Me : Nothing.
X : Protests?
Me : A bunch of people complaining about the influx of pigeons ... "stop the coo" etc?
X : Political protests?
Me : A bunch of people helping Dominic's play?
X : Are you going to be sensible?
Me : No, I'd hate to be alone.
Me : That's the point. You're supposed to get outraged. Then you look like the outraged. What's needed is not outrage but firm, solid action i.e. support Labour's proposal.
X : That's not going to happen.
Me : Then get used to a new Withdrawal Agreement.
Me : What do you think is the point to prorogue Parliament? A new session, a drip feed of new "voter friendly" announcements and a new, ever so slightly modified WA?
X : Parliament won't vote for it.
Me : After going on protests about no deal?
Me : You don't. This game is all about providing as many options for yourself as possible and keeping the opponent off balance. That's what OODA is all about. How do you think Trump has been running circles around most of the DNC?
Step 1 - stop getting outraged.
Step 2 - focus on stuff that matters to voters, build momentum around hope, stop burning energy chasing outrage.
X : What about no confidence?
Me : LibDems i.e. "Dominic's useful idiots" have messed that up.
Me : John Bercow? He's a star, a real wild card. He could really mess up the play ... remember "‘any act or omission which obstructs or impedes either House of Parliament in the performance of its functions" ... can lead to a contempt debate.
Me : Quite the opposite. Look at the diagram that I put above (NB it will be in flux) now read carefully what Green wrote - ... time to ratify / new deal / preferred option / overblown / calm voice
Given Ken Clarke has now said he would support Labour's proposals with Corbyn as caretaker PM ... now is your chance Swinson to do the same. Early morning announcement and we could be game on.
Me : Everyone is getting outraged about "no deal", a lot of the recent build up of outrage was initiated with the leak of Operation Yellowhammer, then prorogue of Parliament etc. Have you considered the purpose isn't "no deal" but the build up of outrage?
Me : Why? Outraged people don't think clearly, they spend their energy on outrage which means you can focus on stuff that matters so that neutral voters see a choice of "one side that is outraged" vs "one side that is considered and doing positive things".
Me : Partially. Johnson needs enough of a change to the WA to claim success, he needs Parliament to accept it over "No Deal" which both mean he also needs to look credible over "No Deal". Remember there are many moving parts.
Me : Well, the brexit party. They'll go ballistic over a modified WA given the amount of energy spent declaring it a betrayal of democracy etc. There are many moving parts.
Me : Gosh, billion dollar question. You have many moving parts - the EC, the EU as a collective and individual nation states. Johnson doesn't need much, he just needs something if that is the actual game.
X : Is it?
Me : No idea.
Me : Only what we can observe. They're making more positive announcements (police funding, school funding etc) and sparking outrage (yelowhammer, prorogue) ... anything else is speculation.
Me : In my view, the language is wrong. To prorogue Parliament at this time is an act which will clearly to some extent impede the House in the performance of its functions over brexit ... which begs a question ...
Me : I guess it will be an accelerating stream of positive messages (i.e. more funds for nurses, police, teachers, education, climate etc etc) combined with statements designed to provoke outrage and claims of action over a deal.
Me : You mean this - petition.parliament.uk/petitions/2691… ... sign it. Leave or Remain. This is not the way forward.
Me : @JolyonMaugham has done some great stuff i.e. UK can cancel decision. I've mixed feelings on this case because I'm not a lawyer and I don't know how it might impact any speaker driven contempt of house debate.
Me : No, people should protest. I'm against the language. To prorogue Parliament in this manner clearly impedes the House in the performance of its function over brexit. But this is not a #coup. That word undermines the protest.
... this is going to turn into a masterclass isn't it.
Me : It's all about momentum, an accelerating drip drip of positive messages creating that feeling of an overwhelming beneficial effect. With one hand you disorient opponents with outrage, with the other you create growing momentum around hope. See Trump.
Me : I can't think of examples where the messages turned out to be true in the end. MAGA etc. Doesn't stop them being used. The first step in fighting the game is to realise what game is being played.
Me : I know, I was there. But we were trying to stop a war and it was a war. The problem here, is this is not a #coup and that will be used against it.
