Miss Moorehead @MissMooreheadCV · Nov 1 P3B have been preparing for Thursday, when P6 are encouraging everybody to wear a skirt to raise awareness of #LaRopaNoTieneGenero, or as our lovely posters say ‘clothing has no gender’ @MissWhiteCV@MissMcGroryCV.
I think this type of thing will seem very normal by this time next year.
Yes, Peak Woke will never happen, it will just continue and worsen
You have to wonder how mad it might get
2020 went beyond what happened in 1968. The revolution will keep going until it reaches some sort of limit: either it collapses due to the absurdity of its own contradictions, or it gets attacked from outside. All you can really do is try and stay out of its way.
The absent @SeanT, erstwhile citizen of this same manor, posits in the Spectator that Woke is actually a proper new religion, and will thus endure
Let us hope that, as always, he is entirely wrong and befuddled by The Drink
For woke to be a new religion (rather than a variant of christianity, as suggested by some) it needs to travel. And from what I can see, it isn't doing that - quite the reverse.
It is certainly spreading in the English speaking world, and now - bizarrely - into India
Miss Moorehead @MissMooreheadCV · Nov 1 P3B have been preparing for Thursday, when P6 are encouraging everybody to wear a skirt to raise awareness of #LaRopaNoTieneGenero, or as our lovely posters say ‘clothing has no gender’ @MissWhiteCV@MissMcGroryCV.
I think this type of thing will seem very normal by this time next year.
Yes, Peak Woke will never happen, it will just continue and worsen
You have to wonder how mad it might get
2020 went beyond what happened in 1968. The revolution will keep going until it reaches some sort of limit: either it collapses due to the absurdity of its own contradictions, or it gets attacked from outside. All you can really do is try and stay out of its way.
The absent @SeanT, erstwhile citizen of this same manor, posits in the Spectator that Woke is actually a proper new religion, and will thus endure
Let us hope that, as always, he is entirely wrong and befuddled by The Drink
For woke to be a new religion (rather than a variant of christianity, as suggested by some) it needs to travel. And from what I can see, it isn't doing that - quite the reverse.
It is certainly spreading in the English speaking world, and now - bizarrely - into India
As far as I can see it is an anglo saxon thing, largely driven by post colonial guilt.
It has origins going way back to obscure, extreme American race and gender studies of the 1960s, with half a nod to Cultural Marxism. From there the fungus slowly infested sociology, then anthropology, geography, and in the last decade pretty much all of academe
And in the last few years, it has exploded everywhere. Shedding spores
It is dangerous because it is so similar to a religion. It replaces religion, by offering the same absolute moral certainties, in a bewildering world. There is no arguing with Woke. You either submit and agree, as in Islam, or you are haram. A racist or a transphobe or whatever. That's it
Yet who are the true believers of the woke religion? Mainly students and some liberal academics and a few in the public sector.
It is hardly a religious force growing on the scale of evangelical Christianity or Islam globally yet.
But religions can EXPLODE
How many followers did Mohammad have in, say, 620AD? A few dozen? A few hundred?
By his death in 632 most of Arabia was Islamic. That's ten years. Within 40 years of his death, Islam ruled: from Spain to India
The commissioner for standards will not be resigning and will serve her full term to December 22
Guess if everyone else is in it for the ££££ why should we expect her to lose six weeks pay because of the lack of Tory shame?
December 2022 though
Sorry misinterpreted as 22nd December. I think my cynical point still stands. If the government and the PM are determined to allow corruption at the heart of public life, we cannot really expect mid level officials to make a pointless and losing stand against them. If they do then great, but if they don't I have sympathy with her position to carry on.
The blame lies with those who enabled a known and shameless liar (well beyond the normal "lies" of politics) to become PM.
The electorate then
No. The members of the Conservative Party. The electorate couldn't and can't choose the PM.
They voted for him and the party with an 80 seat majority
The electorate voted for their MPs. A crucial distinction in constitutional principle. Not least because it highlights the MP's prior responsibility to their constituents - not to their funders or to their party leader.
Unlike so many other unpopular moves, this Patterson vote is one that the government cannot u-turn on. They own it completely and irrevocably. There is no wriggle room whatsoever. Good.
At least in the days of duck houses, moat cleaning and stable heating it was just greed. This is far worse. Any member who voted for this amendment voted to permit corruption. They are now accessories in common enterprise to loot the public purse for themselves and their mates.
I would be interested if anyone has a list of abstentions/rebels.
The commissioner for standards will not be resigning and will serve her full term to December 22
Guess if everyone else is in it for the ££££ why should we expect her to lose six weeks pay because of the lack of Tory shame?
December 2022 though
Sorry misinterpreted as 22nd December. I think my cynical point still stands. If the government and the PM are determined to allow corruption at the heart of public life, we cannot really expect mid level officials to make a pointless and losing stand against them. If they do then great, but if they don't I have sympathy with her position to carry on.
The blame lies with those who enabled a known and shameless liar (well beyond the normal "lies" of politics) to become PM.
The electorate then
No. The members of the Conservative Party. The electorate couldn't and can't choose the PM.
They voted for him and the party with an 80 seat majority
The electorate voted for their MPs. A crucial distinction in constitutional principle. Not least because it highlights the MP's prior responsibility to their constituents - not to their funders or to their party leader.
Semantics - it was the anti-corbynite vote that did it for Bozo last time.
Unlike so many other unpopular moves, this Patterson vote is one that the government cannot u-turn on. They own it completely and irrevocably. There is no wriggle room whatsoever. Good.
At least in the days of duck houses, moat cleaning and stable heating it was just greed. This is far worse. Any member who voted for this amendment voted to permit corruption. They are now accessories in common enterprise to loot the public purse for themselves and their mates.
I would be interested if anyone has a list of abstentions/rebels.
It's not just to loot the public purse - it's the fact they can now do paid lobbying while pretending to raise the issue as if it come from a constituent who had raised the issue to the MP....
So it's now a nice little earner for any MP wishing to abuse their position
Boris Johnson is remaking British politics in his own image - corrupt, dishonest and utterly self-serving. A shameful day for our democracy.
Yep, we are getting exactly what was going to happen once the Tories decided to make a grifting liar their leader.
it is why I voted for Jeremy Hunt
Would that be the same Jeremy Hunt that signed the amendment? 🤔
Everything is relative. Regrettable if he did. Not sure how often he has voted against a three line whip ( I am sure someone with more time than me will tell me). Either way, it is people who supported Boris Johnson, like yourself, that have taken the Tory Party into this sewer.
I respect Jeremy Hunt but had he been Tory leader I doubt he would have got a majority against Corbyn, more a rehash of May's 2017 result. Farage would still have stood BXP candidates in Tory seats so the Tories would have lost more seats to the LDs and I doubt he would have won as many seats from Labour in the Redwall as Boris did, being a Remainer unlike Leaver Boris
As I have said many times, winning an election is very important, but it is what you do when you have won it that counts. I think Mrs T said it somewhat more eloquently but I cant recall the quote.
Boris Johnson is continually forgiven by folk such as yourself because he "won". The reality is the real Tory party lost. They replaced centuries of belief in good governance and statesmanship with ego driven populism and clownish tomfoolery. Britain is a laughing stock. When people talk about patriotism, think of an image of Boris Johnson and ask yourself whether any world leader takes him seriously.
The Conservative members have been leaving in droves for some time now, not least because the paid part of the party has overuled the volunteers at every turn. Now, the Tory organisation is dominated by a clique of professional politicians and the volunteer members, who used to be the party, eiher now simply ignored or silenced or quite often they are actively derided. The members have no power or control.
Now Johnson is moving onto the Conservative voters: he gaslights them at every turn, with insane, economically illiterate policies, Russian donors and a side order of bullshit. He assumes that they will continue to support him.
For the time being he has been right.
He assumes that the electoral system will keep him in power for as long as he wants the job. So far, he is right. However, if the wind were to change then we would not necessarily be looking at the pendulum swinging and Labour returning in a couple of elections time. It is quite possible that the Conservative voter bloc swings strongly away, as they did in Chesham and Amersham. Right now, no one thinks that Labour or, still less the Liberal Democrats, can put up a fight that will knock the Tories out next time. However, Johnson´s confidence in the voters may be rather misplaced. A sustained swing like the "Cleggasm" only this time the voters follow it up, is not impossible, and if a big enough bloc of hitherto Tory voters defects, then the Tories could face implosion.
The historical precedent (the Liberal Party collapse in the 1920s) still suggests a time line of several elections, but if Johnson continues to play with fire, then the timeline becomes a lot more uncertain.
The Conservative Party, the most successful political party in history, that we knew until 2014 is dead. Tbe zombie Tories may not survive a decade.
Not making any comment on the optimistic picture that you paint, but why do you pick the year 2014 as the expiration date for the Conservative Party?
