@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
It was poorly done. It doesn't mean every bad move by others following that is ok by virtue of the whole shitshow being started by others. Bercow has made it worse when he could have made the same point much better, and Dudderidge is now also making it worse.
The Speaker should surely have the confidence of the whole house. If he wins the no confidence vote but with a clearly-divided house then he should follow Thatcher's footsteps and resign..
Screw the government. If there is a motion of NC, then even winning by one vote will be legitimate.
No it won't not when the Speaker is supposed to be a non-partisan position supported [and opposed] equally by both sides.
Would you find it equally legitimate if Bercow retires next year as scheduled and is replaced by a very partisan Tory - say David Davis perhaps - who proceeds to be a pro-government partisan through his entire period but commands the support of a majority plus one of Parliament entirely drawn from the government benches?
Partisan speakers would inevitably go down the route of being pro-government speakers as it is the government that commands the majority of the Commons. Are you serious that you find that acceptable?
The partisanship is being brought by the government
Dave Rubin has interviewed Flemming Rose (the guy who 10 years published the Mohammad cartoons in Denmark). First two parts are up, with the discussion ranging from the back story those cartoons through to his thoughts on forthcoming elections in Europe.
ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXUXvtoBhUo
ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfeH1Xl2iqM
That was a very good interview. Can't believe it was 12 years ago that the Danish cartoons were published.
That seems worst of both worlds - he's still there but the Tories cannot pretend they are not his enemy now and he will subtly act accordingly.
I think that ship sailed last year with the previous attempt to remove him!
That wasn't an open declaration of war though was it? Yes it was a move, but not open motion of no confidence. They could all, after a time, settle down and pretend it wasn't what it was. This cannot be other than it appears.
Dr. Prasannan, and I'm not German. If I were speaking it, I'd pronounce Porsche the way they do, and when I speak English (which is rather more common) I pronounce it the way it should be pronounced in English.
Clive Lewis has published his resignation letter, complete with the authentic spelling mistakes you'd expect from someone tipped as a future Labour leader:
Didn't the BBC sack him for being a crap journalist?
Nooooo...its was because the BBC are a load of racists*.
* According to Clive.
Not sure the BBC did sack him, did they?
Sorry you are right. They didn't promote him because he was crap, and he said it was because he was black
Maybe Regional BBC News try to reflect their audience. My regional news is BBC London and they seem to do that pretty well, intentionally or not.
EastEnders, on the other hand, is the most racist programme on tv in terms of accurately reflecting the local population
Definite BAME under-representation there.
Yes I find that quite incredible. The lack of offence taken by the people who wanted (the far more accurate) Midsomer Murders producer hung, drawn and quartered is bewildering.
No BAME in our village of 1000 people in the Home Counties.
We once had a black person but he did have a hyphenated name.
Hypenated names now usually just mean born out of wedlock. It long since ceased to be a posh thing.
"Farms and food producers are having to compete harder for a shrinking pool of workers. One poultry farmer said he had raised wages by 15 per cent. Pete Taylor, operations director at recruitment firm Encore Personnel, which supplies labour to the food industry, is laying on minibuses to bring in staff to pick and process food in Spalding, Lincolnshire, from the wider surrounding area.
“Over Christmas, one company said that out of 500 workers on one particular shift, they were about 200 short,” he said. “It’s the aftermath panic of Brexit, and people are running for the hills. They’re certainly not running for the Fens, which is where we need them.” "
However, on the subject of not-at-all-xenophobic Britain:
"Nick Houghton, managing director of a food manufacturing company in Nottingham, relies on EU staff to fill 75 per cent of his workforce and complains that the atmosphere has become increasingly hostile.
“Staff have said to me they don’t talk on the phone on the bus any more because they don’t want people to hear them speaking Polish. That’s despicable in my view,” he said.
Mr Houghton scoffs when asked why he can’t find local workers to fill the gaps. “There isn’t a pool of unemployed workers sitting there waiting for the EU workers to go back, ready and able to take up these jobs,” he said."
Since when did an imagined/feared peril become something everyone should be ashamed about? Polish people being abused on buses due to their ethnicity would be despicable. Polish people fearing they might be abused can be nothing more than regrettable.
Mr. PAW, an interesting angle I hadn't considered. However, I would take the view that precedent has been for the final letter not to be pronounced in Porsche (in English). So, I'd pronounce the E for the man himself, or his relatives, but not for the car.
Mr. kle4, it won't even be subtle.
Mr. Meeks, as outrageous and inept as a Speaker wading into Foreign affairs, and denouncing something without consulting the Lord Great Chamberlain and the Lords Speaker, who also have a say in the decision?
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
He is visiting the UK - so long as he can get through the border i.e. Amber Rudd is OK with it then there is no problem. I'm pretty sure no details of the specific venues was released or discussed. If you know otherwise please share.
The Speaker should surely have the confidence of the whole house. If he wins the no confidence vote but with a clearly-divided house then he should follow Thatcher's footsteps and resign..
Screw the government. If there is a motion of NC, then even winning by one vote will be legitimate.
No it won't not when the Speaker is supposed to be a non-partisan position supported [and opposed] equally by both sides.
Would you find it equally legitimate if Bercow retires next year as scheduled and is replaced by a very partisan Tory - say David Davis perhaps - who proceeds to be a pro-government partisan through his entire period but commands the support of a majority plus one of Parliament entirely drawn from the government benches?
Partisan speakers would inevitably go down the route of being pro-government speakers as it is the government that commands the majority of the Commons. Are you serious that you find that acceptable?
The partisanship is being brought by the government - so leave that shit out! Bercow criticised Trump and correctly. He is a hero.
There are middle grounds. Criticising Trump is not what upsets many - it was the manner of criticism. Which he knows he did the wrong way, since he apologised to the Lord Speaker. Several examples have been given how he could have been critical of Trump while reflecting the will of the house, more or less, without being unreasonable.
Even some of our most right wing comrades on here have said they wouldn't have voted Trump. Criticising him is not automatically heroic, nor is not seeing it as inherently heroic in all circumstances the act of a Trump supporter.
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
Thank god they got Bercow's permission before they invited the Chinese premier!
I'll just leave this for the pronunciation debate: "Nike".
My grandfather pronounced "Peugeot" as "Pyew-jot", which I thought very odd, but my other half does exactly the same thing.
But on such questions, my grandmother could not be defeated. At Sunday tea, she once asked the table: "would you like an Ecc-les cake?" There was a pause. Then she said: "I know some people call them Eccles cakes. But I say Ecc-les cakes." There's no arguing with that.
Clive Lewis has published his resignation letter, complete with the authentic spelling mistakes you'd expect from someone tipped as a future Labour leader:
Didn't the BBC sack him for being a crap journalist?
Nooooo...its was because the BBC are a load of racists*.
* According to Clive.
Not sure the BBC did sack him, did they?
Sorry you are right. They didn't promote him because he was crap, and he said it was because he was black
Maybe Regional BBC News try to reflect their audience. My regional news is BBC London and they seem to do that pretty well, intentionally or not.
