politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Theresa May should not be allowed to create any new peers unti

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Theresa May should not be allowed to create any new peers until GE2015 expenses fraud allegations have been resolved

CON whistleblowers accuse party of 'huge betrayal' of electorate over GE2015 expenses. Latest from @MichaelLCrick https://t.co/ItYi8ezm5H

Read the full story here

logical_song

First?

TheScreamingEagles

If Theresa May wishes to create some new working peers, I am quite happy to serve my party and country.

Big_G_NorthWales

TheScreamingEagles said:

If Theresa May wishes to create some new working peers, I am quite happy to serve my party and country.

So am I

ThreeQuidder

She shouldn't create any new peers.

But only if a bunch of unrepresentative relic LDs are kicked out.

RobD

Seems unlikely that new peers will be required. Labour have said they won't obstruct the bill if it gets sent back with the amendments removed.

RobD

TheScreamingEagles said:

If Theresa May wishes to create some new working peers, I am quite happy to serve my party and country.

I wonder how loyal TSE would be to a May government...

edit: Not as loyal as Big_G_NorthWales...

logical_song

ThreeQuidder said:

She shouldn't create any new peers.

But only if a bunch of unrepresentative relic LDs are kicked out.

Do you think that peers should be representative? Are you in favour of an elected upper chamber?

Toms

Seriously folks, bugger the class system.

Big_G_NorthWales

She could appoint a number of UKIP and DUP peers as well as conservatives

Hertsmere_Pubgoer

TheScreamingEagles said:

If Theresa May wishes to create some new working peers, I am quite happy to serve my party and country.

Wouldn't you be tarred with the brush of Osborne's stooge?

Big_G_NorthWales

Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

If Theresa May wishes to create some new working peers, I am quite happy to serve my party and country.

Wouldn't you be tarred with the brush of Osborne's stooge?

I wouldn't

Ishmael_Z

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Big_G_NorthWales

RobD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

If Theresa May wishes to create some new working peers, I am quite happy to serve my party and country.

I wonder how loyal TSE would be to a May government...

edit: Not as loyal as Big_G_NorthWales...

Well said

RobD

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

Sandpit

RobD said:

Seems unlikely that new peers will be required. Labour have said they won't obstruct the bill if it gets sent back with the amendments removed.

That sounds reasonable. They've taken the opportunity to make their point, have listened to the PM and the Commons, and won't tie the hands of the negotiation team on such a major issue. So, despite the grandstanding on all sides, the process should work as expected.

Pulpstar

The Three Brexiteers are lined up for the Sunday shows.

logical_song

Big_G_NorthWales said:

She could appoint a number of UKIP and DUP peers as well as conservatives

But we could do without the scandals (UKIP) or the damage to the NI peace process (DUP).

Pulpstar

Sandpit said:

RobD said:

Seems unlikely that new peers will be required. Labour have said they won't obstruct the bill if it gets sent back with the amendments removed.

That sounds reasonable. They've taken the opportunity to make their point, have listened to the PM and the Commons, and won't tie the hands of the negotiation team on such a major issue. So, despite the grandstanding on all sides, the process should work as expected.

I hope all the new found converts to Lords reform maintain their zeal after A50 is done and dusted there.

RobD

Pulpstar said:

Sandpit said:

RobD said:

Seems unlikely that new peers will be required. Labour have said they won't obstruct the bill if it gets sent back with the amendments removed.

That sounds reasonable. They've taken the opportunity to make their point, have listened to the PM and the Commons, and won't tie the hands of the negotiation team on such a major issue. So, despite the grandstanding on all sides, the process should work as expected.

I hope all the new found converts to Lords reform maintain their zeal after A50 is done and dusted there.

Does repealing the 99 act count as reform?

TheScreamingEagles

Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

If Theresa May wishes to create some new working peers, I am quite happy to serve my party and country.

Wouldn't you be tarred with the brush of Osborne's stooge?

I wish.

Floater

Quite right Mike - the Lib Dems have a nifty little power base in the Lords and we wouldn't want that diluted would we.

Mortimer

LDs shouldn't use 'winning here' bar charts till they've actually 'won here'...

Floater

Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

If Theresa May wishes to create some new working peers, I am quite happy to serve my party and country.

Wouldn't you be tarred with the brush of Osborne's stooge?

You couldn't take someone with THOSE shoes seriously

Pulpstar

RobD said:

Pulpstar said:

Sandpit said:

RobD said:

Seems unlikely that new peers will be required. Labour have said they won't obstruct the bill if it gets sent back with the amendments removed.

That sounds reasonable. They've taken the opportunity to make their point, have listened to the PM and the Commons, and won't tie the hands of the negotiation team on such a major issue. So, despite the grandstanding on all sides, the process should work as expected.

I hope all the new found converts to Lords reform maintain their zeal after A50 is done and dusted there.

Does repealing the 99 act count as reform?

Lol No.

House of Lords elected in thirds every 5 years by seats containing 5 members each in STV. 600 members to match the commons.
40 seats every 5 years (200 peers), 15 year terms. 1 term only per lifetime.

Mortimer

Also, TSE, that was not a blistering attack.

Ishmael_Z

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

I have no idea, but it seems to me a possibility that if the non-tory peers get the idea that she is trying to nullify the House by swamping it, they will close ranks against her, in which case just appointing a dozen or so is not going to be effective.

logical_song

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

No.
"The speaker of the House of Lords has warned Theresa May against stuffing the Chamber with new peers in a bid to get Brexit through.

Lord Fowler, a Tory peer until he took up the speaker's post in the Chamber, intervened after threats that ministers might "do a Lloyd George and create a thousand peers" to pass the Government’s Brexit legislation if those already in the Lords opposed it.

