"Steve Walker" wrote in message
...
On 24/09/2019 22:11, dennis@home wrote:
On 24/09/2019 15:47, abelard wrote:
On Tue, 24 Sep 2019 14:41:53 +0100, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 24/09/2019 12:52, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

What proof is there that the intention was to muzzle?

five weeks instead of five days is enough for normal people.


certainly it took less than that to try to block the
democratic vote to leave

and to block and election ...twice...

What do you expect?
if they let boris call an election he will use it to stop the HoC from
debating stuff.
Nobody trust him not to choose halloween for election day which he could
do if they voted to allow an election.

As I have said numerous times, if they genuinely feared that, there was no
need to legislate to block a no deal Brexit, no need to force a request
for an extension, when all they needed to do was legislate to allow Boris
to call an election, but with the date fixed by the legislation.

Its not clear that parliament can specify the date and
it would likely take a while before the supreme court
could rule that it could, with some risk that it would
rule that parliament couldnt do that and that that
is the PM prerogative.

That they did not shows that they were intent on blocking no deal, even if
the public might vote for the Conservatives and give them a mandate for
it.

It actually shows that Labour realises that it would be decimated.

We have already seen he will use illegal prorogue to try and stifle
debate and he will use an election to do the same.

Its what happens when the HoC doesn't trust the PM.

Only brexiteers appear to not understand this and claim doing something
to prevent undemocratic action to be undemocratic.
But as we have seen if its in their favour its democratic and if it isn't
its undemocratic. Such is the minds of brexiteers.

See the solution above.

It isnt necessarily a solution.