The fateful decision to make the EU referendum a full manifesto commitment.
7 years after which, while the Tories could lose, and may well lose, the next election, no other party is in a position to win it. That is not extinction time for the Tories.
One can add to that that Boris's Tories are both seeking to carry on invading the red wall, defend the blue wall, promote the union, and gain colossal credentials as the party of Zero CO2 plans. (Compare with every leftish regime in the world!) While raising the minimum wage, keeping full employment, steering Brexit while having a little go at Johnny Foreigner and waving the flag.
The Tories have a set of tactics for having a go at the difficult task of winning the next election.
This, it seems to me, is more than can be said for other parties. Labour in particular are nowhere close to 'making a better offer' to the punter.
A lot of Tories did not want to be associated with this vote
And yet because of their cowardice they all are. Absolutely disgraceful from the government and the MPs. The opposition completely caught napping as well given the level of Tory abstentions.
To be fair given his wife took suicide over this issue I think he has already suffered enough. I expect a few opposition MPs felt the same as clearly did most Tory MPs.
Suspending him for a month would really not have done much and just set back his constituency work anyway, even if I would probably not have voted for the Leadsom amendment myself.
If his electors are still annoyed with him then let them vote him out at the next general election
What an utterly specious argument, even by your own dismal standards. By you logic, MPs needn't have a disciplinary process at all - leave it all to the election. Those in safe seats (like Patterson) would be practically immune under that process - very little chance his appalling, egregious breach of paid lobbying rules would trump the likely desire of his constituents for a Tory Government in 2023/24.
The "already suffered enough" line is similarly nonsensical. Patterson has shamelessly used the tragic death of his wife to deflect from his corrupt actions before that happened. He claims the pressure of the disciplinary process contributed to her death. Nobody here can know if that is true or not. But we do know WHY there was a disciplinary process... it's because Mr Patterson repeatedly, blatantly abused his position and privileges to feather his nest. Try a similar line at sentencing in the Crown Court and see how far it gets you.
That is largely my view actually.
MPs employers are their constituents and their local party, not Parliament. Parliament is there to serve MPs and Lords not the other way round.
If their local party or their constituents dislike what they are doing they can deselect them or vote them out at election time.
As I said he is not facing any criminal charges so Crown Court sentencing is not relevant
It's entirely relevant. Fairness to the person who has been found guilty of misconduct is MORE important the more serious the repercussions, such as criminal penalties in a Crown Court trial, not LESS important.
So if a judge would give short shrift to an argument that you should be treated leniently because of the impact on others in your life of the trial (which you as the guilty party had done more than anyone to cause) then it's DOUBLY the case in the current situation.
That you feel there shouldn't be a disciplinary process at all speaks volumes of you personally, and there is no need to respond further.
Given there was no criminal activity in this case clearly the penalties of a Crown Court trial are not relevant. Had Patterson committed a criminal offence and been found guilty he would have faced criminal sanction, even jail, regardless of his wife's suicide. However he faced no criminal sanction so his fellow MPs could decide whether they wanted to impose any sanctions on him or not over his lobbying work given the context.
I stand by my view MPs should be judged solely at election time or by their local parties as they always used to be. They are elected for 5 year terms and unless they get a substantial prison sentence should be allowed to complete that term and judged on how they performed at it at the next election
You have utterly missed my point.
Let me take you through it slowly.
The more serious the sanctions on the table, the more important it is to guarantee fair treatment to the accused. That is why the highest level of protection applies in the Crown Court, because serious criminal sanctions are on the table.
Criminal sanctions are not on the table in an MP's disciplinary case. So the protections afforded to the accused can hardly be expected to be greater.
So, if the impact of the process on the health of family members of the accused isn't relevant in the Crown Court (particularly, but not only, because that impact is the fault of the accused first and foremost) then it is ludicrous to suggest it's a mitigation for the MP. That would mean giving greater protections in a case where the consequences for the accused are less, which is madness.
It is important to offer a fair trial yes, especially in criminal trials.
In terms of sanction however for the guilty while in a criminal matter the suicide of a family member may not be taken into account, in a non criminal matter like this where the most likely sanction was simply a trivial month's suspension then if MPs wanted to drop that punishment because of the context that is their right to do so.
As I have said I remain of the view in any case MPs should solely be judged by the constituents and local parties anyway not Parliament on how they have performed in their job.
His wife's suicide was very sad, but he was found to have breached the ethics and a 30 day suspension is not trivial as it can trigger a recall petition which is exactly the point you make in your last paragraph
The actions by Boris and others today has been inexcusable
I also oppose recall petitions every 5 minutes and would oppose a similar sanction for a Labour MP based on the same facts.
Otherwise MPs could easily decide to impose sanctions on each other and force recall petitions to be collected by their local party members in the MPs constituency just to force constant by elections because they want a chance to win the incumbent's seat. See also the ludicrous recall petitions you now get in California for senior elected officials.
MPs are elected for up to 5 year terms and should serve those terms and be judged on them by their electorate once they have completed those terms.
They should not be suspended and face a recall unless they have faced a criminal conviction and a prison term of at least a year or more
Sometimes he is actually right about things @DPJHodges I don’t understand the politics in this Owen Patterson vote. What’s the upside for Boris and the government. What does he think he gets out of it. Complete gift for Labour.
There’s not much us mere voters can do apart from email our MPs and express our view of the latest antics (as well as vote against them at the next election)
Unfortunately, my MP is Michael Gove,
At least you know from past experience he'd undermine Boris if the opportunity arose for him to benefit. Sadly that is improbable.
The commissioner for standards will not be resigning and will serve her full term to December 22
Guess if everyone else is in it for the ££££ why should we expect her to lose six weeks pay because of the lack of Tory shame?
December 2022 though
Sorry misinterpreted as 22nd December. I think my cynical point still stands. If the government and the PM are determined to allow corruption at the heart of public life, we cannot really expect mid level officials to make a pointless and losing stand against them. If they do then great, but if they don't I have sympathy with her position to carry on.
The blame lies with those who enabled a known and shameless liar (well beyond the normal "lies" of politics) to become PM.
The electorate then
Not really, they were given a choice of him or Corbyn. Tory MPs putting him through to the membership ballot when in the previous leadership election over 100 joined a anyone but Boris whatsapp group. They knew he was rotten.
Ultimately it is the electorate who put parties into power and it is upto losing parties to win back the votes
You can ask why labour and the lib dems are failing to cut through in these crazy times
Absolutely valid point. Opposition parties just don't benefit from the way they used to. Question though is whether the government should be exploiting this to drive through good things - why governments are supposed to be elected - or continue to bin the rules and roll around in the mud of open corruption.
No other Tory PM would be doing this. Because its wrong.
I could see Corbyn as PM doing the same process to protect his comrades. And the Tories who are meh about this, or even defending it today would be absolutely frothing about it.
It's the classic 'turn the protagonists around' test. It's obvious how it would be seen in that case.
To be fair I think a small majority of Tory posters today have unequivocally criticised the decision, still disappointing how many excuses are made by others.
I think the vast majority of Tory posters [including Tory voters at last election who have since left the party] have opposed the amendment today.
I agree with Hunt etc on this, that the right to natural justice and an appeal should happen here, but it doesn't seem many others do.
Did Hunt, or any of the others, make that point in previous cases involving Labour and other MPs?
If you believe in changing the disciplinary process, you decouple it from an individual case. This is transparently making up the rules as you go along to assist a friend. It stinks, and you know it.
Boris Johnson is remaking British politics in his own image - corrupt, dishonest and utterly self-serving. A shameful day for our democracy.
Yep, we are getting exactly what was going to happen once the Tories decided to make a grifting liar their leader.
it is why I voted for Jeremy Hunt
Would that be the same Jeremy Hunt that signed the amendment? 🤔
Everything is relative. Regrettable if he did. Not sure how often he has voted against a three line whip ( I am sure someone with more time than me will tell me). Either way, it is people who supported Boris Johnson, like yourself, that have taken the Tory Party into this sewer.
I respect Jeremy Hunt but had he been Tory leader I doubt he would have got a majority against Corbyn, more a rehash of May's 2017 result. Farage would still have stood BXP candidates in Tory seats so the Tories would have lost more seats to the LDs and I doubt he would have won as many seats from Labour in the Redwall as Boris did, being a Remainer unlike Leaver Boris
As I have said many times, winning an election is very important, but it is what you do when you have won it that counts. I think Mrs T said it somewhat more eloquently but I cant recall the quote.
Boris Johnson is continually forgiven by folk such as yourself because he "won". The reality is the real Tory party lost. They replaced centuries of belief in good governance and statesmanship with ego driven populism and clownish tomfoolery. Britain is a laughing stock. When people talk about patriotism, think of an image of Boris Johnson and ask yourself whether any world leader takes him seriously.
