Elon agreed to buy Twitter without any of the usual checks and balances. Few people are going to willingly let him back out of the purchase (because they want the extra profit his offer gave them).
Are we going to do a tally of who on PB thinks what.
I think Boris loses. My reasoning is that it will (indeed has already been) one damn thing after another and if they keep him it is only a matter of time before he Borises up again and we are back to where we started all the while the polls tanking.
He has tainted the party and although has had successes that was then and we are left with a very flawed leader.*
Took the 5.1 bf at modest levels.
*Of course we always were but it is becoming more transparent to people by the day.
I'm sticking my head above the parapet to say that he will resign after the Confidence vote. But there are two scenarios how this happens: 1. He wins, but the vote against is 150ish. Downing Street fires up the "that draws a line under it, lets move on" script, but we hear from MPs who just voted for him that they don't think he can credibly cling on like that. The clamour builds and he quits later this week 2. He loses. Several signs that this is possible - very slow build of open support, self-harm acts by pro-Boris loons like Elphicke and Dorries etc
Is it officially a resignation if he loses? Or is he just out?
Constitutionally, a vote of no-confidence should mean he no longer has the confidence of the majority party in the Commons, and thus should tender his resignation to HMQ. However, he could hang on, forcing a VONC in the Commons and a constitutional crisis.
It's normal for an outgoing party leader to stay on as prime minister while the new leader is selected, even if it takes 3 months for that to happen.
If Boris loses tonight and SKS tries to call a Commons VONC, could the Speaker deny it as abuse of process?
On what grounds? LOTO has an absolute right to call a VONC at any time. Thatcher called plenty.
Because the intention of a VONC is to get either an election or a change of government. Calling one in the middle of a change of government when an election isn't possible seems like abuse of process - because what happens if the vote succeeds?
I don't understand what you mean by abuse of process? The purpose of a VONC is to test whether the government has the support of the House or not. Nothing more. And it is convention one can be called by the LOTO at any time. Without a reason put forward. And it's given complete priority.
Is there precedent for one being called during a leadership election of the governing party?
I would have thought I was clear enough about what I meant by "abuse of process", but I'll try again - what happens if the vote succeeds? SKS doesn't have the confidence of the house, and neither does any Tory (yet) because the leadership election isn't over (yet). But you can't call a general election because there will soon be someone who will have the confidence of the house by a large margin. In other words, a constitutional crisis - and surely calling a vote that, if successful, precipitates an unneccessary constitutional crisis is abuse of process.
You are confusing 2 different things. The Parliamentary Conservative Party having confidence in Boris as Leader of the Conservative Party, and the House of Commons having confidence in the Conservative Government. It is very possible, indeed overwhelmingly likely, that Conservative MP's would happily continue to have confidence in the Government during a Tory leadership election - along the lines of 'I have confidence in a Tory government, no matter who is leading it - but I don't have confidence that Boris is the best person to be leading that Tory Government'
It is about the reaction to alleged inflammatory statements about Islam by a BJP politician but... the news organization does not actually say what the statement is. Because heaven above a global news organization report the factual root of the story.
What was the actual offending statement? In response to Muslims mocking Hindu deities she said:
“Should I start mocking claims of flying horses or the flat-earth theory as mentioned in your Quran? You are marrying a 6-year-old girl and having sex with her when she turned 9. Who did it? Prophet Muhammad. Should I start saying all these things that are mentioned in your scriptures?”
Now these are things that are ACTUALLY in the Koran and most trusted Hadith. So factually reporting a non-Muslim saying what Muslims actually believe is now too politically incorrect to be reported, even if it at the core of a major news story.
As I understand it...
Aisha's age is not in the Koran. There are hadith that give ages, but there isn't a consensus over their accuracy. So, that's not something that is believed by all Muslims. Plenty believe she was older (15, 19, etc.).
Wording around the Earth being flat is somewhat ambiguous and contested. That's not something that is believed by most Muslims.
The winged horse is in the Koran, although it's a winged horse-like beast, it's not necessarily a winged horse. Tradition has it as more of a chimera.
"Nadine Dorries @NadineDorries 1/4 On afternoon of 23rd July 2020 when I was health minister you telephoned me to tell me that we had to handle the pandemic following the example set by the East/China. That people testing + should be removed from their homes and placed into isolation hotels for two weeks.
2/4You said yr wife’s family had experience of this during SARS. I said that British people would never tolerate being removed from their homes and loved ones at which point you demanded I show you the evidence for that. Your handling of the pandemic would have been a disaster.
3/4 Your pandemic preparation during six years as health secretary was found wanting and inadequate.Your duplicity right now in destabilising the party and country to serve your own personal ambition, more so.
4/4You told others that PM and Gov would swiftly collapse on back of Brexit and you would swoop in. You told me as much in Victoria St after GE. If you had been leader you’d have handed the keys of No10 to Corbyn. You’ve been wrong about almost everything, you are wrong again now"
July 2020? I don't buy that. Possibly a viable policy in Feb 2020, but by July it had faded to allow EOTHO etc.
I don't believe Mad Nad.
It was the low levels of community transmission at the time that would have made a policy of hotel isolation practical. MaxPB was one who advocated for it most forcefully on here, as a way to avoid more general restrictions on liberty.
You couldn't have done it in Feb 2020, because we didn't have the testing capacity to identify the infectious.
We did actually have hotel isolation at one point, didn't we? I recall the first few cases were put in a quarantine hotel. We heard endless reports on social media from people who were locked in a room.
That stopped once it became obvious that there wasn't going to be enough hotel space or staff.
It bought us a week at the most.
It was a fudge. Hotel isolation was just from a select number of countries. So loads of people simply re-routed their flights. If I remember correctly, Turkey was a particular popular by-pass destination to avoid this.
Are we going to do a tally of who on PB thinks what.
I think Boris loses. My reasoning is that it will (indeed has already been) one damn thing after another and if they keep him it is only a matter of time before he Borises up again and we are back to where we started all the while the polls tanking.
He has tainted the party and although has had successes that was then and we are left with a very flawed leader.*
Took the 5.1 bf at modest levels.
*Of course we always were but it is becoming more transparent to people by the day.
I'm sticking my head above the parapet to say that he will resign after the Confidence vote. But there are two scenarios how this happens: 1. He wins, but the vote against is 150ish. Downing Street fires up the "that draws a line under it, lets move on" script, but we hear from MPs who just voted for him that they don't think he can credibly cling on like that. The clamour builds and he quits later this week 2. He loses. Several signs that this is possible - very slow build of open support, self-harm acts by pro-Boris loons like Elphicke and Dorries etc
Is it officially a resignation if he loses? Or is he just out?
Constitutionally, a vote of no-confidence should mean he no longer has the confidence of the majority party in the Commons, and thus should tender his resignation to HMQ. However, he could hang on, forcing a VONC in the Commons and a constitutional crisis.
It's normal for an outgoing party leader to stay on as prime minister while the new leader is selected, even if it takes 3 months for that to happen.
If Boris loses tonight and SKS tries to call a Commons VONC, could the Speaker deny it as abuse of process?
On what grounds? LOTO has an absolute right to call a VONC at any time. Thatcher called plenty.
Because the intention of a VONC is to get either an election or a change of government. Calling one in the middle of a change of government when an election isn't possible seems like abuse of process - because what happens if the vote succeeds?
I don't understand what you mean by abuse of process? The purpose of a VONC is to test whether the government has the support of the House or not. Nothing more. And it is convention one can be called by the LOTO at any time. Without a reason put forward. And it's given complete priority.
Is there precedent for one being called during a leadership election of the governing party?
I would have thought I was clear enough about what I meant by "abuse of process", but I'll try again - what happens if the vote succeeds? SKS doesn't have the confidence of the house, and neither does any Tory (yet) because the leadership election isn't over (yet). But you can't call a general election because there will soon be someone who will have the confidence of the house by a large margin. In other words, a constitutional crisis - and surely calling a vote that, if successful, precipitates an unneccessary constitutional crisis is abuse of process.
With respect that's nonsense. If a VoNC in the government succeeded after Johnson had lost his Tory party VoNC and if (at that point) there is no one who could command the support of the house, then there has to be a GE. It matters not a jot whether the Tories have a leader or not.
If Johnson doesn't indicate he's going after losing a Tory party VoNC, Starmer should quite rightly call a VoNC in the government, if only to show what a sorry shambles the Tory government has become. The Speaker would, of course, allow it, as he is constitutionally bound to do.
What would Tory MPs do in such a situation? Very tricky, which is why Johnson will indicate he is resigning if he loses the leadership VoNC.
And its even worse. So TM made her 50% by 12.15pm. Johnson hasn't even got to 25% (as his vote is out of 359, whereas May was out of 316).
He might win, but his authority will be completely shot.
I’m beginning to wonder if he might just lose this.
So am I.
I thought all these votes ended up with the leader 'winning' but basically forced to resign shortly afterwards because of the scale of the opposition within the party.
Only IDS actually lost a vote straight out the gate, and he wasn't PM at the time.
I think he will lose today, and have modestly backed this view.
Me too at 4.5. The reasons to ditch look stronger than those to keep and this is their chance.
I agree, it feels like it is slipping away from him. Mad Nad hasn’t done him any favours either. Last chance is a rallying cry at 4pm?
Plus Raab thinks he’ll win the vote. So that must strongly indicate he’s losing it.
BlowJob is addressing the '22 at 4pm. Remember that his doing so after the Gray report is widely reported as being pivotal in accelerating the input of no confidence letters...
It’s going to be usual Boris bollocks and bluster with some classical history references thrown in - he’s Horatius Cocles holding off the hoards who wish to turn back Brexit etc etc.
Thing is they’ve all heard it enough that the joke is stale and the scales will have been removed from enough people’s eyes.
It’s like how every time you hear “world beating” now from Boris or suchlike instead of a swelling of pride in your patriotic heart everyone just thinks “ffs this is tedious crap”.
Are we going to do a tally of who on PB thinks what.
I think Boris loses. My reasoning is that it will (indeed has already been) one damn thing after another and if they keep him it is only a matter of time before he Borises up again and we are back to where we started all the while the polls tanking.
He has tainted the party and although has had successes that was then and we are left with a very flawed leader.*
Took the 5.1 bf at modest levels.
*Of course we always were but it is becoming more transparent to people by the day.
I'm sticking my head above the parapet to say that he will resign after the Confidence vote. But there are two scenarios how this happens: 1. He wins, but the vote against is 150ish. Downing Street fires up the "that draws a line under it, lets move on" script, but we hear from MPs who just voted for him that they don't think he can credibly cling on like that. The clamour builds and he quits later this week 2. He loses. Several signs that this is possible - very slow build of open support, self-harm acts by pro-Boris loons like Elphicke and Dorries etc
Is it officially a resignation if he loses? Or is he just out?
Constitutionally, a vote of no-confidence should mean he no longer has the confidence of the majority party in the Commons, and thus should tender his resignation to HMQ. However, he could hang on, forcing a VONC in the Commons and a constitutional crisis.
It's normal for an outgoing party leader to stay on as prime minister while the new leader is selected, even if it takes 3 months for that to happen.
