As they say the “optics” don’t look good – politicalbetting.com
As they say the “optics” don’t look good – politicalbetting.com
Generally speaking if all the front pages are about one specific political story then it is not good for one side or the other. And so it is this morning.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Why the hell did they make this a 3-line whip?
They could, for example, have instructed Tories to abstain.
Why did Liz fire Suella today of all days? What was the security breach, and how serious is it really?
What on earth was going on between Downing Street and the Whip’s Office? Where, for example, is the Chief of Staff? You know, the one who moonlights as a lobbyist for foreign dictators?
All intensely relaxing… apart from the old couple next to me, calmly discussing nuclear war and “how to avoid radiation”
Anyway, it’s all about Norwegian pipelines on the twitters tonight.
I know it can be a grey area, with many a 'You asked for my resignation and I so I give it' type occasions. I don't have her letter to hand so not sure of the truth here - given there was at least a prompting incident I'm guessing it was a sacking.
A spreadsheet from Guido recorded 158 having publicly backed her. Short a majority, yes, but not by much and with undeclared MPs she might well have had that majority in reality. Boris was one and we know he backed her over Sunak for example.
So MPs were prepared to give her a shot. She took that too much for granted though. It wasnt a Corbyn situation.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vSLuKhnwoPU93oTC4NpHD17MncMTuluq76eOmjhhahiepU6UNWEV1Hy-qsVHCEdfEvwaRNtGIOSc1Ku/pubhtml?gid=1717238762&single=true
Admittedly public support is no guarantee they actually did support her rather than just backing the clear winner - worth remembering though the other leadership candidates mostly backed her over Rishi too.
If the Final had been decided by MPs I think it's inconceivable Truss would have got enough Mordaunt supporters to win.
If Truss resigned today and Brady announced the next contest would be decided by MPs alone I reckon Sunak would instantly go below 1.5 on Betfair.
Nevertheless, such evidence we have is that in a Rishi/Liz contest more MPs stated they were for Liz than Rishi. She was not the first choice of many, but in the final contest she got the nod.
So she cannot use the excuse that the MPs never gave her a chance.
But as more than 40 Con MPs didn't support the Government, if she removes the whip from all of them then the Conservatives no longer have a majority.
The whole episode makes it even more breathtaking that Brady hasn't already acted.
Brady is as incompetent as Truss. He should not allow Truss to singlehandedly destroy the Conservative Party.
British-Russian son of Putin ally arrested for flying drones near gas terminal
Norway has blamed 'foreign intelligence' for mysterious air activity in recent weeks
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/10/19/british-russian-son-putin-ally-arrested-flying-drones-near-gas/ (£££)
Even if it's a ploy as MikeL suggests re a vote of no confidence it would be too damaging.
We need a General Election but there's no real mechanism by which to do so. Unless 40 tory MPs decide to self-immolate.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11334463/Cabinet-ally-Liz-Truss-says-situation-terminal-1922-Committee-meet-TODAY.html
But given the energy crisis that has enveloped us, I think any 2019 manifesto commitments about energy can be broken. Manifestos are for ordinary times, and with respect to energy, these are not ordinary times.
Normally she'd stay on in a caretaker capacity until a new PM was elected.
I can't see that happening unless everyone agrees to play nice for however long it takes -- unlikely.
Truss would have to see the King to resign (still feels odd saying "King" there... not least because I want to clarify I don't mean Elvis!). Who would Charles send for? Would he rely on Truss's advice? Would Coffey be in with a shout of being caretaker PM simply because she's Deputy right now?
Even if there's behind-the-scenes agreement in the Tory party that Sunak (or whoever) steps in as caretaker, what does Charles do if Truss recommends someone else?
There's a strong case here for a written Constitution...!!
Its only role is to frustrate democracy and it doesn't even do that very well.
I think it outlived its usefulness once people stopped believing in the hereditary principle, more than a century ago.