Yes we know full well Biden takes him seriously. Hence AUKUS etc
Just because you don't, doesn't mean people like Biden are as deluded with clown metaphors as you are.
I am deluded? It is called diplomacy you silly boy. You think Biden admires him and this is the reason for AUKUS? Oh dear lol!
Who says anything about admires? Not me.
Biden engages in realpolitik which means taking other leaders seriously.
Boris does the exact same thing.
Admiration isn't something that world leaders should be engaging in.
He is a joke, in the same way Trump is perceived to be a joke. Funny how you run to his defence. Such a similarity between you and the Trumpians the other side of the pond.
The only PM in recent years who was a joke was his predecessor, whom other leaders openly mocked.
Cake, no cherries, Prime Minister.
If indeed, Johnson is a joke, clown, figure of fun, despised by everyone, what does it say about the people who keep losing to him?
Sometimes he is actually right about things @DPJHodges I don’t understand the politics in this Owen Patterson vote. What’s the upside for Boris and the government. What does he think he gets out of it. Complete gift for Labour.
There’s not much us mere voters can do apart from email our MPs and express our view of the latest antics (as well as vote against them at the next election)
Unfortunately, my MP is Michael Gove,
At least you know from past experience he'd undermine Boris if the opportunity arose for him to benefit. Sadly that is improbable.
The commissioner for standards will not be resigning and will serve her full term to December 22
Guess if everyone else is in it for the ££££ why should we expect her to lose six weeks pay because of the lack of Tory shame?
December 2022 though
Sorry misinterpreted as 22nd December. I think my cynical point still stands. If the government and the PM are determined to allow corruption at the heart of public life, we cannot really expect mid level officials to make a pointless and losing stand against them. If they do then great, but if they don't I have sympathy with her position to carry on.
The blame lies with those who enabled a known and shameless liar (well beyond the normal "lies" of politics) to become PM.
The electorate then
Not really, they were given a choice of him or Corbyn. Tory MPs putting him through to the membership ballot when in the previous leadership election over 100 joined a anyone but Boris whatsapp group. They knew he was rotten.
Ultimately it is the electorate who put parties into power and it is upto losing parties to win back the votes
You can ask why labour and the lib dems are failing to cut through in these crazy times
Absolutely valid point. Opposition parties just don't benefit from the way they used to. Question though is whether the government should be exploiting this to drive through good things - why governments are supposed to be elected - or continue to bin the rules and roll around in the mud of open corruption.
No other Tory PM would be doing this. Because its wrong.
I could see Corbyn as PM doing the same process to protect his comrades. And the Tories who are meh about this, or even defending it today would be absolutely frothing about it.
It's the classic 'turn the protagonists around' test. It's obvious how it would be seen in that case.
To be fair I think a small majority of Tory posters today have unequivocally criticised the decision, still disappointing how many excuses are made by others.
Alistair Meaks answered that earlier on twitter - I'll post it again for convenience.
It’s entirely rational. The new system means in practice MPs will need govt support to escape punishment, increasing executive control. MPs have been forced to commit themselves to this. And scrutiny of the executive is further weakened. A good day’s work for the PM.
And there's the money angle. We know how motivated on that score the PM is.
The commissioner for standards will not be resigning and will serve her full term to December 22
Guess if everyone else is in it for the ££££ why should we expect her to lose six weeks pay because of the lack of Tory shame?
December 2022 though
Sorry misinterpreted as 22nd December. I think my cynical point still stands. If the government and the PM are determined to allow corruption at the heart of public life, we cannot really expect mid level officials to make a pointless and losing stand against them. If they do then great, but if they don't I have sympathy with her position to carry on.
The blame lies with those who enabled a known and shameless liar (well beyond the normal "lies" of politics) to become PM.
The electorate then
No. The members of the Conservative Party. The electorate couldn't and can't choose the PM.
They voted for him and the party with an 80 seat majority
The electorate voted for their MPs. A crucial distinction in constitutional principle. Not least because it highlights the MP's prior responsibility to their constituents - not to their funders or to their party leader.
Semantics - it was the anti-corbynite vote that did it for Bozo last time.
So you take the view tghat the constitution is irrelevant and corruption is to be encouraged?
Miss Moorehead @MissMooreheadCV · Nov 1 P3B have been preparing for Thursday, when P6 are encouraging everybody to wear a skirt to raise awareness of #LaRopaNoTieneGenero, or as our lovely posters say ‘clothing has no gender’ @MissWhiteCV@MissMcGroryCV.
I think this type of thing will seem very normal by this time next year.
Yes, Peak Woke will never happen, it will just continue and worsen
You have to wonder how mad it might get
2020 went beyond what happened in 1968. The revolution will keep going until it reaches some sort of limit: either it collapses due to the absurdity of its own contradictions, or it gets attacked from outside. All you can really do is try and stay out of its way.
The absent @SeanT, erstwhile citizen of this same manor, posits in the Spectator that Woke is actually a proper new religion, and will thus endure
Let us hope that, as always, he is entirely wrong and befuddled by The Drink
For woke to be a new religion (rather than a variant of christianity, as suggested by some) it needs to travel. And from what I can see, it isn't doing that - quite the reverse.
It is certainly spreading in the English speaking world, and now - bizarrely - into India
Miss Moorehead @MissMooreheadCV · Nov 1 P3B have been preparing for Thursday, when P6 are encouraging everybody to wear a skirt to raise awareness of #LaRopaNoTieneGenero, or as our lovely posters say ‘clothing has no gender’ @MissWhiteCV@MissMcGroryCV.
I think this type of thing will seem very normal by this time next year.
Yes, Peak Woke will never happen, it will just continue and worsen
You have to wonder how mad it might get
2020 went beyond what happened in 1968. The revolution will keep going until it reaches some sort of limit: either it collapses due to the absurdity of its own contradictions, or it gets attacked from outside. All you can really do is try and stay out of its way.
The absent @SeanT, erstwhile citizen of this same manor, posits in the Spectator that Woke is actually a proper new religion, and will thus endure
Let us hope that, as always, he is entirely wrong and befuddled by The Drink
For woke to be a new religion (rather than a variant of christianity, as suggested by some) it needs to travel. And from what I can see, it isn't doing that - quite the reverse.
It is certainly spreading in the English speaking world, and now - bizarrely - into India
As far as I can see it is an anglo saxon thing, largely driven by post colonial guilt.
It has origins going way back to obscure, extreme American race and gender studies of the 1960s, with half a nod to Cultural Marxism. From there the fungus slowly infested sociology, then anthropology, geography, and in the last decade pretty much all of academe
And in the last few years, it has exploded everywhere. Shedding spores
It is dangerous because it is so similar to a religion. It replaces religion, by offering the same absolute moral certainties, in a bewildering world. There is no arguing with Woke. You either submit and agree, as in Islam, or you are haram. A racist or a transphobe or whatever. That's it
Yet who are the true believers of the woke religion? Mainly students and some liberal academics and a few in the public sector.
It is hardly a religious force growing on the scale of evangelical Christianity or Islam globally yet.
But religions can EXPLODE
How many followers did Mohammad have in, say, 620AD? A few dozen? A few hundred?
By his death in 632 most of Arabia was Islamic. That's ten years. Within 40 years of his death, Islam ruled: from Spain to India
That is because Islam (and also Christianity) had appeal with ordinary people in the areas they spread.
There is little evidence the most ultra wokesim has much appeal to most ordinary people beyond liberal elites, as evidenced by the Virginia result last night
A lot of Tories did not want to be associated with this vote
And yet because of their cowardice they all are. Absolutely disgraceful from the government and the MPs. The opposition completely caught napping as well given the level of Tory abstentions.
To be fair given his wife took suicide over this issue I think he has already suffered enough. I expect a few opposition MPs felt the same as clearly did most Tory MPs.
Suspending him for a month would really not have done much and just set back his constituency work anyway, even if I would probably not have voted for the Leadsom amendment myself.
If his electors are still annoyed with him then let them vote him out at the next general election
What an utterly specious argument, even by your own dismal standards. By you logic, MPs needn't have a disciplinary process at all - leave it all to the election. Those in safe seats (like Patterson) would be practically immune under that process - very little chance his appalling, egregious breach of paid lobbying rules would trump the likely desire of his constituents for a Tory Government in 2023/24.
The "already suffered enough" line is similarly nonsensical. Patterson has shamelessly used the tragic death of his wife to deflect from his corrupt actions before that happened. He claims the pressure of the disciplinary process contributed to her death. Nobody here can know if that is true or not. But we do know WHY there was a disciplinary process... it's because Mr Patterson repeatedly, blatantly abused his position and privileges to feather his nest. Try a similar line at sentencing in the Crown Court and see how far it gets you.