If Boris loses tonight and SKS tries to call a Commons VONC, could the Speaker deny it as abuse of process?
On what grounds? LOTO has an absolute right to call a VONC at any time. Thatcher called plenty.
Because the intention of a VONC is to get either an election or a change of government. Calling one in the middle of a change of government when an election isn't possible seems like abuse of process - because what happens if the vote succeeds?
I don't understand what you mean by abuse of process? The purpose of a VONC is to test whether the government has the support of the House or not. Nothing more. And it is convention one can be called by the LOTO at any time. Without a reason put forward. And it's given complete priority.
Is there precedent for one being called during a leadership election of the governing party?
I would have thought I was clear enough about what I meant by "abuse of process", but I'll try again - what happens if the vote succeeds? SKS doesn't have the confidence of the house, and neither does any Tory (yet) because the leadership election isn't over (yet). But you can't call a general election because there will soon be someone who will have the confidence of the house by a large margin. In other words, a constitutional crisis - and surely calling a vote that, if successful, precipitates an unneccessary constitutional crisis is abuse of process.
Are we going to do a tally of who on PB thinks what.
I think Boris loses. My reasoning is that it will (indeed has already been) one damn thing after another and if they keep him it is only a matter of time before he Borises up again and we are back to where we started all the while the polls tanking.
He has tainted the party and although has had successes that was then and we are left with a very flawed leader.*
Took the 5.1 bf at modest levels.
*Of course we always were but it is becoming more transparent to people by the day.
I'm sticking my head above the parapet to say that he will resign after the Confidence vote. But there are two scenarios how this happens: 1. He wins, but the vote against is 150ish. Downing Street fires up the "that draws a line under it, lets move on" script, but we hear from MPs who just voted for him that they don't think he can credibly cling on like that. The clamour builds and he quits later this week 2. He loses. Several signs that this is possible - very slow build of open support, self-harm acts by pro-Boris loons like Elphicke and Dorries etc
Is it officially a resignation if he loses? Or is he just out?
Constitutionally, a vote of no-confidence should mean he no longer has the confidence of the majority party in the Commons, and thus should tender his resignation to HMQ. However, he could hang on, forcing a VONC in the Commons and a constitutional crisis.
It's normal for an outgoing party leader to stay on as prime minister while the new leader is selected, even if it takes 3 months for that to happen.
If Boris loses tonight and SKS tries to call a Commons VONC, could the Speaker deny it as abuse of process?
On what grounds? LOTO has an absolute right to call a VONC at any time. Thatcher called plenty.
Because the intention of a VONC is to get either an election or a change of government. Calling one in the middle of a change of government when an election isn't possible seems like abuse of process - because what happens if the vote succeeds?
I don't understand what you mean by abuse of process? The purpose of a VONC is to test whether the government has the support of the House or not. Nothing more. And it is convention one can be called by the LOTO at any time. Without a reason put forward. And it's given complete priority.
Is there precedent for one being called during a leadership election of the governing party?
I would have thought I was clear enough about what I meant by "abuse of process", but I'll try again - what happens if the vote succeeds? SKS doesn't have the confidence of the house, and neither does any Tory (yet) because the leadership election isn't over (yet). But you can't call a general election because there will soon be someone who will have the confidence of the house by a large margin. In other words, a constitutional crisis - and surely calling a vote that, if successful, precipitates an unneccessary constitutional crisis is abuse of process.
It would not be an abuse of process. It would be a choice made by the Commons. Your reasoning is reason for the Commons to not make that choice. But if the Commons says it doesn't have confidence in anyone, it is the Commons' choice to have an election.
If we find out names of the confidence in Boris herd, apart from a few mavericks they will be brexiteers.
This is Brexit. Today is Brexit. The coming leadership election will be massively Brexit.
Don’t believe me? Then muse on perhaps a big part of Boris appeal in 2019 was, after Brexit done the country will put the division into the past, two sides of a fault line come together, move on under a unifying leader - but we are still waiting for it!
Can the Tory Party win again without achieving that?
Plus - having written and signed off the Brexit deal, it’s made them an inflexible government - in all the ways Brexit dips it’s fingers in policy direction.
To say Boris Brexit Deal is 100% sacrosanct, you will come across against putting Brexit behind us - you remain effing business, and it will remain a struggle for a clear and winning economic strategy.
Post Boris, these are the issues for the party to sort out to win again. And you find relationship with the governments Brexit positions clearly woven through these issues, through many of the issues in the new leaders in tray.
I’m not saying anything anti Brexit. I’m not saying it needs big move from hard to soft Brexit. The point I’m making is government doesn’t work when it meets blocker of intransigence - it works through flexibility. Flexibility pulls people into a tent, and you work together. Intransigence keeps them outside.
The point I’m making is what the Tory Party needs to be, flexible in decision making, and where the country needs to be at, together with Brexit fault line in the past, for the Tory party to win elections again.
You have your head in the sand like an ostrich if you think the Tory Party and country are in those two places today, and there’s not much work to do on them!
I’m pretty sure I am not deluded you know 🙂 I’m pretty sure I’m hitting the nail on the head. The due diligence needed on the next leader and the strategies underpinning her government.
Its about Partygate, front and centre. That's why Johnson was booed. That's why 95% of the nation wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire. Lies about parties when they didn't see mum or didn't get the last chat with the dying relative or to go the funeral, or held a shit one with an officious prick stopping a hug.
For some in the media its always brexit. For the public this is about the parties and the lies. 100%
"Nadine Dorries @NadineDorries 1/4 On afternoon of 23rd July 2020 when I was health minister you telephoned me to tell me that we had to handle the pandemic following the example set by the East/China. That people testing + should be removed from their homes and placed into isolation hotels for two weeks.
2/4You said yr wife’s family had experience of this during SARS. I said that British people would never tolerate being removed from their homes and loved ones at which point you demanded I show you the evidence for that. Your handling of the pandemic would have been a disaster.
3/4 Your pandemic preparation during six years as health secretary was found wanting and inadequate.Your duplicity right now in destabilising the party and country to serve your own personal ambition, more so.
4/4You told others that PM and Gov would swiftly collapse on back of Brexit and you would swoop in. You told me as much in Victoria St after GE. If you had been leader you’d have handed the keys of No10 to Corbyn. You’ve been wrong about almost everything, you are wrong again now"
Are we going to do a tally of who on PB thinks what.
I think Boris loses. My reasoning is that it will (indeed has already been) one damn thing after another and if they keep him it is only a matter of time before he Borises up again and we are back to where we started all the while the polls tanking.
He has tainted the party and although has had successes that was then and we are left with a very flawed leader.*
Took the 5.1 bf at modest levels.
*Of course we always were but it is becoming more transparent to people by the day.
I'm sticking my head above the parapet to say that he will resign after the Confidence vote. But there are two scenarios how this happens: 1. He wins, but the vote against is 150ish. Downing Street fires up the "that draws a line under it, lets move on" script, but we hear from MPs who just voted for him that they don't think he can credibly cling on like that. The clamour builds and he quits later this week 2. He loses. Several signs that this is possible - very slow build of open support, self-harm acts by pro-Boris loons like Elphicke and Dorries etc
Is it officially a resignation if he loses? Or is he just out?
Constitutionally, a vote of no-confidence should mean he no longer has the confidence of the majority party in the Commons, and thus should tender his resignation to HMQ. However, he could hang on, forcing a VONC in the Commons and a constitutional crisis.
It's normal for an outgoing party leader to stay on as prime minister while the new leader is selected, even if it takes 3 months for that to happen.
If Boris loses tonight and SKS tries to call a Commons VONC, could the Speaker deny it as abuse of process?
On what grounds? LOTO has an absolute right to call a VONC at any time. Thatcher called plenty.
Because the intention of a VONC is to get either an election or a change of government. Calling one in the middle of a change of government when an election isn't possible seems like abuse of process - because what happens if the vote succeeds?
I don't understand what you mean by abuse of process? The purpose of a VONC is to test whether the government has the support of the House or not. Nothing more. And it is convention one can be called by the LOTO at any time. Without a reason put forward. And it's given complete priority.
Is there precedent for one being called during a leadership election of the governing party?
I would have thought I was clear enough about what I meant by "abuse of process", but I'll try again - what happens if the vote succeeds? SKS doesn't have the confidence of the house, and neither does any Tory (yet) because the leadership election isn't over (yet). But you can't call a general election because there will soon be someone who will have the confidence of the house by a large margin. In other words, a constitutional crisis - and surely calling a vote that, if successful, precipitates an unneccessary constitutional crisis is abuse of process.
With respect that's nonsense. If a VoNC in the government succeeded (it won't) after Johnson had lost his Tory party VoNC and if (at that point) there is no one who could command the support of the house, then there has to be a GE. It matters not a jot whether the Tories have a leader or not.
If Johnson doesn't indicate he's going after losing a Tory party VoNC, Starmer should quite rightly call a VoNC in the government, if only to show what a sorry shambles the Tory government has become. The Speaker would, of course, allow it, as he is constitutionally bound to do.
What would Tory MPs do in such a situation? Very tricky, which is why Johnson will indicate he is resigning if he loses the leadership VoNC.
Why will he do that? If he thinks he can win a GE he could cling onto office, lose a VoNC in the Commons and advise a dissolution. This is what Callaghan did as recently as 1979. After all, he has nowhere else to go.
Are we going to do a tally of who on PB thinks what.
I think Boris loses. My reasoning is that it will (indeed has already been) one damn thing after another and if they keep him it is only a matter of time before he Borises up again and we are back to where we started all the while the polls tanking.
He has tainted the party and although has had successes that was then and we are left with a very flawed leader.*
Took the 5.1 bf at modest levels.
*Of course we always were but it is becoming more transparent to people by the day.
I'm sticking my head above the parapet to say that he will resign after the Confidence vote. But there are two scenarios how this happens: 1. He wins, but the vote against is 150ish. Downing Street fires up the "that draws a line under it, lets move on" script, but we hear from MPs who just voted for him that they don't think he can credibly cling on like that. The clamour builds and he quits later this week 2. He loses. Several signs that this is possible - very slow build of open support, self-harm acts by pro-Boris loons like Elphicke and Dorries etc
Is it officially a resignation if he loses? Or is he just out?
Constitutionally, a vote of no-confidence should mean he no longer has the confidence of the majority party in the Commons, and thus should tender his resignation to HMQ. However, he could hang on, forcing a VONC in the Commons and a constitutional crisis.
It's normal for an outgoing party leader to stay on as prime minister while the new leader is selected, even if it takes 3 months for that to happen.
If Boris loses tonight and SKS tries to call a Commons VONC, could the Speaker deny it as abuse of process?
On what grounds? LOTO has an absolute right to call a VONC at any time. Thatcher called plenty.
Because the intention of a VONC is to get either an election or a change of government. Calling one in the middle of a change of government when an election isn't possible seems like abuse of process - because what happens if the vote succeeds?
I don't understand what you mean by abuse of process? The purpose of a VONC is to test whether the government has the support of the House or not. Nothing more. And it is convention one can be called by the LOTO at any time. Without a reason put forward. And it's given complete priority.
Is there precedent for one being called during a leadership election of the governing party?