He said the upper chamber would not "sabotage" Brexit, while pointing out that the House is already too large and that Ms May should "move away from the example" of David Cameron when it came to approving large numbers of new peers."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/speaker-house-of-lords-theresa-may-lord-fowler-create-new-tory-peers-brexit-legislation-lloyd-george-a7512496.html

RobD

Ishmael_Z said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

I have no idea, but it seems to me a possibility that if the non-tory peers get the idea that she is trying to nullify the House by swamping it, they will close ranks against her, in which case just appointing a dozen or so is not going to be effective.

Yeah, which is why I don't think she'll appoint any more than is normal. Don't expect any new LD nominations in the coming years though

Big_G_NorthWales

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

If the HOL's pings the bill back again do not be surprised

RobD

logical_song said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

No.
"The speaker of the House of Lords has warned Theresa May against stuffing the Chamber with new peers in a bid to get Brexit through.

Lord Fowler, a Tory peer until he took up the speaker's post in the Chamber, intervened after threats that ministers might "do a Lloyd George and create a thousand peers" to pass the Government’s Brexit legislation if those already in the Lords opposed it.

He said the upper chamber would not "sabotage" Brexit, while pointing out that the House is already too large and that Ms May should "move away from the example" of David Cameron when it came to approving large numbers of new peers."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/speaker-house-of-lords-theresa-may-lord-fowler-create-new-tory-peers-brexit-legislation-lloyd-george-a7512496.html

If they created a thousand new peers the Lords will be do nothing but introducing members for the rest of the Parliament!

RobD

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

If the HOL's pings the bill back again do not be surprised

I think she would call an election rather than appoint new peers if that happened.

Big_G_NorthWales

logical_song said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

She could appoint a number of UKIP and DUP peers as well as conservatives

But we could do without the scandals (UKIP) or the damage to the NI peace process (DUP).

I think with those already in the HOL they would be in good company

Pulpstar

RobD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

If the HOL's pings the bill back again do not be surprised

I think she would call an election rather than appoint new peers if that happened.

She can't. FTPA.

logical_song

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

I have no idea, but it seems to me a possibility that if the non-tory peers get the idea that she is trying to nullify the House by swamping it, they will close ranks against her, in which case just appointing a dozen or so is not going to be effective.

Yeah, which is why I don't think she'll appoint any more than is normal. Don't expect any new LD nominations in the coming years though

Tory peers were among the first to demand Ms May let Parliament vote on the deal that she strikes with the EU.

TheScreamingEagles

Paging alumni of Cowley Tech

More proof, if proof were needed, that Oxford University is a complete dump.

Three members of the Unite union with close links to Len McCluskey and Jeremy Corbyn “ran rings around the room” at a Labour National Executive Committee hearing into claims of antisemitism and bullying at Oxford University’s Labour Club.

https://www.thejc.com/news/news-features/unions-were-behind-oxford-probe-cover-up-1.434079

ThreeQuidder

logical_song said:

ThreeQuidder said:

She shouldn't create any new peers.

But only if a bunch of unrepresentative relic LDs are kicked out.

Do you think that peers should be representative? Are you in favour of an elected upper chamber?

I'm in favour of an upper chamber elected proportionally to Commons votes, with perhaps a very small number of appropriate crossbench specialists.

RobD

logical_song said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

I have no idea, but it seems to me a possibility that if the non-tory peers get the idea that she is trying to nullify the House by swamping it, they will close ranks against her, in which case just appointing a dozen or so is not going to be effective.

Yeah, which is why I don't think she'll appoint any more than is normal. Don't expect any new LD nominations in the coming years though

Tory peers were among the first to demand Ms May let Parliament vote on the deal that she strikes with the EU.

13 Tory peers voted for that amendment, 208 did not.

RobD

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

If the HOL's pings the bill back again do not be surprised

I think she would call an election rather than appoint new peers if that happened.

She can't. FTPA.

Sorry, "call for". Agreed it is far from certain she would have the numbers to do that in the Commons without the farcical situation of Tory MPs voting for no confidence in a Tory government. Have I mentioned how much I don't like the FTPA...

SimonStClare

200 new peers should do it, with JohnO of this parish at the top of the list.

kle4

logical_song said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

No.
"The speaker of the House of Lords has warned Theresa May against stuffing the Chamber with new peers in a bid to get Brexit through.

Lord Fowler, a Tory peer until he took up the speaker's post in the Chamber, intervened after threats that ministers might "do a Lloyd George and create a thousand peers" to pass the Government’s Brexit legislation if those already in the Lords opposed it.

He said the upper chamber would not "sabotage" Brexit, while pointing out that the House is already too large and that Ms May should "move away from the example" of David Cameron when it came to approving large numbers of new peers."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/speaker-house-of-lords-theresa-may-lord-fowler-create-new-tory-peers-brexit-legislation-lloyd-george-a7512496.html

It would be a silly and petty reaction to the Lords being obstructive, when change should be undertaken with more care. But given Labour are committed to Brexit, how much ping pong will the Lords really engage in having made their point.

As for not doing it until the elections stuff is cleared up, well, given how long it takes and how much there is to look into, she'd have to wait a long time.

Sandpit

First blood to Ireland. These midnight evening kickoffs are annoying though.

Omnium

I have a concern.

It seems to me that betting on politics may become a little like betting on clown racing. I imagine others, like I, have a certain social standing to maintain, and as such the current crowd of politicians is becoming something of a liability.

Does anyone have any suggestions?

According to my current plan the purveyors of false mustaches should be in for a killing.

tlg86

Clearly Ukip need greater representation in the Lords. I am very much available if the PM doesn't want to stuff the Lords with Tories.

Pulpstar

IDS calling for an NI hike review.

