RugbyRebels

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

twitchy wrote:

although its a spoof, I'm trying to imagine how Corbyn could be PM in a strong stable coalition....not quite succeeding.

It's increasingly looking like Unionists v Republicans in parliament, as an aside; Jezza is anti monarchy iirc.

I'm anti monarchy too. Though given they exist, and we'd still need a head of state, and I don't want a President, or for the PM to have many of the head of state duties, and the monarchy is a useful diplomatic tool, and the monarchy is useful for tourism, and that it'd swamp any Parliament for time to try and unwind the monarch as the head of state I don't know I'd ever bother to try and change the monarchy, I'll just grumble it was ever set up like that in the first place.

Given it is there I wouldn't be as rude about them as Corbyn has been.

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

twitchy wrote:

although its a spoof, I'm trying to imagine how Corbyn could be PM in a strong stable coalition....not quite succeeding.

It's increasingly looking like Unionists v Republicans in parliament, as an aside; Jezza is anti monarchy iirc.

I'm anti monarchy too. Though given they exist, and we'd still need a head of state, and I don't want a President, or for the PM to have many of the head of state duties, and the monarchy is a useful diplomatic tool, and the monarchy is useful for tourism, and that it'd swamp any Parliament for time to try and unwind the monarch as the head of state I don't know I'd ever bother to try and change the monarchy, I'll just grumble it was ever set up like that in the first place.

Given it is there I wouldn't be as rude about them as Corbyn has been.

Adder wrote: I never understood the tourism part.

Sent from my SM-J500FN using Tapatalk

Banquo wrote:

twitchy wrote:

although its a spoof, I'm trying to imagine how Corbyn could be PM in a strong stable coalition....not quite succeeding.

It's increasingly looking like Unionists v Republicans in parliament, as an aside; Jezza is anti monarchy iirc.

Zhivago wrote:

Zhivago wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: Hung parliament could still mean a Conservative led coalition, if only a couple of seats out the Ulster Unionists will prop her up.

OK, if the Conservatives have a majority government after the election, which could be just 1 seat, then I win. If not you win. Loser gets to display the avatar of the winner's choice for 1 month (but it has to be safe for work).

Agreed?

Agreed

Here's your avatar, Sandy.

Banquo wrote: good for you, but you aren't the leader of the Labour party.

Sandydragon wrote:Ignore the last Kamber. 31 days and counting.

Zhivago wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:Ignore the last Kamber. 31 days and counting.

Good stuff Sandy.

Sandydragon wrote:

Zhivago wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:Ignore the last Kamber. 31 days and counting.

Good stuff Sandy.

A promise is a promise and all that.

Sandydragon wrote:In a poll I saw earlier, the only conservative politician that gets a positive public review is Ruth Davison. Who isn't an mp.

Boris was the best of the rest. There will be another GE in the not too distant future, might as well fight fire with fire.

Banquo wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:In a poll I saw earlier, the only conservative politician that gets a positive public review is Ruth Davison. Who isn't an mp.

Boris was the best of the rest. There will be another GE in the not too distant future, might as well fight fire with fire.

I feckin hope not. Not only would corbers likely be running a minority govt, but I'm sick and tired, like Brenda, of these incompetent c*nts preening their self importance all over the place. They are meant to serve us, not themselves. The world would lose cock all if we just got rid of the lot of them and started again.

Banquo wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:In a poll I saw earlier, the only conservative politician that gets a positive public review is Ruth Davison. Who isn't an mp.

Boris was the best of the rest. There will be another GE in the not too distant future, might as well fight fire with fire.

I feckin hope not. Not only would corbers likely be running a minority govt, but I'm sick and tired, like Brenda, of these incompetent c*nts preening their self importance all over the place. They are meant to serve us, not themselves. The world would lose cock all if we just got rid of the lot of them and started again.

Stom wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:In a poll I saw earlier, the only conservative politician that gets a positive public review is Ruth Davison. Who isn't an mp.

Boris was the best of the rest. There will be another GE in the not too distant future, might as well fight fire with fire.

I feckin hope not. Not only would corbers likely be running a minority govt, but I'm sick and tired, like Brenda, of these incompetent c*nts preening their self importance all over the place. They are meant to serve us, not themselves. The world would lose cock all if we just got rid of the lot of them and started again.

Indeed. I hate that it's all about: Oh, we need to do this to stop them getting in...that's not how it bloody works! You need to do something to help me! To help Banquo, to help Mrs. Taylor down the road with her tea shop. To help Virat with his convenience store. You bunch of self serving egotistical wank buckets.

Mellsblue wrote:

Stom wrote:

Banquo wrote: I feckin hope not. Not only would corbers likely be running a minority govt, but I'm sick and tired, like Brenda, of these incompetent c*nts preening their self importance all over the place. They are meant to serve us, not themselves. The world would lose cock all if we just got rid of the lot of them and started again.

