POLITICS CORNER

[Tizer]

Very good, and Martha also has the advantage of being able to see it from an outsider's perspective.

I don't understand what is going on. Corbyn continues to insist that he should lead any temporary coalition even though it is clear that this is a non-starter and the only Labour voices we hear support this. Looks orchestrated to me. I can't help having a suspicion that No Deal is accepted now and is seen to have advantages in that any benefits can be taken advantage of and any bad consequences can be used to attack the Tories and force them out of government. In Labour's case the advantage is taking control of the commanding heights and for the SNP it opens the door to independence. Nothing else seems to fit.

I've just read Matthew Parris's article in the Saturday edition of The Times and the bit of your post I put in italics is what Parris also concludes. His belief is that it's orchestrated by Seamus Milne and the clique of advisers in Corbyn's office.

[plaques]

I've said it before. Matthew Parris = Times = Rupert Murdoch. = rightwing bias = forget it.

Priti Patel seems determine to cause as much chaos in our relations with the EU that is humanly possible.

Freedom of movement by European Union nationals into the UK will end overnight from October 31 in the event of a no deal Brexit, Priti Patel has signalled. Patel.

Unless there is a very long list of exceptions to this general statement I doubt if the EU will take it lying down and we could see all manner of restrictions in the opposite direction. Just the sort of thing we need to help Johnson's negotiations along.

[Tripps]

I've just heard Jeremy Corbyn say that in the event of a vote of no confidence in the Government "that would lead to a caretaker Government led by Labour".

See Caretaker Government 40 seconds in. He says " under all normal processes - the Leader of the Opposition takes over when the Government collapses".

I still can find no confirmation that this is the case. Wiki VONCsays a lot on the subject - much mention of General Election but nothing about caretaker Governments.

Is he correct or not? If not I wonder why is he not challenged on it, and why he continues to say it.

[Tizer]

I don't know if this helps - it's all I could find on UK caretaker governments but I haven't the will to wade through it!
`Operation of the 'caretaker convention'' LINK
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've said it before. Matthew Parris = Times = Rupert Murdoch. = rightwing bias = forget it.

I can't agree with you on that, Plaques. I read only one `hard copy' newspaper and that's the Saturday edition of The Times. I choose it because it's the least biased and most accurate of the lot. They `tell it like it is'. They're just as critical of the right as the left. If you don't see interviews with Corbyn in The Times don't think it's for want of trying, they'd love to do an interview with him but his minders won't let them.

[plaques]

Read through the 'caretaker convention' which to me makes a good deal of sense. Winston Churchill took over from Neville Chamberlain by agreement with the opposition parties. So as long as they have the best interest of the country in mind its not really a bad system.

Sorry about the Times comment. I took the Times as my paper from the mid 50s right until the News of the World scandal. Consequently when all the local paper shops closed down as a result of the drop in sales it finally made up my mind for me that Murdoch was one issue too far. Corbyn is not an orator in the old sense but his live presentations are solid if not memorable. Possibly his 'minders' know that the name of the game nowadays is to take pieces out of context and attach them to their own phrasings which then portrays a completely different meaning. Sad, but that's life.

[Tripps]

Read through the 'caretaker convention' which to me makes a good deal of sense.

Wouldn't argue with you - however it says -

The 'caretaker period' refers to the period after the general election until a new Government that commands support of the House of Commons has been formed.

Not the period following a successful vote if no confidence in the Government.

[plaques]

All a bit fuzzy Tripps. My understanding, which will no doubt be proved to be totally wrong, is that there are two phases to this caretaker issue.
1. if a vote of confidence is defeated, or a vote of no confidence is passed, then the incumbent government must resign, or call a general election
At this point we are back to convention, where they could try to recover confidence.
2. if a motion of no confidence in the government is passed in express terms, the house must then adopt a vote of confidence in that same or an alternative government within 14 days, or a general election is held.

I am assuming this alternative government is what is now being called a caretaker government until the immediate problem is solved ie: Brexit deal. If this caretaker government then goes on to dissolve itself, the fixed term not applying, then we are into a general election.

All very confusing with probably more loop holes than you could poke a stick at.

[Tripps]

I think perhaps you're making it more complicated than necessary? The 'caretaker ' referred to in Tizer's link seems to me, to be nothing to do with any vote of confidence - just the procedure which follows any General Election.

It's late, and my head is starting to hurt -

[Stanley]

I too thought you were a bit hard on Parris P but I agree totally about Patel. She is a hang 'em and flog 'em hard line Tory and is a stranger to tact and accommodation. Her intervention on foreign nationalks will rebound on us. Nasty Party personified.
As for debate on what caretaker means. I suppose it means what they want it to mean.
I agree totally with those MPs who are calling for Parliament to be recalled immediately and kept in session until we have a clear outcome or Brexit or both.
Still baffled by Corbyn and his insistence he leads any caretaker administration. When Churchill took over in 1940 he was invited by Parliament. It wasn't a diktat from him.
Later, lots of speculation about the contents of a letter Johnson has sent to Tusk which clarifies some of his thinking about what should be re-opened before October. The general opinion is that by insisting on reversal of the EU red line on the backstop (And the Irish PM has underlined this) Johnson is deliberately setting the bar too high with the intention of being able to say it is EU intransigence that is forcing us into whatever happens in October. I think that's true and underlines my belief that he is settled on a No Deal outcome.
In terms of UK PLC this is generally agreed to be the worst outcome and will lead to huge economic problems. We need some action from Parliament now!