More proof if it was needed that it is an excellent idea.

Sandpit

RobD said:

logical_song said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

I have no idea, but it seems to me a possibility that if the non-tory peers get the idea that she is trying to nullify the House by swamping it, they will close ranks against her, in which case just appointing a dozen or so is not going to be effective.

Yeah, which is why I don't think she'll appoint any more than is normal. Don't expect any new LD nominations in the coming years though

Tory peers were among the first to demand Ms May let Parliament vote on the deal that she strikes with the EU.

13 Tory peers voted for that amendment, 208 did not.

The Tory whipping of the Lords (ooh, err!) has been very good indeed over the past couple of years. Could be a late night for them on Monday though, hope they've all booked a room in their club.

TheScreamingEagles

Pulpstar said:

IDS calling for an NI hike review.

More proof if it was needed that it is an excellent idea.

I agree.

Stick to your guns Phil!

Restharrow

TheScreamingEagles said:

Paging alumni of Cowley Tech

More proof, if proof were needed, that Oxford University is a complete dump.

Three members of the Unite union with close links to Len McCluskey and Jeremy Corbyn “ran rings around the room” at a Labour National Executive Committee hearing into claims of antisemitism and bullying at Oxford University’s Labour Club.

https://www.thejc.com/news/news-features/unions-were-behind-oxford-probe-cover-up-1.434079

You don't have to go all the way to Oxford to find antisemitism. I'm fairly confident you'd find it closer to home if you cared to look.

nunu

RobD said:

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

If the HOL's pings the bill back again do not be surprised

I think she would call an election rather than appoint new peers if that happened.

She can't. FTPA.

Sorry, "call for". Agreed it is far from certain she would have the numbers to do that in the Commons without the farcical situation of Tory MPs voting for no confidence in a Tory government. Have I mentioned how much I don't like the FTPA...

even with that farcical situation she would still crush corbyn tho so whats the problem.

Pulpstar

tlg86 said:

Clearly Ukip need greater representation in the Lords. I am very much available if the PM doesn't want to stuff the Lords with Tories.

I think you should definitely get something for hitting the woodwork in terms of aristocratic/landed gentry happenstance.

Ishmael_Z

TheScreamingEagles said:

Paging alumni of Cowley Tech

More proof, if proof were needed, that Oxford University is a complete dump.

Three members of the Unite union with close links to Len McCluskey and Jeremy Corbyn “ran rings around the room” at a Labour National Executive Committee hearing into claims of antisemitism and bullying at Oxford University’s Labour Club.

https://www.thejc.com/news/news-features/unions-were-behind-oxford-probe-cover-up-1.434079

At the best university in Cambridge after Anglia Ruskin, they do anti-semitism off their own bat - Labour party input not required: https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/antisemitic-attack-victims-demand-apology-from-cambridge-university-authorities-1.148004

Big_G_NorthWales

Sandpit said:

RobD said:

logical_song said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

I have no idea, but it seems to me a possibility that if the non-tory peers get the idea that she is trying to nullify the House by swamping it, they will close ranks against her, in which case just appointing a dozen or so is not going to be effective.

Yeah, which is why I don't think she'll appoint any more than is normal. Don't expect any new LD nominations in the coming years though

Tory peers were among the first to demand Ms May let Parliament vote on the deal that she strikes with the EU.

13 Tory peers voted for that amendment, 208 did not.

The Tory whipping of the Lords (ooh, err!) has been very good indeed over the past couple of years. Could be a late night for them on Monday though, hope they've all booked a room in their club.

The lib dems are reported to be bringing in 90 bunk beds

RobD

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Sandpit said:

RobD said:

logical_song said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

I have no idea, but it seems to me a possibility that if the non-tory peers get the idea that she is trying to nullify the House by swamping it, they will close ranks against her, in which case just appointing a dozen or so is not going to be effective.

Yeah, which is why I don't think she'll appoint any more than is normal. Don't expect any new LD nominations in the coming years though

Tory peers were among the first to demand Ms May let Parliament vote on the deal that she strikes with the EU.

13 Tory peers voted for that amendment, 208 did not.

The Tory whipping of the Lords (ooh, err!) has been very good indeed over the past couple of years. Could be a late night for them on Monday though, hope they've all booked a room in their club.

The lib dems are reported to be bringing in 90 bunk beds

All for naught if Labour concede after the first ping/pong.

AndyJS

FPT:

rcs1000 said:

Pulpstar said:

Actual vote totals I can see being something like :

Conservative 45%
Lib Dems 24%
Labour 15%
UKIP 9%
Greens 2%

I would be staggered if the LDs did that well.

I suppose they might have a chance of hitting 24% in the English shire counties, but the actual vote shares will include local elections in Scotland and Wales and I can't see the LDs doing particularly well there.

williamglenn

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

If the HOL's pings the bill back again do not be surprised

I think she would call an election rather than appoint new peers if that happened.

She can't. FTPA.

She's stuck between a trade bloc and a hard Brexit.

RobD

AndyJS said:

FPT:

rcs1000 said:

Pulpstar said:

Actual vote totals I can see being something like :

Conservative 45%
Lib Dems 24%
Labour 15%
UKIP 9%
Greens 2%

I would be staggered if the LDs did that well.

I suppose they might have a chance of hitting 24% in the English shire counties, but the actual vote shares will include local elections in Scotland and Wales and I can't see the LDs doing particularly well there.

Isn't the perceived wisdom that the Tories would lose seats/councils at the upcoming locals? with a vote share of 45% that would be quite hard!

RobD

williamglenn said:

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

If the HOL's pings the bill back again do not be surprised

I think she would call an election rather than appoint new peers if that happened.

She can't. FTPA.

She's stuck between a trade bloc and a hard Brexit.