But listening to the political commentators, the biggest problem is that the tories are so riven and ripped apart that they cannot agree to any unifying candidate. Hard as it is to believe, we could be back in a similar situation under a different leader in 2 months time.
We need a General Election but there's no mechanism by which to get one, so far as we know.
p.s. It's easy to blame one faction over another. Boris clearly takes some of the blame for downing the most competent candidate, Rishi, out of sheer spite. But the ERG are fucking nutjobs who have wrecked their party and this country. Sorry but there's no simpler or more accurate way of putting it.
The issue is composition and status.
Whilst I'm sanguine about an appointed chamber if it is improved (no ex MPs or donors, minimum attendance etc) I think Labour will follow through finally. The current set up, with hereditaries still there, was not meant to be the final position, though it is hilarious its lasted this long.
Just nuts.
https://twitter.com/TheStudyofWar/status/1582938879329722369
"Deputy envoy of Russia to UN denies export of Iranian drone to Russia, threatens to review relationship with UN secretary office, if UN send experts to study Russian drones in Ukraine "
https://twitter.com/Liveuamap/status/1582845062957785088
https://twitter.com/theliverdr/status/1582713925669617664
The United States Drug Induced Liver Injury Network (DILIN) just published their series on turmeric related severe liver injury.
A 🧵 on why this paper is useful, in the context of turmeric as a dietary supplement and
why considering food as medicine is a stupid thing to do…
I'd strongly argue that the HoC and governments sometimes gets new legislation wrong, and therefore a revising chamber *is* necessary. So then the question becomes one of composition. I *really* dislike an elected second chamber; IMV many of the problems with the HoL comes from the party-political influences within it.
Stuff the HoL with experts in various areas and let them feed in to the HoC's work. Make it more professional as well.
1. Despite a dozen or two wells having been drilled and fracked, no commercial shale gas deposits have yet been found. That may change, but as of now, it's exploration only.
2. Should commercial quantities of gas be discovered, then exploitation of that resource will be disruptive to the local residents.
My view is that the government should be very open to private firms seeking to discover if there are commercial tight gas formations. If there are, then there will need to be a serious discussion about how to get local buy in.
But there's no point in putting the cart before the horse. Let's find out if there is gas to extract first. (And there the signs are not particularly hopeful)
That's the fact of the matter and MPs from whatever side should know enough Erskine May to realise.
Whoever from No 10 sent the late memo out that it wasn't should probably be sacked.
The minister doing the summing up should also have emphasised this and not needed direction from No 10. Which was wrongly given.
No-one comes out with any particular credit from the whole unedifying mess but the No 10 official (And perhaps their boss
She is way beyond a joke.
It must hurt Leavers, seeing their foolish project finally hitting the buffers of reality. It’s driven the Tories insane, such is the trauma.
https://twitter.com/jonsopel/status/1582851796758048770
Which does raise the question of how reliable it is; important matters could be decided on narrow votes, yet we can’t trust that the count is accurate?
But being absolutely cynical, wouldn't it be more beneficial to Labour to leave the Tories twisting in the wind for as long as possible? Unless the consequence is to wreck the economy beyond recall, which admittedly doesn't look impossible.
Steve "Hunt" Baker has said that Jizzy Lizzy has said she'll give Swella her job back in January. Poor Shapsie!
And today we may have Bravernan’s resignation statement which may reveal the true policy differences behind the resignation.
This all happened on a day when the headline inflation rate hit 10%.
So, whilst it may appear like an excellent sport, to most of us in the country it really isn't just entertainment or a sport.
2 DUP voted (With govt)
All SF obviously abstained
Maj of 96.
It's almost impossible to work out how many pairs there were but if we take the DUP as being unwrapped and everyone else against then the maj should have been
Working maj considering SF 71
2 DUP with govt effectively raises that to 75.
Then 6 DUP abstentions from the notional opposition gets that to 81.
But the majority was 96.