That is largely my view actually.
MPs employers are their constituents and their local party, not Parliament. Parliament is there to serve MPs and Lords not the other way round.
If their local party or their constituents dislike what they are doing they can deselect them or vote them out at election time.
As I said he is not facing any criminal charges so Crown Court sentencing is not relevant
It's entirely relevant. Fairness to the person who has been found guilty of misconduct is MORE important the more serious the repercussions, such as criminal penalties in a Crown Court trial, not LESS important.
So if a judge would give short shrift to an argument that you should be treated leniently because of the impact on others in your life of the trial (which you as the guilty party had done more than anyone to cause) then it's DOUBLY the case in the current situation.
That you feel there shouldn't be a disciplinary process at all speaks volumes of you personally, and there is no need to respond further.
Given there was no criminal activity in this case clearly the penalties of a Crown Court trial are not relevant. Had Patterson committed a criminal offence and been found guilty he would have faced criminal sanction, even jail, regardless of his wife's suicide. However he faced no criminal sanction so his fellow MPs could decide whether they wanted to impose any sanctions on him or not over his lobbying work given the context.
I stand by my view MPs should be judged solely at election time or by their local parties as they always used to be. They are elected for 5 year terms and unless they get a substantial prison sentence should be allowed to complete that term and judged on how they performed at it at the next election
You have utterly missed my point.
Let me take you through it slowly.
The more serious the sanctions on the table, the more important it is to guarantee fair treatment to the accused. That is why the highest level of protection applies in the Crown Court, because serious criminal sanctions are on the table.
Criminal sanctions are not on the table in an MP's disciplinary case. So the protections afforded to the accused can hardly be expected to be greater.
So, if the impact of the process on the health of family members of the accused isn't relevant in the Crown Court (particularly, but not only, because that impact is the fault of the accused first and foremost) then it is ludicrous to suggest it's a mitigation for the MP. That would mean giving greater protections in a case where the consequences for the accused are less, which is madness.
It is important to offer a fair trial yes, especially in criminal trials.
In terms of sanction however for the guilty while in a criminal matter the suicide of a family member may not be taken into account, in a non criminal matter like this where the most likely sanction was simply a trivial month's suspension then if MPs wanted to drop that punishment because of the context that is their right to do so.
As I have said I remain of the view in any case MPs should solely be judged by the constituents and local parties anyway not Parliament on how they have performed in their job.
His wife's suicide was very sad, but he was found to have breached the ethics and a 30 day suspension is not trivial as it can trigger a recall petition which is exactly the point you make in your last paragraph
The actions by Boris and others today has been inexcusable
I also oppose recall petitions every 5 minutes and would oppose a similar sanction for a Labour MP based on the same facts.
Otherwise MPs could easily decide to impose sanctions on each other and force recall petitions just to force constant by elections because they want a chance to win the incumbent's seat. See also the ludicrous recall petitions you now get in California for senior elected officials.
MPs are elected for up to 5 year terms and should serve those terms and be judged on them by their electorate once they have completed those terms.
They should not be suspended and face a recall unless they have faced a criminal conviction and a prison term of at least a year or more
You are aware of what Owen was found guilty of doing.
Abusing his position as an MP to write letters (as if he was writing on behalf of a constituent) for a very large sum of money.
Boris Johnson is remaking British politics in his own image - corrupt, dishonest and utterly self-serving. A shameful day for our democracy.
Yep, we are getting exactly what was going to happen once the Tories decided to make a grifting liar their leader.
it is why I voted for Jeremy Hunt
Would that be the same Jeremy Hunt that signed the amendment? 🤔
Everything is relative. Regrettable if he did. Not sure how often he has voted against a three line whip ( I am sure someone with more time than me will tell me). Either way, it is people who supported Boris Johnson, like yourself, that have taken the Tory Party into this sewer.
I respect Jeremy Hunt but had he been Tory leader I doubt he would have got a majority against Corbyn, more a rehash of May's 2017 result. Farage would still have stood BXP candidates in Tory seats so the Tories would have lost more seats to the LDs and I doubt he would have won as many seats from Labour in the Redwall as Boris did, being a Remainer unlike Leaver Boris
As I have said many times, winning an election is very important, but it is what you do when you have won it that counts. I think Mrs T said it somewhat more eloquently but I cant recall the quote.
Boris Johnson is continually forgiven by folk such as yourself because he "won". The reality is the real Tory party lost. They replaced centuries of belief in good governance and statesmanship with ego driven populism and clownish tomfoolery. Britain is a laughing stock. When people talk about patriotism, think of an image of Boris Johnson and ask yourself whether any world leader takes him seriously.
Yes we know full well Biden takes him seriously. Hence AUKUS etc
Just because you don't, doesn't mean people like Biden are as deluded with clown metaphors as you are.
I am deluded? It is called diplomacy you silly boy. You think Biden admires him and this is the reason for AUKUS? Oh dear lol!
Who says anything about admires? Not me.
Biden engages in realpolitik which means taking other leaders seriously.
Boris does the exact same thing.
Admiration isn't something that world leaders should be engaging in.
He is a joke, in the same way Trump is perceived to be a joke. Funny how you run to his defence. Such a similarity between you and the Trumpians the other side of the pond.
The only PM in recent years who was a joke was his predecessor, whom other leaders openly mocked.
Cake, no cherries, Prime Minister.
If indeed, Johnson is a joke, clown, figure of fun, despised by everyone, what does it say about the people who keep losing to him?
Surprised to see Kwasi Kwarteng abstained. I thought in a 3 line whip all ministers had to support the Government?
Depends if he was paired. It's a shame we don't have pairing lists, or at least i haven't seen one for this vote.
According to all the sources I have seen even pairing is normally suspended for 3 line whips unless there is a serious reason such as illness or absence overseas.
The commissioner for standards will not be resigning and will serve her full term to December 22
Guess if everyone else is in it for the ££££ why should we expect her to lose six weeks pay because of the lack of Tory shame?
December 2022 though
Sorry misinterpreted as 22nd December. I think my cynical point still stands. If the government and the PM are determined to allow corruption at the heart of public life, we cannot really expect mid level officials to make a pointless and losing stand against them. If they do then great, but if they don't I have sympathy with her position to carry on.
The blame lies with those who enabled a known and shameless liar (well beyond the normal "lies" of politics) to become PM.
The electorate then
No. The members of the Conservative Party. The electorate couldn't and can't choose the PM.
They voted for him and the party with an 80 seat majority
The electorate voted for their MPs. A crucial distinction in constitutional principle. Not least because it highlights the MP's prior responsibility to their constituents - not to their funders or to their party leader.
Semantics - it was the anti-corbynite vote that did it for Bozo last time.
So you take the view tghat the constitution is irrelevant and corruption is to be encouraged?
No I'm just taking a common sense view point in contrast to your whitterings. The electorate can't vote for the PM directly but by voting for their party they have power over who becomes PM.
A lot of Tories did not want to be associated with this vote
And yet because of their cowardice they all are. Absolutely disgraceful from the government and the MPs. The opposition completely caught napping as well given the level of Tory abstentions.
To be fair given his wife took suicide over this issue I think he has already suffered enough. I expect a few opposition MPs felt the same as clearly did most Tory MPs.
Suspending him for a month would really not have done much and just set back his constituency work anyway, even if I would probably not have voted for the Leadsom amendment myself.
If his electors are still annoyed with him then let them vote him out at the next general election
What an utterly specious argument, even by your own dismal standards. By you logic, MPs needn't have a disciplinary process at all - leave it all to the election. Those in safe seats (like Patterson) would be practically immune under that process - very little chance his appalling, egregious breach of paid lobbying rules would trump the likely desire of his constituents for a Tory Government in 2023/24.
The "already suffered enough" line is similarly nonsensical. Patterson has shamelessly used the tragic death of his wife to deflect from his corrupt actions before that happened. He claims the pressure of the disciplinary process contributed to her death. Nobody here can know if that is true or not. But we do know WHY there was a disciplinary process... it's because Mr Patterson repeatedly, blatantly abused his position and privileges to feather his nest. Try a similar line at sentencing in the Crown Court and see how far it gets you.
That is largely my view actually.
MPs employers are their constituents and their local party, not Parliament. Parliament is there to serve MPs and Lords not the other way round.
If their local party or their constituents dislike what they are doing they can deselect them or vote them out at election time.
As I said he is not facing any criminal charges so Crown Court sentencing is not relevant
It's entirely relevant. Fairness to the person who has been found guilty of misconduct is MORE important the more serious the repercussions, such as criminal penalties in a Crown Court trial, not LESS important.
So if a judge would give short shrift to an argument that you should be treated leniently because of the impact on others in your life of the trial (which you as the guilty party had done more than anyone to cause) then it's DOUBLY the case in the current situation.