Me : I don't. But each election, they rush out a set of voter friendly policies whilst declaring a new type of "caring" Conservative. This is rapidly followed by an old type of Conservative should they win -
What you'll probably get is more public service cuts and reduced working benefits -
Me : Interesting question as they need different styles to fit their environments. Hence Corbyn is more of a consensus-builder whereas Johnson is more my way or the highway.
X : Why do they need different styles?
Me : Oh god, we're going to end up looking like numpties. First, he is not unelected but he has no mandate. Second, this is not a coup. Third, you have no idea whether no deal is the goal.
Me : What happens next week when we have MPs sitting in the house. Do you realise how often "Where's the coup" is going to get replayed at us? Also, what happens when Boris has a modified withdrawal agreement? You've just forced your hand, you'll have to vote for it.
Me : I am for leaving. But leaving is a secondary issue compared to ending austerity. This is why you have leavers + remainers working together within Labour. I have no interest in the austerity agenda being continued.
Me : No. It's not a coup and the march should have been about stopping Boris riding roughshod over democracy rather than overturning the referendum result. Like lots of leavers I know, we signed the petition but kept clear of the march.
1) VoNC (vote of no confidence) with interim Gov headed by Corbyn (the preferred choice of Ken Clarke and the FT)
2) a Hobson's choice of Withdrawal Agreement vs No Deal.
3) Some other magical option aka DUI aka Dominic's Useful Idiots.
Me : That's option 3)
X : That's not fair
Me : Neither is life. At least this isn't a false binary i.e. the referendum - ... we are, where we are. Express your opinion or let others express that opinion for you.
Me : OODA
X : Eh?
Me : I would imagine all sorts of scenarios have been war gamed. They'll have a preferred path but what happens depends upon how the landscape changes. You have to assume there will be some misdirection as well.
Me : Yep. Look for states of confusion sparking interest such as clear statements on one front but at the same time "rumours" of conflict i.e. "Fantastic relationship" + rumours of "anger" or "Clear common direction" + rumours of "rebellion" ...
Me : I do which means I assume others do. Effective manoeuvre keeps the enemy off balance.
Me : Talk to a magician. Someone like @rufusevison ... they know all about it and how to trick the mind.
Me: I am but it is secondary compared to austerity. I'm not pleased by gameplay which might impede the function of the House, hence I'm not happy with reasons to prorogue Parliament. I also find calling it a #coup to be ridiculous.
Me : I have respect for his capabilities, in the same way I have respect for Boris, another capable person. I don't agree with the methods nor the focus. I thought that May was at least trying to build consensus rather than railroad.
Me : Corbyn is playing it right, they need to get the VoNC over the line and onto a GE. I doubt any other leader since Attlee could have survived the continual barrage Corbyn has received over the years.
Me : It matters because of symbolism. After the FT, after Ken Clarke, if Jo Swinson who vocally said Corbyn could not become temporary PM changes that position ... then that could trigger the momentum needed.
Me : In a VoNC and vote of confidence in an alternative Gov? I can't imagine that would ever happen even in a broad church like Labour. It's almost unthinkable.
Me : In a protest vote over the EU, sure. But in a GE, with the Brexit Party saying it wants a non aggression pact with the Conservatives? Most Labour leavers I know want an end to austerity not more of it to fund tax breaks.
Me : "Bring back May" would have at least been funnier.
Boris speaking outside No.10 to deafening roars of "Bring back May" would have at least got the displeasure across regarding the actions with less room to counter.
Me : Lol. Before the election it'll be in the back garden. After the election it'll have burned down in the Amazon.
MP blasts "foul mouthed oaf" Cummings ->
Me : Ah, undermining the point of a VoNC. It's crafty for several reasons.
Me : It takes the eye off the ball. Fixes it on Monday. Did I mention something about misdirection? I'm sure I must have. It's like the call from the "powerless" PM for the support and help of the "people". It's rather formidable.
Me : If Cummings can get through tomorrow without a rapid VoNC, approval of interim Gov or any other mishap then yes ... it's over but probably not in the way that you think.
Me : It all depends upon actions but I suspect the path is still a modified WA vs no deal option for the house then an election.
X : No deal isn't an option.
Me : All I know is that you keep telling me this. Let us wait and see.
Me : Confidently stated. We shall see what amendments happen in the HoL and how they deal with prerogative power.
X : It will be law, no deal is dead.
Me : You keep telling me this. I'm expecting #Outrage++ on Monday.