Your coat, sir!

Pulpstar

williamglenn said:

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

If the HOL's pings the bill back again do not be surprised

I think she would call an election rather than appoint new peers if that happened.

She can't. FTPA.

She's stuck between a trade bloc and a hard Brexit.

Can't believe all the brexiteers going wibbly over what might happen. They need to man up.

AndyJS

RobD said:

AndyJS said:

FPT:

rcs1000 said:

Pulpstar said:

Actual vote totals I can see being something like :

Conservative 45%
Lib Dems 24%
Labour 15%
UKIP 9%
Greens 2%

I would be staggered if the LDs did that well.

I suppose they might have a chance of hitting 24% in the English shire counties, but the actual vote shares will include local elections in Scotland and Wales and I can't see the LDs doing particularly well there.

Isn't the perceived wisdom that the Tories would lose seats/councils at the upcoming locals? with a vote share of 45% that would be quite hard!

Their projected share in 2013 was just 29% so you'd expect them to gain seats this time I think. Not sure who thought they'd lose them.

Pulpstar

RobD said:

AndyJS said:

FPT:

rcs1000 said:

Pulpstar said:

Actual vote totals I can see being something like :

Conservative 45%
Lib Dems 24%
Labour 15%
UKIP 9%
Greens 2%

I would be staggered if the LDs did that well.

I suppose they might have a chance of hitting 24% in the English shire counties, but the actual vote shares will include local elections in Scotland and Wales and I can't see the LDs doing particularly well there.

Isn't the perceived wisdom that the Tories would lose seats/councils at the upcoming locals? with a vote share of 45% that would be quite hard!

I can't see the Tories losing anything in England. These elections are the Brexitshire heartlands.

Sandpit

nunu said:

RobD said:

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

If the HOL's pings the bill back again do not be surprised

I think she would call an election rather than appoint new peers if that happened.

She can't. FTPA.

Sorry, "call for". Agreed it is far from certain she would have the numbers to do that in the Commons without the farcical situation of Tory MPs voting for no confidence in a Tory government. Have I mentioned how much I don't like the FTPA...

even with that farcical situation she would still crush corbyn tho so whats the problem.

I think Mrs May should lay the motion that Parliament be dissolved for an election on May 4th - just to watch the complete farce that would be the Opposition voting against it!

RobD

AndyJS said:

RobD said:

AndyJS said:

FPT:

rcs1000 said:

Pulpstar said:

Actual vote totals I can see being something like :

Conservative 45%
Lib Dems 24%
Labour 15%
UKIP 9%
Greens 2%

I would be staggered if the LDs did that well.

I suppose they might have a chance of hitting 24% in the English shire counties, but the actual vote shares will include local elections in Scotland and Wales and I can't see the LDs doing particularly well there.

Isn't the perceived wisdom that the Tories would lose seats/councils at the upcoming locals? with a vote share of 45% that would be quite hard!

Their projected share in 2013 was just 29% so you'd expect them to gain seats this time I think. Not sure who thought they'd lose them.

I think MarkSenior's head would explode...

Pulpstar

Sandpit said:

nunu said:

RobD said:

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

If the HOL's pings the bill back again do not be surprised

I think she would call an election rather than appoint new peers if that happened.

She can't. FTPA.

Sorry, "call for". Agreed it is far from certain she would have the numbers to do that in the Commons without the farcical situation of Tory MPs voting for no confidence in a Tory government. Have I mentioned how much I don't like the FTPA...

even with that farcical situation she would still crush corbyn tho so whats the problem.

I think Mrs May should lay the motion that Parliament be dissolved for an election on May 4th - just to watch the complete farce that would be the Opposition voting against it!

Both Our Genial Host, and the Crosby prophet reckon it is very very difficult for May to get out of the FTPA. I have been laying an election this year mainly on their dual wisdom.

tlg86

Pulpstar said:

tlg86 said:

Clearly Ukip need greater representation in the Lords. I am very much available if the PM doesn't want to stuff the Lords with Tories.

I think you should definitely get something for hitting the woodwork in terms of aristocratic/landed gentry happenstance.

Damn straight. I'd like to be Baron Leveson Gower of Knaphill and St Johns.

justin124

Sandpit said:

nunu said:

RobD said:

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

If the HOL's pings the bill back again do not be surprised

I think she would call an election rather than appoint new peers if that happened.

She can't. FTPA.

Sorry, "call for". Agreed it is far from certain she would have the numbers to do that in the Commons without the farcical situation of Tory MPs voting for no confidence in a Tory government. Have I mentioned how much I don't like the FTPA...

even with that farcical situation she would still crush corbyn tho so whats the problem.

I think Mrs May should lay the motion that Parliament be dissolved for an election on May 4th - just to watch the complete farce that would be the Opposition voting against it!

They would just abstain.

Hertsmere_Pubgoer

RobD said:

AndyJS said:

RobD said:

AndyJS said:

FPT:

rcs1000 said:

Pulpstar said:

Actual vote totals I can see being something like :

Conservative 45%
Lib Dems 24%
Labour 15%
UKIP 9%
Greens 2%

I would be staggered if the LDs did that well.

I suppose they might have a chance of hitting 24% in the English shire counties, but the actual vote shares will include local elections in Scotland and Wales and I can't see the LDs doing particularly well there.

Isn't the perceived wisdom that the Tories would lose seats/councils at the upcoming locals? with a vote share of 45% that would be quite hard!

Their projected share in 2013 was just 29% so you'd expect them to gain seats this time I think. Not sure who thought they'd lose them.

I think MarkSenior's head would explode...

His trousers certainly would

Sandpit

Pulpstar said:

Sandpit said:

nunu said:

RobD said:

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

If the HOL's pings the bill back again do not be surprised

I think she would call an election rather than appoint new peers if that happened.