[Tripps]

I listened to Radio 4 this morning - an interview with Diane Abbot. They tried to get the Labour policy on Brexit out of her. I understood that given the opportunity, they would negotiate a new agreement with the EU, then have a referendum, in which 'remain' would be an option - and she would campaign for that.

[PanBiker]

I agree totally with those MPs who are calling for Parliament to be recalled immediately and kept in session until we have a clear outcome or Brexit or both.

I said that when it all went belly up. Failing a coalition we should have locked the doors on them until a resolution three years ago.

[Stanley]

I listened to that interview also David. I thought she did very well despite the aggressive way she was harried. Of course she has had her moments in the past and I couldn't help feeling that the interviewer was trying to confuse her and get another scalp. I don't like the way these interviews are conducted these days. The technique of constant interruptions prefaced by apologies for the interruption, the use of 'we are short of time' to cut the informant short and the attempts to put words in the informant's mouth. We would get a clearer picture if the informant was allowed to answer the question.
I get the feeling that the interviewer has got the answer they want to hear in their head and all their efforts are aimed at getting that admission. John McDonnell is very good at quietly diverting the interviewer by quietly sticking to his point and getting it over. Imagine how Johnson would bumble and procrastinate if he was subjected to that treatment. That of course is why his minders have kept him away from confrontation.
What struck me yesterday was the coherent picture given by people at the sharp end of delivering Brexit, the leaders of the transport and food distribution industries. Without exception they agreed that Brexit was going to cause problems, that the government isn't transparent enough and that No Deal would be a catastrophe. Johnson's bumps in the road look like a massive understatement.
Johnson goes to Europe today and there is no expectation of him getting anything other than a dusty answer. No Deal is looking more and more probable.

[Stanley]

Later.... I have just heard an interesting observation by a former speech writer for George W Bush. He was talking about the tweet from Trump first offering to buy Greenland and then calling of his visit because the Danish PM Mette Frederiksen described the suggestion as "absurd" and said she hoped Mr Trump was not being serious.
Announcing the cancellation of his visit, Mr Trump tweeted: "Denmark is a very special country with incredible people, but based on Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen's comments, that she would have no interest in discussing the purchase of Greenland, I will be postponing our meeting scheduled in two weeks for another time....". A White House spokesman confirmed that the president's visit had been cancelled.
The speech writer suggested that there was another reason. Ex President Obama is visiting Greenland and would be making a speech while he was there and he couldn't risk the inevitable comparison between himself and Obama.
As David would say, this has that ring of truth.....

[plaques]

Johnson's bumps in the road look like a massive understatement.

Don't worry it will be a million to one if we hit these bumps. Also Gove has a cunning plan to deal with a no deal. What could go wrong?

How far have we sunk in looking after homeless children.
Shipping containers 'used to house homeless children' Link..
The Children's Commissioner for England says that as well as the 124,000 children officially homeless, a further 90,000 are estimated to be "sofa-surfing".
Her report tells of families housed in repurposed shipping containers and office blocks, and whole families living in tiny spaces.
Councils blamed a £159m funding gap.

Compassionate Conservatives?
Actually it could be the start of a good idea. Once we crash out of the EU there will be thousands of redundant containers. We could tweak the housing rules and sort out the housing shortage for all those not on the housing ladder rung.

[Stanley]

I agree P, it's a scandal as is the stock response "we are investing £xmillion/billion", completely ignoring the fact that there is the problem and so it's obvious that the investment is either in the wrong place or not sufficient.

[Tizer]

Compassionate Conservatives? Actually it could be the start of a good idea. Once we crash out of the EU there will be thousands of redundant containers. We could tweak the housing rules and sort out the housing shortage for all those not on the housing ladder rung.

We know you're being satirical, Plaques, but be careful - with the present gang running the country they might pick up your comment and say it's `the will of the people' and go ahead with it as an `initiative'!

I don't like the way these interviews are conducted these days.

In defence of the radio interviewers, they are what they are due to the intransigence of interviewees unwilling to give straight answers to questions. Thank goodness we've still got interviewers who will persist in trying to get useful answers out of them (but we soon will lose J. Humphrys). A good example was the man who was interviewed after the 08.00 news this morning on Today on the topic of no deal preparations.

This was the BBC News web site's top story at 17.00 yesterday, then I heard nothing more and had to search their web site for it this morning.
`Brexit: No-deal plan threatens UK fuel plants' LINK

[Stanley]

I heard both those interviews Tiz. I suppose that you are right and they have to be aggressive but it still grates on my nerves, but as you say, when you get people like Cleverly(!), Shaps and Raab on air you want to scream at the buggers!
The report from Philips about their refinery is just one more example of unintended consequences and I fear there will be many of them. I saw the report on TV.
Going back a bit, Atlee was famous for his monosyllabic responses in his infrequent interviews. It was a bit of a problem for the interviewer in those days when deference ruled.
Johnson didn't get a lot of change in Berlin yesterday. I think Angela is teasing him with her 30 days.