EastEnders, on the other hand, is the most racist programme on tv in terms of accurately reflecting the local population
Definite BAME under-representation there.
Yes I find that quite incredible. The lack of offence taken by the people who wanted (the far more accurate) Midsomer Murders producer hung, drawn and quartered is bewildering.
No BAME in our village of 1000 people in the Home Counties.
We once had a black person but he did have a hyphenated name.
Hypenated names now usually just mean born out of wedlock. It long since ceased to be a posh thing.
Clive Lewis has published his resignation letter, complete with the authentic spelling mistakes you'd expect from someone tipped as a future Labour leader:
Didn't the BBC sack him for being a crap journalist?
Nooooo...its was because the BBC are a load of racists*.
* According to Clive.
Not sure the BBC did sack him, did they?
Sorry you are right. They didn't promote him because he was crap, and he said it was because he was black
Maybe Regional BBC News try to reflect their audience. My regional news is BBC London and they seem to do that pretty well, intentionally or not.
EastEnders, on the other hand, is the most racist programme on tv in terms of accurately reflecting the local population
Definite BAME under-representation there.
Yes I find that quite incredible. The lack of offence taken by the people who wanted (the far more accurate) Midsomer Murders producer hung, drawn and quartered is bewildering.
No BAME in our village of 1000 people in the Home Counties.
We once had a black person but he did have a hyphenated name.
Hypenated names now usually just mean born out of wedlock. It long since ceased to be a posh thing.
Clive Lewis has published his resignation letter, complete with the authentic spelling mistakes you'd expect from someone tipped as a future Labour leader:
Didn't the BBC sack him for being a crap journalist?
Nooooo...its was because the BBC are a load of racists*.
* According to Clive.
Not sure the BBC did sack him, did they?
Sorry you are right. They didn't promote him because he was crap, and he said it was because he was black
Maybe Regional BBC News try to reflect their audience. My regional news is BBC London and they seem to do that pretty well, intentionally or not.
EastEnders, on the other hand, is the most racist programme on tv in terms of accurately reflecting the local population
Definite BAME under-representation there.
Yes I find that quite incredible. The lack of offence taken by the people who wanted (the far more accurate) Midsomer Murders producer hung, drawn and quartered is bewildering.
No BAME in our village of 1000 people in the Home Counties.
We once had a black person but he did have a hyphenated name.
Hypenated names now usually just mean born out of wedlock. It long since ceased to be a posh thing.
The Speaker should surely have the confidence of the whole house. If he wins the no confidence vote but with a clearly-divided house then he should follow Thatcher's footsteps and resign..
Screw the government. If there is a motion of NC, then even winning by one vote will be legitimate.
No it won't not when the Speaker is supposed to be a non-partisan position supported [and opposed] equally by both sides.
Would you find it equally legitimate if Bercow retires next year as scheduled and is replaced by a very partisan Tory - say David Davis perhaps - who proceeds to be a pro-government partisan through his entire period but commands the support of a majority plus one of Parliament entirely drawn from the government benches?
Partisan speakers would inevitably go down the route of being pro-government speakers as it is the government that commands the majority of the Commons. Are you serious that you find that acceptable?
The partisanship is being brought by the government - so leave that shit out! Bercow criticised Trump and correctly. He is a hero.
There are middle grounds. Criticising Trump is not what upsets many - it was the manner of criticism. Which he knows he did the wrong way, since he apologised to the Lord Speaker. Several examples have been given how he could have been critical of Trump while reflecting the will of the house, more or less, without being unreasonable.
Even some of our most right wing comrades on here have said they wouldn't have voted Trump. Criticising him is not automatically heroic, nor is not seeing it as inherently heroic in all circumstances the act of a Trump supporter.
Fascists have to stopped - by any means available.
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
Clive Lewis has published his resignation letter, complete with the authentic spelling mistakes you'd expect from someone tipped as a future Labour leader:
Didn't the BBC sack him for being a crap journalist?
Nooooo...its was because the BBC are a load of racists*.
* According to Clive.
Not sure the BBC did sack him, did they?
Sorry you are right. They didn't promote him because he was crap, and he said it was because he was black
Maybe Regional BBC News try to reflect their audience. My regional news is BBC London and they seem to do that pretty well, intentionally or not.
EastEnders, on the other hand, is the most racist programme on tv in terms of accurately reflecting the local population
Definite BAME under-representation there.
Yes I find that quite incredible. The lack of offence taken by the people who wanted (the far more accurate) Midsomer Murders producer hung, drawn and quartered is bewildering.
No BAME in our village of 1000 people in the Home Counties.
We once had a black person but he did have a hyphenated name.
Hypenated names now usually just mean born out of wedlock. It long since ceased to be a posh thing.
I always put Tara Palmer-Tomkinson and AA Gill in the same sort of bracket, so it's a bit sad they've both died within a few weeks of each other. Obviously there's the Sunday Times connection.
The Speaker should surely have the confidence of the whole house. If he wins the no confidence vote but with a clearly-divided house then he should follow Thatcher's footsteps and resign..
Screw the government. If there is a motion of NC, then even winning by one vote will be legitimate.
No it won't not when the Speaker is supposed to be a non-partisan position supported [and opposed] equally by both sides.
Would you find it equally legitimate if Bercow retires next year as scheduled and is replaced by a very partisan Tory - say David Davis perhaps - who proceeds to be a pro-government partisan through his entire period but commands the support of a majority plus one of Parliament entirely drawn from the government benches?
Partisan speakers would inevitably go down the route of being pro-government speakers as it is the government that commands the majority of the Commons. Are you serious that you find that acceptable?
The partisanship is being brought by the government - so leave that shit out! Bercow criticised Trump and correctly. He is a hero.
There are middle grounds. Criticising Trump is not what upsets many - it was the manner of criticism. Which he knows he did the wrong way, since he apologised to the Lord Speaker. Several examples have been given how he could have been critical of Trump while reflecting the will of the house, more or less, without being unreasonable.
Even some of our most right wing comrades on here have said they wouldn't have voted Trump. Criticising him is not automatically heroic, nor is not seeing it as inherently heroic in all circumstances the act of a Trump supporter.
Fascists have to stopped - by any means available.
The Speaker should surely have the confidence of the whole house. If he wins the no confidence vote but with a clearly-divided house then he should follow Thatcher's footsteps and resign..
Screw the government. If there is a motion of NC, then even winning by one vote will be legitimate.
No it won't not when the Speaker is supposed to be a non-partisan position supported [and opposed] equally by both sides.
Would you find it equally legitimate if Bercow retires next year as scheduled and is replaced by a very partisan Tory - say David Davis perhaps - who proceeds to be a pro-government partisan through his entire period but commands the support of a majority plus one of Parliament entirely drawn from the government benches?
Partisan speakers would inevitably go down the route of being pro-government speakers as it is the government that commands the majority of the Commons. Are you serious that you find that acceptable?
The partisanship is being brought by the government - so leave that shit out! Bercow criticised Trump and correctly. He is a hero.