She can't. FTPA.

Sorry, "call for". Agreed it is far from certain she would have the numbers to do that in the Commons without the farcical situation of Tory MPs voting for no confidence in a Tory government. Have I mentioned how much I don't like the FTPA...

even with that farcical situation she would still crush corbyn tho so whats the problem.

I think Mrs May should lay the motion that Parliament be dissolved for an election on May 4th - just to watch the complete farce that would be the Opposition voting against it!

Both Our Genial Host, and the Crosby prophet reckon it is very very difficult for May to get out of the FTPA. I have been laying an election this year mainly on their dual wisdom.

If 2/3 of the Commons (434 MPs) vote for the motion, then an election we shall have. It's unlikely to pass only because this is the only time in living memory that the official opposition don't want one!

FWIW I agree with you that - if the A50 bill goes through next week - the 2017 election is a lay. I've backed 2019 and 2020.

TheScreamingEagles

https://twitter.com/drjennings/status/840147227335041024

matt

TheScreamingEagles said:

Paging alumni of Cowley Tech

More proof, if proof were needed, that Oxford University is a complete dump.

Three members of the Unite union with close links to Len McCluskey and Jeremy Corbyn “ran rings around the room” at a Labour National Executive Committee hearing into claims of antisemitism and bullying at Oxford University’s Labour Club.

https://www.thejc.com/news/news-features/unions-were-behind-oxford-probe-cover-up-1.434079

People over 23 getting excited about where they went to college need to closely examine their lives....

Sandpit

TheScreamingEagles said:

ttps://twitter.com/drjennings/status/840147227335041024

Look at Tony Blair's woeful underperformance in 1997. Shockingly poor vote he got.

TheScreamingEagles

matt said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Paging alumni of Cowley Tech

More proof, if proof were needed, that Oxford University is a complete dump.

Three members of the Unite union with close links to Len McCluskey and Jeremy Corbyn “ran rings around the room” at a Labour National Executive Committee hearing into claims of antisemitism and bullying at Oxford University’s Labour Club.

https://www.thejc.com/news/news-features/unions-were-behind-oxford-probe-cover-up-1.434079

People over 23 getting excited about where they went to college need to closely examine their lives....

It is an important story about current politics given influence of Len McCluskey on Jeremy Corbyn.

ThreeQuidder

Pulpstar said:

Sandpit said:

nunu said:

RobD said:

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

If the HOL's pings the bill back again do not be surprised

I think she would call an election rather than appoint new peers if that happened.

She can't. FTPA.

Sorry, "call for". Agreed it is far from certain she would have the numbers to do that in the Commons without the farcical situation of Tory MPs voting for no confidence in a Tory government. Have I mentioned how much I don't like the FTPA...

even with that farcical situation she would still crush corbyn tho so whats the problem.

I think Mrs May should lay the motion that Parliament be dissolved for an election on May 4th - just to watch the complete farce that would be the Opposition voting against it!

Both Our Genial Host, and the Crosby prophet reckon it is very very difficult for May to get out of the FTPA. I have been laying an election this year mainly on their dual wisdom.

She needs the agreement of either Labour or the Lords.

ThreeQuidder

justin124 said:

Sandpit said:

nunu said:

RobD said:

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

If the HOL's pings the bill back again do not be surprised

I think she would call an election rather than appoint new peers if that happened.

She can't. FTPA.

Sorry, "call for". Agreed it is far from certain she would have the numbers to do that in the Commons without the farcical situation of Tory MPs voting for no confidence in a Tory government. Have I mentioned how much I don't like the FTPA...

even with that farcical situation she would still crush corbyn tho so whats the problem.

I think Mrs May should lay the motion that Parliament be dissolved for an election on May 4th - just to watch the complete farce that would be the Opposition voting against it!

They would just abstain.

That would count as, and be seen as, voting against.

Pulpstar

Sandpit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

ttps://twitter.com/drjennings/status/840147227335041024

Look at Tony Blair's woeful underperformance in 1997. Shockingly poor vote he got.

I don't think I've found a single model or past historical precedent that is any good for Corbyn so far.

Sandpit

justin124 said:

Sandpit said:

nunu said:

RobD said:

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

If the HOL's pings the bill back again do not be surprised

I think she would call an election rather than appoint new peers if that happened.

She can't. FTPA.

Sorry, "call for". Agreed it is far from certain she would have the numbers to do that in the Commons without the farcical situation of Tory MPs voting for no confidence in a Tory government. Have I mentioned how much I don't like the FTPA...

even with that farcical situation she would still crush corbyn tho so whats the problem.

I think Mrs May should lay the motion that Parliament be dissolved for an election on May 4th - just to watch the complete farce that would be the Opposition voting against it!

They would just abstain.

Yes, for this particular vote an abstention is a vote against. They'd take the day off and moan about the Tories wasting valuable Parliamentary time with a vanity project - or some such flowery language as to why they don't want to let the people have their say. Could be close if the SNP were in favour of the election though, a couple of dozen Lab 'rebels' could see the motion pass.

MarkHopkins

Sandpit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

ttps://twitter.com/drjennings/status/840147227335041024

Look at Tony Blair's woeful underperformance in 1997. Shockingly poor vote he got.

Blair = Icarus.

matt

TheScreamingEagles said:

matt said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Paging alumni of Cowley Tech

More proof, if proof were needed, that Oxford University is a complete dump.

Three members of the Unite union with close links to Len McCluskey and Jeremy Corbyn “ran rings around the room” at a Labour National Executive Committee hearing into claims of antisemitism and bullying at Oxford University’s Labour Club.

https://www.thejc.com/news/news-features/unions-were-behind-oxford-probe-cover-up-1.434079

People over 23 getting excited about where they went to college need to closely examine their lives....

