Roughly the same time as the immediate general election that Johnson's successor will obviously feel obliged to call in order to the decent thing and ensure that their mandate is supported by the electorate at large.
This is great for Starmer, not so much because it weakens an already weak government, but because it sends a very powerful signal that Labour is no longer under the control of the loony left, and is once again a safe bet for wavering centrist types to vote for. It's hard to imagine a defection like this under Corbyn.
Regardless of Boris being crap I really don’t agree with MPs switching parties like this - really think morally they should trigger a by-election as in most cases they are elected as a member of their original party.
If they believe that the other party is better for the country then they should have the courage of their convictions that their constituents would agree and vote for them in their new party.
Would be more honest or fair to resign the whip and act as an Independent IMHO.
On topic - grimmest PMQ run up for the PM that I can remember.
I think that @bigjohnowls is referring to the habit of certain ultra-ultra-left types of referring to everyone in the Labour party who isn't an ultra-ultra leftist as a Tory...
Roughly the same time as the immediate general election that Johnson's successor will obviously feel obliged to call in order to the decent thing and ensure that their mandate is supported by the electorate at large.
I don't understand why you wouldn't call a by-election. Surely you want the publicity of saying "look, I'm giving the people the chance to validate my decision, etc. etc."
Hugely symbolic on so many levels. The one I like the best is that Bury South has a large Jewish community. The pain Corbyn caused there must have been immense. Wakeford - who is co-chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on British Jews - would never dared have moved if he felt Labour had not made substantial progress in tackling its anti-Semitism problem.
Roughly the same time as the immediate general election that Johnson's successor will obviously feel obliged to call in order to the decent thing and ensure that their mandate is supported by the electorate at large.
I don't understand why you wouldn't call a by-election. Surely you want the publicity of saying "look, I'm giving the people the chance to validate my decision, etc. etc."
presumably because of the small, but not negligible, chance that he will not re-win the seat.
Roughly the same time as the immediate general election that Johnson's successor will obviously feel obliged to call in order to the decent thing and ensure that their mandate is supported by the electorate at large.
I don't understand why you wouldn't call a by-election. Surely you want the publicity of saying "look, I'm giving the people the chance to validate my decision, etc. etc."
Yeah, to be fair in this case, where I'm sure he'd win, it would be a nice bit of publicity - but I'm not sure either party would like to set the precedent that a fresh mandate is required. That said, maybe it would be in Labour's interest to do it and then use that to claim the moral high ground when the next Tory PM refuses to call an election.
Hugely symbolic on so many levels. The one I like the best is that Bury South has a large Jewish community. The pain Corbyn caused there must have been immense. Wakeford - who is co-chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on British Jews - would never dared have moved if he felt Labour had not made substantial progress in tackling its anti-Semitism problem.
Hugely symbolic in that SKS is happy to sit with Tories
Roughly the same time as the immediate general election that Johnson's successor will obviously feel obliged to call in order to the decent thing and ensure that their mandate is supported by the electorate at large.
I don't understand why you wouldn't call a by-election. Surely you want the publicity of saying "look, I'm giving the people the chance to validate my decision, etc. etc."
If I was a Tory MP, I would not boo Wakeford, or denigrate him (publicly, at least). I'd just go for regret: he's a good man, and was a good colleague, but he's made the wrong decision.
This is great for Starmer, not so much because it weakens an already weak government, but because it sends a very powerful signal that Labour is no longer under the control of the loony left, and is once again a safe bet for wavering centrist types to vote for. It's hard to imagine a defection like this under Corbyn.
Yes, I remember many voices saying Shaun Woodward's 1999 defection was bad for Labour as it showed that they weren't true socialists. Of course, if anything it had the opposite effect, showing that Labour had changed and could attract centrists.
This is very wrong. I am a centrist but the Kippers were willing to put their change of allegiance to the voters. Centrist MPs are too elitist to let their constituents have their say. Pure cowardice.
Hugely symbolic on so many levels. The one I like the best is that Bury South has a large Jewish community. The pain Corbyn caused there must have been immense. Wakeford - who is co-chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on British Jews - would never dared have moved if he felt Labour had not made substantial progress in tackling its anti-Semitism problem.
Hugely symbolic in that SKS is happy to sit with Tories
Lol, Johnson really does not have a grip on his party at all. The whole thing looks absolutely shambolic
Their heavy handed threats to try and get loyalty has backfired
I’m looking at Johnson now at PMQs, with his shaggy, bowl cut hair and ill fitting suit and I’m wondering how he inspires loyalty, perhaps HFUYD can tell us?