I would have thought I was clear enough about what I meant by "abuse of process", but I'll try again - what happens if the vote succeeds? SKS doesn't have the confidence of the house, and neither does any Tory (yet) because the leadership election isn't over (yet). But you can't call a general election because there will soon be someone who will have the confidence of the house by a large margin. In other words, a constitutional crisis - and surely calling a vote that, if successful, precipitates an unneccessary constitutional crisis is abuse of process.
With respect that's nonsense. If a VoNC in the government succeeded after Johnson had lost his Tory party VoNC and if (at that point) there is no one who could command the support of the house, then there has to be a GE. It matters not a jot whether the Tories have a leader or not.
If Johnson doesn't indicate he's going after losing a Tory party VoNC, Starmer should quite rightly call a VoNC in the government, if only to show what a sorry shambles the Tory government has become. The Speaker would, of course, allow it, as he is constitutionally bound to do.
What would Tory MPs do in such a situation? Very tricky, which is why Johnson will indicate he is resigning if he loses the leadership VoNC.
What would Tory MPs do? Hastily rally around a temporary PM. Messy, but hardly an intractable problem.
If we find out names of the confidence in Boris herd, apart from a few mavericks they will be brexiteers.
This is Brexit. Today is Brexit. The coming leadership election will be massively Brexit.
Don’t believe me? Then muse on perhaps a big part of Boris appeal in 2019 was, after Brexit done the country will put the division into the past, two sides of a fault line come together, move on under a unifying leader - but we are still waiting for it!
Can the Tory Party win again without achieving that?
Plus - having written and signed off the Brexit deal, it’s made them an inflexible government - in all the ways Brexit dips it’s fingers in policy direction.
To say Boris Brexit Deal is 100% sacrosanct, you will come across against putting Brexit behind us - you remain effing business, and it will remain a struggle for a clear and winning economic strategy.
Post Boris, these are the issues for the party to sort out to win again. And you find relationship with the governments Brexit positions clearly woven through these issues, through many of the issues in the new leaders in tray.
I’m not saying anything anti Brexit. I’m not saying it needs big move from hard to soft Brexit. The point I’m making is government doesn’t work when it meets blocker of intransigence - it works through flexibility. Flexibility pulls people into a tent, and you work together. Intransigence keeps them outside.
The point I’m making is what the Tory Party needs to be, flexible in decision making, and where the country needs to be at, together with Brexit fault line in the past, for the Tory party to win elections again.
You have your head in the sand like an ostrich if you think the Tory Party and country are in those two places today, and there’s not much work to do on them!
I’m pretty sure I am not deluded you know 🙂 I’m pretty sure I’m hitting the nail on the head. The due diligence needed on the next leader and the strategies underpinning her government.
I've been wondering if there's a dog that's failing to bark in all of this. We were solemnly assured by Boris's admirers, both on here and in the media, that the Gray Report was laughably undamning - just a photo of Boris with a pile of crap sandwiches and a can of Coke. Yet, his MPs are now enacting the whole febrile and traumatizing process of a leadership challenge. Is this really just down to PartyGate - something I'd have thought was perfectly spinnable - or are there other dynamics afoot?
Are we going to do a tally of who on PB thinks what.
I think Boris loses. My reasoning is that it will (indeed has already been) one damn thing after another and if they keep him it is only a matter of time before he Borises up again and we are back to where we started all the while the polls tanking.
He has tainted the party and although has had successes that was then and we are left with a very flawed leader.*
Took the 5.1 bf at modest levels.
*Of course we always were but it is becoming more transparent to people by the day.
I'm sticking my head above the parapet to say that he will resign after the Confidence vote. But there are two scenarios how this happens: 1. He wins, but the vote against is 150ish. Downing Street fires up the "that draws a line under it, lets move on" script, but we hear from MPs who just voted for him that they don't think he can credibly cling on like that. The clamour builds and he quits later this week 2. He loses. Several signs that this is possible - very slow build of open support, self-harm acts by pro-Boris loons like Elphicke and Dorries etc
Is it officially a resignation if he loses? Or is he just out?
Constitutionally, a vote of no-confidence should mean he no longer has the confidence of the majority party in the Commons, and thus should tender his resignation to HMQ. However, he could hang on, forcing a VONC in the Commons and a constitutional crisis.
It's normal for an outgoing party leader to stay on as prime minister while the new leader is selected, even if it takes 3 months for that to happen.
If Boris loses tonight and SKS tries to call a Commons VONC, could the Speaker deny it as abuse of process?
On what grounds? LOTO has an absolute right to call a VONC at any time. Thatcher called plenty.
Because the intention of a VONC is to get either an election or a change of government. Calling one in the middle of a change of government when an election isn't possible seems like abuse of process - because what happens if the vote succeeds?
I don't understand what you mean by abuse of process? The purpose of a VONC is to test whether the government has the support of the House or not. Nothing more. And it is convention one can be called by the LOTO at any time. Without a reason put forward. And it's given complete priority.
Is there precedent for one being called during a leadership election of the governing party?
I would have thought I was clear enough about what I meant by "abuse of process", but I'll try again - what happens if the vote succeeds? SKS doesn't have the confidence of the house, and neither does any Tory (yet) because the leadership election isn't over (yet). But you can't call a general election because there will soon be someone who will have the confidence of the house by a large margin. In other words, a constitutional crisis - and surely calling a vote that, if successful, precipitates an unneccessary constitutional crisis is abuse of process.
Are we going to do a tally of who on PB thinks what.
I think Boris loses. My reasoning is that it will (indeed has already been) one damn thing after another and if they keep him it is only a matter of time before he Borises up again and we are back to where we started all the while the polls tanking.
He has tainted the party and although has had successes that was then and we are left with a very flawed leader.*
Took the 5.1 bf at modest levels.
*Of course we always were but it is becoming more transparent to people by the day.
I'm sticking my head above the parapet to say that he will resign after the Confidence vote. But there are two scenarios how this happens: 1. He wins, but the vote against is 150ish. Downing Street fires up the "that draws a line under it, lets move on" script, but we hear from MPs who just voted for him that they don't think he can credibly cling on like that. The clamour builds and he quits later this week 2. He loses. Several signs that this is possible - very slow build of open support, self-harm acts by pro-Boris loons like Elphicke and Dorries etc
Is it officially a resignation if he loses? Or is he just out?
Constitutionally, a vote of no-confidence should mean he no longer has the confidence of the majority party in the Commons, and thus should tender his resignation to HMQ. However, he could hang on, forcing a VONC in the Commons and a constitutional crisis.
It's normal for an outgoing party leader to stay on as prime minister while the new leader is selected, even if it takes 3 months for that to happen.
If Boris loses tonight and SKS tries to call a Commons VONC, could the Speaker deny it as abuse of process?
On what grounds? LOTO has an absolute right to call a VONC at any time. Thatcher called plenty.
Because the intention of a VONC is to get either an election or a change of government. Calling one in the middle of a change of government when an election isn't possible seems like abuse of process - because what happens if the vote succeeds?
I don't understand what you mean by abuse of process? The purpose of a VONC is to test whether the government has the support of the House or not. Nothing more. And it is convention one can be called by the LOTO at any time. Without a reason put forward. And it's given complete priority.
Is there precedent for one being called during a leadership election of the governing party?
I would have thought I was clear enough about what I meant by "abuse of process", but I'll try again - what happens if the vote succeeds? SKS doesn't have the confidence of the house, and neither does any Tory (yet) because the leadership election isn't over (yet). But you can't call a general election because there will soon be someone who will have the confidence of the house by a large margin. In other words, a constitutional crisis - and surely calling a vote that, if successful, precipitates an unneccessary constitutional crisis is abuse of process.
It's NOT an abuse of process. If the Conservatives were in the middle of a leadership crisis, they'd simply bat aside a Parliamentary vote with their 359 votes.
IF the situation was such that a leadership election within the Conservative party was underway, and the Conservatives couldn't get together the needed 322 to - in tangent- survive a Parliamentary vote, then I'd suggest they don't deserve to be the government anyway. In fact, it'd be a nice way to force a GE and then the Conservatives present a new leader in time for that GE.
The two processes share a name, namely 'VONC' but they operate completely independently of each other and there being one in progress does not prevent the other happening too.
If the DUP called a VONC in Jeffrey Donaldson, would you argue that Sir Keir Starmer couldn't VONC the government because the DUP party was in a leadership election?
If we find out names of the confidence in Boris herd, apart from a few mavericks they will be brexiteers.
This is Brexit. Today is Brexit. The coming leadership election will be massively Brexit.
Don’t believe me? Then muse on perhaps a big part of Boris appeal in 2019 was, after Brexit done the country will put the division into the past, two sides of a fault line come together, move on under a unifying leader - but we are still waiting for it!
Can the Tory Party win again without achieving that?
Plus - having written and signed off the Brexit deal, it’s made them an inflexible government - in all the ways Brexit dips it’s fingers in policy direction.
To say Boris Brexit Deal is 100% sacrosanct, you will come across against putting Brexit behind us - you remain effing business, and it will remain a struggle for a clear and winning economic strategy.
Post Boris, these are the issues for the party to sort out to win again. And you find relationship with the governments Brexit positions clearly woven through these issues, through many of the issues in the new leaders in tray.
I’m not saying anything anti Brexit. I’m not saying it needs big move from hard to soft Brexit. The point I’m making is government doesn’t work when it meets blocker of intransigence - it works through flexibility. Flexibility pulls people into a tent, and you work together. Intransigence keeps them outside.
The point I’m making is what the Tory Party needs to be, flexible in decision making, and where the country needs to be at, together with Brexit fault line in the past, for the Tory party to win elections again.
You have your head in the sand like an ostrich if you think the Tory Party and country are in those two places today, and there’s not much work to do on them!
I’m pretty sure I am not deluded you know 🙂 I’m pretty sure I’m hitting the nail on the head. The due diligence needed on the next leader and the strategies underpinning her government.
Its about Partygate, front and centre. That's why Johnson was booed. That's why 95% of the nation wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire. Lies about parties when they didn't see mum or didn't get the last chat with the dying relative or to go the funeral, or held a shit one with an officious prick stopping a hug.
For some in the media its always brexit. For the public this is about the parties and the lies. 100%
You can both be right. The VONC is about Partygate, but the topic of key debate in a subsequent leadership context could be Brexit.
Amazing how the lesson these MPs have learned is the opposite of the obvious lesson from 1990 - namely that a change of leader reversed the party’s fortunes and enabled another election win (also the lesson of Boris’ 2019 arrival).
If we find out names of the confidence in Boris herd, apart from a few mavericks they will be brexiteers.
This is Brexit. Today is Brexit. The coming leadership election will be massively Brexit.
Don’t believe me? Then muse on perhaps a big part of Boris appeal in 2019 was, after Brexit done the country will put the division into the past, two sides of a fault line come together, move on under a unifying leader - but we are still waiting for it!
Can the Tory Party win again without achieving that?
Plus - having written and signed off the Brexit deal, it’s made them an inflexible government - in all the ways Brexit dips it’s fingers in policy direction.
To say Boris Brexit Deal is 100% sacrosanct, you will come across against putting Brexit behind us - you remain effing business, and it will remain a struggle for a clear and winning economic strategy.