[plaques]

Johnson didn't get a lot of change in Berlin yesterday.

When the news first broke on the Merkel meeting its was lauded as a big breakthrough for Johnson. Something along the lines that a 'Political solution' was possible, whatever that means. As time rolls on it transpires that what she was saying was you have 30 days to come up with a workable solution. Ref: At the news conference, the German chancellor said a realistic alternative to the plan would require "absolute clarity" on the post-Brexit future relationship between the UK and the EU.
Johnson has now accepted that the onus is on him to find a solution. Ref: Mr Johnson replied: "You rightly say the onus is on us to produce those solutions, those ideas [...] and that is what we want to do".
The position has now changed from the EU's intransigence on not finding a solution to one where it is clearly up to Johnson to offer up a solution. This is something that everybody knew but for some reason it wouldn't sink in with Johnson and his cohorts. Unfortunately we will probably get a lot of harebrained schemes which will never pass muster and then we will be back to EU's intransigence.
No wonder why I get depressed.

[Stanley]

No point being depressed Old Lad! I've been listening to interviews with EU politicians and they are unanimous. This trip to Berlin and Paris is a stunt, he has no new ideas, the EU is not going to budge from their agreed position. They are also incredulous that any reasonable political system could be so stupid as to allow such an obviously damaging circumstance as a No Deal Brexit. One even voiced the rather touching thought that it couldn't possibly happen because our politicians are so sensible. I wish I could share his optimism, at the moment there are no signs of any sense. Not even a recall of Parliament!

[Tizer]

I was pleased to hear it clearly stated on `Today' this morning that the Brexiteers claim that Turkey would join the EU was wrong. I've been telling people that for the last three years. Each individual EU nation would have a right of veto if there was a vote on it. While in the EU we can stop any other outside nation joining the EU. They mentioned how Penny Mordant had made the claim in an interview with Andrew Marr and he ad failed to point out that it was false. David Davis said perhaps it was simply a mistake. If so, it was a mistake with enormous repercussions. What they didn't mention this morning is that a Brexit campaign leaflet making this false claim (and other false claims) was put through every letterbox in the land before the Referendum.

[Stanley]

A lot of inconvenient truths have been swept under the carpet Tiz, just as important as the outright lies and zany forecasts of bright sunlit uplands where we could create a new economic empire by using our innate superiority over all others. Johnson is still in La la Land but with the backing and advice of some very clever and devious political operators. PE this week has some interesting views about who is funding this malarkey.
The sad truth is that Johnson is playing a blinder at the moment and everything is proceeding smoothly in his grand plan. He seems to have paralysed the opposition who are reduced to carping and chattering instead of revolting against what is quite obviously an enormous get-rich scheme for certain high wealth individuals.
In the analysis of 2008 one US senator said that it was a a political coup by large financial institutions and I can't help suspecting that this is what is happening now.
In years to come this whole process will be seen to have been the most enormous (and perhaps successful in the perpetrator's terms) frauds of all time.
Read MD on the subject of Trump and the NHS in this week's PE!

[plaques]

This picture says it all.
.

.
Reminds me of the verse from Abdul Abulbul Amir. Abdul
Young man, quoth Abdul, has life grown so dull
That you wish to end your career?
Vile infidel, know, you have trod on the toe
Of Abdul Abulbul Amir.

Whatever the real meaning behind this picture was it shows we have a buffoon as Prime minister.
Creating an image of statesmanship should be the number one priority by any countries leader. This is one of the reasons Corbyn falls behind in the popularity stakes.

[Stanley]

I think you're right P and its confirmation of something that we have known all along.



This caught my eye in Private Eye....

[Tizer]

Thanks for that PE cartoon, Stanley, it's a case of `be careful what you wish for'!

Plaques, in my scan of the newspaper front pages this morning that photo was on the Telegraph front page and it made us squirm. Yes, Boris Johnson is a buffoon, a fool. He's doing that childish, inferiority complex thing of sticking his feet on the furniture to try and and appear powerful. Being impolite is the last thing you should do if you are going to negotiate with the French president, especially when it's Macron.

[Tripps]

Whatever the real meaning behind this picture was it shows we have a buffoon as Prime minister

I'd agree in part with the second half of the sentence, but this 'photo', which is actually a screen grab from a video clip, has been turned into what could be called 'fake news' .

The two were speaking with a fair measure of jocularity - when did Mrs May last get a laugh from her opponent - and one of them said the tables looked like foot stools. Boris raised his foot which was in contact with the table for just an instant to demonstrate - and the world fell in on him. Watch the full video, and see. Here it is

Major diplomatic incident, grave insult to a head of state, what can you expect from an arrogant old Etonian etc etc. . . .

PS I wonder how long it will be before it's 'taken to the next level' and we are reminded that in the Arab world it is a great insult to show the sole of your shoe to someone.