There are middle grounds. Criticising Trump is not what upsets many - it was the manner of criticism. Which he knows he did the wrong way, since he apologised to the Lord Speaker. Several examples have been given how he could have been critical of Trump while reflecting the will of the house, more or less, without being unreasonable.
Even some of our most right wing comrades on here have said they wouldn't have voted Trump. Criticising him is not automatically heroic, nor is not seeing it as inherently heroic in all circumstances the act of a Trump supporter.
Fascists have to stopped - by any means available.
Clive Lewis has published his resignation letter, complete with the authentic spelling mistakes you'd expect from someone tipped as a future Labour leader:
Didn't the BBC sack him for being a crap journalist?
Nooooo...its was because the BBC are a load of racists*.
* According to Clive.
Not sure the BBC did sack him, did they?
Sorry you are right. They didn't promote him because he was crap, and he said it was because he was black
Maybe Regional BBC News try to reflect their audience. My regional news is BBC London and they seem to do that pretty well, intentionally or not.
EastEnders, on the other hand, is the most racist programme on tv in terms of accurately reflecting the local population
Definite BAME under-representation there.
Yes I find that quite incredible. The lack of offence taken by the people who wanted (the far more accurate) Midsomer Murders producer hung, drawn and quartered is bewildering.
No BAME in our village of 1000 people in the Home Counties.
We once had a black person but he did have a hyphenated name.
Hypenated names now usually just mean born out of wedlock. It long since ceased to be a posh thing.
Clive Lewis has published his resignation letter, complete with the authentic spelling mistakes you'd expect from someone tipped as a future Labour leader:
Didn't the BBC sack him for being a crap journalist?
Nooooo...its was because the BBC are a load of racists*.
* According to Clive.
Not sure the BBC did sack him, did they?
Sorry you are right. They didn't promote him because he was crap, and he said it was because he was black
Maybe Regional BBC News try to reflect their audience. My regional news is BBC London and they seem to do that pretty well, intentionally or not.
EastEnders, on the other hand, is the most racist programme on tv in terms of accurately reflecting the local population
Definite BAME under-representation there.
Yes I find that quite incredible. The lack of offence taken by the people who wanted (the far more accurate) Midsomer Murders producer hung, drawn and quartered is bewildering.
No BAME in our village of 1000 people in the Home Counties.
We once had a black person but he did have a hyphenated name.
Hypenated names now usually just mean born out of wedlock. It long since ceased to be a posh thing.
Tara Palmer-Tomkinson RIP
Camilla Parker-Bowles
No hyphen, which is no doubt really posh.
She's dispensed with a surname completely now, which is poshest of all.
The Speaker should surely have the confidence of the whole house. If he wins the no confidence vote but with a clearly-divided house then he should follow Thatcher's footsteps and resign..
Screw the government. If there is a motion of NC, then even winning by one vote will be legitimate.
No it won't not when the Speaker is supposed to be a non-partisan position supported [and opposed] equally by both sides.
Would yoable?
The partisanship is being brought by the government - so leave that shit out! Bercow criticised Trump and correctly. He is a hero.
There are middle grounds. Criticising Trump is not what upsets many - it was the manner of criticism. Which he knows he did the wrong way, since he apologised to the Lord Speaker. Several examples have been given how he could have been critical of Trump while reflecting the will of the house, more or less, without being unreasonable.
Even some of our most right wing comrades on here have said they wouldn't have voted Trump. Criticising him is not automatically heroic, nor is not seeing it as inherently heroic in all circumstances the act of a Trump supporter.
Fascists have to stopped - by any means available.
Even accepting that premise, for the moment, no request had been made and if he wanted to stop an address should such a request be made, several far less partisan examples of what he could have said which would have stopped it, have been provided.
Bercow simply stating he recognised the concerns many members had with the idea of a visit, and that he was one of the three who needed to consent to such a thing and would express the concerns of the house to the others would, surely, have resulted in no such request being made, or refused if it was, without provoking a reaction (and notably not only Tory headbangers have been irritated), or at least not such a large one.
I don't support his ousting, and I never wanted Trump invited to a state visit, but he has behaved poorly in my view.
Incidentally, opting for an unnecessarily damaging extreme tactic when a subtler precision tactic would have done just as well, seems very Trump like.
Or to put another way, maybe things need stopping by any means available - why does that mean when there are several means, we should choose the most destructive and destabilising?
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
They must cover NHS issues but day after day they only have the one story and it is almost always the catastrophe that is the English NHS, rather than the Welsh and Scots NHS which are worse
You should probably get in touch with your pro brexit, anti independence, life-long SNP member in-law for some on the the ground info.
'It comes as official NHS figures for December show that 86.2% of A&E patients in England were dealt with in under four hours. December A&E figures for Scotland are much higher at 92.6% while Wales and Northern Ireland's figures are lower than England's.'
The Speaker should surely have the confidence of the whole house. If he wins the no confidence vote but with a clearly-divided house then he should follow Thatcher's footsteps and resign..
Screw the government. If there is a motion of NC, then even winning by one vote will be legitimate.
No it won't not when the Speaker is supposed to be a non-partisan position supported [and opposed] equally by both sides.
Would you find it equally legitimate if Bercow retires next year as scheduled and is replaced by a very partisan Tory - say David Davis perhaps - who proceeds to be a pro-government partisan through his entire period but commands the support of a majority plus one of Parliament entirely drawn from the government benches?
Partisan speakers would inevitably go down the route of being pro-government speakers as it is the government that commands the majority of the Commons. Are you serious that you find that acceptable?
The partisanship is being brought by the government - so leave that shit out! Bercow criticised Trump and correctly. He is a hero.
There are middle grounds. Criticising Trump is not what upsets many - it was the manner of criticism. Which he knows he did the wrong way, since he apologised to the Lord Speaker. Several examples have been given how he could have been critical of Trump while reflecting the will of the house, more or less, without being unreasonable.
Even some of our most right wing comrades on here have said they wouldn't have voted Trump. Criticising him is not automatically heroic, nor is not seeing it as inherently heroic in all circumstances the act of a Trump supporter.
I think this is a red herring. The question is not whether the criticism of Trump was correct or reasonable (for which a case can undoubtedly be made) but whether it was correct or appropriate for the Speaker to make a unilateral declaration in respect of these matters which has the effect of undermining the foreign policy of the government of the day and in respect of which he failed to consult the other interested parties.
Put shortly, it wasn't. It was an abuse of his position and however much one agrees with the views expressed that position does not change. He has undermined himself. I suspect he will survive but he is damaged by this and, far more important, so is the Office that he holds.
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
It's got nothing to do with euroscepticism and you know that's the case, you're just being intentionally provocative. It solely comes down to how much you value the speaker's impartiality.
The Speaker should surely have the confidence of the whole house. If he wins the no confidence vote but with a clearly-divided house then he should follow Thatcher's footsteps and resign..
Screw the government. If there is a motion of NC, then even winning by one vote will be legitimate.
No it won't not when the Speaker is supposed to be a non-partisan position supported [and opposed] equally by both sides.
Would yoable?
The partisanship is being brought by the government - so leave that shit out! Bercow criticised Trump and correctly. He is a hero.