It is an important story about current politics given influence of Len McCluskey on Jeremy Corbyn.

Cowley Tech rather gave the game away.

justin124

Sandpit said:

justin124 said:

Sandpit said:

nunu said:

RobD said:

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

If the HOL's pings the bill back again do not be surprised

I think she would call an election rather than appoint new peers if that happened.

She can't. FTPA.

Sorry, "call for". Agreed it is far from certain she would have the numbers to do that in the Commons without the farcical situation of Tory MPs voting for no confidence in a Tory government. Have I mentioned how much I don't like the FTPA...

even with that farcical situation she would still crush corbyn tho so whats the problem.

I think Mrs May should lay the motion that Parliament be dissolved for an election on May 4th - just to watch the complete farce that would be the Opposition voting against it!

They would just abstain.

Yes, for this particular vote an abstention is a vote against. They'd take the day off and moan about the Tories wasting valuable Parliamentary time with a vanity project - or some such flowery language as to why they don't want to let the people have their say. Could be close if the SNP were in favour of the election though, a couple of dozen Lab 'rebels' could see the motion pass.

Such rebels would be effectively deselected by being denied NEC endorsement.

MarkHopkins

"Reasons to vote for Democrats" tops Amazon bestseller list.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39226684

Sean_F

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

AndyJS said:

FPT:

rcs1000 said:

Pulpstar said:

Actual vote totals I can see being something like :

Conservative 45%
Lib Dems 24%
Labour 15%
UKIP 9%
Greens 2%

I would be staggered if the LDs did that well.

I suppose they might have a chance of hitting 24% in the English shire counties, but the actual vote shares will include local elections in Scotland and Wales and I can't see the LDs doing particularly well there.

Isn't the perceived wisdom that the Tories would lose seats/councils at the upcoming locals? with a vote share of 45% that would be quite hard!

I can't see the Tories losing anything in England. These elections are the Brexitshire heartlands.

Not all of them. Kent, Essex, the Midlands, Devon, Cornwall, the North and Midlands, certainly. But, parts of the Home Counties, and the M3 and M4 corridors had high Remain votes, and should be good for the Lib Dems.

justin124

Sean_F said:

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

AndyJS said:

FPT:

rcs1000 said:

Pulpstar said:

Actual vote totals I can see being something like :

Conservative 45%
Lib Dems 24%
Labour 15%
UKIP 9%
Greens 2%

I would be staggered if the LDs did that well.

I suppose they might have a chance of hitting 24% in the English shire counties, but the actual vote shares will include local elections in Scotland and Wales and I can't see the LDs doing particularly well there.

Isn't the perceived wisdom that the Tories would lose seats/councils at the upcoming locals? with a vote share of 45% that would be quite hard!

I can't see the Tories losing anything in England. These elections are the Brexitshire heartlands.

Not all of them. Kent, Essex, the Midlands, Devon, Cornwall, the North and Midlands, certainly. But, parts of the Home Counties, and the M3 and M4 corridors had high Remain votes, and should be good for the Lib Dems.

I really don't believe that Brexit is going to be a major factor in determining how people vote.

Mortimer

justin124 said:

Sandpit said:

justin124 said:

Sandpit said:

nunu said:

RobD said:

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

If the HOL's pings the bill back again do not be surprised

I think she would call an election rather than appoint new peers if that happened.

She can't. FTPA.

Sorry, "call for". Agreed it is far from certain she would have the numbers to do that in the Commons without the farcical situation of Tory MPs voting for no confidence in a Tory government. Have I mentioned how much I don't like the FTPA...

even with that farcical situation she would still crush corbyn tho so whats the problem.

I think Mrs May should lay the motion that Parliament be dissolved for an election on May 4th - just to watch the complete farce that would be the Opposition voting against it!

They would just abstain.

Yes, for this particular vote an abstention is a vote against. They'd take the day off and moan about the Tories wasting valuable Parliamentary time with a vanity project - or some such flowery language as to why they don't want to let the people have their say. Could be close if the SNP were in favour of the election though, a couple of dozen Lab 'rebels' could see the motion pass.

Such rebels would be effectively deselected by being denied NEC endorsement.

You're obsessed with rules; politics is all about pushing boundaries.

DavidL

Oh for goodness sake. Get a grip. Theresa May is PM. The election result is not going to be overturned.

MarkHopkins

DavidL said:

Oh for goodness sake. Get a grip. Theresa May is PM. The election result is not going to be overturned.

But if it was overturned, would that mean that everything done since May 2015 would be null and void?

Then maybe the referendum never happened, and the result overturned!

tlg86

MarkHopkins said:

DavidL said:

Oh for goodness sake. Get a grip. Theresa May is PM. The election result is not going to be overturned.

But if it was overturned, would that mean that everything done since May 2015 would be null and void?

Then maybe the referendum never happened, and the result overturned!

It'd be like that bit in Dallas when a whole series had just been a dream.

justin124

Mortimer said:

justin124 said:

Sandpit said:

justin124 said:

Sandpit said:

nunu said:

RobD said:

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

If the HOL's pings the bill back again do not be surprised

I think she would call an election rather than appoint new peers if that happened.

She can't. FTPA.

Sorry, "call for". Agreed it is far from certain she would have the numbers to do that in the Commons without the farcical situation of Tory MPs voting for no confidence in a Tory government. Have I mentioned how much I don't like the FTPA...

even with that farcical situation she would still crush corbyn tho so whats the problem.

I think Mrs May should lay the motion that Parliament be dissolved for an election on May 4th - just to watch the complete farce that would be the Opposition voting against it!

They would just abstain.

