There is an article in Foreign Policy (see here: https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/08/29...liament-boris/) discussing why the Queen can't do anything about Brexit, but I truly do not understand the point of having a sovereign who is unwilling or unable to act because doing so would arguably cause a political crisis or the end of the monarchy itself (as the article suggests).
If the monarch only has theoretical power but no real power, then why does anyone pay any attention at all to her (or him)?
Does the Queen (via Governor General) not have the exact same role in Canada as she does in the UK?
If they refuse to let him hold an election. and they won't let his motion to close parliament before Brexit pass, what are their options?
Cant he just refuse to sign an agreement extending deadline, causing a hard Brexit?
Most of the opposition say they are fine with an election, they just want the no-hard Brexit bill passed into law before agreeing to one. After that its more about arguing on the date of the election (pre October 31 or post)
There is an article in Foreign Policy (see here: https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/08/29...liament-boris/) discussing why the Queen can't do anything about Brexit, but I truly do not understand the point of having a sovereign who is unwilling or unable to act because doing so would arguably cause a political crisis or the end of the monarchy itself (as the article suggests).
If the monarch only has theoretical power but no real power, then why does anyone pay any attention at all to her (or him)?
Why not? I get not understanding the ceremonial aspect of the royal family. But questioning whether or not an unelected member of a royal bloodline should have authority over a country is not understanding democracy.
So my question is this - and it may end up being quite silly.
They had a referendum and the majority of people wanted Brexit. Fair enough. The government has looked into this and I'm sure by now they can say they took their best crack at it but it's not looking like what's best for the country to continue down this path.
Can't they just say - "we did our best to look into what 51% of you wanted but it's just not feasible" - and back out of leaving?
So my question is this - and it may end up being quite silly.
They had a referendum and the majority of people wanted Brexit. Fair enough. The government has looked into this and I'm sure by now they can say they took their best crack at it but it's not looking like what's best for the country to continue down this path.
Can't they just say - "we did our best to look into what 51% of you wanted but it's just not feasible" - and back out of leaving?
Well, sure - that would have been the logical outcome (and might still be), but the problem is that the governing party was captured by a lunatic minority due to the fact that:
1) the PM who pulled the referendum stunt (to play to the lunatic minority) resigned rather than clean up his mess
2) he was replaced by a colourless non-entity, who proved incompetent as well, and managed to (a) lose the majority, making the party hostage to some North Irish lunatics) and (b) bungled the Exit and had to resign, leaving the choice of new party leader and PM in the hands of a small group of registered party members who are on the cutting edge of the Brexit lunacy
3) the party members picked a slimy fool to be party leader and PM and so here we are.
So my question is this - and it may end up being quite silly.
They had a referendum and the majority of people wanted Brexit. Fair enough. The government has looked into this and I'm sure by now they can say they took their best crack at it but it's not looking like what's best for the country to continue down this path.
Can't they just say - "we did our best to look into what 51% of you wanted but it's just not feasible" - and back out of leaving?
The best way out now would be another referendum over the actual Brexit, not the Homer Simpson like imaginary one where the UK leaves the EU and all the old Commonwealth countries squeal with delight and ask Britain to take them over again as life in the empire was so wonderful for the natives and the filthy continentals prostrate themselves in front of John Bulls massive spitfire shaped Johnson as he whips in out his tweed three piece suit.
But as Brexit has become more a religious article of faith for the leavers and they know full well they would lose that vote and Parliament is rightfully concerned that they would be ignoring the will of the people, no matter how stupid that 'will' is there is an understandable concern over all of it.
The Following User Says Thank You to afc wimbledon For This Useful Post:
the picture of the two of them is hilarious to me. if someone who didn't know who they were had to guess who the PM was, it sure wouldn't be the billy carter looking buffoon, that's for sure.
The Following User Says Thank You to GordonBlue For This Useful Post:
the picture of the two of them is hilarious to me. if someone who didn't know who they were had to guess who the PM was, it sure wouldn't be the billy carter looking buffoon, that's for sure.
The younger brother got a first with honours from Oxford in Modern history, Boris barely managed a mid second in Classics, a degree noted for its less than Academic rigour, without a doubt the younger brother is the brighter of the two.
Unlike his older Brother Jo Johnson has managed to stay married to the same woman and has two kids with her, Boris has been unwilling to say how many children he has fathered as there are one or two bastards in his progeny he has yet to admit to publically.
Thus far the police have never been called to Jo's house to intervene in a screaming match where his partner accused him of being a spoiled **** who doesn't value anything.
Is there a time in any other time in history this was ever considered?
Meanwhile law to stop a no-deal Brexit has been passed by Parliament and forces Bojo to goto Brussels to ask for a Brexit extension date. So is Bojo going to die in a ditch now? https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...box=1567781068
Jo Johnson's resignation also comes as the government announced it would give MPs another chance to vote for an early election on Monday.
So voting on the economic future of your country is a one-and-done thing for them, but losing a House vote just means he's going to try again and again until he gets what he wants.
What are the chances that he just goes ahead with the Brexit deal that May previously negotiated?
He would love to but his own hardliners wont vote for that and the Brexit Party will then split his vote at an election probably costing him the PM's job
They are running out of options though if both the no-deal Brexit and extending the deadline are supposedly off the table.
In terms of things getting done on other fronts in the U.K. - how much has this been distracting from other business and functions of parliament there? Has it had an impact on the otherwise functioning of the country?
