Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » So in the end just 21 LAB MPs abstained

2»

Comments

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,238
    surbiton said:

    Moses_ said:

    Bit of a damp squib - I suspect that Osborne urging people to vote with the Government or at least abstain was counter-productive.

    What does PB make of this story?

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/oct/14/zac-goldsmith-urged-to-withdraw-paedophile-ring-allegations

    There was a good deal of indignation here about Watson, in seemingly rather similar contexts. I didn't comment much then and won't now, as I don't know enough about the allegations and supposed evidence, though as I've said before I do think that death should not really be open season for allegations not least because of the impact on surviving relatives.

    If h
    If he is wrong he should withdraw now and apologise without reservation. Other members should avoid the rhetoric that seems to be the norm here normally from your side I should add.

    By the way Nick could you point me to the place where The .Nonce Finder General actually withdraws the comments or even apologises for distress caused.

    Anywhere?


    I think Goldsmith should not withdraw any comment.

    Surely, the first person who raised the Jimmy Saville issue was also attacking an "innocent" dead man until more evidence came in. No one thinks Saville was innocent today !

    The stories about some of these people were rife in the 80s when both Watson and Goldsmith were toddlers.

    There were many rumours about McAlpine as well, and those proved to be false. The poor man had to live with whispered innuendos and nudge-nudge comments for many years. It was only when the BBC were stupid enough to state them publicly that he could sue.

    If McAlpine had died before the BBC broadcast, there can be little doubt that his name would now be sullied.

    Still, it seems that in your mind 'rumours' against people you ideologically hate are automatically true.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,750
    Morning all, my MP is in the interesting position of never being able to be disloyal to the opposition ;)
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,750

    Scott_P said:

    Surely in this age of household economics, Ms Lucas has a point: isn't that how most people get mortgages?

    No

    If you follow her point to its logical conclusion using your analogy, we would all be richer if we all took out bigger mortgages and bought bigger houses.
    Like the Manchester UTD owners
    Actually there can be good tax reasons for borrowing tonnes of money.
  • flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903
    JEO said:

    surbiton said:

    RobD said:

    surbiton said:

    RobD said:

    surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    Speedy said:

    FPT

    From the Times

    Scottish MPs will be blocked from voting on English-only laws under new plans to be brought before the Commons next week.

    The timing of the announcement is intended as a deliberate provocation of the Scottish National party at the start of its annual conference, according to Tory sources.

    Will it pass though, or is it just to make the SNP mad.
    Why wouldn't it pass?
    Does it not need HoL approval as well ?
    Why should it? It is effectively just a change to the standing orders of the Commons.
    It does remove the "vote Labour , get SNP" card from the Tories !
    Labour, with SNP support, could simply reverse the standing order change. ;)
    Then this is another farcical "rule". Tories have a majority now.
    Why is it a farcical rule, because it can be changed by successive Parliaments? Surely that is a key part of how our Parliament functions?
    Should London MPs vote in all English matters when some of the powers are devolved to London ? Should MPs from Devon vote on the HS2 ?
    Which matters are devolved to London that means London MPs can vote on a policy area that doesn't affect their constituents?

    HS2 is an individual project, not a policy area.
    Correct; the suggestion is preposterous. Local government is not the same as a devolved national parliament. It is absurd that a Scottish MP can vote on the English NHS but not on the Scottish NHS.
  • flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903

    RobD said:

    surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    Speedy said:

    FPT

    From the Times

    Scottish MPs will be blocked from voting on English-only laws under new plans to be brought before the Commons next week.

    The timing of the announcement is intended as a deliberate provocation of the Scottish National party at the start of its annual conference, according to Tory sources.

    Will it pass though, or is it just to make the SNP mad.
    Why wouldn't it pass?
    Does it not need HoL approval as well ?
    Why should it? It is effectively just a change to the standing orders of the Commons.
    It does remove the "vote Labour , get SNP" card from the Tories !
    Labour, with SNP support, could simply reverse the standing order change. ;)
    Indeed - 'no parliament can bind its successor' (or so they said during my Constitutional Law tutorials.

    However it is the sort of change that is actually quite hard to undo = as the world moves on and past battles aren't always worth re-fighting.

    Given that Labour won't be in a position to do anything for a long time, I am not too concerned about it!
    If labour and the SNP threaten to remove it then good luck to labour at the election. Plus vote labour get the SNP still works since there are other issues the electorate would run frit from.
Sign In or Register to comment.