2018 Queen's Speech cancelled by gvt

[RAyMO]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40317814

citing pressures of Brexit and the wrongly named "Great Repeal Bill" the govt have cancelled the Queens speech in 2018.

Personally, I believe its an attempt by the govt to avoid a potential defeat on the 2018 agenda.

Democracy? What Democracy?

Edited June 18, 2017 by RAyMO

[eugenonegin]

It does seem a bit high handed.And a bit inept. 

[Black Monk]

Good. We must have more time to crack on with leaving the EU. It must be the priority.

[sees]

I don't understand.  How would the Queen's speech delay political proceedings exactly?  Could it be that the government cancelled it due to the Queen mentioning the recent disasters?   Could it be that the current government don't want the focus on them for the recent corporate manslaughter of so many at Grenfell Tower?  Hmmm

[stevewinn]

2 hours ago, sees said:

I don't understand.  How would the Queen's speech delay political proceedings exactly?  Could it be that the government cancelled it due to the Queen mentioning the recent disasters?   Could it be that the current government don't want the focus on them for the recent corporate manslaughter of so many at Grenfell Tower?  Hmmm

The Queens speech is written by the Government and is more of a "wish list" of what it wants to achieve during its term. The Queens involvement is the ceremonial opening of Parliament. What would be the point in doing a Queens speech when the opposition as already said they'd vote it down regardless, with that fact in mind it would be just a waste of time and energy. So like Black Monk said, concentrate on Brexit, the day to day domestic politics can just carry on as normal.

Brexit is the number one issue facing this country. an Act of Parliament as already been past mandating that we Leave the EU. staying in either the Single market or Customs Union is not leaving the EU. The Government is mandated to Leave and Leave we are; The Prime Minister, the Chancellor have both said that. the hiring of Crawford Falconer also shows we will be leaving the EU totally. as Crawford Falconer will be the government’s chief trade negotiations adviser, charging him with helping to broker new trade deals with the rest of the world as we leave the European Union. Falconer and his team will develop and negotiate free trade agreements and market access accords with nations outside of the EU, the Department for International Trade said on Friday in an statement. He’ll also assist in landing deals for specific sectors and products.

It all starts 8am Monday morning. (tomorrow) Let the fun and games begin. The biggest battle will not be with the EU, but with those on our own side, media outlets such as the BBC, The Times news paper etc...

 

[sees]

Well it seems that a soft brexit is favoured by the majority, yes?  ....and to avoid, at all costs, a no deal!

[Black Monk]

46 minutes ago, sees said:

Well it seems that a soft brexit is favoured by the majority, yes?  ....and to avoid, at all costs, a no deal!

No. The majority of British people want Brexit, which is what they voted for last year

The terms "soft Brexit" and "hard Brexit" were only invented by the Remoaners after they lost the referendum. There were no such terms before and during the referendum itself. "Hard Brexit" is basically Remoanerish for what the majority of us call Brexit, which is what we voted for. "Soft Brexit" is Remoanerish for "No Brexit at all."

[sees]

13 minutes ago, Black Monk said:

No. The majority of British people want Brexit, which is what they voted for last year

The terms "soft Brexit" and "hard Brexit" were only invented by the Remoaners after they lost the referendum. There were no such terms before and during the referendum itself. "Hard Brexit" is basically Remoanerish for what the majority of us call Brexit, which is what we voted for. "Soft Brexit" is Remoanerish for "No Brexit at all."

Well I've heard the term soft Brexit used a lot quite recently actually, i.e. when Theresa Mayday only just scraped through with the election results.

I haven't followed the situation closely but it seems that a 'no deal' would be disastrous and best avoided.

Edited June 18, 2017 by sees

[RAyMO]

1 hour ago, stevewinn said:

What would be the point in doing a Queens speech when the opposition as already said they'd vote it down regardless, with that fact in mind it would be just a waste of time and energy.