Roughly the same time as the immediate general election that Johnson's successor will obviously feel obliged to call in order to the decent thing and ensure that their mandate is supported by the electorate at large.
I don't understand why you wouldn't call a by-election. Surely you want the publicity of saying "look, I'm giving the people the chance to validate my decision, etc. etc."
Yeah, to be fair in this case, where I'm sure he'd win, it would be a nice bit of publicity - but I'm not sure either party would like to set the precedent that a fresh mandate is required. That said, maybe it would be in Labour's interest to do it and then use that to claim the moral high ground when the next Tory PM refuses to call an election.
The last sentence - a by-election would be a bit risky for Labour (but not very, at the moment). Claiming the moral high ground might be a good step for them....
Regardless of Boris being crap I really don’t agree with MPs switching parties like this - really think morally they should trigger a by-election as in most cases they are elected as a member of their original party.
If they believe that the other party is better for the country then they should have the courage of their convictions that their constituents would agree and vote for them in their new party.
Would be more honest or fair to resign the whip and act as an Independent IMHO.
It's a perfectly logical function of our FPTP system, where individual constituency MPs are elected to represent an area and are free to decide at any time whether or not to take a party whip. Other (more proportional) electoral systems are available.
In pure parliamentary terms there is not much meaningful difference between being a rebel MP who routinely votes against their party whip (e.g. Corbyn, Skinner, or the Maastricht rebels) and taking a different party whip. Only when it comes to a vote of confidence, but with a majority as big as Boris has that's a moot point anyway.
If I was a Tory MP, I would not boo Wakeford, or denigrate him (publicly, at least). I'd just go for regret: he's a good man, and was a good colleague, but he's made the wrong decision.
He's prolonged his career from 2023 to probably 2035 or so as a minimum.
This was quite amusing in the BBC coverage. ...One cabinet minister blamed Covid for the behaviour of the new intake. This minister said that Covid restrictions, which have kept many MPs away from Westminster for large chunks of the last two years, meant they had not been properly “socialised”....
Not that surprising given London, especially Inner London, was Remain central. The only reason most Tory MPs in Remain seats in London in 2019 held their seats was to keep out Corbyn, wealthy Remainers see Starmer as much less of a threat.
Tories doing a bit better in Outer London though were a few areas like Hillingdon, Bexley and Havering voted Leave on 25% than Inner London, where every borough voted Remain and the Tories are on just 18%. That suggests the Tories could not only lose Wandsworth and Barnet in May but even lose Westminster and Kensington and Chelsea on a really bad night
Last Starmer interview I read said that there was no question of Rejoining in his mind. We were OUT, end of.
What that suggests is that, in his mind, apart from a few committed Europeans like myself banging on about it, he doesn't expect the EU to be an issue at the next, and indeed next but one election.
So whether an area was Leave or Remain in 2016 will be immaterial. The issue will be the Governments overall competence.
For Remainers the best policy is to sit tight for a while. The economy is clearly on a lower growth path post-Brexit and people will increasingly notice. Wait for about five years and there will be a clear majority for rejoin, or at least for EEA membership. That's the time to organise a vote to make it happen. In the meantime, just sit back and let Brexit fail on its own. Don't create a stabbed in the back myth for Brexiteers by hastening its end.
Yes, pretty soon we will see that the lying bunch of chancers weren't suddenly competent at trade and foreign policy, but screwed that up too.
Lib Dems will push for SM membership, but not Rejoin in the short term. The SNP, PC and SF will be for their nations to Rejoin as independent states.
Ultimately the biggest obstacle to Rejoin will be the break up of the UK. Without Scotland and NI the hurdle to Rejoin gets a lot higher.
Or being completely surrounded by EU states may change the calculation for a lot of people.
Hmm. Strange definition of completely surrounded given that our largest border by far will continue to be with the sea. And being completely surrounded by EU countries doesn't seem to have made the Swiss more pro-EU. Quite the reverse in fact.
Unless you are a very strong swimmer the sea border thing is not really relevant. Spain's longest border is also with the sea, ditto Italy's. Unlike those countries, you won't easily be able to leave the rUK without entering EU waters or airspace unless you take a very narrow corridor over Cornwall. The landlocked position of Switzerland is ameliorated by the fact it is in the Schengen area. That is an element of EU integration we didn't even subscribe to when we were in, so its absence from the EU has no practical day-to-day effects.
