[Politics] UK Suspends Parliament

Terminal Blue

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 20, 2020
3,293
899
118
Country
United Kingdom
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49495757

Short summary, the British government just asked the queen to suspend parliament for 5 weeks, until the 14th October. It's important to note that the queen isn't allowed to say refuse to such requests, so in reality what we mean is that the government, under Boris Johnson, has temporarily suspended parliament.

According to Michael Gove, who has acted as government spokesperson on this issue, this suspension is to allow the government and PM to address domestic policy. However, the timing is, to put it mildly, extremely questionable, since the planned date of the UK's withdrawal from the EU is the 31st October. Now obviously, I cannot tell you with total certainty that Gove is lying, but the incredibly obvious motivation one could see for this suspension would be to prevent parliament from mounting any kind of opposition to no-deal Brexit.

The thing is, whether or not this is the motivation (spoiler: it is), it is going to be the effect, and one with fairly chilling consequences for democracy in the UK. This whole thing has been described as a coup, and that's not without justification since it essentially represents the executive unilaterally trying to shut down the legislature to prevent oversight. However, I also don't think that's the main issue here. The truth is, we're not quite at Emperor Palpatine stage yet, but there is a broader context in which this is merely the latest part of an ongoing attack on the supremacy of parliament within the British political system in the wake of Brexit, and that supremacy of Parliament is the essence of British democracy. Boris Johnson, our prime minister, has openly stated that he intends to run the next general election on a "people vs. parliament" program, which sounds great, but now we're getting an insight into what that means. In short, it means a strong, authoritarian, executive-driven government claiming to represent the "will of the people", even when pushing through policies which will literally kill people.

In fact, I think part of why this is so important even if you don't live in the UK is that it completely puts paid to the idea that populism is anti-authoritarian. Populism as an ideology is deeply authoritarian, and we should always be wary of it. It's no surprise to see other authoritarian populists (like a certain US president) come out in support of what is essentially a temporary end to democracy.

Of course, if the suspension of democracy becomes routine, at what point are you not living in a democracy any more?
 

Wakey87

New member
Sep 20, 2011
160
0
0
They were going be in recess anyway, in reality of those 5 weeks they are realy only losing a few days.
But to be perfectly honest it is the only way to break the deadlock, Parliament is clearly a remain parliament in a leave country.


By Votes:
17.4m Leave - 16.1m Remain

By Constituency
406 Leave - 242 Remain

Constituency By Party
Labour: 148 Leave - 84 Remain
Conservative 247 Leave - 80 Remain

By Region
9 Leave - 3 Remain

By Member of Parliament
160 Leave - 486 Remain
 

Seanchaidh

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
4,416
2,420
118
Country
United States of America
Right-wing "populism" is indeed authoritarian and will tend to crush even merely nominal democracy. Such "populism" is hardly "populist" at all in the real intentions of its leaders.
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
7,206
2,023
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
Wakey87 said:
They were going be in recess anyway, in reality of those 5 weeks they are realy only losing a few days.
But to be perfectly honest it is the only way to break the deadlock, Parliament is clearly a remain parliament in a leave country.


By Votes:
17.4m Leave - 16.1m Remain

By Constituency
406 Leave - 242 Remain

Constituency By Party
Labour: 148 Leave - 84 Remain
Conservative 247 Leave - 80 Remain

By Region
9 Leave - 3 Remain

By Member of Parliament
160 Leave - 486 Remain
That not breaking the deadlock. That's circumventing the system.

No, I dont think any agree would have been reached. Everyone has been intractable. Taking away someone's power is going to get everyone offside, though. Next, 60 days are going to be really interesting
 
Apr 17, 2009
1,751
0
0
I think I'm mostly annoyed by how childish it is. BoJo heard his opponents were rallying to stop him getting the No Deal he wanted, so he just shuts down all of Parliament like a kid taking his ball and going home. If you're going to try and seize power you could at least be clever and subtle about it you know? When you're denying the people a voice while claiming to be speaking for the people I just feel insulted
 

Terminal Blue

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 20, 2020
3,293
899
118
Country
United Kingdom
Wakey87 said:
They were going be in recess anyway, in reality of those 5 weeks they are realy only losing a few days.
Parliamentary recess is from the 25th July to the 3rd of September. The suspension will begin on the 12th of September, and end on the 14th October.

Wakey87 said:
By Member of Parliament
160 Leave - 486 Remain
So, there's a bunch of things wrong here, but let's address the big one.

All these numbers are from 2016 (I mean, some of them are just made up, but the numbers they're clearly based on are from 2016).

Since 2016, a lot of things have happened. The conservative party has had to replace two leaders. We've seen a politican who campaigned for remain become prime minister and run a general election on a hard Brexit platform. We've had that general election, which wiped out the conservative majority in parliament, resulting in a hung parliament and a controversial confidence and supply deal with the DUP. We've moved from an environment in which remain and leave poll similarly to one in which remain consistently polls better than leave (incredibly consistently, in fact). We've moved from a media environment in which most traditional news outlets support leave to one in which the express remains the only outspokenly pro-leave print newspaper.