Thats a very strange view to take. The Queens Speech is the formal means for parliament to endorse the governemts policy. Failure to have a queens speech can be for no other reason than the government being afraid of losing and thus being forced to a General election. As those on the Brexit side of the argument used to tell us - Parliament is sovereign not the government.

Not having a Queens speech is an abuse of Parliamnent.

[keithisco]

4 minutes ago, sees said:

Well I've heard the term soft Brexit used a lot quite recently actually, i.e. when Theresa Mayday only just scraped through with the election results.

I haven't followed the situation closely but it seems that a 'no deal' would be disastrous and best avoided.

If you listen too much to the BBC you will hear this term as being preferable because the BBC is the "Remoaners" and left-wing mouthpiece. You CANNOT be in the Single Market without also being in the Customs Union, and you are also required to accept the European Court of Justice as a priori over UK Legislation.

What this means is that the UK will NOT be allowed by the EU to negotiate its own free-trade deals, you MUST accept Free-Movement of people even if some of them are totally feckless and don't want to work-on the positive side we will accept free-movement of foreigners that contribute to the economy and the UK way of life as long as it does not undermine the wage aspirations of the population as a whole.

"Hard" Brexit is really just "Brexit"- "Soft" Brexit is No Brexit.

[keithisco]

7 minutes ago, RAyMO said:

Thats a very strange view to take. The Queens Speech is the formal means for parliament to endorse the governemts policy. Failure to have a queens speech can be for no other reason than the government being afraid of losing and thus being forced to a General election. As those on the Brexit side of the argument used to tell us - Parliament is sovereign not the government.

Not having a Queens speech is an abuse of Parliamnent.

No it isn't, on all counts. The Queens speech does no more than set out the agenda for the coming session of Parliament after the annual recess. By cancelling the Queens Speech in 2018 means the work of the Parliamentary commissions and more importantly the Brexit negotiations can continue without interruption-and that is the reason for this action.

[stevewinn]

29 minutes ago, sees said:

Well I've heard the term soft Brexit used a lot quite recently actually, i.e. when Theresa Mayday only just scraped through with the election results.

I haven't followed the situation closely but it seems that a 'no deal' would be disastrous and best avoided.

Soft Brexit is filling the airwaves; its double speak for remaining part of the EU.

An Act of Parliament as been passed, The government is mandated to Leave the EU. 

If we remain part of the Single Market or Customs Union we have not left the EU.

No, Deal better than a bad deal, and that is very true, its a negotiation position.

The No Deal disaster, it needs explaining in numbers by the Government as it wont be a disaster far from it. How can it be disastrous its only a political project we are leaving. going from being locked inside a customs union of 29 members and three states to an open trade forum of 167 countries whereby we can sign our own trade agreements, in the process we'll no longer be paying into the EU political project at the cost of £10billion+ a year. and we can also raise money for the coffers on any tariffs levied.  

Far too many people have been cocooned with this whole EU business. and you'd think for some its a matter of life and death. - The UK will be fine outside of the EU, if the EU can do free trade agreements with the likes of Peru, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Ukraine, Israel etc... and these countries do not and have not handed over sovereignty to the EU like the UK has.- what is stopping a EU-UK free trade deal? only the EU itself as it wants to punish the UK for leaving and to prevent others wanting to leave, it doesn't say much for EU political project and self confidence that it as to prevent others leaving. doesn't that admission highlight that if the EU-UK agreed a free trade agreement then that status is better than being a EU member. and raises the question why and what is the purpose of the EU then.

The UK is returning to the way its done business for the last 400 years, the oddity is the last 43 as a EU member.

Edited June 18, 2017 by stevewinn

[Matt221]

Perhaps the Queen is gonna jack it in and hand the throne and all the gubbins that go with it to Charles......

[hetrodoxly]

4 hours ago, sees said:

Well it seems that a soft brexit is favoured by the majority, yes?  ....and to avoid, at all costs, a no deal!

No there's only 'Brexit' and the Majority have Just voted for May to carry it through.

