Jenny1

Jules-and-Boo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > collaborate - behave in a grown up manner - be > able to make decisions - put the people first - > not bicker and debase themselves - be transparent > - provide full and clear facts - do not tell lies > - do not commit to something they cannot deliver > > and so on. > > > basic stuff really It's the politicians who've not done that though, isn't it? Not the civil servants.

robbin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > She needs to be removed. > > Is the No. 10 cat still about? I hear it's been spotted in talks with David Lidington.

robbin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Just about another 15 million to go... I detect your sardonic sense of humour at work here. Because I'm sure you know it's not sensible to compare apples with oranges, and that you understand the wider lobbying value of such a well-supported petition at a time when the most important thing is to focus MP's minds on the fact that there are many and varied options out there, that the public is aware of this, that it's their duty to start considering all the potential paths forward. They need to disabuse themselves of the quaint notion that Teresa May has all the answers (or indeed any answers).

Jules-and-Boo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > really? you really think they have been behaving > as they should given the office they hold? Yes. What have they done wrong in your view?

Jules-and-Boo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This whole debacle has clearly demonstrated that > our civil servants (yes - remember their mission > being to serve the electorate?) are unfit to do > their job. > I agree with your other criticisms, but not this one. I haven't seen any evidence that the civil service has not been doing it's job. Also, do remember the HoL has pretty limited powers. The main problem is Corbyn and May and their collective disrespect for Parliament.

Jules-and-Boo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > that is actually a positive Of course.

Jules-and-Boo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There is not going to be a Revoke A50. > Perhaps not. Although serious commentators (ie David Allen Green) put the likelihood at 33.3 per cent earlier in the week. But the purpose of the petition is wider than that, don't you think? It helps to focus MPs minds in the crucial days and weeks to come on the fact that there are many and varied options out there, and that we, the public, are aware of this and that it's up to MPs to get together, be courageous and look at all the possibilities on offer. They have to shake off the idea that TM has all the answers (or indeed any answers).

robbin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Also, I can't see how Labour could win a > GE with Corbyn still at the helm. > If there was a GE surely the likely outcome is another hung parliament. This could lead to a broad coalition including the SNP etc which would mean MPs from different parties could start to work out a new way forward.

Hemingway Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > ....a second refeendum, which as it happens I > think would probably return the same result, But it wouldn't be the same result, would it, because even if 'Leave' won, it would, this time, be a concrete proposal for a defined form of 'Leave' (see my post on the other thread re that) > far more worrying revoking article 50. This > delusion really is echo chamber stuff.it's really > not what much of the country is thinking. We'd end > up with a significant, populist, proper Right Wng > party with millions of voters. I tend to think panic about this is overplayed.

...and of course I still think 'revoke' is the best option. Campaigning both for a People's Vote and Revoke is now the wisest course. And the march on Saturday will be full of people with preferences for one or the other - their aims are not mutually exclusive.

Whoever wins a 'People's Vote' we would still be in a better place than we are now. The question put in such a vote has to be for concrete choices. Either the Status Quo or a defined deal, the WA or, depending on the timing of a referendum, a new agreement drawn up in 'extra time' (allowing, among other things, for Citizens Assemblies as in Ireland prior to the abortion vote). The massive problem so far is that we've all been wallowing around in some kind of amorphous political soup with the definition of what constitutes 'Leave' never properly defined, understood and agreed upon. I'd be sad if a well thought through 'Leave' option won, I firmly believe we'd be turning our back on massive benefits, but it would be infinitely better than the damaging muddle we're in at the moment.

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The two extensions offered (so far) are > based on the PM getting agreement to the WA > through the HOC, which is unlikely to happen. Doesn't the April extension apply only if the WA doesn't pass?

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > exdulwicher Wrote: > ----------------------------------- > > > > Imagine the good that could have been done over > > the last 3 years if all the time, effort and > money > > spent on this farce had gone into education, > > transport, communities, the NHS.... > > > Yep. Double Yep.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > No second referendum. End the chaos, revoke > article 50. I think campaigning for both is wise at this stage.

May 7th seems to be off the table - Alberto Nardelli now reporting on Twitter 'EUCO agrees to an extension to 22 May, provided WA is approved by the HoC next week. If the WA is not approved by the HoC next week, EUCO agrees to an extension until 12 April, expects UK to indicate a way forward for the consideration of EUCO'.

My fantasy would be a broad coalition government including SNP etc. This thread by Robert Saunders is a good explainer of how both May and Corbyn derive their authority from outside Parliament, and so undermine our whole political system. The fact that neither of them is fit to hold public office doesn't help.

Perhaps May will go next week? It looks as if her fractured government might be beyond repair if she can't even rely on her Chief Whip. https://www.itv.com/news/2019-03-21/has-the-prime-minister-cracked-her-chief-whip/ If she's pushed out it might unblock the system enough to allow a new way forward. The EU seem to be suggesting an unconditional extension of A50 til May 7th, which would help. Sensible not to make it reliant on any MV3 going her way.

Alex Andreou's 12:00 update is 801,411 signatures

johnie Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Jenny1 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Yes. Do spread the word. But it's important not > to > > keep the page open just to watch the numbers > rise, > > satisfying though it is, as I believe this > risks > > overloading the site. > > Use this instead: > https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petitio > n=241584 Hi Johnie. Good thinking - but I suspect that using the tracking site might still cause problems. I'm no expert on this, but I read that it makes complex requests of the parliamentary servers, thus putting a load on the petition site that it can't handle. Alex Andreou has said he'll give hourly updates on twitter - so I'm using that as my source of info now.

Yes. Which is why it's important not to overload the server by keeping the window open after having signed.

Yes. Do spread the word. But it's important not to keep the page open just to watch the numbers rise, satisfying though it is, as I believe this risks overloading the site.

Interesting thinking on Twitter from Lewis Gooddall of Sky about when in the past we've faced similar situations. He made a short list and concluded that the most similar was the IMF Crisis of 1976 (Just remember this one!). But he notes that in order for it to be resolved Callaghan and Healey needed to be flexible and stand up to their own party. No sign of that kind of behaviour right now.

JohnL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The ultimate humiliation now .... > > In Brussels some EU officials are now saying that > EU leaders will not even take a decision about > extending article 50 tomorrow - because Theresa > May sent her letter too late. The message seems to be that she can't have an extension until she gets agreement to some way forward in the Commons. In other words EU leaders are showing more respect for the HOC than she's ever done. I doubt she'll resign. I suspect she'll cling on to the possibility of bludgeoning Parliament into accepting the WA until the very last moment.

JohnL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > They're both saying we're in a full scale national > crisis - but if we were wouldn't they co-operate > with each other ? Yes. A cross-party group should have been set up to work out ways forward the day after the referendum result was known in 2016. As others have pointed out, one of the key reasons we're in this mess is that the FPTP system has fostered pantomimic 'conflict' in politics, but no ability to compromise. Arguably if either May or Corbyn were fit to lead a major political party they'd have managed to work out a flexible, co-operative approach despite the inherent weaknesses of FPTP.

...and of course neither May nor Corbyn have the guts to grasp participation in EU elections, to allow for a longer extension. So, barring extraordinary unforeseen events, my money would be on May being successful in blackmailing Parliament into accepting the WA. And I think we should all stop calling the WA a 'Deal' - because if it is accepted the actual business of negotiating the proper deal will only just be starting....