There are middle grounds. Criticising Trump is not what upsets many - it was the manner of criticism. Which he knows he did the wrong way, since he apologised to the Lord Speaker. Several examples have been given how he could have been critical of Trump while reflecting the will of the house, more or less, without being unreasonable.
Even some of our most right wing comrades on here have said they wouldn't have voted Trump. Criticising him is not automatically heroic, nor is not seeing it as inherently heroic in all circumstances the act of a Trump supporter.
Fascists have to stopped - by any means available.
Even accepting that premise, for the moment, no request had been made and if he wanted to stop an address should such a request be made, several far less partisan examples of what he could have said which would have stopped it, have been provided.
Bercow simply stating he recognised the concerns many members had with the idea of a visit, and that he was one of the three who needed to consent to such a thing and would express the concerns of the house to the others would, surely, have resulted in no such request being made, or refused if it was, without provoking a reaction (and notably not only Tory headbangers have been irritated), or at least not such a large one.
I don't support his ousting, and I never wanted Trump invited to a state visit, but he has behaved poorly in my view.
Incidentally, opting for an unnecessarily damaging extreme tactic when a subtler precision tactic would have done just as well, seems very Trump like.
Or to put another way, maybe things need stopping by any means available - why does that mean when there are several means, we should choose the most destructive and destabilising?
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
It's got nothing to do with euroscepticism and you know that's the case, you're just being intentionally provocative. It solely comes down to how much you value the speaker's impartiality.
The Speaker is not supposed to be impartial. He's supposed to speak for the House of Commons. That is what he did. You just don't like what he said.
Sky and BBC on an all day marathon of disaster that is the NHS. Journalist feading doctors with inviting and helpful suggestions and every statistic indicating the end of the NHS.
There are serious problems in the NHS and in particular with the lack of joined up thinking with Social care but I fail to see how it is helped by journalists and cameras being use to distract staff working and generally getting in their way.
Interesting that the NHS does not feature in the 10 most popular stories on the BBC web page.
The MSM are running the risk of making the NHS a 'switch off' story and doing the opposite of what they are trying to achieve. They must cover NHS issues but day after day they only have the one story and it is almost always the catastrophe that is the English NHS, rather than the Welsh and Scots NHS which are worse
As Leader of the Opposition, before the '15 Election, Ed Miliband gave a presentation to the BBC on how he would "weaponise" the problems of the NHS as a political tool. The Beeb is taking his advice.
In what way is the Welsh NHS worse? We have to put up with politicians distracting staff whenever they feel there's a good news story all the time.
The Speaker should surely have the confidence of the whole house. If he wins the no confidence vote but with a clearly-divided house then he should follow Thatcher's footsteps and resign..
Screw the government. If there is a motion of NC, then even winning by one vote will be legitimate.
No it won't not when the Speaker is supposed to be a non-partisan position supported [and opposed] equally by both sides.
Would you find it equally legitimate if Bercow retires next year as scheduled and is replaced by a very partisan Tory - say David Davis perhaps - who proceeds to be a pro-government partisan through his entire period but commands the support of a majority plus one of Parliament entirely drawn from the government benches?
Partisan speakers would inevitably go down the route of being pro-government speakers as it is the government that commands the majority of the Commons. Are you serious that you find that acceptable?
The partisanship is being brought by the government - so leave that shit out! Bercow criticised Trump and correctly. He is a hero.
There are middle grounds. Criticising Trump is not what upsets many - it was the manner of criticism. Which he knows he did the wrong way, since he apologised to the Lord Speaker. Several examples have been given how he could have been critical of Trump while reflecting the will of the house, more or less, without being unreasonable.
Even some of our most right wing comrades on here have said they wouldn't have voted Trump. Criticising him is not automatically heroic, nor is not seeing it as inherently heroic in all circumstances the act of a Trump supporter.
Fascists have to stopped - by any means available.
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
It's got nothing to do with euroscepticism and you know that's the case, you're just being intentionally provocative. It solely comes down to how much you value the speaker's impartiality.
The Speaker is not supposed to be impartial. He's supposed to speak for the House of Commons. That is what he did. You just don't like what he said.
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
It's got nothing to do with euroscepticism and you know that's the case, you're just being intentionally provocative. It solely comes down to how much you value the speaker's impartiality.
The Speaker is not supposed to be impartial. He's supposed to speak for the House of Commons. That is what he did. You just don't like what he said.
I always put Tara Palmer-Tomkinson and AA Gill in the same sort of bracket, so it's a bit sad they've both died within a few weeks of each other. Obviously there's the Sunday Times connection.
Really? One was a brilliant, witty writer, one of the very best. The other had a ghost column written by someone else.
I find the fascination with clothes horses such as TPT really strange.
The Scots NHS is performing better than England in the key measurements. Current A@E performance England 82 per cent , current Scottish performance 93 per cent. Most fundamental is sustainability. English Trusts are mired in debt, Scottish Boards have comparatively minor issues.
Clive Lewis has published his resignation letter, complete with the authentic spelling mistakes you'd expect from someone tipped as a future Labour leader:
Didn't the BBC sack him for being a crap journalist?
Nooooo...its was because the BBC are a load of racists*.
* According to Clive.
Not sure the BBC did sack him, did they?
Sorry you are right. They didn't promote him because he was crap, and he said it was because he was black
Maybe Regional BBC News try to reflect their audience. My regional news is BBC London and they seem to do that pretty well, intentionally or not.
EastEnders, on the other hand, is the most racist programme on tv in terms of accurately reflecting the local population
Definite BAME under-representation there.
Yes I find that quite incredible. The lack of offence taken by the people who wanted (the far more accurate) Midsomer Murders producer hung, drawn and quartered is bewildering.
No BAME in our village of 1000 people in the Home Counties.
We once had a black person but he did have a hyphenated name.
Hypenated names now usually just mean born out of wedlock. It long since ceased to be a posh thing.
Tara Palmer-Tomkinson RIP
Camilla Parker-Bowles
No hyphen, which is no doubt really posh.
She's dispensed with a surname completely now, which is poshest of all.
Hello duchess is surely what they say to all the old ladies in the markets of the East End?
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
Clive Lewis has published his resignation letter, complete with the authentic spelling mistakes you'd expect from someone tipped as a future Labour leader:
Didn't the BBC sack him for being a crap journalist?
Nooooo...its was because the BBC are a load of racists*.
* According to Clive.
Not sure the BBC did sack him, did they?
Sorry you are right. They didn't promote him because he was crap, and he said it was because he was black
Maybe Regional BBC News try to reflect their audience. My regional news is BBC London and they seem to do that pretty well, intentionally or not.
EastEnders, on the other hand, is the most racist programme on tv in terms of accurately reflecting the local population
Definite BAME under-representation there.
Yes I find that quite incredible. The lack of offence taken by the people who wanted (the far more accurate) Midsomer Murders producer hung, drawn and quartered is bewildering.
No BAME in our village of 1000 people in the Home Counties.
We once had a black person but he did have a hyphenated name.
Hypenated names now usually just mean born out of wedlock. It long since ceased to be a posh thing.