[eugenonegin]

5 hours ago, stevewinn said:

The Queens speech is written by the Government and is more of a "wish list" of what it wants to achieve during its term. The Queens involvement is the ceremonial opening of Parliament. What would be the point in doing a Queens speech when the opposition as already said they'd vote it down regardless, with that fact in mind it would be just a waste of time and energy. So like Black Monk said, concentrate on Brexit, the day to day domestic politics can just carry on as normal.

Brexit is the number one issue facing this country. an Act of Parliament as already been past mandating that we Leave the EU. staying in either the Single market or Customs Union is not leaving the EU. The Government is mandated to Leave and Leave we are; The Prime Minister, the Chancellor have both said that. the hiring of Crawford Falconer also shows we will be leaving the EU totally. as Crawford Falconer will be the government’s chief trade negotiations adviser, charging him with helping to broker new trade deals with the rest of the world as we leave the European Union. Falconer and his team will develop and negotiate free trade agreements and market access accords with nations outside of the EU, the Department for International Trade said on Friday in an statement. He’ll also assist in landing deals for specific sectors and products.

It all starts 8am Monday morning. (tomorrow) Let the fun and games begin. The biggest battle will not be with the EU, but with those on our own side, media outlets such as the BBC, The Times news paper etc...

 

stevewinn,please remind us what the chief benefits of Brexit will be.

It has been a year since the referendum campaign and I have forgotten.

 

[eugenonegin]

9 hours ago, eugeneonegin said:

stevewinn,please remind us what the chief benefits of Brexit will be.

It has been a year since the referendum campaign and I have forgotten.

 

Any one else, then?

[stevewinn]

13 hours ago, eugeneonegin said:

stevewinn,please remind us what the chief benefits of Brexit will be.

It has been a year since the referendum campaign and I have forgotten.

 

Come back to us when you've remembered.

[oldrover]

4 hours ago, eugeneonegin said:

Any one else, then?

Um.... Is it.... No sorry. 

[Essan]

14 hours ago, eugeneonegin said:

stevewinn,please remind us what the chief benefits of Brexit will be.

It has been a year since the referendum campaign and I have forgotten.

 

We regain sovereignty.

ie henceforth, legislation will be down to us, tailored for our purposes and not imposed on us by someone else with ulterior motives

Or, put another way, we start accepting personal responsiblity once again instead of hiding behind the excuse that "the nasty EU made us do it!"   I can understand why this scares some people, especially those who believe they only have "rights" and  like to hide behind their mother's skirt ,,,,,


Also, we will have left the ship before the rats, the festering decay, corrupt crew and megalomanical captain sink it once and for all in the coming storm  

 

Edit: oh, and best of all.  It really, really, really  p*sses off the Germans and Belgiums, especially the former who will have to pay their empire all themselves, instead of getting up to help prop it up

 

Edited June 19, 2017 by Essan

[eugenonegin]

3 hours ago, Essan said:

......

 

Edit: oh, and best of all.  It really, really, really  p*sses off the Germans and Belgiums...

 

Haha! Now that is worth something!

[eugenonegin]

6 hours ago, oldrover said:

Um.... Is it.... No sorry. 

I'm guessing you are asking my personal views on Brexit? Probably a remainer, on balance.

Actually, I can see benefits in our leaving, I just think the groundwork hasn't been done, from what we have been allowed to see. Though I can see there are tactical reasons for not showing our hand- maybe we have some aces.

[oldrover]

14 minutes ago, eugeneonegin said:

I'm guessing you are asking my personal views on Brexit? Probably a remainer, on balance.

Actually, I can see benefits in our leaving, I just think the groundwork hasn't been done, from what we have been allowed to see. Though I can see there are tactical reasons for not showing our hand- maybe we have some aces.

To be honest, it was just my hilarious way of saying that I can't see any benefit. Except of course the rather dubious, in terms of actual benefit but very valid point noted by Essan above. At least we can't blame the EU anymore and have to own our own shaft ups/unpopular policies. Also old plot lines from 'Yes Minister' won't be presented as facts.