Post Boris, these are the issues for the party to sort out to win again. And you find relationship with the governments Brexit positions clearly woven through these issues, through many of the issues in the new leaders in tray.
I’m not saying anything anti Brexit. I’m not saying it needs big move from hard to soft Brexit. The point I’m making is government doesn’t work when it meets blocker of intransigence - it works through flexibility. Flexibility pulls people into a tent, and you work together. Intransigence keeps them outside.
The point I’m making is what the Tory Party needs to be, flexible in decision making, and where the country needs to be at, together with Brexit fault line in the past, for the Tory party to win elections again.
You have your head in the sand like an ostrich if you think the Tory Party and country are in those two places today, and there’s not much work to do on them!
I’m pretty sure I am not deluded you know 🙂 I’m pretty sure I’m hitting the nail on the head. The due diligence needed on the next leader and the strategies underpinning her government.
I've been wondering if there's a dog that's failing to bark in all of this. We were solemnly assured by Boris's admirers, both on here and in the media, that the Gray Report was laughably undamning - just a photo of Boris with a pile of crap sandwiches and a can of Coke. Yet, his MPs are now enacting the whole febrile and traumatizing process of a leadership challenge. Is this really just down to PartyGate - something I'd have thought was perfectly spinnable - or are there other dynamics afoot?
It’s the fuzzy socialism and fiscal incontinence that have tipped the balance I reckon.
As at 2.30pm, @johnestevens has counted 102 statements of support for Boris.
Theresa May had got 159 by 12:15, which translated into 200 votes in the final result.
Dunno about you, but to me that maths doesn't look encouraging for Boris.
Of those 102, how many will vote against given that it's a secret ballot. Especially with all the pressure to declare in favour on payroll MPs. I wouldn't be shocked if of those 102 he actually only get 80 or so votes.
Are we going to do a tally of who on PB thinks what.
I think Boris loses. My reasoning is that it will (indeed has already been) one damn thing after another and if they keep him it is only a matter of time before he Borises up again and we are back to where we started all the while the polls tanking.
He has tainted the party and although has had successes that was then and we are left with a very flawed leader.*
Took the 5.1 bf at modest levels.
*Of course we always were but it is becoming more transparent to people by the day.
I'm sticking my head above the parapet to say that he will resign after the Confidence vote. But there are two scenarios how this happens: 1. He wins, but the vote against is 150ish. Downing Street fires up the "that draws a line under it, lets move on" script, but we hear from MPs who just voted for him that they don't think he can credibly cling on like that. The clamour builds and he quits later this week 2. He loses. Several signs that this is possible - very slow build of open support, self-harm acts by pro-Boris loons like Elphicke and Dorries etc
Is it officially a resignation if he loses? Or is he just out?
Constitutionally, a vote of no-confidence should mean he no longer has the confidence of the majority party in the Commons, and thus should tender his resignation to HMQ. However, he could hang on, forcing a VONC in the Commons and a constitutional crisis.
It's normal for an outgoing party leader to stay on as prime minister while the new leader is selected, even if it takes 3 months for that to happen.
If Boris loses tonight and SKS tries to call a Commons VONC, could the Speaker deny it as abuse of process?
On what grounds? LOTO has an absolute right to call a VONC at any time. Thatcher called plenty.
Because the intention of a VONC is to get either an election or a change of government. Calling one in the middle of a change of government when an election isn't possible seems like abuse of process - because what happens if the vote succeeds?
I don't understand what you mean by abuse of process? The purpose of a VONC is to test whether the government has the support of the House or not. Nothing more. And it is convention one can be called by the LOTO at any time. Without a reason put forward. And it's given complete priority.
Is there precedent for one being called during a leadership election of the governing party?
I would have thought I was clear enough about what I meant by "abuse of process", but I'll try again - what happens if the vote succeeds? SKS doesn't have the confidence of the house, and neither does any Tory (yet) because the leadership election isn't over (yet). But you can't call a general election because there will soon be someone who will have the confidence of the house by a large margin. In other words, a constitutional crisis - and surely calling a vote that, if successful, precipitates an unneccessary constitutional crisis is abuse of process.
You are, in effect, arguing the governing Party has a de facto veto on when a VONC can or can't be called. That's what I'd call abuse of process. And it wouldn't win. But if it did there'd have to be an election. Or, far more likely, someone temporary who commands the confidence of the House.
"Nadine Dorries @NadineDorries 1/4 On afternoon of 23rd July 2020 when I was health minister you telephoned me to tell me that we had to handle the pandemic following the example set by the East/China. That people testing + should be removed from their homes and placed into isolation hotels for two weeks.
2/4You said yr wife’s family had experience of this during SARS. I said that British people would never tolerate being removed from their homes and loved ones at which point you demanded I show you the evidence for that. Your handling of the pandemic would have been a disaster.
3/4 Your pandemic preparation during six years as health secretary was found wanting and inadequate.Your duplicity right now in destabilising the party and country to serve your own personal ambition, more so.
4/4You told others that PM and Gov would swiftly collapse on back of Brexit and you would swoop in. You told me as much in Victoria St after GE. If you had been leader you’d have handed the keys of No10 to Corbyn. You’ve been wrong about almost everything, you are wrong again now"
If we find out names of the confidence in Boris herd, apart from a few mavericks they will be brexiteers.
This is Brexit. Today is Brexit. The coming leadership election will be massively Brexit.
This is soooooooooo tedious. Look, as a remainer who probably wanted to rejoin I fully accept it ain't gonna happen. Brexit has been and GONE. We have to live with it now for good or ill, mostly the latter.
There are a hundred things which matter and as many reasons why Johnson is a liability. Brexit isn't one of them.
If we find out names of the confidence in Boris herd, apart from a few mavericks they will be brexiteers.
This is Brexit. Today is Brexit. The coming leadership election will be massively Brexit.
Don’t believe me? Then muse on perhaps a big part of Boris appeal in 2019 was, after Brexit done the country will put the division into the past, two sides of a fault line come together, move on under a unifying leader - but we are still waiting for it!
Can the Tory Party win again without achieving that?
Plus - having written and signed off the Brexit deal, it’s made them an inflexible government - in all the ways Brexit dips it’s fingers in policy direction.
To say Boris Brexit Deal is 100% sacrosanct, you will come across against putting Brexit behind us - you remain effing business, and it will remain a struggle for a clear and winning economic strategy.
Post Boris, these are the issues for the party to sort out to win again. And you find relationship with the governments Brexit positions clearly woven through these issues, through many of the issues in the new leaders in tray.
I’m not saying anything anti Brexit. I’m not saying it needs big move from hard to soft Brexit. The point I’m making is government doesn’t work when it meets blocker of intransigence - it works through flexibility. Flexibility pulls people into a tent, and you work together. Intransigence keeps them outside.
The point I’m making is what the Tory Party needs to be, flexible in decision making, and where the country needs to be at, together with Brexit fault line in the past, for the Tory party to win elections again.
You have your head in the sand like an ostrich if you think the Tory Party and country are in those two places today, and there’s not much work to do on them!
I’m pretty sure I am not deluded you know 🙂 I’m pretty sure I’m hitting the nail on the head. The due diligence needed on the next leader and the strategies underpinning her government.
I've been wondering if there's a dog that's failing to bark in all of this. We were solemnly assured by Boris's admirers, both on here and in the media, that the Gray Report was laughably undamning - just a photo of Boris with a pile of crap sandwiches and a can of Coke. Yet, his MPs are now enacting the whole febrile and traumatizing process of a leadership challenge. Is this really just down to PartyGate - something I'd have thought was perfectly spinnable - or are there other dynamics afoot?
The critical dynamic is that he's already done everything he was elected to do, and he seems fairly clueless about what to do next. Almost nobody was happy with how he handled the pandemic (in one direction or the other) even before partygate, and his economic policies have been controversial - and possibly courageous - within the party.
If we find out names of the confidence in Boris herd, apart from a few mavericks they will be brexiteers.
This is Brexit. Today is Brexit. The coming leadership election will be massively Brexit.
Don’t believe me? Then muse on perhaps a big part of Boris appeal in 2019 was, after Brexit done the country will put the division into the past, two sides of a fault line come together, move on under a unifying leader - but we are still waiting for it!
Can the Tory Party win again without achieving that?
Plus - having written and signed off the Brexit deal, it’s made them an inflexible government - in all the ways Brexit dips it’s fingers in policy direction.
To say Boris Brexit Deal is 100% sacrosanct, you will come across against putting Brexit behind us - you remain effing business, and it will remain a struggle for a clear and winning economic strategy.
Post Boris, these are the issues for the party to sort out to win again. And you find relationship with the governments Brexit positions clearly woven through these issues, through many of the issues in the new leaders in tray.
I’m not saying anything anti Brexit. I’m not saying it needs big move from hard to soft Brexit. The point I’m making is government doesn’t work when it meets blocker of intransigence - it works through flexibility. Flexibility pulls people into a tent, and you work together. Intransigence keeps them outside.
The point I’m making is what the Tory Party needs to be, flexible in decision making, and where the country needs to be at, together with Brexit fault line in the past, for the Tory party to win elections again.
You have your head in the sand like an ostrich if you think the Tory Party and country are in those two places today, and there’s not much work to do on them!
I’m pretty sure I am not deluded you know 🙂 I’m pretty sure I’m hitting the nail on the head. The due diligence needed on the next leader and the strategies underpinning her government.
I've been wondering if there's a dog that's failing to bark in all of this. We were solemnly assured by Boris's admirers, both on here and in the media, that the Gray Report was laughably undamning - just a photo of Boris with a pile of crap sandwiches and a can of Coke. Yet, his MPs are now enacting the whole febrile and traumatizing process of a leadership challenge. Is this really just down to PartyGate - something I'd have thought was perfectly spinnable - or are there other dynamics afoot?
I think Partygate - and specifically his response to it rather than the parties themselves - reminded everyone of who he is, and always will be. It was the moment the MPs allowed the scales to fall from their eyes.
If we find out names of the confidence in Boris herd, apart from a few mavericks they will be brexiteers.
This is Brexit. Today is Brexit. The coming leadership election will be massively Brexit.
Don’t believe me? Then muse on perhaps a big part of Boris appeal in 2019 was, after Brexit done the country will put the division into the past, two sides of a fault line come together, move on under a unifying leader - but we are still waiting for it!
Can the Tory Party win again without achieving that?
Plus - having written and signed off the Brexit deal, it’s made them an inflexible government - in all the ways Brexit dips it’s fingers in policy direction.
To say Boris Brexit Deal is 100% sacrosanct, you will come across against putting Brexit behind us - you remain effing business, and it will remain a struggle for a clear and winning economic strategy.
Post Boris, these are the issues for the party to sort out to win again. And you find relationship with the governments Brexit positions clearly woven through these issues, through many of the issues in the new leaders in tray.
I’m not saying anything anti Brexit. I’m not saying it needs big move from hard to soft Brexit. The point I’m making is government doesn’t work when it meets blocker of intransigence - it works through flexibility. Flexibility pulls people into a tent, and you work together. Intransigence keeps them outside.