Tara Palmer-Tomkinson RIP
Camilla Parker-Bowles
No hyphen, which is no doubt really posh.
She's dispensed with a surname completely now, which is poshest of all.
No she hasn't, she's swapped it for Mountbatten-Windsor
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
Even if the intent of his statement reflects the will of the house, broadly speaking, the manner could still have been incorrect. And by his own admission at least part of it was, since he apologised to the Lord Speaker. Calling for ousting may well be an overreaction to that (though we all know it is a longstanding dislike behind the swell against him), and in fact more damaging than whatever damage he has done to his position in the eyes of some.
As DavidL, no headbanger, suggests, regardless of his Trump criticism reflecting the will of the house or being reasonable, he made a unilateral declaration which undermined the government and failed to consult the other interested parties before doing so. You say you would not have taken the same decision as Bercow - surely then you can accept people are permitted to criticise the process and manner of his decision, even if the view that Trump is awful and should not be able to address parliament was the wish of the commons?
Clive Lewis has published his resignation letter, complete with the authentic spelling mistakes you'd expect from someone tipped as a future Labour leader:
Didn't the BBC sack him for being a crap journalist?
Nooooo...its was because the BBC are a load of racists*.
* According to Clive.
Not sure the BBC did sack him, did they?
Sorry you are right. They didn't promote him because he was crap, and he said it was because he was black
Maybe Regional BBC News try to reflect their audience. My regional news is BBC London and they seem to do that pretty well, intentionally or not.
EastEnders, on the other hand, is the most racist programme on tv in terms of accurately reflecting the local population
Definite BAME under-representation there.
Yes I find that quite incredible. The lack of offence taken by the people who wanted (the far more accurate) Midsomer Murders producer hung, drawn and quartered is bewildering.
No BAME in our village of 1000 people in the Home Counties.
We once had a black person but he did have a hyphenated name.
Hypenated names now usually just mean born out of wedlock. It long since ceased to be a posh thing.
Tara Palmer-Tomkinson RIP
Camilla Parker-Bowles
No hyphen, which is no doubt really posh.
She's dispensed with a surname completely now, which is poshest of all.
No she hasn't, she's swapped it for Mountbatten-Windsor
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
The Speaker should surely have the confidence of the whole house. If he wins the no confidence vote but with a clearly-divided house then he should follow Thatcher's footsteps and resign..
Screw the government. If there is a motion of NC, then even winning by one vote will be legitimate.
No it won't not when the Speaker is supposed to be a non-partisan position supported [and opposed] equally by both sides.
Would you find it equally legitimate if Bercow retires next year as scheduled and is replaced by a very partisan Tory - say David Davis perhaps - who proceeds to be a pro-government partisan through his entire period but commands the support of a majority plus one of Parliament entirely drawn from the government benches?
Partisan speakers would inevitably go down the route of being pro-government speakers as it is the government that commands the majority of the Commons. Are you serious that you find that acceptable?
The partisanship is being brought by the government - so leave that shit out! Bercow criticised Trump and correctly. He is a hero.
There are middle grounds. Criticising Trump is not what upsets many - it was the manner of criticism. Which he knows he did the wrong way, since he apologised to the Lord Speaker. Several examples have been given how he could have been critical of Trump while reflecting the will of the house, more or less, without being unreasonable.
Even some of our
I think this is a red herring. The question is not whether the criticism of Trump was correct or reasonable (for which a case can undoubtedly be made) but whether it was correct or appropriate for the Speaker to make a unilateral declaration in respect of these matters which has the effect of undermining the foreign policy of the government of the day and in respect of which he failed to consult the other interested parties.
Put shortly, it wasn't. It was an abuse of his position and however much one agrees with the views expressed that position does not change. He has undermined himself. I suspect he will survive but he is damaged by this and, far more important, so is the Office that he holds.
I would like to see Trump barracked by parliament, like a particularly bad tempered PMQs, but surely either the PM had no intention of Trump addressing parliament, in which case no problem, or she exceeded her authority by suggesting it before discussing with the speaker.
The Scots NHS is performing better than England in the key measurements. Current A@E performance England 82 per cent , current Scottish performance 93 per cent. Most fundamental is sustainability. English Trusts are mired in debt, Scottish Boards have comparatively minor issues.
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
It's got nothing to do with euroscepticism and you know that's the case, you're just being intentionally provocative. It solely comes down to how much you value the speaker's impartiality.
The Speaker is not supposed to be impartial. He's supposed to speak for the House of Commons. That is what he did. You just don't like what he said.
But you are pretending that everyone criticising Bercow didn't like what he said, when in fact many don't like the way he said it. He could speak for the commons without sparking this storm.
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
Majority support is not enough for someone meant to represent the whole house - especially when the support is so partisan.
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
Even if the intent of his statement reflects the will of the house, broadly speaking, the manner could still have been incorrect. And by his own admission at least part of it was, since he apologised to the Lord Speaker. Calling for ousting may well be an overreaction to that (though we all know it is a longstanding dislike behind the swell against him), and in fact more damaging than whatever damage he has done to his position in the eyes of some.
As DavidL, no headbanger, suggests, regardless of his Trump criticism reflecting the will of the house or being reasonable, he made a unilateral declaration which undermined the government and failed to consult the other interested parties before doing so. You say you would not have taken the same decision as Bercow - surely then you can accept people are permitted to criticise the process and manner of his decision, even if the view that Trump is awful and should not be able to address parliament was the wish of the commons?
But that's not what's happening. The complaint is largely about the substance (coupled with an intense dislike of John Bercow himself).
The Scots NHS is performing better than England in the key measurements. Current A@E performance England 82 per cent , current Scottish performance 93 per cent. Most fundamental is sustainability. English Trusts are mired in debt, Scottish Boards have comparatively minor issues.
Isn't it because social care is taxpayer funded north of the border? I recall the entitlement differs anyway.
The Scots NHS is performing better than England in the key measurements. Current A@E performance England 82 per cent , current Scottish performance 93 per cent. Most fundamental is sustainability. English Trusts are mired in debt, Scottish Boards have comparatively minor issues.
The Speaker should surely have the confidence of the whole house. If he wins the no confidence vote but with a clearly-divided house then he should follow Thatcher's footsteps and resign..
Screw the government. If there is a motion of NC, then even winning by one vote will be legitimate.
No it won't not when the Speaker is supposed to be a non-partisan position supported [and opposed] equally by both sides.
Would yoable?
The partisanship is being brought by the government - so leave that shit out! Bercow criticised Trump and correctly. He is a hero.
There are middle grounds. Criticising Trump is not what upsets many - it was the manner of criticism. Which he knows he did the wrong way, since he apologised to the Lord Speaker. Several examples have been given how he could have been critical of Trump while reflecting the will of the house, more or less, without being unreasonable.
Even some of our most right wing comrades on here have said they wouldn't have voted Trump. Criticising him is not automatically heroic, nor is not seeing it as inherently heroic in all circumstances the act of a Trump supporter.
Fascists have to stopped - by any means available.