Which suggests some Tory MPs actually broke their pairs, so the true number of peoper rebel abstentions is actually impossible to count
https://twitter.com/giovannigruni/status/1582441784445063168?t=Xglw3PTP_3VBffcvamC8YQ&s=19
https://twitter.com/johnredwood/status/1582958185375469570
Which is why she was resigned…
Katherine Harris, the former Secretary of State of Florida.
Can it only have been a year?
The Daily Telegraph has apologised after breaching the Editors' Code when it published claims made by Restore Trust about non-existent mass sackings at the National Trust. 1/3
The interviewee claimed the NT ‘sacked 1,700 curators at the start of covid’, going on to claim ‘lots’ had spoken to Restore Trust about age and commercialism. The number of curator redundancies in 2020 was in fact 8; 4 of these voluntary. 2/3
The subheading for the article described a campaign ‘against the politicisation’ of the National Trust, despite the interviewee discussing their own links to a main political party in it. I complained about this but the Telegraph will not change the subheading.
https://twitter.com/CeliaRichards0n/status/1582974202235486208/photo/1
I’d say that was a sacking offence? She got her resignation in first.
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2022-10-19/division/6C87FA56-6A8F-459D-8037-61F29A52FE63/BanOnFrackingForShaleGasBill?outputType=Names
The "it's a confidence motion" to not vote against their own manifesto was bad.
Realising they were in trouble and withdrawing the confidence part at the last was really bad.
Cabinet ministers scuffling and physically dragging wayward MPs through the lobby is outrageous.
The Chief Whip and Deputy both resigning and then later unresigning is bonkers. The PM not voting in her own confidence motion as she is publicly snubbed by her own Chief Whip is insane.
Sending text messages at 01:30 to senior hacks reinstating the confidence element as the price for keeping the Chief and Deputy Whip in post is madness.
And I haven't mentioned the "resignation" of the Home Secretary and her replacement by a man who still has the "let's depose the PM" spreadsheet.
Yesterday was the end. The government has ceased to function and it is clear to all that Truss has to go. Impossible but now necessary. The problem is that the Shapps appointment instead of Braverman ignited the smouldering civil war so that anointing anyone else is likely now impossible.
Which makes for the most impossible thing - total collapse to a General Election - now a very real scenario. What a shit show.
Then she would find herself in an infinitely worse position than Truss as PM.
The key problem is that - after getting Brexit done - the tories don't have a clear idea what they are in power to do. Is it to provide strong and stable leadership? Or to destroy the woke?
Edit - the only other examples I can think of with large majorities are the Liberals in 1866 who imploded over the Second Reform Act, the Conservatives in 1846 who split over the Corn Laws, and the Whigs in 1834 over Melbourne replacing Grey as PM.
There is an immense moral and ethical cowardice in academia and in think tanks. The level of pontification on nuclear war without asking the question what happens next is astounding. What happens when Ukraine is forced into a peace deal that cedes its territories? Some thoughts..
https://twitter.com/AfterWestphalia/status/1582730511910580226
The MPs who supported Truss, Braverman and Badenoch in the leadership election are not all going to sit idly by and watch Sunak (or whoever) implement policies that they oppose.
It seems like the issue was that the government needed to win it to keep control of the legislative process, so it is understandable therefore why it was turned in to a confidence issue.
But a spectacularly brilliant political manoeuvre by Labour in any case.
Why do Tories hate Britain?
https://twitter.com/DavidHenigUK/status/1582981678280380416
The Tories have no-one who can take her to one side and say "Suella...no. Just...no! Look at Liz Truss - and learn." The lack of respected grandees who are listened to is a major (pun intended) problem for management of the party.
Although Labour may not have wanted Truss brought down so immediately, so perhaps they have overshot?
He did however have a much better excuse than any of the others. This is an entirely unforced error, a bit like Tariff Reform or the Second Reform Act.
I fear it could go on like yesterday for days, weeks and months to come.
I think it is a good time to log out of this website for a while and focus on work.