That you feel there shouldn't be a disciplinary process at all speaks volumes of you personally, and there is no need to respond further.
Given there was no criminal activity in this case clearly the penalties of a Crown Court trial are not relevant. Had Patterson committed a criminal offence and been found guilty he would have faced criminal sanction, even jail, regardless of his wife's suicide. However he faced no criminal sanction so his fellow MPs could decide whether they wanted to impose any sanctions on him or not over his lobbying work given the context.
I stand by my view MPs should be judged solely at election time or by their local parties as they always used to be. They are elected for 5 year terms and unless they get a substantial prison sentence should be allowed to complete that term and judged on how they performed at it at the next election
You have utterly missed my point.
Let me take you through it slowly.
The more serious the sanctions on the table, the more important it is to guarantee fair treatment to the accused. That is why the highest level of protection applies in the Crown Court, because serious criminal sanctions are on the table.
Criminal sanctions are not on the table in an MP's disciplinary case. So the protections afforded to the accused can hardly be expected to be greater.
So, if the impact of the process on the health of family members of the accused isn't relevant in the Crown Court (particularly, but not only, because that impact is the fault of the accused first and foremost) then it is ludicrous to suggest it's a mitigation for the MP. That would mean giving greater protections in a case where the consequences for the accused are less, which is madness.
It is important to offer a fair trial yes, especially in criminal trials.
In terms of sanction however for the guilty while in a criminal matter the suicide of a family member may not be taken into account, in a non criminal matter like this where the most likely sanction was simply a trivial month's suspension then if MPs wanted to drop that punishment because of the context that is their right to do so.
As I have said I remain of the view in any case MPs should solely be judged by the constituents and local parties anyway not Parliament on how they have performed in their job.
His wife's suicide was very sad, but he was found to have breached the ethics and a 30 day suspension is not trivial as it can trigger a recall petition which is exactly the point you make in your last paragraph
The actions by Boris and others today has been inexcusable
I also oppose recall petitions every 5 minutes and would oppose a similar sanction for a Labour MP based on the same facts.
Otherwise MPs could easily decide to impose sanctions on each other and force recall petitions just to force constant by elections because they want a chance to win the incumbent's seat. See also the ludicrous recall petitions you now get in California for senior elected officials.
MPs are elected for up to 5 year terms and should serve those terms and be judged on them by their electorate once they have completed those terms.
They should not be suspended and face a recall unless they have faced a criminal conviction and a prison term of at least a year or more
You just confirm that you are a party apparatchik who cannot see right from wrong, and excuse unacceptable behaviour in public office
Miss Moorehead @MissMooreheadCV · Nov 1 P3B have been preparing for Thursday, when P6 are encouraging everybody to wear a skirt to raise awareness of #LaRopaNoTieneGenero, or as our lovely posters say ‘clothing has no gender’ @MissWhiteCV@MissMcGroryCV.
I think this type of thing will seem very normal by this time next year.
Yes, Peak Woke will never happen, it will just continue and worsen
You have to wonder how mad it might get
2020 went beyond what happened in 1968. The revolution will keep going until it reaches some sort of limit: either it collapses due to the absurdity of its own contradictions, or it gets attacked from outside. All you can really do is try and stay out of its way.
The absent @SeanT, erstwhile citizen of this same manor, posits in the Spectator that Woke is actually a proper new religion, and will thus endure
Let us hope that, as always, he is entirely wrong and befuddled by The Drink
For woke to be a new religion (rather than a variant of christianity, as suggested by some) it needs to travel. And from what I can see, it isn't doing that - quite the reverse.
It is certainly spreading in the English speaking world, and now - bizarrely - into India
Miss Moorehead @MissMooreheadCV · Nov 1 P3B have been preparing for Thursday, when P6 are encouraging everybody to wear a skirt to raise awareness of #LaRopaNoTieneGenero, or as our lovely posters say ‘clothing has no gender’ @MissWhiteCV@MissMcGroryCV.
I think this type of thing will seem very normal by this time next year.
Yes, Peak Woke will never happen, it will just continue and worsen
You have to wonder how mad it might get
2020 went beyond what happened in 1968. The revolution will keep going until it reaches some sort of limit: either it collapses due to the absurdity of its own contradictions, or it gets attacked from outside. All you can really do is try and stay out of its way.
The absent @SeanT, erstwhile citizen of this same manor, posits in the Spectator that Woke is actually a proper new religion, and will thus endure
Let us hope that, as always, he is entirely wrong and befuddled by The Drink
For woke to be a new religion (rather than a variant of christianity, as suggested by some) it needs to travel. And from what I can see, it isn't doing that - quite the reverse.
It is certainly spreading in the English speaking world, and now - bizarrely - into India
As far as I can see it is an anglo saxon thing, largely driven by post colonial guilt.
It has origins going way back to obscure, extreme American race and gender studies of the 1960s, with half a nod to Cultural Marxism. From there the fungus slowly infested sociology, then anthropology, geography, and in the last decade pretty much all of academe
And in the last few years, it has exploded everywhere. Shedding spores
It is dangerous because it is so similar to a religion. It replaces religion, by offering the same absolute moral certainties, in a bewildering world. There is no arguing with Woke. You either submit and agree, as in Islam, or you are haram. A racist or a transphobe or whatever. That's it
Yet who are the true believers of the woke religion? Mainly students and some liberal academics and a few in the public sector.
It is hardly a religious force growing on the scale of evangelical Christianity or Islam globally yet.
But religions can EXPLODE
How many followers did Mohammad have in, say, 620AD? A few dozen? A few hundred?
By his death in 632 most of Arabia was Islamic. That's ten years. Within 40 years of his death, Islam ruled: from Spain to India
That is because Islam (and also Christianity) had appeal with ordinary people in the areas they spread.
They is little evidence the most ultra wokesim has much appeal to most ordinary people beyond liberal elites, as evidenced by the Virginia result last night
Yes, that's fair, and is grounds for cautious optimism, long term. However Wokeness has already eaten into many western institutions, like rust, despite lacking broad popularity.
Perhaps it is a weird kind of hybrid, it has definite elements of religiosity, but ALSO of radical political movements
Communism was never "broadly popular", but it took over half the world, was only defeated after decades of struggle, and the stink of it still lingers. Putin certainly compares it to Bolshevism, as we have seen
Miss Moorehead @MissMooreheadCV · Nov 1 P3B have been preparing for Thursday, when P6 are encouraging everybody to wear a skirt to raise awareness of #LaRopaNoTieneGenero, or as our lovely posters say ‘clothing has no gender’ @MissWhiteCV@MissMcGroryCV.
I think this type of thing will seem very normal by this time next year.
Yes, Peak Woke will never happen, it will just continue and worsen
You have to wonder how mad it might get
2020 went beyond what happened in 1968. The revolution will keep going until it reaches some sort of limit: either it collapses due to the absurdity of its own contradictions, or it gets attacked from outside. All you can really do is try and stay out of its way.
The absent @SeanT, erstwhile citizen of this same manor, posits in the Spectator that Woke is actually a proper new religion, and will thus endure
Let us hope that, as always, he is entirely wrong and befuddled by The Drink
For woke to be a new religion (rather than a variant of christianity, as suggested by some) it needs to travel. And from what I can see, it isn't doing that - quite the reverse.
It is certainly spreading in the English speaking world, and now - bizarrely - into India
Miss Moorehead @MissMooreheadCV · Nov 1 P3B have been preparing for Thursday, when P6 are encouraging everybody to wear a skirt to raise awareness of #LaRopaNoTieneGenero, or as our lovely posters say ‘clothing has no gender’ @MissWhiteCV@MissMcGroryCV.
I think this type of thing will seem very normal by this time next year.
Yes, Peak Woke will never happen, it will just continue and worsen
You have to wonder how mad it might get
2020 went beyond what happened in 1968. The revolution will keep going until it reaches some sort of limit: either it collapses due to the absurdity of its own contradictions, or it gets attacked from outside. All you can really do is try and stay out of its way.
The absent @SeanT, erstwhile citizen of this same manor, posits in the Spectator that Woke is actually a proper new religion, and will thus endure
Let us hope that, as always, he is entirely wrong and befuddled by The Drink
For woke to be a new religion (rather than a variant of christianity, as suggested by some) it needs to travel. And from what I can see, it isn't doing that - quite the reverse.
It is certainly spreading in the English speaking world, and now - bizarrely - into India
As far as I can see it is an anglo saxon thing, largely driven by post colonial guilt.