Even accepting that premise, for the moment, no request had been made and if he wanted to stop an address sh Trump like.
Or to put another way, maybe things need stopping by any means available - why does that mean when there are several means, we should choose the most destructive and destabilising?
Can't make an omelette without breaking eggs?
Sure, but you can crack one open carefully so you get all the inside into the pan without any shell, or you can throw the whole box into the pan in a great big mess. You'll get your omelette either way, but one will be more palatable when you serve it up to others.
The Scots NHS is performing better than England in the key measurements. Current A@E performance England 82 per cent , current Scottish performance 93 per cent. Most fundamental is sustainability. English Trusts are mired in debt, Scottish Boards have comparatively minor issues.
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
Majority support is not enough for someone meant to represent the whole house - especially when the support is so partisan.
There are two positions, both partisan. It would be perverse to choose the position of the minority.
The partisanship is being brought by the government - so leave that shit out! Bercow criticised Trump and correctly. He is a hero.
There are middle grounds. Criticising Trump is not what upsets many - it was the manner of criticism. Which he knows he did the wrong way, since he apologised to the Lord Speaker. Several examples have been given how he could have been critical of Trump while reflecting the will of the house, more or less, without being unreasonable.
Even some of our
I think this is a red herring. The question is not whether the criticism of Trump was correct or reasonable (for which a case can undoubtedly be made) but whether it was correct or appropriate for the Speaker to make a unilateral declaration in respect of these matters which has the effect of undermining the foreign policy of the government of the day and in respect of which he failed to consult the other interested parties.
Put shortly, it wasn't. It was an abuse of his position and however much one agrees with the views expressed that position does not change. He has undermined himself. I suspect he will survive but he is damaged by this and, far more important, so is the Office that he holds.
I would like to see Trump barracked by parliament, like a particularly bad tempered PMQs, but surely either the PM had no intention of Trump addressing parliament, in which case no problem, or she exceeded her authority by suggesting it before discussing with the speaker.
This state visit is going to be popcorn time...
I have not seen any evidence that an address to Parliament was even discussed before Bercow's outburst. A state visit does not necessarily include such an event. Lord Fowler was pretty clear the question had not even arisen.
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
Majority support is not enough for someone meant to represent the whole house - especially when the support is so partisan.
There are two positions, both partisan. It would be perverse to choose the position of the minority.
I forgot he had a gun to his head and thus had to make a statement.
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
Even if the intent of p is awful and should not be able to address parliament was the wish of the commons?
But that's not what's happening. The complaint is largely about the substance (coupled with an intense dislike of John Bercow himself).
From some, definitely. How much of it, I am uncertain. But it is one reason I don't think ousting him so directly so soon is appropriate. But I do think there are legitimate concerns, I would reasonable people could concede that even if outrage is being overdone or caught up in a longstanding political and personal battle between Bercow and his former colleagues.
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
Majority support is not enough for someone meant to represent the whole house - especially when the support is so partisan.
There are two positions, both partisan. It would be perverse to choose the position of the minority.
He didn't have to. But he didn't have to use a bazooka when a pistol would have done.
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
Majority support is not enough for someone meant to represent the whole house - especially when the support is so partisan.
There are two positions, both partisan. It would be perverse to choose the position of the minority.
Did he have to have a public position on the matter?
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
Majority support is not enough for someone meant to represent the whole house - especially when the support is so partisan.
There are two positions, both partisan. It would be perverse to choose the position of the minority.
Did he have to have a public position on the matter?
The point came up in response to a question asked of the Speaker by an MP following an early day motion that MP had put down:
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
Majority support is not enough for someone meant to represent the whole house - especially when the support is so partisan.
There are two positions, both partisan. It would be perverse to choose the position of the minority.
Did he have to have a public position on the matter?
Yes. Trump should not have been invited and the HoC should not just roll over because of May's inferiority complex re: Trump..
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
Embarrassing.
Stop. Digging.
No sucking up being done by losers yet, I see.
Post of the playground. Sad.
Make Antifrank Great Again?
He's far from the only one here to have hit the self-destruct button over Brexit.
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
Majority support is not enough for someone meant to represent the whole house - especially when the support is so partisan.
There are two positions, both partisan. It would be perverse to choose the position of the minority.
Did he have to have a public position on the matter?
Yes. Trump should not have been invited .
He hasn't been, not to the Commons, though he was entitled to comment as he was asked a question.
Antifrank: He didn't have to take a partisan position. He could have simply said: "I am not aware of any request for President Trump to speak in Westminster Hall. If one is made, I will consult with members of the house"
Even if members were opposed, he could have had a quiet word with a senior minister rather than gratuitously embarrassing the government.
The Scots NHS is performing better than England in the key measurements. Current A@E performance England 82 per cent , current Scottish performance 93 per cent. Most fundamental is sustainability. English Trusts are mired in debt, Scottish Boards have comparatively minor issues.
It is inevitably a complex picture and the focus on A&E to the exclusion of almost everything else is misleading.
Surely that is mostly due to the Scottish lifestyle?
Yeah, another complication. Drink too much, eat too much fat, live in a truly lousy climate with an over representation of the damage done by heavy industry and mining, especially in the central belt. Comparisons in health are fraught with difficulty and politicians focus on the sharpest soundbite, regardless of its relevance.
The Scots NHS is performing better than England in the key measurements. Current A@E performance England 82 per cent , current Scottish performance 93 per cent. Most fundamental is sustainability. English Trusts are mired in debt, Scottish Boards have comparatively minor issues.
Isn't it because social care is taxpayer funded north of the border? I recall the entitlement differs anyway.
What stops it being so in England ? Government policy ?
The Scots NHS is performing better than England in the key measurements. Current A@E performance England 82 per cent , current Scottish performance 93 per cent. Most fundamental is sustainability. English Trusts are mired in debt, Scottish Boards have comparatively minor issues.
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
Majority support is not enough for someone meant to represent the whole house - especially when the support is so partisan.
There are two positions, both partisan. It would be perverse to choose the position of the minority.
Did he have to have a public position on the matter?
Yes. Trump should not have been invited and the HoC should not just roll over because of May's inferiority complex re: Trump..
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
Embarrassing.
Stop. Digging.
No sucking up being done by losers yet, I see.
Post of the playground. Sad.
Make Antifrank Great Again?
He's far from the only one here to have hit the self-destruct button over Brexit.
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
Majority support is not enough for someone meant to represent the whole house - especially when the support is so partisan.
There are two positions, both partisan. It would be perverse to choose the position of the minority.
Did he have to have a public position on the matter?
Yes. Trump should not have been invited and the HoC should not just roll over because of May's inferiority complex re: Trump..
I always put Tara Palmer-Tomkinson and AA Gill in the same sort of bracket, so it's a bit sad they've both died within a few weeks of each other. Obviously there's the Sunday Times connection.
Really? One was a brilliant, witty writer, one of the very best. The other had a ghost column written by someone else.
I find the fascination with clothes horses such as TPT really strange.
I didn't mean the same bracket in terms of talent.