In short, it is not a case of a pro-remain parliament and a pro-leave country. That was the rhetoric in 2016, but it doesn't work any more, because people who might have voted on the promise of ?350 million a week for the NHS, or other now retracted claims by the leave campaign, are now much more away of what Brexit is actually going to look like, and what the government can actually deliver, and in general they don't like it.

https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questio...-remaining-in-the-eu-which-would-you-support/

https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questio...e-the-right-decisions-on-the-issue-of-brexit/

It is very clear that most people who voted for Brexit did not vote for a Brexit which might have negative consequences for them or their families, they voted for a Brexit which was going to be economically beneficial and politically smooth, and that is not what we are going to get. At the same time, most politicians seem to have accepted the reality that due to the referendum Brexit needs to happen, and the political debate has now moved on to what kind of Brexit can be achieved which will be acceptable and do minimal harm to the country. It is only recently, when it has become clear that it is a choice between no deal or a bad deal, that the thought of a second referendum or delaying Brexit has been on the parliamentary table.

Back in 2016, it wasn't just MPs who were pro-remain. Almost everyone with any kind of political expertise (such as political scientists and economists) overwhelmingly tended towards remain. This is not to say that we should always side with expertise, but what these experts were responding to was the overwhelming lack of hard information and data about the potential consequences of leaving the EU. Most people are not experts, they probably didn't have particularly deep knowledge of the best available research back in 2016, but they are also not idiots. Whether you are ideologically opposed to the EU or not, the deal which is on the table right now is shit, and most people know it's shit. No deal is even worse.
 

Dreiko_v1legacy

New member
Aug 28, 2008
4,696
0
0
I dunno, if you care about democracy, wouldn't you want the result of referendums to be upheld though? It's kinda ironic to me that people who ask to ignore democracy and do a second referendum because they lost the first now are all pro-democracy all of a sudden.

If anything, this is preserving democracy by safeguarding the implementation of a democratic referendum's result.
 

Kwak

Elite Member
May 2, 2020
1,674
1,119
118
Country
4
Why would he be trying to push through the no-deal option? Isn't that commonly agreed as being the worst possible outcome? Why would he be trying to sabotage the future of the country?


I noticed this juicy bit of spectacle.
The move has not gone down well with many, and one foul-mouthed celebrity tweet in particular has gone massively viral.

Nineties heart throb Hugh Grant unloaded on Mr Johnson, writing: "You will not f**k with my children?s future.
"You will not destroy the freedoms my grandfather fought two world wars to defend. F**k off you over-promoted rubber bath toy. Britain is revolted by you and you little gang of masturbatory prefects."

However, a brutal response to the actor's tirade from talk show host Piers Morgan has also gone viral this morning.

"Oh shut up you virtue-signalling little twat," he wrote on Twitter.
The fact that expressing outrage at a subversion of democracy can be dismissed as 'virtue signalling' sums up the shitshow that the world is now. Fuck this world.
 

Terminal Blue

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 20, 2020
3,293
899
118
Country
United Kingdom
Dreiko said:
I dunno, if you care about democracy, wouldn't you want the result of referendums to be upheld though? It's kinda ironic to me that people who ask to ignore democracy and do a second referendum because they lost the first now are all pro-democracy all of a sudden.

If anything, this is preserving democracy by safeguarding the implementation of a democratic referendum's result.
So, once again, lots of stuff wrong here, but let's focus on the big one.

Let's say I ask you if you want a sandwich, and you say yes. So I go and take a shit between two slices of bread and hand you the result. Technically, I gave you a sandwich, but it probably isn't the sandwich you wanted. It's a shit sandwich. Would you feel compelled to eat the sandwich because, after all, you did ask for a sandwich. Would you be okay with me forcing you to eat the shit sandwich? After all, it may not be what you wanted, but it is what you asked for.

This is the situation we are in now regarding Brexit. People may have voted leave in the referendum, they may have asked for a sandwich, but they probably don't want the sandwich they're getting (in fact, polling suggests they kind of hate it). It is a shit sandwich. It is an absolutely shit sandwich with no redeeming qualities unless you are ideologically committed enough to believe that leaving the EU is worth eating shit for, which some people are, sure, but most are not.

This stopped being merely a question of leave versus remain a long time ago. Until very recently, Brexit itself had bipartisan support with both major parties agreeing that it needed to happen. The problem, for a long time now, has been the consistent failure to actually achieve Brexit in a way that doesn't force the people who voted for it to eat a shit sandwich.
 

Baffle

Elite Member
Apr 6, 2020
2,045
980
118
evilthecat said:
Let's say I ask you if you want a sandwich, and you say yes. So I go and take a shit between two slices of bread and hand you the result. Technically, I gave you a sandwich, but it probably isn't the sandwich you wanted. It's a shit sandwich. Would you feel compelled to eat the sandwich because, after all, you did ask for a sandwich. Would you be okay with me forcing you to eat the shit sandwich? After all, it may not be what you wanted, but it is what you asked for.
Worse, it's actually like offering someone a really good sandwich with all their favourite fillings, and no bad things like relish at all. Then giving them a shit sandwich with relish.
 