I had assumed that since you were talking about changing public opinion you were talking psychologically not practically. And unless you believe the EU would decide to block all access except that Cornish corridor - which would be an 'interesting' claim then it makes not one bit of difference who owns those waters.
Bit of a straw man there - there are many any varied administrative hassles up to and not necessarily including "blocking access". The practical then translates into the psychological. The waters don't matter, unless you are a fisherman, it's what happens when you get to the other side of them that matters. And in the case of Ireland who will have no desire nor need to stay in the CTA post unification, and Scotland, who will want to reorientate towards the EU, that hassle will involve having to pay for the EU equivalent of ESTA.
It's academic and I've no desire to re-run these arguments. I've been content to sit back and watch the whole fiasco fail from the 2019 election on and I should stick to that policy. It's working so far.
There are huge numbers of Irish people living and working in Britain. I don't see the Irish government wanting to walk away from the CTA post-unification - and I'd imagine ending it would do a lot to alienate those who would prefer Union with London to Union with Dublin.
I'm confident the CTA will continue for at least another century.
Once Irish unification happens there will be no going back to union with London. Those with British passports can continue to move freely. But there would be no reason to maintain special privileges for the Irish. Especially while they free ride on our defence umbrella and leech off our taxation base with their dodgy tax regime. If they want to continue to get the benefits of living and voting in Britain, they can meet the earning threshold and swear allegiance to HMQ.
SKS in danger of enjoying himself too much. Laughing and snorting to himself and the audience. Either this is (literally) deadly serious (ref: HMQ) or it is not. SKS is slightly in no mans land.
Comments
Any more to follow, I wonder?
His letter presumably won’t count now.
I wonder if Starmer is trying to keep Boris in place?
What was happening in September to prompt that?
Boris fan please explain
i n n o c e n t f a c e
Mike's busy and I'm with the other half.
Christian Wakeford and Boris Johnson might end my relationship.
Fingers crossed
Nothing more
If they believe that the other party is better for the country then they should have the courage of their convictions that their constituents would agree and vote for them in their new party.
Would be more honest or fair to resign the whip and act as an Independent IMHO.
He defected about five minutes after Everton scored an injury time equaliser in the Merseyside derby.
Still, it is an embarrassing disaster for the government and a hammer blow for the red wall caucus.
Is he therefore hoping for another ten or twenty defections ?
I think that @bigjohnowls is referring to the habit of certain ultra-ultra-left types of referring to everyone in the Labour party who isn't an ultra-ultra leftist as a Tory...
Starmer will not want to keep Boris in place IMO as only Boris can keep former Labour voters in place
🍿
'You realise right, that centrist Labour sabotaged two general elections? This just shows Labour are actually Tory 2, the backup team. Pointless.'
https://twitter.com/raystonian/status/1483769632431480832?s=20
'You see the problem with Labour taking tories into its ranks though?'
https://twitter.com/FALLLFAN/status/1483770154513272837?s=20
'I can't believe I have to explain this, but winning an election is meaningless if the only material change is the colour and name of the governing party'
https://twitter.com/thetertus/status/1483769753638424579?s=20
'More Tories in the Parliamentary Labour Party. That’s *exactly* what we need.'
https://twitter.com/MrGeorgePRS/status/1483769897612161026?s=20
If you send a letter to Brady (not old lady...), can you recall it if you want? I.e. send in a letter contradicting it.
If not, do letters have a lifetime? If I was an MP and sent it in two years ago, does it still count?
The questions from Lab might be just single-toned and if he has prepped he will be able to bat them away.
But it might dicourage les autres
Starmer has his mojo back at PMQs
Absolutely great line: "Given the noise from the Tory backbench, I guess the chief whip has told them to bring their own booze."
In pure parliamentary terms there is not much meaningful difference between being a rebel MP who routinely votes against their party whip (e.g. Corbyn, Skinner, or the Maastricht rebels) and taking a different party whip. Only when it comes to a vote of confidence, but with a majority as big as Boris has that's a moot point anyway.
https://i.imgur.com/X7kKDcX.jpeg
If I was better technically I'd embed it as an image!
One for the Sherlocks among us.
This is agony for Johnson.
Other than it having a blue theme I could not see one mention of him being a Conservative. I'm guessing he was fairly soft to begin with.
Changing his website to Labour will only need a quick update to his CSS to switch from blue to red.
...One cabinet minister blamed Covid for the behaviour of the new intake. This minister said that Covid restrictions, which have kept many MPs away from Westminster for large chunks of the last two years, meant they had not been properly “socialised”....