JamesM

Shard

Was this to be Dr Evil's ace up his sleeve? As I commented upthread, he did seem remarkably coy about matters earlier in the week. The lunatics do seem hell bent on crashing out, despite public pronouncements to the contrary.

DaveLovesDee

The headline insinuates MPs duty is to pass the deal, when it's actually their duty to thoroughly scrutinise the proposed agreement then vote on it. Which the Letwin Amendment now allows them to do.

Shard

Old DaveJ doesn't seem to get that simple fact.

dave_j

I agree that the newspaper uses it's headline to apply pressure to MPs but all that it states is that MPs should 'now' do their duty. The unwritten implication is that now they have a 'Boris' bill then they should vote for it but this is not explicitly stated although it's clear from the printed word what's actually meant.
I still fail to see how this misleads anyone, it plainly says what it's about.

BristolUK

So you believe that some may be misled into believing it's fact because it's on the front page of a newspaper but you don't see it as misleading?

dbd33

Bonkers Boris seems to have taken us beyond this now, If I follow correctly, he's written to the EU asking for an extension and followed up with two letters saying "nah, not really". This really is Trumpian diplomacy.

DaveLovesDee

It's not MPs the headline is aimed at.

It's aimed at Leavers, so that when MPs do their actual duty and scrutinise the actual bill, and if they still decide this bill shouldn't pass, Leavers will have been primed that MPs didn't do their 'duty' (as defined by Leavers). The headline is yet another slow-burning fuse, MPs will be the target, and all in time for Bonfire Night. Thought the fireworks will start next week....

dave_j

If I were to write a news headline that clearly stated something like "Trump should stop behaving like an idiot", no doubt some would believe Trump to be an idiot, but that's not what the headline says, it would actually state that in my opinion Trump has been acting like an idiot and should stop.
The fact that some would choose to believe that Trump is an idiot reflects more on how they see Trump and would understand the headline as something that reinforced their own belief and there's not much you can do about that.
Trump supporters might choose to see the headline as misleading because they'd choose to argue that the headline 'misleadingly' infers that Trump is an idiot which it does not.
Unfortunately, logic disappears where strongly held convictions are concerned.

I agree that leavers figured in the thought process, but only as a second order effect that would come into play should MPs vote the bill down. In other words there is an unwritten threat, aimed at MPs to look to their constituents, especially I concede leavers, for when the election is called. In other words it's a reminder to MPs that their constituents read this newspaper and will remember.

dbd33

The headline is misleading because it claims that Johnson has a new Brexit deal. He doesn't. He has some warmed over nonsense he knows not to be legal. Even if we perceive his duty to be to achieve a deal, he's failed.

It's not the duty of MPs to blindly endorse the ideas of the Prime Minister but we don't have to go that far. Whatever Johnson's duty might be, pretending to have a lawful exit arrangement when he does not is plainly not his duty.

dave_j

Q. Is Boris' deal identical to May's deal?
A. No, therefore it is different and since it didn't exist before last week it can be described as being New. To argue otherwise is nonsense.

BristolUK

That's a different argument that you're having with others. The point I'm making, and one which you agree on, is the effect that one's newspaper - in this case the mail is the example used - has if one sees something as fact.

If your headline says "Trump should stop behaving like an idiot" and the sub headline gives an example of something idiotic and you don't clearly state this is your opinion in the same way that the Mail did not say it was their opinion, then it may come across as fact, just as you have agreed.

And why wouldn't it come across as fact. If someone "should stop doing something" it follows that they must be doing the something in order to stop it.
If they are behaving like an idiot and your sub heading was of something idiotic, then why would anyoe conclude they weren't an idiot?

DaveLovesDee

It's misrepresenting what an MPs duty is. What they'll expect is that MPs will pass the bill without question.

What's nonsense is claiming it's new. Its not, it's merely different, and worse.

Boris Johnson's Brexit deal is the 'same deal' offered to Theresa May three years ago

.

Almost Canadian

If this is a reference to the Act that Novo has referred to above, this falls way short of your usual excellent arguments. One assumes that, if the new agreement breaches that Act, and I don't know that it does, the enabling legislation for the new agreement will simply need to have a section that states that the other Act is, "..hereby repealed with immediate effect." Parliament is supreme and it is impossible to bind future Parliaments. The remainers will have to do much better than that.

Novocastrian

You're entirely right, but it may take a ruling from the Scottish Court to point out the issue to Jakob and Boris. Jolyon Maugham has a time slot set aside by the Court for tomorrow.

I'm just looking forward to seeing JRM's face when he learns that the current deal is unlawful because of his own amendment.