Vote of no confidence and losing the legitimacy to govern. It'll only take a few Tory MP's to vote with Lab+SNP to carry the motion.
a prime minister changing has not seen an automatic election, I'm think Blair/Brown and Cameron May. As to the no confidence, I found this Under the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011, a passing of a motion of no confidence is one of only two ways in which an early election can occur (the other is a motion to hold an early election passed by at least two thirds of MPs). Following a successful motion, Parliament must dissolve, unless the motion is overturned within 14 days by the passing of an explicit motion of confidence. This procedure is designed to allow a minority government time to seek the support of other parties (as a formal coalition or with a confidence and supply arrangement) to avoid having to face re-election. As of June 2017, a motion of no confidence has yet to be called under the terms of the Act. It remains to be seen how the Act will affect a motion of no confidence in practice.
Davis's resignation letter to May Dear Prime Minister, As you know there have been a significant number of occasions in the last year or so on which I have disagreed with the Number 10 policy line, ranging from accepting the Commission’s sequencing of negotiations through to the language on Northern Ireland in the December Joint Report. At each stage I have accepted collective responsibility because it is part of my task to find workable compromises, and because I considered it was still possible to deliver on the mandate of the referendum, and on our manifesto commitment to leave the Customs Union and the Single Market. I am afraid that I think the current trend of policy and tactics is making that look less and less likely. Whether it is the progressive dilution of what I thought was a firm Chequers agreement in February on right to diverge, or the unnecessary delays of the start of the White Paper, or the presentation of a backstop proposal that omitted the strict conditions that I requested and believed that we had agreed, the general direction of policy will leave us in at best a weak negotiating position, and possibly an inescapable one. The Cabinet decision on Friday crystallised this problem. In my view the inevitable consequence of the proposed policies will be to make the supposed control by Parliament illusory rather than real. As I said at Cabinet, the “common rule book” policy hands control of large swathes of our economy to the EU and is certainly not returning control of our laws in any real sense. I am also unpersuaded that our negotiating approach will not just lead to further demands for concessions. Of course this is a complex area of judgement and it is possible that you are right and I am wrong. However, even in that event it seems to me that the national interest requires a Secretary of State in my Department that is an enthusiastic believer in your approach, and not merely a reluctant conscript. While I have been grateful to you for the opportunity to serve, it is with great regret that I tender my resignation from the Cabinet with immediate effect. Yours ever, David Davis
what? another one? have we got another 1,5bill to spend? strong and stable comes with a price, but does it come with a warranty? we all know about the fix term act noob but who is gonna want the poisoned chalice and what difference would it make anyhoo? they both want a hard brexit and lab would need a coalition with you know who aint gonna go for it. three, three general elections in 3years AH AH AHHHHH! tick tock. 10 days away from news and interweb. perfect timing.
How is a coward? May listened to advisors who never had to worry about being elected or not elected when they called the snap election, she fucked up and then sacked them. She had been told not to trust them. She is now again riding roughshod over her own brexit minister on the advice of a remaining civil servant Olly Robins who will never have to face an election or consequence of an examination. When she shuts grown men and women in a room, tells them to leave their phones and watches outside and if anyone disagrees with her they will get a cab home, I'm not sure what part of "party" she has remembered? Given all that, why would you stay if the remainer pm has undermined and replaced you in all but name for the last year? It will be an interesting few days Fin enjoy your break, we won't miss indi threads
Remainers and the EU say nothing for mine and will never get my support or vote under any circumstances ever. Let it continue.
Rees-Mogg will have no appeal to the masses. His background, his voice and his business dealings would make him easy to tear to pieces. Any election would probably bring another hung Parliament but biased to Labour rather than the Tories.
Ruling someone out because of how they speak and their background seems a bit discriminatory. As to his business, it has offices in the republic and singapore but the head office is in London and is declared in the members interests book, all above board as per the rules require.