It has origins going way back to obscure, extreme American race and gender studies of the 1960s, with half a nod to Cultural Marxism. From there the fungus slowly infested sociology, then anthropology, geography, and in the last decade pretty much all of academe
And in the last few years, it has exploded everywhere. Shedding spores
It is dangerous because it is so similar to a religion. It replaces religion, by offering the same absolute moral certainties, in a bewildering world. There is no arguing with Woke. You either submit and agree, as in Islam, or you are haram. A racist or a transphobe or whatever. That's it
Yet who are the true believers of the woke religion? Mainly students and some liberal academics and a few in the public sector.
It is hardly a religious force growing on the scale of evangelical Christianity or Islam globally yet.
One thing's for sure: it's a huge vote winner for conservative parties all round the world. It probably made the difference wrt the Virginia election last night.
A lot of Tories did not want to be associated with this vote
And yet because of their cowardice they all are. Absolutely disgraceful from the government and the MPs. The opposition completely caught napping as well given the level of Tory abstentions.
To be fair given his wife took suicide over this issue I think he has already suffered enough. I expect a few opposition MPs felt the same as clearly did most Tory MPs.
Suspending him for a month would really not have done much and just set back his constituency work anyway, even if I would probably not have voted for the Leadsom amendment myself.
If his electors are still annoyed with him then let them vote him out at the next general election
What an utterly specious argument, even by your own dismal standards. By you logic, MPs needn't have a disciplinary process at all - leave it all to the election. Those in safe seats (like Patterson) would be practically immune under that process - very little chance his appalling, egregious breach of paid lobbying rules would trump the likely desire of his constituents for a Tory Government in 2023/24.
The "already suffered enough" line is similarly nonsensical. Patterson has shamelessly used the tragic death of his wife to deflect from his corrupt actions before that happened. He claims the pressure of the disciplinary process contributed to her death. Nobody here can know if that is true or not. But we do know WHY there was a disciplinary process... it's because Mr Patterson repeatedly, blatantly abused his position and privileges to feather his nest. Try a similar line at sentencing in the Crown Court and see how far it gets you.
That is largely my view actually.
MPs employers are their constituents and their local party, not Parliament. Parliament is there to serve MPs and Lords not the other way round.
If their local party or their constituents dislike what they are doing they can deselect them or vote them out at election time.
As I said he is not facing any criminal charges so Crown Court sentencing is not relevant
It's entirely relevant. Fairness to the person who has been found guilty of misconduct is MORE important the more serious the repercussions, such as criminal penalties in a Crown Court trial, not LESS important.
So if a judge would give short shrift to an argument that you should be treated leniently because of the impact on others in your life of the trial (which you as the guilty party had done more than anyone to cause) then it's DOUBLY the case in the current situation.
That you feel there shouldn't be a disciplinary process at all speaks volumes of you personally, and there is no need to respond further.
Given there was no criminal activity in this case clearly the penalties of a Crown Court trial are not relevant. Had Patterson committed a criminal offence and been found guilty he would have faced criminal sanction, even jail, regardless of his wife's suicide. However he faced no criminal sanction so his fellow MPs could decide whether they wanted to impose any sanctions on him or not over his lobbying work given the context.
I stand by my view MPs should be judged solely at election time or by their local parties as they always used to be. They are elected for 5 year terms and unless they get a substantial prison sentence should be allowed to complete that term and judged on how they performed at it at the next election
You have utterly missed my point.
Let me take you through it slowly.
The more serious the sanctions on the table, the more important it is to guarantee fair treatment to the accused. That is why the highest level of protection applies in the Crown Court, because serious criminal sanctions are on the table.
Criminal sanctions are not on the table in an MP's disciplinary case. So the protections afforded to the accused can hardly be expected to be greater.
So, if the impact of the process on the health of family members of the accused isn't relevant in the Crown Court (particularly, but not only, because that impact is the fault of the accused first and foremost) then it is ludicrous to suggest it's a mitigation for the MP. That would mean giving greater protections in a case where the consequences for the accused are less, which is madness.
It is important to offer a fair trial yes, especially in criminal trials.
In terms of sanction however for the guilty while in a criminal matter the suicide of a family member may not be taken into account, in a non criminal matter like this where the most likely sanction was simply a trivial month's suspension then if MPs wanted to drop that punishment because of the context that is their right to do so.
As I have said I remain of the view in any case MPs should solely be judged by the constituents and local parties anyway not Parliament on how they have performed in their job.
His wife's suicide was very sad, but he was found to have breached the ethics and a 30 day suspension is not trivial as it can trigger a recall petition which is exactly the point you make in your last paragraph
The actions by Boris and others today has been inexcusable
I also oppose recall petitions every 5 minutes and would oppose a similar sanction for a Labour MP based on the same facts.
Otherwise MPs could easily decide to impose sanctions on each other and force recall petitions just to force constant by elections because they want a chance to win the incumbent's seat. See also the ludicrous recall petitions you now get in California for senior elected officials.
MPs are elected for up to 5 year terms and should serve those terms and be judged on them by their electorate once they have completed those terms.
They should not be suspended and face a recall unless they have faced a criminal conviction and a prison term of at least a year or more
You are aware of what Owen was found guilty of doing.
Abusing his position as an MP to write letters (as if he was writing on behalf of a constituent) for a very large sum of money.
He was not found guilty of anything criminal no, he was found guilty of breaching Commons rules by doing paid lobbying work, something par for the course in say DC
A lot of Tories did not want to be associated with this vote
And yet because of their cowardice they all are. Absolutely disgraceful from the government and the MPs. The opposition completely caught napping as well given the level of Tory abstentions.
To be fair given his wife took suicide over this issue I think he has already suffered enough. I expect a few opposition MPs felt the same as clearly did most Tory MPs.
Suspending him for a month would really not have done much and just set back his constituency work anyway, even if I would probably not have voted for the Leadsom amendment myself.
If his electors are still annoyed with him then let them vote him out at the next general election
What an utterly specious argument, even by your own dismal standards. By you logic, MPs needn't have a disciplinary process at all - leave it all to the election. Those in safe seats (like Patterson) would be practically immune under that process - very little chance his appalling, egregious breach of paid lobbying rules would trump the likely desire of his constituents for a Tory Government in 2023/24.
The "already suffered enough" line is similarly nonsensical. Patterson has shamelessly used the tragic death of his wife to deflect from his corrupt actions before that happened. He claims the pressure of the disciplinary process contributed to her death. Nobody here can know if that is true or not. But we do know WHY there was a disciplinary process... it's because Mr Patterson repeatedly, blatantly abused his position and privileges to feather his nest. Try a similar line at sentencing in the Crown Court and see how far it gets you.
That is largely my view actually.
MPs employers are their constituents and their local party, not Parliament. Parliament is there to serve MPs and Lords not the other way round.
If their local party or their constituents dislike what they are doing they can deselect them or vote them out at election time.
As I said he is not facing any criminal charges so Crown Court sentencing is not relevant
It's entirely relevant. Fairness to the person who has been found guilty of misconduct is MORE important the more serious the repercussions, such as criminal penalties in a Crown Court trial, not LESS important.
So if a judge would give short shrift to an argument that you should be treated leniently because of the impact on others in your life of the trial (which you as the guilty party had done more than anyone to cause) then it's DOUBLY the case in the current situation.
That you feel there shouldn't be a disciplinary process at all speaks volumes of you personally, and there is no need to respond further.
Given there was no criminal activity in this case clearly the penalties of a Crown Court trial are not relevant. Had Patterson committed a criminal offence and been found guilty he would have faced criminal sanction, even jail, regardless of his wife's suicide. However he faced no criminal sanction so his fellow MPs could decide whether they wanted to impose any sanctions on him or not over his lobbying work given the context.
I stand by my view MPs should be judged solely at election time or by their local parties as they always used to be. They are elected for 5 year terms and unless they get a substantial prison sentence should be allowed to complete that term and judged on how they performed at it at the next election
You have utterly missed my point.
Let me take you through it slowly.
The more serious the sanctions on the table, the more important it is to guarantee fair treatment to the accused. That is why the highest level of protection applies in the Crown Court, because serious criminal sanctions are on the table.
Criminal sanctions are not on the table in an MP's disciplinary case. So the protections afforded to the accused can hardly be expected to be greater.
So, if the impact of the process on the health of family members of the accused isn't relevant in the Crown Court (particularly, but not only, because that impact is the fault of the accused first and foremost) then it is ludicrous to suggest it's a mitigation for the MP. That would mean giving greater protections in a case where the consequences for the accused are less, which is madness.
It is important to offer a fair trial yes, especially in criminal trials.
In terms of sanction however for the guilty while in a criminal matter the suicide of a family member may not be taken into account, in a non criminal matter like this where the most likely sanction was simply a trivial month's suspension then if MPs wanted to drop that punishment because of the context that is their right to do so.
As I have said I remain of the view in any case MPs should solely be judged by the constituents and local parties anyway not Parliament on how they have performed in their job.