Me : No and I don't think we will get a GE either. I could easily be wrong and I don't mind fessing up to that. But I suspect on Monday we shall see exactly why the LibDems were Dominic's Useful Idiots. Should have gone with Labour's proposal.
Me : I could easily be wrong. A change of circumstance, an individual actors actions ... a lot can happen and I'm guessing at the path. They will have war gamed many scenarios and I don't have the time to go digging / doing any deep analysis.
Me : I would have gone with Labour's proposal on day one. Today? I would be preparing for a GE against a revitalised Tory party with possible support by Brexit Party. I would war game how to deal with a WA+ and a long run up of "positive" announcements.
Me : The "humble PM trying to battle for the people reaching out to the people with humility to keep them informed about the forces that rally against them" scripted?
Well, at least he didn't start with "My loving people"
Me : Oh, you misunderstand me. I'm Old Labour for which there are only modest differences with One Nation Tory. What I dislike is both manipulation of people and the illusion of One Nation for reasons of electioneering ...
Me : Let us wait and see.
X : Who will win?
Me : I don't know. The game is in play. Think of it like a grand chess match of Seamus Milne vs Dominic Cummings. They're both very capable. It's fascinating.
"The legislative cannot abridge the executive of any power which it now has by law, without it's own consent"
... a critical principle and why consent is needed. Hence ...
I do wonder if Bercow, by stating the bill did not need Queen's Consent actually broke the constitution. We will find out soon enough.
I keep thinking people see that as some sort of given but I'm not sure. I thought the point of Royal Assent was a duty on the Monarch to prevent wrong being done. Of course, I'm no constitutional lawyer.
Me : That's what everyone tells me.
X : Well, they're right.
Me : I'm not a lawyer but I'd hazard a guess that this Bill (publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill…) is going to end up in court, one way or another.
Me : I'm not a lawyer.
X : So you don't know?
Me : No. But having read it then I can guess.
X : Whats your guess?
Me : I'd guess that the problem is not that the PM "must seek" an extension but the PM "agrees" to the proposed extension.
Me : "legislative cannot abridge the executive of any power which it now has by law, without it's own consent"
X : And?
Me : "Agrees" seems a lot like something that's going to need consent. Anyway, I'm not a lawyer and we will find out soon enough.
Me : That's ok. I'm pretty sure the PM is going out of his way to make it clear that he does not consent to "agree" to any proposed extension. That's why I focused on those words. I am probably wrong but I suspect there is a problem there.
Me : It's not that simple. There are all sorts of complications. There's also what the intention of the bill is.
X : To stop no deal.
Me : On the surface yes. But there's another potential side to this regarding stopping prorogation.
This problem was highlighted by Marie Jean Antoine Nicolas de Caritat, Marquis De Condorcet - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marquis_d… ..
It is why In order for Democracy to function then it requires not only consent but informed debate.
The techniques being used undermine that informed debate. They are techniques of propaganda.
I take a different view - informed consent, transparency and truth are essential for equality and fairness within a democratic system.
You can't deal with these techniques of propaganda without removing many of the existing mechanisms of control. And the existing system won't like that.
... well, no surprise. It does imply that the Gov seems to think the no Brexit deal either broke the constitution or has some wiggle room.
Me : It's a possibility, backed with messaging of "We're confident, but if no-one is willing to call an election, we will do it for you" ... they'd probably vote against, I doubt their play is the VoNC but they'll keep their options open.
Me : Dominic Raab said it might - theguardian.com/politics/2019/…
X : Yes but you said this before.
Me : I'm not a lawyer, I don't know.
X : Do I have to ask you to guess?
Me : Yes.
X : Guess.
Me : Ok ...
X : And why is that a problem?
Me : You need consent to abridge executive power. I'm not sure it has been given, in fact the PM has gone out of his way to say he doesn't consent.
Me : I know. But that doesn't mean Gov agrees with that. Then you may have an issue of Royal Assent.
X : What's the issue?
Me : I don't know, you'd have to talk to a constitutional lawyer.
X : Can you guess?
Me : Ok then ...
Me : It means, go talk to a Constitutional lawyer. I'm a layperson with a vague past interest and no idea of what I'm actually talking about. I'm interested because these are really strange waters we're in.
Me : That's what Raab said but then maybe that's the point.
X : Eh?
Me : I've got this vague idea that any bill waiting for assent was given it if prorogation of Parliament occurred. So, the bill's purpose might be just to delay it.