Indeed. I hate that it's all about: Oh, we need to do this to stop them getting in...that's not how it bloody works! You need to do something to help me! To help Banquo, to help Mrs. Taylor down the road with her tea shop. To help Virat with his convenience store. You bunch of self serving egotistical wank buckets.

Banquo is beyond help

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Stom wrote:
Indeed. I hate that it's all about: Oh, we need to do this to stop them getting in...that's not how it bloody works! You need to do something to help me! To help Banquo, to help Mrs. Taylor down the road with her tea shop. To help Virat with his convenience store. You bunch of self serving egotistical wank buckets.

Banquo is beyond help

c%nt

Stom wrote:Jonathan Powell said this about siding with the DUP, a stance I hadn't considered. I'd be interested in hearing thoughts on it, especially from someone who may know a bit more about this than me. Eugene?

I do think it’s a mistake to go into government with the “support of our friends” in the DUP. Even John Major avoided doing that and the reason he avoided that is the peace process is based on a balance that the British government has made it clear it is neutral in Northern Ireland, it doesn’t take sides. Once you have their support you are no longer neutral.

It matters for two big reasons. First, we haven’t managed to get the executive back up and running in Northern Ireland because of divisions between the two sides. The British government were trying to mediate between the two sides to get an administration up and running again and of course now it can’t possibly have that role of mediating.

And secondly I think it’s a mistake because one of the big issues in the Brexit negotiations is the border between north and south. Now the DUP is a minority in its view about Brexit, it’s in favour of Brexit. This is going to be a very real problem.

Whatever you put on a piece of paper, you’re living there with a minority government, that’s dependant on the DUP, you get to a crucial issue and then they say, ‘Remember what we want in terms of talks in Northern Ireland’, and the government has a choice: do they say, ‘We’re not giving you let, we’ll let the government collapse’, or do they just bend a little on that issue, it’s just one small issue it doesn’t matter. But beyond that the government can’t possibly be seen as neutral on Northern Ireland now if it puts itself at the mercy of the DUP.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Stom wrote:Jonathan Powell said this about siding with the DUP, a stance I hadn't considered. I'd be interested in hearing thoughts on it, especially from someone who may know a bit more about this than me. Eugene?

I do think it’s a mistake to go into government with the “support of our friends” in the DUP. Even John Major avoided doing that and the reason he avoided that is the peace process is based on a balance that the British government has made it clear it is neutral in Northern Ireland, it doesn’t take sides. Once you have their support you are no longer neutral.

It matters for two big reasons. First, we haven’t managed to get the executive back up and running in Northern Ireland because of divisions between the two sides. The British government were trying to mediate between the two sides to get an administration up and running again and of course now it can’t possibly have that role of mediating.

And secondly I think it’s a mistake because one of the big issues in the Brexit negotiations is the border between north and south. Now the DUP is a minority in its view about Brexit, it’s in favour of Brexit. This is going to be a very real problem.

Whatever you put on a piece of paper, you’re living there with a minority government, that’s dependant on the DUP, you get to a crucial issue and then they say, ‘Remember what we want in terms of talks in Northern Ireland’, and the government has a choice: do they say, ‘We’re not giving you let, we’ll let the government collapse’, or do they just bend a little on that issue, it’s just one small issue it doesn’t matter. But beyond that the government can’t possibly be seen as neutral on Northern Ireland now if it puts itself at the mercy of the DUP.

HMG will find it very difficult - even moreso than usual - to be trusted as an honest broker in the executive discussions. I don't see how it would work, nor how the DUP would permit anyone else to do the job. Certainly the DUP won't be happy for the Irish govt to do the job and I can't see Trump's America doing the job. The consequences of that are hard to unravel. Direct rule could lead to a return to terrorism I guess, but I'd expect Sinn Fein and the big beasts in the RA to just wait out the collapse of this government rather than go back to buying trips in Libya.

That being said, even th DUP say they don't want a hard border. I don't see Brexit negotiations really being an issue

SerjeantWildgoose wrote:It is a very delicate balance over here Euge and Stom. This time last week it was not.

Following the March elections Sinn Fein held all the cards and the DUP were begging for scraps - and even then we were close to an agreement before the general election was called. An agreement that would likely have collapsed on the sticky issue of Foster's position as FM. Her position has now been strengthened immeasurably and I think that Sinn Fein will make a lot of noise, but probably accept the deal as already agreed on some form of Irish language act and assurances on the border. Their belief that there was a possible return to the electorate has now been blown out of the water and If they don't agree to form an Executive, we're back to direct rule in some form that will see them lose all those concessions and the most influential position they have ever held in the northern Assembly.

The NI parties like to play on the brink, but even Sinn Fein will recognise that their long game needs to be played for a while longer yet.

Zhivago wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:I can see the Lib Dems doing very well out of this.

They'll be having my vote

Banquo wrote:

Zhivago wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:I can see the Lib Dems doing very well out of this.

They'll be having my vote

is that what happened, out of interest?