The cross party proposal put forward by the Labour Party to take control of the Commons business order paper on the 25th of June has been rejected by MPs.


The move by Labour to try and force a vote against a no deal Brexit on the 25th of June by taking control of the business of the House of Commons, was thankfully voted down by MPs this afternoon.

The motion that I talked about in a video this morning that could have severely tied the hands of any new Prime Minister, fell by 309 votes to 298. A result that was met with cheers from the Tory side and a shout of "you won't be cheering in September" from the leader of the Labour party, Jeremy Corbyn.

This means that the immediate danger of attempts to take a no deal Brexit, or more accurately a WTO Brexit, off the table has receded. Although there will obviously be further attempts as the crunch date of October the 31st approaches.

The Remainer MPs know that removing no deal from the table will at the very least delay Brexit and, if they play their cards right, scupper it completely.

And right on cue, the shadow Brexit Secretary, Keir Starmer, said:

"There will be other procedural mechanisms we can use. We are already looking at what those other opportunities will be."

And I would wager that the Speaker, John Bercow, will not be too far away to offer advice to those who would wish to exploit any of those opportunities.

And that must be the biggest message ever to Brexiteers, that any incoming serious Brexiteer PM replacing Theresa May, will need to have the ability and the will to prorogue parliament, if necessary.

Any one of the Tory leadership candidates who has rejected, either one or both, of a no-deal or proroguing parliament is a potential lame duck PM before they even get to the first round. They must be ditched quickly!

Now, the BBC reports that, according to the Electoral Commission, The Brexit party headed up by the former UKIP leader, Nigel Farage, is at 'high risk' of accepting illegal donations.

Now I am not a member of Nigel Farage's party, nor do I hold any sort of brief for them.

But what exactly does this comment from the Electoral Commission mean?

I mean, surely any political party that accepts numerous minor donations is at the same risk?

Is The Brexit Party acting illegally, or is it not?

Is there evidence of illegal donations, or not?

In the run up to the EU parliament elections, The Brexit Party met with allegations of accepting dodgy donations and the Electoral Commission was round their offices within days conducting an inspection – despite having earlier given it a verbal clean bill of health, while even turning down offers to visit the party's HQ.

A spokesman for The Brexit Party said:

"They haven't found any examples of infringement of Electoral Commission rules. We trust that the Electoral Commission have been applying the same oversight and rigour to the other political parties and their fundraising."

My advice to The Brexit Party on that is, don't hold your breath on that one.

And my advice to the Electoral Commission is, take a long hard look at the allegations of electoral fraud in the recent Peterborough by-election. Because democracy is really at stake here.


Comment Here!