Yes, for this particular vote an abstention is a vote against. They'd take the day off and moan about the Tories wasting valuable Parliamentary time with a vanity project - or some such flowery language as to why they don't want to let the people have their say. Could be close if the SNP were in favour of the election though, a couple of dozen Lab 'rebels' could see the motion pass.

Such rebels would be effectively deselected by being denied NEC endorsement.

You're obsessed with rules; politics is all about pushing boundaries.

I am sure that if 30 Tory MPs refused to vote for such a motion they would face difficulties with their associations or Tory Central Office.

MarkHopkins

SeanT said:

Top tier international rugby is probably the most entertaining TV sport on the planet. Discuss.

Well, after Beach Volleyball I suppose.

TheKrakenAwakes

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

AndyJS said:

FPT:

rcs1000 said:

Pulpstar said:

Actual vote totals I can see being something like :

Conservative 45%
Lib Dems 24%
Labour 15%
UKIP 9%
Greens 2%

I would be staggered if the LDs did that well.

I suppose they might have a chance of hitting 24% in the English shire counties, but the actual vote shares will include local elections in Scotland and Wales and I can't see the LDs doing particularly well there.

Isn't the perceived wisdom that the Tories would lose seats/councils at the upcoming locals? with a vote share of 45% that would be quite hard!

I can't see the Tories losing anything in England. These elections are the Brexitshire heartlands.

Don't you believe it - the funding cuts to councils are going to hit them hard...Lib Dems will do well in their areas but not so sure about Labour areas

DecrepitJohnL

SeanT said:

Top tier international rugby is probably the most entertaining TV sport on the planet. Discuss.

The Cheltenham Festival starts Tuesday.

Pulpstar

MarkHopkins said:

DavidL said:

Oh for goodness sake. Get a grip. Theresa May is PM. The election result is not going to be overturned.

But if it was overturned, would that mean that everything done since May 2015 would be null and void?

Then maybe the referendum never happened, and the result overturned!

Does that mean that I need to pay back my Brexit winnings ?

MarkHopkins

tlg86 said:

MarkHopkins said:

DavidL said:

Oh for goodness sake. Get a grip. Theresa May is PM. The election result is not going to be overturned.

But if it was overturned, would that mean that everything done since May 2015 would be null and void?

Then maybe the referendum never happened, and the result overturned!

It'd be like that bit in Dallas when a whole series had just been a dream.

But who will emerge from the shower?

Sean_F

MarkHopkins said:

DavidL said:

Oh for goodness sake. Get a grip. Theresa May is PM. The election result is not going to be overturned.

But if it was overturned, would that mean that everything done since May 2015 would be null and void?

Then maybe the referendum never happened, and the result overturned!

No.

Pulpstar

TheKrakenAwakes said:

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

AndyJS said:

FPT:

rcs1000 said:

Pulpstar said:

Actual vote totals I can see being something like :

Conservative 45%
Lib Dems 24%
Labour 15%
UKIP 9%
Greens 2%

I would be staggered if the LDs did that well.

I suppose they might have a chance of hitting 24% in the English shire counties, but the actual vote shares will include local elections in Scotland and Wales and I can't see the LDs doing particularly well there.

Isn't the perceived wisdom that the Tories would lose seats/councils at the upcoming locals? with a vote share of 45% that would be quite hard!

I can't see the Tories losing anything in England. These elections are the Brexitshire heartlands.

Don't you believe it - the funding cuts to councils are going to hit them hard...Lib Dems will do well in their areas but not so sure about Labour areas

I'd hope that'd resonate more than it probably will do.

Sandpit

justin124 said:

Sandpit said:

justin124 said:

Sandpit said:

nunu said:

RobD said:

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

If the HOL's pings the bill back again do not be surprised

I think she would call an election rather than appoint new peers if that happened.

She can't. FTPA.

Sorry, "call for". Agreed it is far from certain she would have the numbers to do that in the Commons without the farcical situation of Tory MPs voting for no confidence in a Tory government. Have I mentioned how much I don't like the FTPA...

even with that farcical situation she would still crush corbyn tho so whats the problem.

I think Mrs May should lay the motion that Parliament be dissolved for an election on May 4th - just to watch the complete farce that would be the Opposition voting against it!

They would just abstain.

Yes, for this particular vote an abstention is a vote against. They'd take the day off and moan about the Tories wasting valuable Parliamentary time with a vanity project - or some such flowery language as to why they don't want to let the people have their say. Could be close if the SNP were in favour of the election though, a couple of dozen Lab 'rebels' could see the motion pass.

Such rebels would be effectively deselected by being denied NEC endorsement.

Wouldn't that just make it even funnier (or more farcical, depending on your point of view)?

Imagine the conversation: "Sorry, we are suspending you for voting to hold an election". It would have the potential to cause big splits, with rejected MPs standing as incumbent independents, possibly turning safe seats into marginals.

Scrapheap_as_was

OGH is talking out of his bar chart.

Lord Scrap of Heap (proposed)

Mortimer

Scrapheap_as_was said:

OGH is talking out of his bar chart.

Lord Scrap of Heap (proposed)

justin124 said:

Mortimer said:

justin124 said:

Sandpit said:

justin124 said:

Sandpit said:

nunu said:

RobD said:

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

If the HOL's pings the bill back again do not be surprised

I think she would call an election rather than appoint new peers if that happened.

She can't. FTPA.

Sorry, "call for". Agreed it is far from certain she would have the numbers to do that in the Commons without the farcical situation of Tory MPs voting for no confidence in a Tory government. Have I mentioned how much I don't like the FTPA...

even with that farcical situation she would still crush corbyn tho so whats the problem.

I think Mrs May should lay the motion that Parliament be dissolved for an election on May 4th - just to watch the complete farce that would be the Opposition voting against it!