The point I’m making is what the Tory Party needs to be, flexible in decision making, and where the country needs to be at, together with Brexit fault line in the past, for the Tory party to win elections again.
You have your head in the sand like an ostrich if you think the Tory Party and country are in those two places today, and there’s not much work to do on them!
I’m pretty sure I am not deluded you know 🙂 I’m pretty sure I’m hitting the nail on the head. The due diligence needed on the next leader and the strategies underpinning her government.
Its about Partygate, front and centre. That's why Johnson was booed. That's why 95% of the nation wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire. Lies about parties when they didn't see mum or didn't get the last chat with the dying relative or to go the funeral, or held a shit one with an officious prick stopping a hug.
For some in the media its always brexit. For the public this is about the parties and the lies. 100%
You can both be right. The VONC is about Partygate, but the topic of key debate in a subsequent leadership context could be Brexit.
Don't disagree with that. I think the direction we take Brexit in WILL be up for grabs, its just that today is about the visceral hatred of Johnson that the public now has.
Are we going to do a tally of who on PB thinks what.
I think Boris loses. My reasoning is that it will (indeed has already been) one damn thing after another and if they keep him it is only a matter of time before he Borises up again and we are back to where we started all the while the polls tanking.
He has tainted the party and although has had successes that was then and we are left with a very flawed leader.*
Took the 5.1 bf at modest levels.
*Of course we always were but it is becoming more transparent to people by the day.
I'm sticking my head above the parapet to say that he will resign after the Confidence vote. But there are two scenarios how this happens: 1. He wins, but the vote against is 150ish. Downing Street fires up the "that draws a line under it, lets move on" script, but we hear from MPs who just voted for him that they don't think he can credibly cling on like that. The clamour builds and he quits later this week 2. He loses. Several signs that this is possible - very slow build of open support, self-harm acts by pro-Boris loons like Elphicke and Dorries etc
Is it officially a resignation if he loses? Or is he just out?
Constitutionally, a vote of no-confidence should mean he no longer has the confidence of the majority party in the Commons, and thus should tender his resignation to HMQ. However, he could hang on, forcing a VONC in the Commons and a constitutional crisis.
It's normal for an outgoing party leader to stay on as prime minister while the new leader is selected, even if it takes 3 months for that to happen.
If Boris loses tonight and SKS tries to call a Commons VONC, could the Speaker deny it as abuse of process?
On what grounds? LOTO has an absolute right to call a VONC at any time. Thatcher called plenty.
Because the intention of a VONC is to get either an election or a change of government. Calling one in the middle of a change of government when an election isn't possible seems like abuse of process - because what happens if the vote succeeds?
I don't understand what you mean by abuse of process? The purpose of a VONC is to test whether the government has the support of the House or not. Nothing more. And it is convention one can be called by the LOTO at any time. Without a reason put forward. And it's given complete priority.
Is there precedent for one being called during a leadership election of the governing party?
I would have thought I was clear enough about what I meant by "abuse of process", but I'll try again - what happens if the vote succeeds? SKS doesn't have the confidence of the house, and neither does any Tory (yet) because the leadership election isn't over (yet). But you can't call a general election because there will soon be someone who will have the confidence of the house by a large margin. In other words, a constitutional crisis - and surely calling a vote that, if successful, precipitates an unneccessary constitutional crisis is abuse of process.
Coincidentally that speech from Kinnock contains the gem "Those who make the law cannot break the law."
Some other things ring true today, too.
But when the windy rhetoric of the right hon. Member for Islwyn (Mr. Kinnock) has blown away, what are their real reasons for bringing this motion before the House? There were no alternative policies—just a lot of disjointed, opaque words.
Are we going to do a tally of who on PB thinks what.
I think Boris loses. My reasoning is that it will (indeed has already been) one damn thing after another and if they keep him it is only a matter of time before he Borises up again and we are back to where we started all the while the polls tanking.
He has tainted the party and although has had successes that was then and we are left with a very flawed leader.*
Took the 5.1 bf at modest levels.
*Of course we always were but it is becoming more transparent to people by the day.
I'm sticking my head above the parapet to say that he will resign after the Confidence vote. But there are two scenarios how this happens: 1. He wins, but the vote against is 150ish. Downing Street fires up the "that draws a line under it, lets move on" script, but we hear from MPs who just voted for him that they don't think he can credibly cling on like that. The clamour builds and he quits later this week 2. He loses. Several signs that this is possible - very slow build of open support, self-harm acts by pro-Boris loons like Elphicke and Dorries etc
Is it officially a resignation if he loses? Or is he just out?
Constitutionally, a vote of no-confidence should mean he no longer has the confidence of the majority party in the Commons, and thus should tender his resignation to HMQ. However, he could hang on, forcing a VONC in the Commons and a constitutional crisis.
It's normal for an outgoing party leader to stay on as prime minister while the new leader is selected, even if it takes 3 months for that to happen.
If Boris loses tonight and SKS tries to call a Commons VONC, could the Speaker deny it as abuse of process?
On what grounds? LOTO has an absolute right to call a VONC at any time. Thatcher called plenty.
Because the intention of a VONC is to get either an election or a change of government. Calling one in the middle of a change of government when an election isn't possible seems like abuse of process - because what happens if the vote succeeds?
I don't understand what you mean by abuse of process? The purpose of a VONC is to test whether the government has the support of the House or not. Nothing more. And it is convention one can be called by the LOTO at any time. Without a reason put forward. And it's given complete priority.
Is there precedent for one being called during a leadership election of the governing party?
I would have thought I was clear enough about what I meant by "abuse of process", but I'll try again - what happens if the vote succeeds? SKS doesn't have the confidence of the house, and neither does any Tory (yet) because the leadership election isn't over (yet). But you can't call a general election because there will soon be someone who will have the confidence of the house by a large margin. In other words, a constitutional crisis - and surely calling a vote that, if successful, precipitates an unneccessary constitutional crisis is abuse of process.
With respect that's nonsense. If a VoNC in the government succeeded after Johnson had lost his Tory party VoNC and if (at that point) there is no one who could command the support of the house, then there has to be a GE. It matters not a jot whether the Tories have a leader or not.
If Johnson doesn't indicate he's going after losing a Tory party VoNC, Starmer should quite rightly call a VoNC in the government, if only to show what a sorry shambles the Tory government has become. The Speaker would, of course, allow it, as he is constitutionally bound to do.
What would Tory MPs do in such a situation? Very tricky, which is why Johnson will indicate he is resigning if he loses the leadership VoNC.
What would Tory MPs do? Hastily rally around a temporary PM. Messy, but hardly an intractable problem.
Ah yes but... in my scenario Johnson hasn't indicated he's going - he is still the PM. Do the Tories rally around the PM they have just VoNC'ed as party leader?
Are we going to do a tally of who on PB thinks what.
I think Boris loses. My reasoning is that it will (indeed has already been) one damn thing after another and if they keep him it is only a matter of time before he Borises up again and we are back to where we started all the while the polls tanking.
He has tainted the party and although has had successes that was then and we are left with a very flawed leader.*
Took the 5.1 bf at modest levels.
*Of course we always were but it is becoming more transparent to people by the day.
I'm sticking my head above the parapet to say that he will resign after the Confidence vote. But there are two scenarios how this happens: 1. He wins, but the vote against is 150ish. Downing Street fires up the "that draws a line under it, lets move on" script, but we hear from MPs who just voted for him that they don't think he can credibly cling on like that. The clamour builds and he quits later this week 2. He loses. Several signs that this is possible - very slow build of open support, self-harm acts by pro-Boris loons like Elphicke and Dorries etc
Is it officially a resignation if he loses? Or is he just out?
Constitutionally, a vote of no-confidence should mean he no longer has the confidence of the majority party in the Commons, and thus should tender his resignation to HMQ. However, he could hang on, forcing a VONC in the Commons and a constitutional crisis.
It's normal for an outgoing party leader to stay on as prime minister while the new leader is selected, even if it takes 3 months for that to happen.
If Boris loses tonight and SKS tries to call a Commons VONC, could the Speaker deny it as abuse of process?
On what grounds? LOTO has an absolute right to call a VONC at any time. Thatcher called plenty.
Because the intention of a VONC is to get either an election or a change of government. Calling one in the middle of a change of government when an election isn't possible seems like abuse of process - because what happens if the vote succeeds?
I don't understand what you mean by abuse of process? The purpose of a VONC is to test whether the government has the support of the House or not. Nothing more. And it is convention one can be called by the LOTO at any time. Without a reason put forward. And it's given complete priority.
Is there precedent for one being called during a leadership election of the governing party?
I would have thought I was clear enough about what I meant by "abuse of process", but I'll try again - what happens if the vote succeeds? SKS doesn't have the confidence of the house, and neither does any Tory (yet) because the leadership election isn't over (yet). But you can't call a general election because there will soon be someone who will have the confidence of the house by a large margin. In other words, a constitutional crisis - and surely calling a vote that, if successful, precipitates an unneccessary constitutional crisis is abuse of process.
With respect that's nonsense. If a VoNC in the government succeeded after Johnson had lost his Tory party VoNC and if (at that point) there is no one who could command the support of the house, then there has to be a GE. It matters not a jot whether the Tories have a leader or not.
If Johnson doesn't indicate he's going after losing a Tory party VoNC, Starmer should quite rightly call a VoNC in the government, if only to show what a sorry shambles the Tory government has become. The Speaker would, of course, allow it, as he is constitutionally bound to do.
What would Tory MPs do in such a situation? Very tricky, which is why Johnson will indicate he is resigning if he loses the leadership VoNC.
I was completely with you until the last para. It would be very tricky for conservative MPs, and potentially disastrous for the party, neither of which are things that Johnson cares even slightly about if there could be personal benefit. He might calculate that in the absence of an agreed leader their least bad option was to allow him to fight the election as incumbent. Presumably he'd expect to win - but even if he assessed his chance as <1%, it's still a bigger chance then the 0% if he resigns. The upside is his (important), the downside is the party's and the country's (unimportant).
If we find out names of the confidence in Boris herd, apart from a few mavericks they will be brexiteers.
This is Brexit. Today is Brexit. The coming leadership election will be massively Brexit.
Don’t believe me? Then muse on perhaps a big part of Boris appeal in 2019 was, after Brexit done the country will put the division into the past, two sides of a fault line come together, move on under a unifying leader - but we are still waiting for it!
Can the Tory Party win again without achieving that?
Plus - having written and signed off the Brexit deal, it’s made them an inflexible government - in all the ways Brexit dips it’s fingers in policy direction.
To say Boris Brexit Deal is 100% sacrosanct, you will come across against putting Brexit behind us - you remain effing business, and it will remain a struggle for a clear and winning economic strategy.
Post Boris, these are the issues for the party to sort out to win again. And you find relationship with the governments Brexit positions clearly woven through these issues, through many of the issues in the new leaders in tray.
I’m not saying anything anti Brexit. I’m not saying it needs big move from hard to soft Brexit. The point I’m making is government doesn’t work when it meets blocker of intransigence - it works through flexibility. Flexibility pulls people into a tent, and you work together. Intransigence keeps them outside.
The point I’m making is what the Tory Party needs to be, flexible in decision making, and where the country needs to be at, together with Brexit fault line in the past, for the Tory party to win elections again.