The Scots NHS is performing better than England in the key measurements. Current A@E performance England 82 per cent , current Scottish performance 93 per cent. Most fundamental is sustainability. English Trusts are mired in debt, Scottish Boards have comparatively minor issues.
It is inevitably a complex picture and the focus on A&E to the exclusion of almost everything else is misleading.
Surely that is mostly due to the Scottish lifestyle?
Yeah, another complication. Drink too much, eat too much fat, live in a truly lousy climate with an over representation of the damage done by heavy industry and mining, especially in the central belt. Comparisons in health are fraught with difficulty and politicians focus on the sharpest soundbite, regardless of its relevance.
It's too much bad fat. Meaning unsaturated, which people are falsely told is better for them. And sugar. Climate is a factor imo, lack of Vitamin D is implicated in lots of health issues. We can assume that's why gingers have one less layer of skin - to make the most of the available sun.
I always put Tara Palmer-Tomkinson and AA Gill in the same sort of bracket, so it's a bit sad they've both died within a few weeks of each other. Obviously there's the Sunday Times connection.
Really? One was a brilliant, witty writer, one of the very best. The other had a ghost column written by someone else.
I find the fascination with clothes horses such as TPT really strange.
I didn't mean the same bracket in terms of talent.
I always put Tara Palmer-Tomkinson and AA Gill in the same sort of bracket, so it's a bit sad they've both died within a few weeks of each other. Obviously there's the Sunday Times connection.
Really? One was a brilliant, witty writer, one of the very best. The other had a ghost column written by someone else.
I find the fascination with clothes horses such as TPT really strange.
I didn't mean the same bracket in terms of talent.
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
Except there aren't any losers, because absolutely no one that we know of has ever wanted Trump to be invited to address Parliament in the first place. I suppose there is an outside chance that he had got wind of a conspiracy to make such an invitation and thought he would get his retaliation in first, but I highly doubt it because it would be utterly insane to want Trump to do this. The reality is that Bercow is a fantasist, and this is him being John Hampden (or Walter Mitty facing the firing squad).
@MrHarryCole: Here we go: Alec Shelbrooke: "I will put my name to any document. John Bercow has brought the Speaker's office into disrepute."
Are they going to unveil anyone who isn't a headbanging Eurosceptic?
You were totally wrong about Bercow, and David Herdson absolutely right.
A period of silence from you on the subject of the Speaker would be appropriate.
I'm very happy to be in the same camp as JackW on this one.
It was outrageous for the government to offer a state visit to Donald Trump without consulting with any of the potentially interested parties on whose behalf it was issuing the invitation. Outrageous and inept.
A partisan post from now, sadly, a partisan poster. And it is affecting your judgement.
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
I am genuinely bewildered by the Eurosceptic meltdown about John Bercow. As it happens, his decision is one I would not have taken. But it seems to command majority support in the House of Commons. Never has the phrase "suck it up losers" seemed more apt.
Majority support is not enough for someone meant to represent the whole house - especially when the support is so partisan.
There are two positions, both partisan. It would be perverse to choose the position of the minority.
Did he have to have a public position on the matter?
The point came up in response to a question asked of the Speaker by an MP following an early day motion that MP had put down:
The Scots NHS is performing better than England in the key measurements. Current A@E performance England 82 per cent , current Scottish performance 93 per cent. Most fundamental is sustainability. English Trusts are mired in debt, Scottish Boards have comparatively minor issues.
It is inevitably a complex picture and the focus on A&E to the exclusion of almost everything else is misleading.
Also the measure should be how good the treatment is - not how quick.
The 4 hour measure is a reasonable predictor of other aspects of care, such as standardised hospital mortality.
Incidentally, my Trust has had no cases of C Diff or MRSA for over six months. That is also a pretty good predictor.
Is it? That's interesting because my perception is that the 4 hour target had been largely plucked out of the air by a politician in the last Labour government based more on what could be aimed for and what people would accept. If I am wrong in that it would be interesting to see the evidence.
The success of the NHS generally, and your trust in particular, in overcoming MRSA type superbugs which at one point were going to kill us all seems to me one of the bigger successes of the NHS in recent years. And much underplayed.
Is it really wise of a bunch of Tory MPs to try and take down the Speaker before the A50 Bill is safely on the Queen's desk?
Bercow is the sort who would cling on by a few votes and stay in post for a couple of years more, knowing the names of all those who voted against him.
@AlastairMeeks: just seen the question from yesterday about Brexit constituencies with a general election turnout. I'll try and come up with an answer.
As a matter of interest was it ever suggested that Trump should address Parliament? Did he want to? He seems the sort who would be more interested in the bling of a visit to the Palace and a carriage drive in Windsor Park.
The Scots NHS is performing better than England in the key measurements. Current A@E performance England 82 per cent , current Scottish performance 93 per cent. Most fundamental is sustainability. English Trusts are mired in debt, Scottish Boards have comparatively minor issues.
It is inevitably a complex picture and the focus on A&E to the exclusion of almost everything else is misleading.
Also the measure should be how good the treatment is - not how quick.
The 4 hour measure is a reasonable predictor of other aspects of care, such as standardised hospital mortality.
Incidentally, my Trust has had no cases of C Diff or MRSA for over six months. That is also a pretty good predictor.
Mine do despite the near 100% occupancy rates for a long while. We've only had 1 lot of norovirus as well this winter as far as I can remember and 'flu hasn't been very prevalent judging by the amount of oseltamivir going out the door. Dodged a bullet.
I always put Tara Palmer-Tomkinson and AA Gill in the same sort of bracket, so it's a bit sad they've both died within a few weeks of each other. Obviously there's the Sunday Times connection.
Really? One was a brilliant, witty writer, one of the very best. The other had a ghost column written by someone else.
I find the fascination with clothes horses such as TPT really strange.
I didn't mean the same bracket in terms of talent.
Is it really wise of a bunch of Tory MPs to try and take down the Speaker before the A50 Bill is safely on the Queen's desk?
Bercow is the sort who would cling on by a few votes and stay in post for a couple of years more, knowing the names of all those who voted against him.
if Bercow doesn't get a massive majority , he is finished. If say 20% say vote against him he might be finished. David Herdson or other cognoscenti might update on the likely % that they think would bring him down.
The Scots NHS is performing better than England in the key measurements. Current A@E performance England 82 per cent , current Scottish performance 93 per cent. Most fundamental is sustainability. English Trusts are mired in debt, Scottish Boards have comparatively minor issues.
It is inevitably a complex picture and the focus on A&E to the exclusion of almost everything else is misleading.
Also the measure should be how good the treatment is - not how quick.
The 4 hour measure is a reasonable predictor of other aspects of care, such as standardised hospital mortality.
Incidentally, my Trust has had no cases of C Diff or MRSA for over six months. That is also a pretty good predictor.
Would you agree, as a clinician, that the arbitrary 4 hour target can have a negative impact on other aspects of care?
It seems to me - watching from afar - that it's something the politicians and managers want to talk about, so the priorities on the grind are skewed towards meeting the target rather than prioritisation by absolute clinical need.
I always put Tara Palmer-Tomkinson and AA Gill in the same sort of bracket, so it's a bit sad they've both died within a few weeks of each other. Obviously there's the Sunday Times connection.