They would just abstain.

Yes, for this particular vote an abstention is a vote against. They'd take the day off and moan about the Tories wasting valuable Parliamentary time with a vanity project - or some such flowery language as to why they don't want to let the people have their say. Could be close if the SNP were in favour of the election though, a couple of dozen Lab 'rebels' could see the motion pass.

Such rebels would be effectively deselected by being denied NEC endorsement.

You're obsessed with rules; politics is all about pushing boundaries.

I am sure that if 30 Tory MPs refused to vote for such a motion they would face difficulties with their associations or Tory Central Office.

Tory MPs are not frit.

TheScreamingEagles

Scrapheap_as_was said:

OGH is talking out of his bar chart.

Lord Scrap of Heap (proposed)

If you're getting a peerage, I wanted to be ennobled as a Duke.

justin124

Sandpit said:

justin124 said:

Sandpit said:

justin124 said:

Sandpit said:

nunu said:

RobD said:

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

If the HOL's pings the bill back again do not be surprised

I think she would call an election rather than appoint new peers if that happened.

She can't. FTPA.

Sorry, "call for". Agreed it is far from certain she would have the numbers to do that in the Commons without the farcical situation of Tory MPs voting for no confidence in a Tory government. Have I mentioned how much I don't like the FTPA...

even with that farcical situation she would still crush corbyn tho so whats the problem.

I think Mrs May should lay the motion that Parliament be dissolved for an election on May 4th - just to watch the complete farce that would be the Opposition voting against it!

They would just abstain.

Yes, for this particular vote an abstention is a vote against. They'd take the day off and moan about the Tories wasting valuable Parliamentary time with a vanity project - or some such flowery language as to why they don't want to let the people have their say. Could be close if the SNP were in favour of the election though, a couple of dozen Lab 'rebels' could see the motion pass.

Such rebels would be effectively deselected by being denied NEC endorsement.

Wouldn't that just make it even funnier (or more farcical, depending on your point of view)?

Imagine the conversation: "Sorry, we are suspending you for voting to hold an election". It would have the potential to cause big splits, with rejected MPs standing as incumbent independents, possibly turning safe seats into marginals.

But that would not be the political reality. They would almost certainly end up being expelled for voting for an election at a time when Labour faced being massacred.

Dadge

justin124 said:

Sean_F said:

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

AndyJS said:

FPT:

rcs1000 said:

Pulpstar said:

Actual vote totals I can see being something like :

Conservative 45%
Lib Dems 24%
Labour 15%
UKIP 9%
Greens 2%

I would be staggered if the LDs did that well.

I suppose they might have a chance of hitting 24% in the English shire counties, but the actual vote shares will include local elections in Scotland and Wales and I can't see the LDs doing particularly well there.

Isn't the perceived wisdom that the Tories would lose seats/councils at the upcoming locals? with a vote share of 45% that would be quite hard!

I can't see the Tories losing anything in England. These elections are the Brexitshire heartlands.

Not all of them. Kent, Essex, the Midlands, Devon, Cornwall, the North and Midlands, certainly. But, parts of the Home Counties, and the M3 and M4 corridors had high Remain votes, and should be good for the Lib Dems.

I really don't believe that Brexit is going to be a major factor in determining how people vote.

I disagree. Not a main factor maybe, but certainly a major one. I think there'll be quite a few unusual swings because of the local feeling on Brexit, and because of the attitude of the local MP to Brexit. UK politics is in for a bumpy ride because of Brexit, and the 2020 GE will be in the wake of the actual departure. If things have gone well, there'll still be resentment from the pro-EU people, and if things have gone badly the impact will be great across the board.

Pulpstar

DecrepitJohnL said:

SeanT said:

Top tier international rugby is probably the most entertaining TV sport on the planet. Discuss.

The Cheltenham Festival starts Tuesday.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHbZD15zaAQ

Went down there specifically to see this last year. Utterly brilliant.

£50 each way at 5-1 was a nice bonus too.

kle4

Mortimer said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

OGH is talking out of his bar chart.

Lord Scrap of Heap (proposed)

justin124 said:

Mortimer said:

justin124 said:

Sandpit said:

justin124 said:

Sandpit said:

nunu said:

RobD said:

Pulpstar said:

RobD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

I am not clear who is going to do the not allowing. The obiter dicta of OGH are of considerable persuasive authority, but not binding on anybody.

If she does do this it will take the upper house close to or over the 1,000 member barrier, which must surely to god trigger a proper reform.

Are there reports that she is thinking about appointing 200 new peers?

If the HOL's pings the bill back again do not be surprised

I think she would call an election rather than appoint new peers if that happened.

She can't. FTPA.

Sorry, "call for". Agreed it is far from certain she would have the numbers to do that in the Commons without the farcical situation of Tory MPs voting for no confidence in a Tory government. Have I mentioned how much I don't like the FTPA...

even with that farcical situation she would still crush corbyn tho so whats the problem.

I think Mrs May should lay the motion that Parliament be dissolved for an election on May 4th - just to watch the complete farce that would be the Opposition voting against it!

They would just abstain.

Yes, for this particular vote an abstention is a vote against. They'd take the day off and moan about the Tories wasting valuable Parliamentary time with a vanity project - or some such flowery language as to why they don't want to let the people have their say. Could be close if the SNP were in favour of the election though, a couple of dozen Lab 'rebels' could see the motion pass.

Such rebels would be effectively deselected by being denied NEC endorsement.

You're obsessed with rules; politics is all about pushing boundaries.

I am sure that if 30 Tory MPs refused to vote for such a motion they would face difficulties with their associations or Tory Central Office.

Tory MPs are not frit.

Could have fooled me.