Baffle

Elite Member
Apr 6, 2020
2,045
980
118
Kwak said:
The fact that expressing outrage at a subversion of democracy can be dismissed as 'virtue signalling' sums up the shitshow that the world is now. Fuck this world.
I think the thing to remember is that Piers Morgan is a huge bellend who'd be forgotten about if he didn't make boorish statements to stay in the limelight.
 

Terminal Blue

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 20, 2020
3,293
899
118
Country
United Kingdom
Baffle2 said:
Worse, it's actually like offering someone a really good sandwich with all their favourite fillings, and no bad things like relish at all. Then giving them a shit sandwich with relish.
But... sandwich means sandwich.
 

Gordon_4_v1legacy

New member
Aug 22, 2010
2,577
0
0
Kwak said:
Why would he be trying to push through the no-deal option? Isn't that commonly agreed as being the worst possible outcome? Why would he be trying to sabotage the future of the country?


I noticed this juicy bit of spectacle.
The move has not gone down well with many, and one foul-mouthed celebrity tweet in particular has gone massively viral.

Nineties heart throb Hugh Grant unloaded on Mr Johnson, writing: "You will not f**k with my children?s future.
"You will not destroy the freedoms my grandfather fought two world wars to defend. F**k off you over-promoted rubber bath toy. Britain is revolted by you and you little gang of masturbatory prefects."

However, a brutal response to the actor's tirade from talk show host Piers Morgan has also gone viral this morning.

"Oh shut up you virtue-signalling little twat," he wrote on Twitter.
The fact that expressing outrage at a subversion of democracy can be dismissed as 'virtue signalling' sums up the shitshow that the world is now. Fuck this world.
I find myself somewhat surprised that Hugh Grant said that. Just seems.....bizarre to imagine the word fuck in his tone of voice.
 

generals3

New member
Mar 25, 2009
1,198
0
0
Dreiko said:
I dunno, if you care about democracy, wouldn't you want the result of referendums to be upheld though? It's kinda ironic to me that people who ask to ignore democracy and do a second referendum because they lost the first now are all pro-democracy all of a sudden.

If anything, this is preserving democracy by safeguarding the implementation of a democratic referendum's result.
What's so anti democratic about having a second referendum about an issue people know a lot more about?
Let's not forget that during the first referendum the campaigns were filled with lies and false promises but also that nobody knew what a "brexit" would look like. Was it a no deal? Was it with a deal? What kind of deal? Etc.
Now at least people know: there is the deal offered by the EU or No deal and be at the mercy of "America First" Donald J Trump.

Surely it would make a lot more democratic sense to ask the citizens opinion now that they actually know what their decision entails? If nothing new had happened and no new information was acquired since the last referendum you would be right, but it isn't the case.

In the end that is why i'm 100% against referanda about such complex and big decisions. Usually the impact of such a decision only becomes clear ex post...
 

Wakey87

New member
Sep 20, 2011
160
0
0
evilthecat said:
It is very clear that most people who voted for Brexit did not vote for a Brexit which might have negative consequences for them or their families, they voted for a Brexit which was going to be economically beneficial and politically smooth, and that is not what we are going to get.
Glad you know what we voted for because apparently we didn't because we were too stupid.

We tried leaving 3 times with a deal and it was blocked at every turn, didn't matter what was on the table there was just no appetite in parliament to implement the result of the refurendum. The leave voters are at the end of their rope, and it's because of the unwillingness to accept we are actualy leaving in parliament is why we are crashing out.
 

Wakey87

New member
Sep 20, 2011
160
0
0
evilthecat said:
Wakey87 said:
They were going be in recess anyway, in reality of those 5 weeks they are realy only losing a few days.
Parliamentary recess is from the 25th July to the 3rd of September. The suspension will begin on the 12th of September, and end on the 14th October.
Thats the Summer recess, we are talking about the Conference recess from mid September to early October.
 

Baffle

Elite Member
Apr 6, 2020
2,045
980
118
Wakey87 said:
The leave voters are at the end of their rope, and it's because of the unwillingness to accept we are actualy leaving in parliament is why we are crashing out.
Big cross next to that one I'm afraid. The last few days of comments on the news has been nothing but leavers getting their excuses in for why it's everyone else's fault that we're leaving the EU with no deal in place. Sorry, but it isn't - it's the fault of the people who voted to leave. Pretty sure they were warned about this before they voted. Yep: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/515068/why-the-government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-the-european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk.pdf


Gordon_4 said:
I find myself somewhat surprised that Hugh Grant said that. Just seems.....bizarre to imagine the word fuck in his tone of voice.
Ever seen Lair of the White Worm? He's in that. Not sure if he swears.