Really? One was a brilliant, witty writer, one of the very best. The other had a ghost column written by someone else.
I find the fascination with clothes horses such as TPT really strange.
I didn't mean the same bracket in terms of talent.
I just don't know what she did. She was very pretty, sexy, clearly knew how to have a very good time, overindulged in drugs, damaged her health and died all too early. I have no desire to speak ill of the dead at all but she was a star at the sort of parties I (and 99% of the population) am never going to be invited to. Other than that, I don't know why she was famous.
The Scots NHS is performing better than England in the key measurements. Current A@E performance England 82 per cent , current Scottish performance 93 per cent. Most fundamental is sustainability. English Trusts are mired in debt, Scottish Boards have comparatively minor issues.
It is inevitably a complex picture and the focus on A&E to the exclusion of almost everything else is misleading.
Also the measure should be how good the treatment is - not how quick.
The 4 hour measure is a reasonable predictor of other aspects of care, such as standardised hospital mortality.
Incidentally, my Trust has had no cases of C Diff or MRSA for over six months. That is also a pretty good predictor.
Is it? That's interesting because my perception is that the 4 hour target had been largely plucked out of the air by a politician in the last Labour government based more on what could be aimed for and what people would accept. If I am wrong in that it would be interesting to see the evidence.
The success of the NHS generally, and your trust in particular, in overcoming MRSA type superbugs which at one point were going to kill us all seems to me one of the bigger successes of the NHS in recent years. And much underplayed.
It is strongly correlated, for example in this very large Australian study:
I suspect that it is correlation rather than causation, with both measures being different ways of measuring the strain on a system. The 4 hr target is the canary in a coalmine.
Is it really wise of a bunch of Tory MPs to try and take down the Speaker before the A50 Bill is safely on the Queen's desk?
Bercow is the sort who would cling on by a few votes and stay in post for a couple of years more, knowing the names of all those who voted against him.
if Bercow doesn't get a massive majority , he is finished. If say 20% say vote against him he might be finished. David Herdson or other cognoscenti might update on the likely % that they think would bring him down.
But it's up to him to resign, rather like Corbyn there's literally no way to force him out.
My worry is that he hangs on and finds a way to make a mess of the A50 Bill, as it bounces back from the Lords.
Many students do things they regret whilst drunk. I just find the focus on the homeless or poor distasteful. Putting a penis in a pigs head is one thing, taunting a vulnerable individual down on their luck is just lower than low.
Comments
Mr. kle4, it won't even be subtle.
Mr. Meeks, as outrageous and inept as a Speaker wading into Foreign affairs, and denouncing something without consulting the Lord Great Chamberlain and the Lords Speaker, who also have a say in the decision?
Even some of our most right wing comrades on here have said they wouldn't have voted Trump. Criticising him is not automatically heroic, nor is not seeing it as inherently heroic in all circumstances the act of a Trump supporter.
Does she get a promotion if Bercow goes or is it back to the backbenches ?
Oh wait.
That's my cat
You should have the good grace and humility to admit you were wrong, and also reassess your objectivity.
If nothing else it will end up costing you a lot of money, as well as respect.
The surname of the extinct family of the Dukes of Buckingham and Chandos was the quintuple-barrelled Temple-Nugent-Brydges-Chandos-Grenville.
An opportunity for Lord Bercow to adopt the name?
He has already changed to Bercow from something like Berkov.
https://youtu.be/d_O822pBg_w?t=9m30s
(start at 9:31)
https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/1616349-to-think-that-double-barrelled-surnames-are-chavvy
And the Sunderland supporters message board:
https://www.readytogo.net/smb/threads/double-barrelled-surnames.728113/
Though I do have some double barralled nieces and nephews. I blame my sister in law!
She's dispensed with a surname completely now, which is poshest of all.
Bercow simply stating he recognised the concerns many members had with the idea of a visit, and that he was one of the three who needed to consent to such a thing and would express the concerns of the house to the others would, surely, have resulted in no such request being made, or refused if it was, without provoking a reaction (and notably not only Tory headbangers have been irritated), or at least not such a large one.
I don't support his ousting, and I never wanted Trump invited to a state visit, but he has behaved poorly in my view.
Incidentally, opting for an unnecessarily damaging extreme tactic when a subtler precision tactic would have done just as well, seems very Trump like.
Or to put another way, maybe things need stopping by any means available - why does that mean when there are several means, we should choose the most destructive and destabilising?
Put shortly, it wasn't. It was an abuse of his position and however much one agrees with the views expressed that position does not change. He has undermined himself. I suspect he will survive but he is damaged by this and, far more important, so is the Office that he holds.
https://twitter.com/rmasher2/status/829046484876226560
"The political impartiality of the Speaker is a key feature of the office,"
Read this:
http://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/parliamentwork/offices-and-ceremonies/overview/the-speaker/procedures-and-impartiality/
For the record I actually agree with what he said, but he shouldn't have been the one saying it.
I find the fascination with clothes horses such as TPT really strange.
Stop. Digging.
https://www.royal.uk/royal-family-name
As DavidL, no headbanger, suggests, regardless of his Trump criticism reflecting the will of the house or being reasonable, he made a unilateral declaration which undermined the government and failed to consult the other interested parties before doing so. You say you would not have taken the same decision as Bercow - surely then you can accept people are permitted to criticise the process and manner of his decision, even if the view that Trump is awful and should not be able to address parliament was the wish of the commons?
This state visit is going to be popcorn time...
It is inevitably a complex picture and the focus on A&E to the exclusion of almost everything else is misleading.
Also the measure should be how good the treatment is - not how quick.
Oh, wait.....
But enough bitterness - good night everyone.
https://www.parliament.uk/edm/2016-17/890
He didn't just pluck this out of thin air.
Even if members were opposed, he could have had a quiet word with a senior minister rather than gratuitously embarrassing the government.
Incidentally, my Trust has had no cases of C Diff or MRSA for over six months. That is also a pretty good predictor.
The success of the NHS generally, and your trust in particular, in overcoming MRSA type superbugs which at one point were going to kill us all seems to me one of the bigger successes of the NHS in recent years. And much underplayed.
Bercow is the sort who would cling on by a few votes and stay in post for a couple of years more, knowing the names of all those who voted against him.
It seems to me - watching from afar - that it's something the politicians and managers want to talk about, so the priorities on the grind are skewed towards meeting the target rather than prioritisation by absolute clinical need.
https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2016/204/9/national-emergency-access-target-neat-and-4-hour-rule-time-review-target
I suspect that it is correlation rather than causation, with both measures being different ways of measuring the strain on a system. The 4 hr target is the canary in a coalmine.
My worry is that he hangs on and finds a way to make a mess of the A50 Bill, as it bounces back from the Lords.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4208432/Cambridge-student-sets-fire-20-note-homeless-person.html
Many students do things they regret whilst drunk. I just find the focus on the homeless or poor distasteful. Putting a penis in a pigs head is one thing, taunting a vulnerable individual down on their luck is just lower than low.