I've already said it,but visiting our German & Swiss customers,and talking to the Americans,I have not heard a single word of concern about Brexit. Brexit will make my commercial operations more difficult/more costly but like millions of others I'm thinking of others -tbh I'd just as well pay more in tax as long as it is spent HERE,even if it means I won't be spending the money on yet another,(Foreign!),motorcycle.. Real businessmen see opportunity when circumstances change-but no one expects positivity from those who enjoy cosy contracts with governments,or who do not have the imagination to modify their policies to suit the new situation. This country WAS ONCE the industrial powerhouse of the world,but has declined WHILE WE WERE MEMBERS OF THE EU! Coincidental? NOT! Foreign,(especially European),ownership of our industries has led to millions of jobs being exported overseas,and a good deal of those jobs would have come with an apprenticeship. Germany & France are huge countries with relatively small populations,one of our biggest resources was the sea and our willingness to trade with the rest of the world,both of which have been affected greatly by EU membership. "I want what's best for me and my family",goes for all those who voted to leave too: It may well be just another way of saying, "fuck everyone else,I'm/I want to be all right Jack",but those leave -voting British citizens have exactly the same right to say it as those who voted to remain. We've had almost 50 years of EC/EU membership,and many people have been losing out from day one...the decline in apprenticeships and manufacturing has taken place while we were members,and being outside the EU will give those others their chance to succeed. It's a very big picture,if the vote had gone the other way I would have accepted it without complaint because that is democracy,(but not without comment,I hasten to add!). The democratic vote has been taken,the die should have been cast,some people are determined to see the worst in everything and unfortunately the failure of Government to deliver on what the majority voted for is likely to lead to more turmoil than if they had announced a clean break,(and a date for it's completion),on the day after the Referendum result was announced. I appreciate that there are those whose opinions differ,and they are perfectly entitled to voice it. But they are not entitled to demand that the Referendum result is ignored,and that their interests put before those of the majority who voted to leave.
The problem is there's a lot of powerful, influential, wealthy people who don't want the UK to leave the EU all for selfish reasons if it suited them we would be out by now What the EU has become is not what it is now an unmanageable corrupted money pit
100% Jim. I'm sick of hearing "But the econonmy..................." It wasn't about the economy and in any case, all the previous predictions of armageddon haven't come to pass and there is zero evidence that future predictions from project fear are any different.
People are entitled to vote for whomever they like. Putting yourself up a a person to lead the country based on your personal qualities, entitles voters to judge you. I doubt the Conservatives will risk having a leader who might put voters off at election time.
The reason the debate has turned to the economy is that remain side want it that way. They tried to drive the agenda during the campaign leading to the vote, with project fear, but were unable to control the narrative where people were concerned about other things. The mainstream media are fuelling this "debate" with project fear mk II. Why is it even being discussed? It was all debated beforehand and the decision has been made. But for more than 2 years now, we've had scare mongering with a few sprinkles of "Leave lied", "People didn't understand what they were voting for", "Millions of jobs at risk", "Lorry parks in Kent" etc. I was, and I'm deeply opposed to a 2nd referendum. Not becasue I think the result will change, I actually think the margin will be larger now given people's anger at the EU over their position and the handling of this by TM. I'm opposed to a 2nd vote, as we had the vote and it's not the best of 3. Also, it would make no difference at all to the remainers who would simply continue as they are now. Let's hope Davis's resignation is just the start, we get more of the same, this proposal is rejected and we get the clean break that the majority knew what they were voting for. Hopefully with a new PM, not Neville Chaimberlain mk II that we currently have.
Hopefully @Gimlet Isn't it interesting that the comments saying JRM has no appeal are from the usual suspects who would never vote Conservative in a million years. I think he would have great appeal throghout the country, no matter what his accent or background.
I think there is confusion or even deliberate muddying of the water over the vote remainers and a lot of leave voters want. Not another referendum, but some choice over how Brexit will work. Seems reasonable from both sides of the divide. Some might call it democracy.
How would the vote work then? The public reject it, so we leave on WTO rules obviously, upholding the vote in June 2016. However the remain side are trying to engineer this as voting against any deal takes it to mean that we now want to stay in the EU. It's all a ploy to engineer us into remaining. I've a better idea. Why don't we have a vote to stay in or leave the EU? Oh, hang on a moment...........
If you were moving to another country, would you want a choice of where? Or are you happy to be told? I would like a choice. Not a sheep.