You have your head in the sand like an ostrich if you think the Tory Party and country are in those two places today, and there’s not much work to do on them!
I’m pretty sure I am not deluded you know 🙂 I’m pretty sure I’m hitting the nail on the head. The due diligence needed on the next leader and the strategies underpinning her government.
I've been wondering if there's a dog that's failing to bark in all of this. We were solemnly assured by Boris's admirers, both on here and in the media, that the Gray Report was laughably undamning - just a photo of Boris with a pile of crap sandwiches and a can of Coke. Yet, his MPs are now enacting the whole febrile and traumatizing process of a leadership challenge. Is this really just down to PartyGate - something I'd have thought was perfectly spinnable - or are there other dynamics afoot?
The critical dynamic is that he's already done everything he was elected to do, and he seems fairly clueless about what to do next. Almost nobody was happy with how he handled the pandemic (in one direction or the other) even before partygate, and his economic policies have been controversial - and possibly courageous - within the party.
Yes. Partygate is the trigger, but a popular PM with a clear policy agenda and a happy country could've shrugged off Partygate. A PM with many obvious flaws, constant U-turns, presiding over a country with the worst cost of living crises since records began, he can't shrug off Partygate.
If we find out names of the confidence in Boris herd, apart from a few mavericks they will be brexiteers.
This is Brexit. Today is Brexit. The coming leadership election will be massively Brexit.
This is soooooooooo tedious. Look, as a remainer who probably wanted to rejoin I fully accept it ain't gonna happen. Brexit has been and GONE. We have to live with it now for good or ill, mostly the latter.
There are a hundred things which matter and as many reasons why Johnson is a liability. Brexit isn't one of them.
Brexit isn't going anywhere. It's not longer about in or out, it's about our long term relationship with the EU. The NIP and article 16 nonsense is just the latest example of how it will never be "done" in the way Boris would have you believe.
If Boris won't go after breaking the law, what chance of him going after winning a VONC? Pretty low I would expect. He will believe that he can turn it around.
I don't believe he has a choice. If he loses the vote tonight, he is automatically removed (he doesn't resign) as Party Leader and a leadership contest begins. Once its resolved, if he then doesn't resign as Prime Minister, the Monarch would just dismiss him (without him being there) and appoint the new leader.
No 'resigning' is needed. It's not voluntary. It can't be stopped.
Not sure about this. Here are the steps, (though it won't happen):
Boris is PM until he isn't. He was appointed as usual as leader of the winning party following a GE. Appointment and remaining are different things. He is entitled to remain PM until either he loses a GE, resigns, or loses a VONC in the Commons. If he lost the leadership of party but didn't have/didn't lose a VONC in the Commons (per impossibile) no-one can sack him.
And why should HM do the Commons dirty work for them?
As at 2.30pm, @johnestevens has counted 102 statements of support for Boris.
Theresa May had got 159 by 12:15, which translated into 200 votes in the final result.
Dunno about you, but to me that maths doesn't look encouraging for Boris.
Of those 102, how many will vote against given that it's a secret ballot. Especially with all the pressure to declare in favour on payroll MPs. I wouldn't be shocked if of those 102 he actually only get 80 or so votes.
Yes, but to the extent that the situations are comparable, that was probably also true in the Theresa May case, so it's already baked into the figures.
The John Stevens tally is now up to 105 pro-Boris statements (although some of them look a bit ambiguous to me), which still isn't looking great for him.
If we find out names of the confidence in Boris herd, apart from a few mavericks they will be brexiteers.
This is Brexit. Today is Brexit. The coming leadership election will be massively Brexit.
Don’t believe me? Then muse on perhaps a big part of Boris appeal in 2019 was, after Brexit done the country will put the division into the past, two sides of a fault line come together, move on under a unifying leader - but we are still waiting for it!
Can the Tory Party win again without achieving that?
Plus - having written and signed off the Brexit deal, it’s made them an inflexible government - in all the ways Brexit dips it’s fingers in policy direction.
To say Boris Brexit Deal is 100% sacrosanct, you will come across against putting Brexit behind us - you remain effing business, and it will remain a struggle for a clear and winning economic strategy.
Post Boris, these are the issues for the party to sort out to win again. And you find relationship with the governments Brexit positions clearly woven through these issues, through many of the issues in the new leaders in tray.
I’m not saying anything anti Brexit. I’m not saying it needs big move from hard to soft Brexit. The point I’m making is government doesn’t work when it meets blocker of intransigence - it works through flexibility. Flexibility pulls people into a tent, and you work together. Intransigence keeps them outside.
The point I’m making is what the Tory Party needs to be, flexible in decision making, and where the country needs to be at, together with Brexit fault line in the past, for the Tory party to win elections again.
You have your head in the sand like an ostrich if you think the Tory Party and country are in those two places today, and there’s not much work to do on them!
I’m pretty sure I am not deluded you know 🙂 I’m pretty sure I’m hitting the nail on the head. The due diligence needed on the next leader and the strategies underpinning her government.
I've been wondering if there's a dog that's failing to bark in all of this. We were solemnly assured by Boris's admirers, both on here and in the media, that the Gray Report was laughably undamning - just a photo of Boris with a pile of crap sandwiches and a can of Coke. Yet, his MPs are now enacting the whole febrile and traumatizing process of a leadership challenge. Is this really just down to PartyGate - something I'd have thought was perfectly spinnable - or are there other dynamics afoot?
I don't think he has much hinterland of support. He was backed to break the Brexit deadlock, but no real love lost, and the constant chaos hasn't endeared. Once he becomes an electoral liability, why not get rid?
As at 2.30pm, @johnestevens has counted 102 statements of support for Boris.
Theresa May had got 159 by 12:15, which translated into 200 votes in the final result.
Dunno about you, but to me that maths doesn't look encouraging for Boris.
Of those 102, how many will vote against given that it's a secret ballot. Especially with all the pressure to declare in favour on payroll MPs. I wouldn't be shocked if of those 102 he actually only get 80 or so votes.
And why wouldn't you, as a Cons MP, very vocally and ostentatiously support the PM if that is what you were going to do.
No downside at all. If you thought he was going to win.
If we find out names of the confidence in Boris herd, apart from a few mavericks they will be brexiteers.
This is Brexit. Today is Brexit. The coming leadership election will be massively Brexit.
Don’t believe me? Then muse on perhaps a big part of Boris appeal in 2019 was, after Brexit done the country will put the division into the past, two sides of a fault line come together, move on under a unifying leader - but we are still waiting for it!
Can the Tory Party win again without achieving that?
Plus - having written and signed off the Brexit deal, it’s made them an inflexible government - in all the ways Brexit dips it’s fingers in policy direction.
To say Boris Brexit Deal is 100% sacrosanct, you will come across against putting Brexit behind us - you remain effing business, and it will remain a struggle for a clear and winning economic strategy.
Post Boris, these are the issues for the party to sort out to win again. And you find relationship with the governments Brexit positions clearly woven through these issues, through many of the issues in the new leaders in tray.
I’m not saying anything anti Brexit. I’m not saying it needs big move from hard to soft Brexit. The point I’m making is government doesn’t work when it meets blocker of intransigence - it works through flexibility. Flexibility pulls people into a tent, and you work together. Intransigence keeps them outside.
The point I’m making is what the Tory Party needs to be, flexible in decision making, and where the country needs to be at, together with Brexit fault line in the past, for the Tory party to win elections again.
You have your head in the sand like an ostrich if you think the Tory Party and country are in those two places today, and there’s not much work to do on them!
I’m pretty sure I am not deluded you know 🙂 I’m pretty sure I’m hitting the nail on the head. The due diligence needed on the next leader and the strategies underpinning her government.
Its about Partygate, front and centre. That's why Johnson was booed. That's why 95% of the nation wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire. Lies about parties when they didn't see mum or didn't get the last chat with the dying relative or to go the funeral, or held a shit one with an officious prick stopping a hug.
For some in the media its always brexit. For the public this is about the parties and the lies. 100%
You can both be right. The VONC is about Partygate, but the topic of key debate in a subsequent leadership context could be Brexit.
Don't disagree with that. I think the direction we take Brexit in WILL be up for grabs, its just that today is about the visceral hatred of Johnson that the public now has.
It'll be a factor. But unlike 2019, it won't be the factor.
If we find out names of the confidence in Boris herd, apart from a few mavericks they will be brexiteers.
This is Brexit. Today is Brexit. The coming leadership election will be massively Brexit.
Don’t believe me? Then muse on perhaps a big part of Boris appeal in 2019 was, after Brexit done the country will put the division into the past, two sides of a fault line come together, move on under a unifying leader - but we are still waiting for it!
Can the Tory Party win again without achieving that?
Plus - having written and signed off the Brexit deal, it’s made them an inflexible government - in all the ways Brexit dips it’s fingers in policy direction.
To say Boris Brexit Deal is 100% sacrosanct, you will come across against putting Brexit behind us - you remain effing business, and it will remain a struggle for a clear and winning economic strategy.
Post Boris, these are the issues for the party to sort out to win again. And you find relationship with the governments Brexit positions clearly woven through these issues, through many of the issues in the new leaders in tray.
I’m not saying anything anti Brexit. I’m not saying it needs big move from hard to soft Brexit. The point I’m making is government doesn’t work when it meets blocker of intransigence - it works through flexibility. Flexibility pulls people into a tent, and you work together. Intransigence keeps them outside.
The point I’m making is what the Tory Party needs to be, flexible in decision making, and where the country needs to be at, together with Brexit fault line in the past, for the Tory party to win elections again.
You have your head in the sand like an ostrich if you think the Tory Party and country are in those two places today, and there’s not much work to do on them!
I’m pretty sure I am not deluded you know 🙂 I’m pretty sure I’m hitting the nail on the head. The due diligence needed on the next leader and the strategies underpinning her government.
I've been wondering if there's a dog that's failing to bark in all of this. We were solemnly assured by Boris's admirers, both on here and in the media, that the Gray Report was laughably undamning - just a photo of Boris with a pile of crap sandwiches and a can of Coke. Yet, his MPs are now enacting the whole febrile and traumatizing process of a leadership challenge. Is this really just down to PartyGate - something I'd have thought was perfectly spinnable - or are there other dynamics afoot?
Gray didn't make any difference is the point; didn't increase the partygate hate but didn't diminish it either. It is really about that: see vox pops, statements by Tory MPs about constituents letters etc
If we find out names of the confidence in Boris herd, apart from a few mavericks they will be brexiteers.
This is Brexit. Today is Brexit. The coming leadership election will be massively Brexit.
Don’t believe me? Then muse on perhaps a big part of Boris appeal in 2019 was, after Brexit done the country will put the division into the past, two sides of a fault line come together, move on under a unifying leader - but we are still waiting for it!
Can the Tory Party win again without achieving that?
Plus - having written and signed off the Brexit deal, it’s made them an inflexible government - in all the ways Brexit dips it’s fingers in policy direction.
To say Boris Brexit Deal is 100% sacrosanct, you will come across against putting Brexit behind us - you remain effing business, and it will remain a struggle for a clear and winning economic strategy.