His wife's suicide was very sad, but he was found to have breached the ethics and a 30 day suspension is not trivial as it can trigger a recall petition which is exactly the point you make in your last paragraph
The actions by Boris and others today has been inexcusable
I also oppose recall petitions every 5 minutes and would oppose a similar sanction for a Labour MP based on the same facts.
Otherwise MPs could easily decide to impose sanctions on each other and force recall petitions just to force constant by elections because they want a chance to win the incumbent's seat. See also the ludicrous recall petitions you now get in California for senior elected officials.
MPs are elected for up to 5 year terms and should serve those terms and be judged on them by their electorate once they have completed those terms.
They should not be suspended and face a recall unless they have faced a criminal conviction and a prison term of at least a year or more
You are aware of what Owen was found guilty of doing.
Abusing his position as an MP to write letters (as if he was writing on behalf of a constituent) for a very large sum of money.
He was not found guilty of anything criminal no, he was found guilty of breaching Commons rules by doing paid lobbying work, something par for the course in say DC
Like beating up grannies is OK because furriners do it?
Miss Moorehead @MissMooreheadCV · Nov 1 P3B have been preparing for Thursday, when P6 are encouraging everybody to wear a skirt to raise awareness of #LaRopaNoTieneGenero, or as our lovely posters say ‘clothing has no gender’ @MissWhiteCV@MissMcGroryCV.
I think this type of thing will seem very normal by this time next year.
Yes, Peak Woke will never happen, it will just continue and worsen
You have to wonder how mad it might get
2020 went beyond what happened in 1968. The revolution will keep going until it reaches some sort of limit: either it collapses due to the absurdity of its own contradictions, or it gets attacked from outside. All you can really do is try and stay out of its way.
The absent @SeanT, erstwhile citizen of this same manor, posits in the Spectator that Woke is actually a proper new religion, and will thus endure
Let us hope that, as always, he is entirely wrong and befuddled by The Drink
For woke to be a new religion (rather than a variant of christianity, as suggested by some) it needs to travel. And from what I can see, it isn't doing that - quite the reverse.
It is certainly spreading in the English speaking world, and now - bizarrely - into India
Miss Moorehead @MissMooreheadCV · Nov 1 P3B have been preparing for Thursday, when P6 are encouraging everybody to wear a skirt to raise awareness of #LaRopaNoTieneGenero, or as our lovely posters say ‘clothing has no gender’ @MissWhiteCV@MissMcGroryCV.
I think this type of thing will seem very normal by this time next year.
Yes, Peak Woke will never happen, it will just continue and worsen
You have to wonder how mad it might get
2020 went beyond what happened in 1968. The revolution will keep going until it reaches some sort of limit: either it collapses due to the absurdity of its own contradictions, or it gets attacked from outside. All you can really do is try and stay out of its way.
The absent @SeanT, erstwhile citizen of this same manor, posits in the Spectator that Woke is actually a proper new religion, and will thus endure
Let us hope that, as always, he is entirely wrong and befuddled by The Drink
For woke to be a new religion (rather than a variant of christianity, as suggested by some) it needs to travel. And from what I can see, it isn't doing that - quite the reverse.
It is certainly spreading in the English speaking world, and now - bizarrely - into India
As far as I can see it is an anglo saxon thing, largely driven by post colonial guilt.
It has origins going way back to obscure, extreme American race and gender studies of the 1960s, with half a nod to Cultural Marxism. From there the fungus slowly infested sociology, then anthropology, geography, and in the last decade pretty much all of academe
And in the last few years, it has exploded everywhere. Shedding spores
It is dangerous because it is so similar to a religion. It replaces religion, by offering the same absolute moral certainties, in a bewildering world. There is no arguing with Woke. You either submit and agree, as in Islam, or you are haram. A racist or a transphobe or whatever. That's it
Yet who are the true believers of the woke religion? Mainly students and some liberal academics and a few in the public sector.
It is hardly a religious force growing on the scale of evangelical Christianity or Islam globally yet.
One thing's for sure: it's a huge vote winner for conservative parties all round the world. It probably made the difference wrt the Virginia election last night.
"Probably"? DEFINITELY
"Wokeness makes its electoral debut. Democrats’ defense of Critical Race Theory in education looks to have been a key factor in the Republicans’ Virginia upset. Cancel Culture/CRT has migrated from campus and twitter into political reality."
Miss Moorehead @MissMooreheadCV · Nov 1 P3B have been preparing for Thursday, when P6 are encouraging everybody to wear a skirt to raise awareness of #LaRopaNoTieneGenero, or as our lovely posters say ‘clothing has no gender’ @MissWhiteCV@MissMcGroryCV.
I think this type of thing will seem very normal by this time next year.
Yes, Peak Woke will never happen, it will just continue and worsen
You have to wonder how mad it might get
2020 went beyond what happened in 1968. The revolution will keep going until it reaches some sort of limit: either it collapses due to the absurdity of its own contradictions, or it gets attacked from outside. All you can really do is try and stay out of its way.
The absent @SeanT, erstwhile citizen of this same manor, posits in the Spectator that Woke is actually a proper new religion, and will thus endure
Let us hope that, as always, he is entirely wrong and befuddled by The Drink
For woke to be a new religion (rather than a variant of christianity, as suggested by some) it needs to travel. And from what I can see, it isn't doing that - quite the reverse.
It is certainly spreading in the English speaking world, and now - bizarrely - into India
Miss Moorehead @MissMooreheadCV · Nov 1 P3B have been preparing for Thursday, when P6 are encouraging everybody to wear a skirt to raise awareness of #LaRopaNoTieneGenero, or as our lovely posters say ‘clothing has no gender’ @MissWhiteCV@MissMcGroryCV.
I think this type of thing will seem very normal by this time next year.
Yes, Peak Woke will never happen, it will just continue and worsen
You have to wonder how mad it might get
2020 went beyond what happened in 1968. The revolution will keep going until it reaches some sort of limit: either it collapses due to the absurdity of its own contradictions, or it gets attacked from outside. All you can really do is try and stay out of its way.
The absent @SeanT, erstwhile citizen of this same manor, posits in the Spectator that Woke is actually a proper new religion, and will thus endure
Let us hope that, as always, he is entirely wrong and befuddled by The Drink
For woke to be a new religion (rather than a variant of christianity, as suggested by some) it needs to travel. And from what I can see, it isn't doing that - quite the reverse.
It is certainly spreading in the English speaking world, and now - bizarrely - into India
As far as I can see it is an anglo saxon thing, largely driven by post colonial guilt.
It has origins going way back to obscure, extreme American race and gender studies of the 1960s, with half a nod to Cultural Marxism. From there the fungus slowly infested sociology, then anthropology, geography, and in the last decade pretty much all of academe
And in the last few years, it has exploded everywhere. Shedding spores
It is dangerous because it is so similar to a religion. It replaces religion, by offering the same absolute moral certainties, in a bewildering world. There is no arguing with Woke. You either submit and agree, as in Islam, or you are haram. A racist or a transphobe or whatever. That's it
Yet who are the true believers of the woke religion? Mainly students and some liberal academics and a few in the public sector.
It is hardly a religious force growing on the scale of evangelical Christianity or Islam globally yet.
Woke fulfills a need for religion, in the same way that climate change activism does. But it doesn't do much more than that. The problem with the analogy is that, when you really go in to it, as a belief system it is completely empty. There is no coherent and inclusive system of meaning and purpose; such that exists within Christianity and Islam, for instance.
Miss Moorehead @MissMooreheadCV · Nov 1 P3B have been preparing for Thursday, when P6 are encouraging everybody to wear a skirt to raise awareness of #LaRopaNoTieneGenero, or as our lovely posters say ‘clothing has no gender’ @MissWhiteCV@MissMcGroryCV.
I think this type of thing will seem very normal by this time next year.
Yes, Peak Woke will never happen, it will just continue and worsen
You have to wonder how mad it might get
2020 went beyond what happened in 1968. The revolution will keep going until it reaches some sort of limit: either it collapses due to the absurdity of its own contradictions, or it gets attacked from outside. All you can really do is try and stay out of its way.
The absent @SeanT, erstwhile citizen of this same manor, posits in the Spectator that Woke is actually a proper new religion, and will thus endure
Let us hope that, as always, he is entirely wrong and befuddled by The Drink
For woke to be a new religion (rather than a variant of christianity, as suggested by some) it needs to travel. And from what I can see, it isn't doing that - quite the reverse.
It is certainly spreading in the English speaking world, and now - bizarrely - into India
Miss Moorehead @MissMooreheadCV · Nov 1 P3B have been preparing for Thursday, when P6 are encouraging everybody to wear a skirt to raise awareness of #LaRopaNoTieneGenero, or as our lovely posters say ‘clothing has no gender’ @MissWhiteCV@MissMcGroryCV.
