actually walk, rather than using official cars. They knew there was a noisy and potentially hostile crowd outside the HoC and could have avoided it. Leadsom was on Twitter within minutes complaining that she'd been hassled. It all looks very much like a publicity stunt.

The real question might be why did JRM choose to bring his son out of Parliament by a route which meant he had to pass through the march? I am sure he could have waited a bit until they had dispersed (there are lovely catering places in the H of C) or have left through a protected area. The man's desperate for publicity.
As for the letters I imagine EU officials are still aching from laughing.

There have been plenty of ‘significant’ parliamentary sittings - but as this one happened to coincide with a large march at a time when tensions and feelings were running high JRM would have been well aware of the risks of taking his son to the event but chose to do so for the photo opportunity. Shame on him.

I presume his son didn’t actually attend the sitting?

Didn't make headlines when Michael Morpurgo was spat at for wearing an anti Brexit badge...

I'm more cynical.
I think it's quite the thing to blab on about how your children/grandchildren are so "woke" these days.

I think Mogg took his son because it was a significant parliamentary sitting. Once in a 40y type occurrence and he wants his son to be able to say ‘I was there’. That’s all.

No- one is doubting that feelings are running high, and the the Govts inability to unite the country as it continues to posture, threaten and challenge Parliament is certainly fuelling that.

However the question was - knowing that, why on earth would any loving father subject his 12 year olds to that? Rational, caring parents would protect their children by keeping them out of the limelight and away from potential danger, but the photo opportunity obviously took priority for JRM.

The point of showing that picture was to show there are aggressive and abusive people on both sides. Remainers often accuse leavers of bad behaviour or inappropriate words, both in Parliament and on these boards, but both sides have their share of fanatical hostile supporters. Remainers cannot take the moral high ground here.

Kuenssberg:

“Govt lawyers and advice from Attorney General is that Johnson is complying with law as Benn Act forced him only to ask for delay, not to change his policy - belief they can apply the law in this narrow and specific way will enrage critics”

Everyone had come in on a Saturday for … well, nothing, really.

Almost apologetically, Sir Oliver promised that he would vote for the deal at the Prime Minister’s earliest convenience.

Maizie; it was difficult to know as we were at the front of the march and had to leave early'ish to get back to our bus.

The child should never have been there and one has to question why JRM took him to 'work' with him that day. Was the child hurt, by the way? I would have thought with an 'angry' crowd of that size, violence would have been difficult to prevent had the people in that crowd wished harm on anyone...

Did you forget to include the photos of Diane Abbott?

One has to wonder why JRM thought it appropriate to take his 12 year old to such an occasion, knowing that feelings on both sides were likely to be running high. Not a nice thing to put your son through, but I suppose the photo opportunity was too strong a lure.

GracesGranMk3 - Much of what the leave pursuers have said, using words like "traitor" when talking about servants of the state doing their job along with the use of the word surrender, ...........all this can be considered at the very least ranting and at the very worst fuelling hate and hate crime.
You accuse leavers of using a few words you don't like, when remainers are behaving so aggressively the Police have to protect an MP and his child. These pictures are appalling.

Did you have a good day, Labaik?

Was it bigger than the last march?

This country has a man child for a PM whose strings are pulled by a [feel free to add your own expletive....]

I think that could easily be seen as an attempt to frustrate the law UG. I hope his cell is to his liking. We're did that come from by the way?

My last post in answer to grannypink1.

And at least some of the sixteen million plus are very stressed, angry and upset too. But here you go again with the crystal ball that tells you what so many people are thinking. YOU DON'T KNOW.

Let's imagine you belong to a holiday club, with 100 members across the country and they had a simple postal vote and 52 member put across against Italy while 48 put on against France how would you know where in Italy the 52 wanted to go if all that was on the ballot paper was

For our next holiday do you want:
Italy
France

And if, when the officials of the club suggested Florence would you be saying "but when we chose Italy we all knew that meant Rome" even though you actually only had contact with one or two of the members?

And if the costs came out as prohibitive wouldn't you expect many to change their minds and might someone suggest another ballot now all the I were dotted and all the Ts crossed just to check more exactly what everyone now wanted?

You cannot assume knowledge you just don't have. Certainly not in Politics and the Law.

So, Boris has sent 3 letters!

The first was the letter demanded by Benn Act, which asks the EU to delay Brexit.

The Second was a covering letter saying the first was from Parliament and not the Government.

The Third was from Boris disavowing the first letter making clear he does not want a delay.

In it, the Prime Minister said any further hold-up would be 'deeply corrosive'.

He complied with the law, as he said he would.
?

NannyP ?