When MPs vote against a Bill at third reading in the House of Commons, they are attempting to press the nuclear button. A vote at third reading is the final vote. A vote against it is a vote to destroy the Bill. Oppositions, of course, regularly vote to destroy Bills that they dislike at third reading, however, when it comes to the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill which cleared its Commons stages yesterday, many of the Labour MPs who voted against were doing so in full opposition to the majority of their constituents wishes.
I am not saying that this Bill is perfect – I don’t think that any Bill that seeks to transfer powers back from the EU in such a short timescale ever could be. Many MPs are concerned that too much power will be transferred to the Government, however, those same MPs didn’t bat an eyelid when numerous powers were being transferred from the UK to Brussels. It is the worst type of hypocrisy.
But this Bill is essential. If the opposition had won the day, we would have been in a complete mess. Even poorer, rushed legislation would have had to be enacted, or (which I am sure those MPs voting against really want) Brexit would have been delayed or even reversed if the delays went on long enough. Continue reading “Labour MPs stick two fingers up to their Leave voting constituents”
If the Prime Minister had had a clear plan and had executed it properly, yesterday’s reshuffle would not have been the media disaster that it is this morning. It terms of personnel changes, her options were always going to be limited. In November and December, she lost three cabinet in ministers in quick succession, and yesterday a further three (Sir Patrick McLoughlin, James Brokenshire, and Justine Greening) left the Government. Sir Patrick was expected; James Brokenshire was a sad departure and I send my good wishes to him for a speedy recovery; and Justine Greening simply isn’t up to the job of a cabinet minister. I am sure that she is a nice person (I have never met her), but I have never regarded her as competent, nor is she a good media performer.
Removing the Chancellor was always going to be tricky. If she had fired him, he would have created more trouble for her on the backbenches. If she had tried to keep him in the cabinet, she would have had to offer him another senior position or he would have resigned. That would have meant moving Boris or Amber Rudd. But where to? And if Boris had left the Government, he would have been a thorn in May’s side.
It was all too complicated, and for a Prime Minister who already lacks authority, it was never going to happen. Continue reading “An omnishambles of a cabinet reshuffle once again paints May as weak and wobbly”