Post Boris, these are the issues for the party to sort out to win again. And you find relationship with the governments Brexit positions clearly woven through these issues, through many of the issues in the new leaders in tray.
I’m not saying anything anti Brexit. I’m not saying it needs big move from hard to soft Brexit. The point I’m making is government doesn’t work when it meets blocker of intransigence - it works through flexibility. Flexibility pulls people into a tent, and you work together. Intransigence keeps them outside.
The point I’m making is what the Tory Party needs to be, flexible in decision making, and where the country needs to be at, together with Brexit fault line in the past, for the Tory party to win elections again.
You have your head in the sand like an ostrich if you think the Tory Party and country are in those two places today, and there’s not much work to do on them!
I’m pretty sure I am not deluded you know 🙂 I’m pretty sure I’m hitting the nail on the head. The due diligence needed on the next leader and the strategies underpinning her government.
I've been wondering if there's a dog that's failing to bark in all of this. We were solemnly assured by Boris's admirers, both on here and in the media, that the Gray Report was laughably undamning - just a photo of Boris with a pile of crap sandwiches and a can of Coke. Yet, his MPs are now enacting the whole febrile and traumatizing process of a leadership challenge. Is this really just down to PartyGate - something I'd have thought was perfectly spinnable - or are there other dynamics afoot?
Partygate (as @turbotubbs said a minute ago) and the extended platty joobs hollibobs meant MPs returned home to their constituents, or canvassed in Tiverton, and got both barrels from their erstwhile supporters who had followed the rules.
I don’t see Tory donors pulling support if Johnson goes . They’ve supported the party well before he became PM and will do so after he’s gone , whenever that is .
Nadine Dorries really has become the Conservative rebels most effective campaigning agent, one of Boris Johnson's biggest errors was not clearing out under performing cheer leading Ministers like Dorries a while ago while leaving far too many more talented and politically astute media performers sitting on the back benches.
All the main Cabinet ministers now tweeted they are voting for Boris tonight except...Priti Patel
Surely if you are any Cabinet member and you fancy being PM then your best chance is to get rid of the current PM. There are a lot in Cabinet who clearly want to be PM. Therefore if you want the ball to come lose from the back of the ruck your should be declaring your support and voting to get rid. I don't see any other logic.
As at 2.30pm, @johnestevens has counted 102 statements of support for Boris.
Theresa May had got 159 by 12:15, which translated into 200 votes in the final result.
Dunno about you, but to me that maths doesn't look encouraging for Boris.
I'm not sure we can read too much into it.
Theresa May had a clear bloc in her favour, and a hung parliament.
Support/opposition for Boris is far more diffused.
Plus Jack W's point earlier is relevant. There will be Tory MPs who will vote for Boris but who won't want their constituents to know that they did so. These MPs will do their best to keep quiet. There will also be MPs who plan to vote against Boris who will be keeping quiet; if they want Boris to go but want to not damage their career prospects if he survives.
If we find out names of the confidence in Boris herd, apart from a few mavericks they will be brexiteers.
This is Brexit. Today is Brexit. The coming leadership election will be massively Brexit.
This is soooooooooo tedious. Look, as a remainer who probably wanted to rejoin I fully accept it ain't gonna happen. Brexit has been and GONE. We have to live with it now for good or ill, mostly the latter.
There are a hundred things which matter and as many reasons why Johnson is a liability. Brexit isn't one of them.
Brexit isn't going anywhere. It's not longer about in or out, it's about our long term relationship with the EU. The NIP and article 16 nonsense is just the latest example of how it will never be "done" in the way Boris would have you believe.
Correct. As someone said the past is not dead. It's not even past.
If Boris won't go after breaking the law, what chance of him going after winning a VONC? Pretty low I would expect. He will believe that he can turn it around.
I don't believe he has a choice. If he loses the vote tonight, he is automatically removed (he doesn't resign) as Party Leader and a leadership contest begins. Once its resolved, if he then doesn't resign as Prime Minister, the Monarch would just dismiss him (without him being there) and appoint the new leader.
No 'resigning' is needed. It's not voluntary. It can't be stopped.
Not sure about this. Here are the steps, (though it won't happen):
Boris is PM until he isn't. He was appointed as usual as leader of the winning party following a GE. Appointment and remaining are different things. He is entitled to remain PM until either he loses a GE, resigns, or loses a VONC in the Commons. If he lost the leadership of party but didn't have/didn't lose a VONC in the Commons (per impossibile) no-one can sack him.
And why should HM do the Commons dirty work for them?
If he doesn't have the confidence of his party he ceases to be leader of that party. As that party is the ;largest in the house then obviously he does not have the support, and he certainly won't get it elsewhere. He would have to resign as he would no longer be able to command a majority.
Technically correct but in the real world a majority of one means its all over really quickly.
Not sure. As I said on the last thread, if he soldiers on with just a small majority, what can they do about it, except change the rules, force another vote, and get the same outcome?
It is about the reaction to alleged inflammatory statements about Islam by a BJP politician but... the news organization does not actually say what the statement is. Because heaven above a global news organization report the factual root of the story.
What was the actual offending statement? In response to Muslims mocking Hindu deities she said:
“Should I start mocking claims of flying horses or the flat-earth theory as mentioned in your Quran? You are marrying a 6-year-old girl and having sex with her when she turned 9. Who did it? Prophet Muhammad. Should I start saying all these things that are mentioned in your scriptures?”
Now these are things that are ACTUALLY in the Koran and most trusted Hadith. So factually reporting a non-Muslim saying what Muslims actually believe is now too politically incorrect to be reported, even if it at the core of a major news story.
As I understand it...
Aisha's age is not in the Koran. There are hadith that give ages, but there isn't a consensus over their accuracy. So, that's not something that is believed by all Muslims. Plenty believe she was older (15, 19, etc.).
Wording around the Earth being flat is somewhat ambiguous and contested. That's not something that is believed by most Muslims.
The winged horse is in the Koran, although it's a winged horse-like beast, it's not necessarily a winged horse. Tradition has it as more of a chimera.
On the coverage, isn't this just the self-censoring BBC self-censoring as per any day with D in it? Been doing it wrt twitter for years and years.
The problem is that such editorial cowardliness is that we cannot judge the story - is the outrage correct, performative or trivial?
It renders the media outlet useless, and it rewards - rather than laughs at - the trivial outrage-monger.
Back between 2004 and 2006 there was a superb blog by a Saudi expat called The Religious Policeman, who had a "Muslim Offence Level" indicator. Perhaps we need to bring it back.
If Boris won't go after breaking the law, what chance of him going after winning a VONC? Pretty low I would expect. He will believe that he can turn it around.
I don't believe he has a choice. If he loses the vote tonight, he is automatically removed (he doesn't resign) as Party Leader and a leadership contest begins. Once its resolved, if he then doesn't resign as Prime Minister, the Monarch would just dismiss him (without him being there) and appoint the new leader.
No 'resigning' is needed. It's not voluntary. It can't be stopped.
Not sure about this. Here are the steps, (though it won't happen):
Boris is PM until he isn't. He was appointed as usual as leader of the winning party following a GE. Appointment and remaining are different things. He is entitled to remain PM until either he loses a GE, resigns, or loses a VONC in the Commons. If he lost the leadership of party but didn't have/didn't lose a VONC in the Commons (per impossibile) no-one can sack him.
And why should HM do the Commons dirty work for them?
Indeed. And it's a mistake for anyone to assume that HMQ will take heed of the CP internal processes, either tonight's vote or a subsequent leadership election. The Conservative Party is just a here-today-gone-tomorrow marriage of convenience embracing a broad spectrum of political positions. Boris could very easily break it apart over his own survival but could remain PM until he loses an election if he chooses.
And what sort of election would that turn out to be? Tories rent asunder but no majority for any other party. The morning after Boris is still in Downing Street and shaping up to face the new HoC...
If Musk’s aim was to destroy Twitter’s reputation in the eyes of investors / analysts, he has done a fantastic job. That might have been his main aim after all
Anyone mentioned #deathgate yet? Shockingly the PM lied (I know...) about his experience with Covid. "I nearly died" and "doctors were preparing how to communicate a 'Death of Stalin' scenario is now proven not to be true.
Yet another load of Boris bullshit. "I nearly died" does sound like a classic exaggeration, especially from him. Not according to the hospital you didn't, who have responded to an FOI requests (with ICO instruction to do so) confirming that no such plans exist, and that the stages of a patient being considered at risk of death were not met with the PM.
I see that Nadine Dorries is re-enacting the Charge of the Light Brigade (the Intellectually Light Brigade in her case) via the medium of Twitter.
It is very nice of the Tories to give us this Whitehall Farce just after the Platinum Jubilee celebrations have ended.
For whose benefit is Nadine tweeting? Surely no-one's mind is going to be made up by a tweet from Nadine? This strikes me as a tweet that is all cost, no benefit. Once again, I am amazed by the way those in the public eye feel unable to maintain a dignified silence on Twitter.
With any luck we will never have to listen a single word that passes from Dorries's lips by the end of the week.
If Boris won't go after breaking the law, what chance of him going after winning a VONC? Pretty low I would expect. He will believe that he can turn it around.
I don't believe he has a choice. If he loses the vote tonight, he is automatically removed (he doesn't resign) as Party Leader and a leadership contest begins. Once its resolved, if he then doesn't resign as Prime Minister, the Monarch would just dismiss him (without him being there) and appoint the new leader.
No 'resigning' is needed. It's not voluntary. It can't be stopped.
Not sure about this. Here are the steps, (though it won't happen):
Boris is PM until he isn't. He was appointed as usual as leader of the winning party following a GE. Appointment and remaining are different things. He is entitled to remain PM until either he loses a GE, resigns, or loses a VONC in the Commons. If he lost the leadership of party but didn't have/didn't lose a VONC in the Commons (per impossibile) no-one can sack him.
And why should HM do the Commons dirty work for them?
If he doesn't have the confidence of his party he ceases to be leader of that party. As that party is the ;largest in the house then obviously he does not have the support, and he certainly won't get it elsewhere. He would have to resign as he would no longer be able to command a majority.
He won't have to resign at all. He can face a VoNC in the Commons and, if he loses, call a general election and, if it turns out to be inconclusive, stay on and wait for something to turn up. An asteroid strike, maybe.
If Boris won't go after breaking the law, what chance of him going after winning a VONC? Pretty low I would expect. He will believe that he can turn it around.
I don't believe he has a choice. If he loses the vote tonight, he is automatically removed (he doesn't resign) as Party Leader and a leadership contest begins. Once its resolved, if he then doesn't resign as Prime Minister, the Monarch would just dismiss him (without him being there) and appoint the new leader.
No 'resigning' is needed. It's not voluntary. It can't be stopped.
Not sure about this. Here are the steps, (though it won't happen):
Boris is PM until he isn't. He was appointed as usual as leader of the winning party following a GE. Appointment and remaining are different things. He is entitled to remain PM until either he loses a GE, resigns, or loses a VONC in the Commons. If he lost the leadership of party but didn't have/didn't lose a VONC in the Commons (per impossibile) no-one can sack him.
And why should HM do the Commons dirty work for them?
