The progressives have long used the George Orwell approach to language by labelling things the opposite of their reality. The latest casualty has been democracy. Now, it seems, ignoring the outcome of a vote is democracy and insisting that it be upheld is undemocratic.
Boris Johnson has come under fire for apparently deciding to ignore the outcome of a no confidence vote. This is patently untrue. It has already been made perfectly clear that he will comply with the Fixed Term Parliament (2011) Act and use the fourteen days open to him to seek the confidence of the house. Failing that, he will go to the country. There is nothing undemocratic about this, nor is it ignoring a vote of no confidence, yet this is the lie being bandied about in a fit of hyperbolic and hysterical outrage and fuckwittery.
In the meantime, John McDonnell betrays his totalitarian roots by suggesting that Labour would seize power from a Johnson government that has lost a no confidence vote.
Mr McDonnell said: ‘I don’t want to drag the Queen into this but I would be sending Jeremy Corbyn in a cab to Buckingham Palace to say, ‘we’re taking over’.’
Just like that.
Where to start? Firstly, I don’t think it is hyperbole to describe such behaviour as a coup, because that is precisely what it would be. The process is pretty straightforward – Johnson loses a no confidence vote. He has fourteen days in which to try to secure the confidence of the house and win a second no confidence vote. If he loses that, he goes to the Queen and seeks a dissolution of parliament and calls an election. By which time, we will have left the European Union by default, which is what this nasty little gambit is all about. Defying that referendum result again.
Jeremy Corbyn taking a taxi to Buckingham Palace and seizing power is not constitutional – not least because he cannot command a majority himself and would, likely as not, lose a vote of no confidence as well.
Then there’s the little matter of the Queen not being at Buckingham Palace at the moment as she is in Balmoral. Gonna be a hefty taxi fare, that one. Whereupon, Her Majesty will give him his marching orders. He has no right to seize power. Such behaviour is not only undemocratic, it is treasonous.
I have never, in all my born days, thought that I would see British politicians behaving in such an appalling manner, more at home in some tin pot dictatorship.
As for the no deal nonsense, we leave on the 31st October. That is what the EU has said. If they so wish, they can return to the negotiating table. It’s entirely up to them. They have chosen not to. Parliament has rejected the deal surrender document three times now. So what, precisely, is Boris Johnson supposed to do? Other than revoke Article 50, ignore the outcome of a plebiscite in direct violation of all democratic principles and the mandates of both Labour and Conservatives at the 2017 general election, thereby confirming that democracy is now utterly dead in this country and voting is now a complete waste of time.
Fucking Hellski!
The Leader of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition is entitled to an official, chauffeur driven government car, why would he use a taxi? Or is John McDonnell making it up as he goes along again?
That would appear to be the case. Playing to the crowd, more likely.
Yes, however I’d point out that it’s long been the case that many of those currently in public office only believe in vox populi, vox dei when it actually suits their personal agenda, not the what the public believes is good. BREXIT etc has merely shone a searchlight on this state of affairs.
Hence the media ‘our democracy’ vs ‘populism’ narrative. What non-progressives think doesn’t count, at least in their eyes. Because we’re not important, are we?
Yeah, I think I got that message…
Presumably the current Labour Leadership think that the UK is somehow similar to Czarist Russia and that the entire population will back them up with torches and pitchforks. Wouldn’t it be brilliant if he actually tried it, got arrested and thrown in jail?
I think the cab would have to drive to Balmoral actually. No doubt her guards would send him on his way back. These Labour idiots are insane. they really are. 75% of MPs seem to have forgotten what democracy is by ignoring the result of the biggest ever vote in British history.
Yeah, I did mention the bit about going to Balmoral.
“…..I would be sending Jeremy Corbyn in a taxi …..”.
So there we have it. The master sending his servant with a note. McDonnell is the O’Brien of Orwell’s prophesy, pretending to be a loyal servant of the ideology while, in fact, being the one controlling it. I would suggest that he has studied Livingstone’s coup of the GLC and believes if one can take a city, why can’t he take a country?
And why not? Also he has ideas about retroactively making Conservative Party policies illegal and prosecuting his political opponents. The man is a tyrant in the making.
OT once again sorry. Elswere on the blogsphere there are discussions about the recent electricity grid meltdown and its effect on the trains. People have been wibbling on about the fifties and how low tech trains would have coped much better. I kept thinking that Longrider would tell them that they were talking bollox.
If the electricity is down, then diesel traction would keep going. If the power lines have come down in high winds, then it’s all stop. I’ve not seen these conversations.
“I have never, in all my born days, thought that I would see British politicians behaving in such an appalling manner, more at home in some tin pot dictatorship.”
I’ve long thought it inevitable.
You can be sure that they have learnt their lesson. From now on we will never get a referendum on anything that is important to them.
Although we have no written constitution, certain actions do require specific consent from the electorate in the form of either a general election on an explicit manifesto commitment or a referendum.
One result of the Gina Miller case (which she probably regrets starting now) is that aspects of Government which were previously the sole prerogative of the executive are subject to legal challenge.
The blithe signing of treaties by Prime Ministers without any other authorisation (or even discussion) is probably going to be more likely to face legal challenge in the future.
Given the offences of the executive in this area alone (1973 signing up to the EEC, Maastricht, Lisbon, etc.), this is a good thing.