I think this type of thing will seem very normal by this time next year.
Yes, Peak Woke will never happen, it will just continue and worsen
You have to wonder how mad it might get
2020 went beyond what happened in 1968. The revolution will keep going until it reaches some sort of limit: either it collapses due to the absurdity of its own contradictions, or it gets attacked from outside. All you can really do is try and stay out of its way.
The absent @SeanT, erstwhile citizen of this same manor, posits in the Spectator that Woke is actually a proper new religion, and will thus endure
Let us hope that, as always, he is entirely wrong and befuddled by The Drink
For woke to be a new religion (rather than a variant of christianity, as suggested by some) it needs to travel. And from what I can see, it isn't doing that - quite the reverse.
It is certainly spreading in the English speaking world, and now - bizarrely - into India
As far as I can see it is an anglo saxon thing, largely driven by post colonial guilt.
It has origins going way back to obscure, extreme American race and gender studies of the 1960s, with half a nod to Cultural Marxism. From there the fungus slowly infested sociology, then anthropology, geography, and in the last decade pretty much all of academe
And in the last few years, it has exploded everywhere. Shedding spores
It is dangerous because it is so similar to a religion. It replaces religion, by offering the same absolute moral certainties, in a bewildering world. There is no arguing with Woke. You either submit and agree, as in Islam, or you are haram. A racist or a transphobe or whatever. That's it
Yet who are the true believers of the woke religion? Mainly students and some liberal academics and a few in the public sector.
It is hardly a religious force growing on the scale of evangelical Christianity or Islam globally yet.
But religions can EXPLODE
How many followers did Mohammad have in, say, 620AD? A few dozen? A few hundred?
By his death in 632 most of Arabia was Islamic. That's ten years. Within 40 years of his death, Islam ruled: from Spain to India
That is because Islam (and also Christianity) had appeal with ordinary people in the areas they spread.
They is little evidence the most ultra wokesim has much appeal to most ordinary people beyond liberal elites, as evidenced by the Virginia result last night
Yes, that's fair, and is grounds for cautious optimism, long term. However Wokeness has already eaten into many western institutions, like rust, despite lacking broad popularity.
Perhaps it is a weird kind of hybrid, it has definite elements of religiosity, but ALSO of radical political movements
Communism was never "broadly popular", but it took over half the world, was only defeated after decades of struggle, and the stink of it still lingers. Putin certainly compares it to Bolshevism, as we have seen
The most regressive aspect of it is that according to its tenets, the only thing that you cannot transcend is race. For everything else, there is a clear distinction between your identity and your body.
Miss Moorehead @MissMooreheadCV · Nov 1 P3B have been preparing for Thursday, when P6 are encouraging everybody to wear a skirt to raise awareness of #LaRopaNoTieneGenero, or as our lovely posters say ‘clothing has no gender’ @MissWhiteCV@MissMcGroryCV.
I think this type of thing will seem very normal by this time next year.
Yes, Peak Woke will never happen, it will just continue and worsen
You have to wonder how mad it might get
2020 went beyond what happened in 1968. The revolution will keep going until it reaches some sort of limit: either it collapses due to the absurdity of its own contradictions, or it gets attacked from outside. All you can really do is try and stay out of its way.
The absent @SeanT, erstwhile citizen of this same manor, posits in the Spectator that Woke is actually a proper new religion, and will thus endure
Let us hope that, as always, he is entirely wrong and befuddled by The Drink
For woke to be a new religion (rather than a variant of christianity, as suggested by some) it needs to travel. And from what I can see, it isn't doing that - quite the reverse.
It is certainly spreading in the English speaking world, and now - bizarrely - into India
Miss Moorehead @MissMooreheadCV · Nov 1 P3B have been preparing for Thursday, when P6 are encouraging everybody to wear a skirt to raise awareness of #LaRopaNoTieneGenero, or as our lovely posters say ‘clothing has no gender’ @MissWhiteCV@MissMcGroryCV.
I think this type of thing will seem very normal by this time next year.
Yes, Peak Woke will never happen, it will just continue and worsen
You have to wonder how mad it might get
2020 went beyond what happened in 1968. The revolution will keep going until it reaches some sort of limit: either it collapses due to the absurdity of its own contradictions, or it gets attacked from outside. All you can really do is try and stay out of its way.
The absent @SeanT, erstwhile citizen of this same manor, posits in the Spectator that Woke is actually a proper new religion, and will thus endure
Let us hope that, as always, he is entirely wrong and befuddled by The Drink
For woke to be a new religion (rather than a variant of christianity, as suggested by some) it needs to travel. And from what I can see, it isn't doing that - quite the reverse.
It is certainly spreading in the English speaking world, and now - bizarrely - into India
As far as I can see it is an anglo saxon thing, largely driven by post colonial guilt.
It has origins going way back to obscure, extreme American race and gender studies of the 1960s, with half a nod to Cultural Marxism. From there the fungus slowly infested sociology, then anthropology, geography, and in the last decade pretty much all of academe
And in the last few years, it has exploded everywhere. Shedding spores
It is dangerous because it is so similar to a religion. It replaces religion, by offering the same absolute moral certainties, in a bewildering world. There is no arguing with Woke. You either submit and agree, as in Islam, or you are haram. A racist or a transphobe or whatever. That's it
Yet who are the true believers of the woke religion? Mainly students and some liberal academics and a few in the public sector.
It is hardly a religious force growing on the scale of evangelical Christianity or Islam globally yet.
But religions can EXPLODE
How many followers did Mohammad have in, say, 620AD? A few dozen? A few hundred?
By his death in 632 most of Arabia was Islamic. That's ten years. Within 40 years of his death, Islam ruled: from Spain to India
That is because Islam (and also Christianity) had appeal with ordinary people in the areas they spread.
They is little evidence the most ultra wokesim has much appeal to most ordinary people beyond liberal elites, as evidenced by the Virginia result last night
Yes, that's fair, and is grounds for cautious optimism, long term. However Wokeness has already eaten into many western institutions, like rust, despite lacking broad popularity.
Perhaps it is a weird kind of hybrid, it has definite elements of religiosity, but ALSO of radical political movements
Communism was never "broadly popular", but it took over half the world, was only defeated after decades of struggle, and the stink of it still lingers. Putin certainly compares it to Bolshevism, as we have seen
Communism was actually pretty popular amongst ordinary peasants in Russia and China initially, mainly because they were so poor
Comments
How many followers did Mohammad have in, say, 620AD? A few dozen? A few hundred?
By his death in 632 most of Arabia was Islamic. That's ten years. Within 40 years of his death, Islam ruled: from Spain to India
So it's now a nice little earner for any MP wishing to abuse their position
One can add to that that Boris's Tories are both seeking to carry on invading the red wall, defend the blue wall, promote the union, and gain colossal credentials as the party of Zero CO2 plans. (Compare with every leftish regime in the world!) While raising the minimum wage, keeping full employment, steering Brexit while having a little go at Johnny Foreigner and waving the flag.
The Tories have a set of tactics for having a go at the difficult task of winning the next election.
This, it seems to me, is more than can be said for other parties. Labour in particular are nowhere close to 'making a better offer' to the punter.
Otherwise MPs could easily decide to impose sanctions on each other and force recall petitions to be collected by their local party members in the MPs constituency just to force constant by elections because they want a chance to win the incumbent's seat. See also the ludicrous recall petitions you now get in California for senior elected officials.
MPs are elected for up to 5 year terms and should serve those terms and be judged on them by their electorate once they have completed those terms.
They should not be suspended and face a recall unless they have faced a criminal conviction and a prison term of at least a year or more
If you believe in changing the disciplinary process, you decouple it from an individual case. This is transparently making up the rules as you go along to assist a friend. It stinks, and you know it.
There is little evidence the most ultra wokesim has much appeal to most ordinary people beyond liberal elites, as evidenced by the Virginia result last night
Abusing his position as an MP to write letters (as if he was writing on behalf of a constituent) for a very large sum of money.
Well done @Tissue_Price
I note Bob Seely abstained.
https://twitter.com/theSNP/status/1455950651750559750?s=20
It's almost like they were paired...
Perhaps it is a weird kind of hybrid, it has definite elements of religiosity, but ALSO of radical political movements
Communism was never "broadly popular", but it took over half the world, was only defeated after decades of struggle, and the stink of it still lingers. Putin certainly compares it to Bolshevism, as we have seen
"Wokeness makes its electoral debut. Democrats’ defense of Critical Race Theory in education looks to have been a key factor in the Republicans’ Virginia upset. Cancel Culture/CRT has migrated from campus and twitter into political reality."
https://twitter.com/epkaufm/status/1455805356949520386?s=20
NEW THREAD
(Of course he doesn't, but the gag was irresistible.)