Indeed. And it's a mistake for anyone to assume that HMQ will take heed of the CP internal processes, either tonight's vote or a subsequent leadership election. The Conservative Party is just a here-today-gone-tomorrow marriage of convenience embracing a broad spectrum of political positions. Boris could very easily break it apart over his own survival but could remain PM until he loses an election if he chooses.
And what sort of election would that turn out to be? Tories rent asunder but no majority for any other party. The morning after Boris is still in Downing Street and shaping up to face the new HoC...
Now, that's what I call a constitutional crisis.
Isn't that kind if what happened with Peel and the Tories over the Corn Laws?
If Boris won't go after breaking the law, what chance of him going after winning a VONC? Pretty low I would expect. He will believe that he can turn it around.
I don't believe he has a choice. If he loses the vote tonight, he is automatically removed (he doesn't resign) as Party Leader and a leadership contest begins. Once its resolved, if he then doesn't resign as Prime Minister, the Monarch would just dismiss him (without him being there) and appoint the new leader.
No 'resigning' is needed. It's not voluntary. It can't be stopped.
Not sure about this. Here are the steps, (though it won't happen):
Boris is PM until he isn't. He was appointed as usual as leader of the winning party following a GE. Appointment and remaining are different things. He is entitled to remain PM until either he loses a GE, resigns, or loses a VONC in the Commons. If he lost the leadership of party but didn't have/didn't lose a VONC in the Commons (per impossibile) no-one can sack him.
And why should HM do the Commons dirty work for them?
If he doesn't have the confidence of his party he ceases to be leader of that party. As that party is the ;largest in the house then obviously he does not have the support, and he certainly won't get it elsewhere. He would have to resign as he would no longer be able to command a majority.
It is conventional for a departing leader to stay on as PM while a new one is elected. In that context, the PM has the confidence of the majority party (because it's on a time-limited basis). There is no need for the PM to resign immediately.
If Johnson refuses to ever resign after losing the party's VONC, then we are in uncharted territory, but presumably his own party would then VONC him in the Commons and he's gone. The new leader (or temporary leader) from the party then goes to the Queen and says "I can command a majority in the House."
All the main Cabinet ministers now tweeted they are voting for Boris tonight except...Priti Patel
Surely if you are any Cabinet member and you fancy being PM then your best chance is to get rid of the current PM. There are a lot in Cabinet who clearly want to be PM. Therefore if you want the ball to come lose from the back of the ruck your should be declaring your support and voting to get rid. I don't see any other logic.
There is also the ‘negative’ side of the coin.
let’s say you are a Red Wall MP and you know the most likely alternatives are Hunt or Sunak. You know the former essentially means you are gone because he’s a slippery fuck who your Brexit voters won’t trust (which, by the way, is the feedback I hear from anyone whose had any dealings with him ie clever but slippery). He’s also likely to be too pro-Remain.
Sunak might have been the default choice a few months back but faces the same problems as you had with BJ ie got a FPN and there have been questions raised over his conduct.
In that case, the ‘safe’ option might be to stick with BJ.
Anyone mentioned #deathgate yet? Shockingly the PM lied (I know...) about his experience with Covid. "I nearly died" and "doctors were preparing how to communicate a 'Death of Stalin' scenario is now proven not to be true.
Yet another load of Boris bullshit. "I nearly died" does sound like a classic exaggeration, especially from him. Not according to the hospital you didn't, who have responded to an FOI requests (with ICO instruction to do so) confirming that no such plans exist, and that the stages of a patient being considered at risk of death were not met with the PM.
If Boris won't go after breaking the law, what chance of him going after winning a VONC? Pretty low I would expect. He will believe that he can turn it around.
I don't believe he has a choice. If he loses the vote tonight, he is automatically removed (he doesn't resign) as Party Leader and a leadership contest begins. Once its resolved, if he then doesn't resign as Prime Minister, the Monarch would just dismiss him (without him being there) and appoint the new leader.
No 'resigning' is needed. It's not voluntary. It can't be stopped.
Not sure about this. Here are the steps, (though it won't happen):
Boris is PM until he isn't. He was appointed as usual as leader of the winning party following a GE. Appointment and remaining are different things. He is entitled to remain PM until either he loses a GE, resigns, or loses a VONC in the Commons. If he lost the leadership of party but didn't have/didn't lose a VONC in the Commons (per impossibile) no-one can sack him.
And why should HM do the Commons dirty work for them?
If he doesn't have the confidence of his party he ceases to be leader of that party. As that party is the ;largest in the house then obviously he does not have the support, and he certainly won't get it elsewhere. He would have to resign as he would no longer be able to command a majority.
He won't have to resign at all. He can face a VoNC in the Commons and, if he loses, call a general election and, if it turns out to be inconclusive, stay on and wait for something to turn up. An asteroid strike, maybe.
No I don't think this is plausible. If he tries this one on a) the Queen won't play his silly games - she just isn't like that b) the tory Party can instantly appoint a caretaker leader - presumably the Deputy PM - whom the Queen will call to form a Gov't. Then they will hold the leadership election.
Might be worth having a punt on Dominic Raab if you think Johnson could try this stunt.
If Musk’s aim was to destroy Twitter’s reputation in the eyes of investors / analysts, he has done a fantastic job. That might have been his main aim after all
Comments
Aisha's age is not in the Koran. There are hadith that give ages, but there isn't a consensus over their accuracy. So, that's not something that is believed by all Muslims. Plenty believe she was older (15, 19, etc.).
Wording around the Earth being flat is somewhat ambiguous and contested. That's not something that is believed by most Muslims.
The winged horse is in the Koran, although it's a winged horse-like beast, it's not necessarily a winged horse. Tradition has it as more of a chimera.
If Johnson doesn't indicate he's going after losing a Tory party VoNC, Starmer should quite rightly call a VoNC in the government, if only to show what a sorry shambles the Tory government has become. The Speaker would, of course, allow it, as he is constitutionally bound to do.
What would Tory MPs do in such a situation? Very tricky, which is why Johnson will indicate he is resigning if he loses the leadership VoNC.
I don't believe for a second he suggested pulling people out of their homes during Covid-19 to forcibly quarantine them.
Thing is they’ve all heard it enough that the joke is stale and the scales will have been removed from enough people’s eyes.
It’s like how every time you hear “world beating” now from Boris or suchlike instead of a swelling of pride in your patriotic heart everyone just thinks “ffs this is tedious crap”.
She is a shocking advert for the conservative party
I don't see any circumstances where he's close to those odds for being the next Prime Minister.
For some in the media its always brexit. For the public this is about the parties and the lies. 100%
Theresa May had a clear bloc in her favour, and a hung parliament.
Support/opposition for Boris is far more diffused.
Blaming Remainers is pathetic given many Leave Tories have said they’re voting against him .
If the Conservatives were in the middle of a leadership crisis, they'd simply bat aside a Parliamentary vote with their 359 votes.
IF the situation was such that a leadership election within the Conservative party was underway, and the Conservatives couldn't get together the needed 322 to - in tangent- survive a Parliamentary vote, then I'd suggest they don't deserve to be the government anyway. In fact, it'd be a nice way to force a GE and then the Conservatives present a new leader in time for that GE.
The two processes share a name, namely 'VONC' but they operate completely independently of each other and there being one in progress does not prevent the other happening too.
If the DUP called a VONC in Jeffrey Donaldson, would you argue that Sir Keir Starmer couldn't VONC the government because the DUP party was in a leadership election?
https://twitter.com/robfordmancs/status/1533807019764981762
Gangi, Sicily
Doesn't bring you happiness when smarkets and Betfair won't take your bets
That's what I'd call abuse of process.
And it wouldn't win. But if it did there'd have to be an election. Or, far more likely, someone temporary who commands the confidence of the House.
There are a hundred things which matter and as many reasons why Johnson is a liability. Brexit isn't one of them.
But when the windy rhetoric of the right hon. Member for Islwyn (Mr. Kinnock) has blown away, what are their real reasons for bringing this motion before the House? There were no alternative policies—just a lot of disjointed, opaque words.
made a woeful start towon the test match.Boris is PM until he isn't.
He was appointed as usual as leader of the winning party following a GE.
Appointment and remaining are different things.
He is entitled to remain PM until either he loses a GE, resigns, or loses a VONC in the Commons.
If he lost the leadership of party but didn't have/didn't lose a VONC in the Commons (per impossibile) no-one can sack him.
And why should HM do the Commons dirty work for them?
The John Stevens tally is now up to 105 pro-Boris statements (although some of them look a bit ambiguous to me), which still isn't looking great for him.
I have backed him losing today.
Boris wins by 100+ @ 4.0 £40
& 131+ MPs No confidence @ 1.56 £90.
It's almost an arb with abstention & a small risk if the vote is exactly 130 - 229 I think...
No downside at all. If you thought he was going to win.
Current prices are 1.54 & 3.9 so tit's just over a 90% book with in my view less than 10% chance of "middle risk".
https://smarkets.com/event/42757771/politics/uk/uk-party-leaders/2022/06/06/20-00/no-confidence-votes-against-johnson
https://smarkets.com/event/42752300/politics/uk/uk-party-leaders/2023/01/01/00-00/boris-johnson-confidence-vote-margin-2022
The problem is that such editorial cowardliness is that we cannot judge the story - is the outrage correct, performative or trivial?
It renders the media outlet useless, and it rewards - rather than laughs at - the trivial outrage-monger.
Back between 2004 and 2006 there was a superb blog by a Saudi expat called The Religious Policeman, who had a "Muslim Offence Level" indicator. Perhaps we need to bring it back.
http://muttawa.blogspot.com/
And what sort of election would that turn out to be? Tories rent asunder but no majority for any other party. The morning after Boris is still in Downing Street and shaping up to face the new HoC...
Now, that's what I call a constitutional crisis.
I don't like her but I think she's appalled by Johnson.
Yet another load of Boris bullshit. "I nearly died" does sound like a classic exaggeration, especially from him. Not according to the hospital you didn't, who have responded to an FOI requests (with ICO instruction to do so) confirming that no such plans exist, and that the stages of a patient being considered at risk of death were not met with the PM.
Won't affect tonight, but it is funny.
https://twitter.com/MarcusJBall/status/1533804069994766336
It really does appear that the government didn’t think this was going to happen today. That doesn’t bode well for Boris.
MPs don't tend to abstain on this sort of thing.
If Johnson refuses to ever resign after losing the party's VONC, then we are in uncharted territory, but presumably his own party would then VONC him in the Commons and he's gone. The new leader (or temporary leader) from the party then goes to the Queen and says "I can command a majority in the House."
let’s say you are a Red Wall MP and you know the most likely alternatives are Hunt or Sunak. You know the former essentially means you are gone because he’s a slippery fuck who your Brexit voters won’t trust (which, by the way, is the feedback I hear from anyone whose had any dealings with him ie clever but slippery). He’s also likely to be too pro-Remain.
Sunak might have been the default choice a few months back but faces the same problems as you had with BJ ie got a FPN and there have been questions raised over his conduct.
In that case, the ‘safe’ option might be to stick with BJ.
Might be worth having a punt on Dominic Raab if you think Johnson could try this stunt.
Twitter YTD: -9%