Me : Well, these are wild guesses. Go talk to a constitutional lawyer and find out or do what I'm doing.
X : Which is?
Me : Watch it play out. It's fascinating. There will be many turns and moves to come yet.
Me : I very much doubt it. Remember declarations that they'll take it to court, they'll ignore it are all going to cause outrage and keep people focused on the bill whilst Cummings keeps focused on building political support.
Me : After weeks (and many more weeks to come) of outrage, agreement on a modified WA and a huge sigh of relief, a flywheel on constant positive announcements ... what is Farage going to do? Outrage when we're leaving?
Me : Like everything else, it's an option. The game changes depending upon the skill of the players and keeping options open is almost always to your advantage. We don't know yet where this will end.
Me : Well, I suspect there's a bit of pleasurable malice to Cummings. If he gets his way then Farage will be left out in the cold shouting like a sad lonely man. A bit of payback for the referendum claims. Of course, individual actors actions and all that.
Me : This is a game between two players and Labour is playing a good game. Nothing is certain, there are many twists and turns to come.
Me : I feel sorry for the local activists. Must be pretty galling watching these "celebrity" MPs joining and snapping up plum seats especially if you don't agree with their past voting records / values.
Me : Yes
X : So, it's law.
Me : It can still be challenged.
X : But if Gov refuse to send a letter?
Me : Well, they need to seek by 19th October. Does it say what postal class to use? International shipping can be 10 to 21 days.
Me : Well ... games are games.
Corbyn spells it out that Boris has indicated that he does not intend to ask for an extension.
Well, next step the Queen's speech.
Alas - "Pro-Remain Labour activists are also hoping the party's conference later this month will commit the leadership to backing Remain under all circumstances"
Repealing the Trade Union Act 2016 in 100 days? Oh, the establishment is going to throw everything it can at Labour.
Me : Yes.
X : No deal.
Me : I think EEA docked to EFTA is good compromise but I'm not against no deal. Labour party position is against no deal and seek its own deal, that's fine with me. I prefer to leave and tackle austerity.
Me : Depends upon who you talk to and who is in charge. A neoliberal fantasy no deal won't be good for workers' rights.
X : What about food?
Me : Depends upon who you talk to ... some claim it will be an apocalypse, others that it'll be minimal.
Me : Worst case scenario planning is worst case scenario planning. The civil service will have been preparing. Unfortunately, even if the actual impact is minimal, you'll probably get some local impacts from panicked hoarders.
Me : Yes, a self fulfilling feedback loop where a bunch of moderately well off people panic about the impact to themselves and hoard large quantities of goods (panic buying) which causes supply issues which are then pointed at by those same people as justification.
Me : At some local level I would imagine some disruption possibly followed later of by a mass of donations to food banks.
X : Why?
Me : The righteous often like to feel righteous even when they are the original cause of the problems.
Me : There are estimated to be 120,000 excess deaths caused by austerity over the last decade. I don't remember the same huge demonstrations against that and protests against tax cuts. We need to tackle austerity.
Me : I don't know what the impact will be. I do know that some are claiming doom and some are claiming nothing. I imagine it will be neither.
Me : I think there are some worst case scenarios which any responsible civil service will have prepared for ... wait ... operation Yellowhammer ... they have prepared for.
court should pronounce a declarator to that effect" - socialsecuritychamber.scot/docs/libraries… ... oh my, this is gearing up for a parliamentary meltdown -
If they overturn and rule it lawful expect howls of outrage.
Gosh, since I'm in a disco mood of music this evening ... I can't help myself ... it's "electrifying" -
With all the AI deep fake capability about, someone could have some real fun here.
You can bet your bottom dollar that Cummings will be focused on building up support.
Me : I've no idea. Been busy with others things.
X : Do you think they will overturn prorogation?
Me : I suspect that's unlikely but you never know. Wait and see.
X : Why unlikely?
Me : It's a political not a legal choice.
Me : Well, I'd hazard a guess that the court will rule it doesn't have jurisdiction. But you never know, wait and see.
X : What happens then?
Me : A mix of outage as we inch closer to the Queen's speech?
Me : It's all too noisy. Court ruling was interesting. Lots of outrage manufactured since. Paths seem to be a VoNC plus interim Corbyn Gov or another prorogue and a Queen's speech. The wild card is a parliament vs the people style election.