The reason migrants can’t be sent back, whether by force or otherwise, is because the government cannot force other countries to accept people. Deportations only happen when the receiving country agrees to receive them. If they don’t you can’t deport no matter how many laws you tear up or lawyers you bar from acting.
If a boat is in British territorial waters or lands on a British shore, what are you going to do: shoot them? Drown them? Tow them to France? And what happens if the French close their ports to us?
You stick them in partially fuelled lifeboats and tow them to a spot that's outside French territorial waters but in international waters. They only have enough fuel to get to France not the UK.
It could 100% be done if the will were there. I am very surprised Johnson and Patel aren't copping more shit over the channel situation.
You propose leaving women and children in lifeboats in the Atlantic or in the Channel, one of the busiest sea lanes in the world, and hope they will be ok and not drown. Wow!
I don't agree with his idea but to be fair they're putting themselves into that sea lane.
We should be doing whatever it takes to stop that for welfare reasons alone, it is a terrible thing people are doing and seriously jeopardising their safety.
I would allow asylum seekers to work and contribute if only to avoid them being sucked into the black economy and being exploited by the people traffickers, who are thoroughly evil people. We are permitting / turning a blind eye to appalling exploitation and 21st century slavery. I also rather like what @rcs1000 has described as the Swiss approach.
The problem with that is it reinforces the cycle. If it is seen that paying all your savings to a people trafficker pays off, more people will do it?
The reason migrants can’t be sent back, whether by force or otherwise, is because the government cannot force other countries to accept people. Deportations only happen when the receiving country agrees to receive them. If they don’t you can’t deport no matter how many laws you tear up or lawyers you bar from acting.
If a boat is in British territorial waters or lands on a British shore, what are you going to do: shoot them? Drown them? Tow them to France? And what happens if the French close their ports to us?
You stick them in partially fuelled lifeboats and tow them to a spot that's outside French territorial waters but in international waters. They only have enough fuel to get to France not the UK.
It could 100% be done if the will were there. I am very surprised Johnson and Patel aren't copping more shit over the channel situation.
You propose leaving women and children in lifeboats in the Atlantic or in the Channel, one of the busiest sea lanes in the world, and hope they will be ok and not drown. Wow!
I think Dura Ace is espressing surprise that Patel hasn`t done this rather than advocating it himself. Anyway, he`s not as bad as my little old lady neighbour who wants to row out in a little boat and burst the immigrants` dinghies.
Am I right in thinking the rule of 6 doesn't apply to gyms? Putting ~20 people in a small spin studio with air con, while they all sweat buckets and breath heavily, ticks so many boxes for transmission.
Correct. My gym temperature checks everyone coming in and seriously restricts numbers in the Spin classes, but that's their choice rather than legal guidelines. Anywhere that makes money is free to carry on regardless. So its very clear - 10 people in a Spin Class indoors - safe and legal. 10 people group cycling outdoors - call the police.
..and yet wants to plough billions into speculative tech ventures. In one sense Cummings and Johnson's have inherited a Tory continuity here, which is an almost pathological inability to understand the importance of already established national-strategic industries since the early 1980's, in the way every major western country does and has protected, and even as Cummings fantasises about creating a new Google.
I don’t really believe this guff about wanting state subsidies to create a tech sector. I think there is another agenda but we have yet to find out what it is. “Tech” feels to me like a cover story, used because it is modern and futuristic. But I think we’re being played.
Have you become a Conspiracy Theorist now?
I would not blame you, I do not think that you are wrong either. One feature of this administration that appears to be reliable is its penchant for lying and dissembling.
I don't think you have to be a conspiracy theorist to think that when a politician passes a law which literally legalizes theft and bribery, their intention is to steal and take bribes.
Am I right in thinking the rule of 6 doesn't apply to gyms? Putting ~20 people in a small spin studio with air con, while they all sweat buckets and breath heavily, ticks so many boxes for transmission.
Correct. My gym temperature checks everyone coming in and seriously restricts numbers in the Spin classes, but that's their choice rather than legal guidelines. Anywhere that makes money is free to carry on regardless. So its very clear - 10 people in a Spin Class indoors - safe and legal. 10 people group cycling outdoors - call the police.
My gym is intent and relentless in disinfecting the fuck out of all the equipment.
..and yet wants to plough billions into speculative tech ventures. In one sense Cummings and Johnson's have inherited a Tory continuity here, which is an almost pathological inability to understand the importance of already established national-strategic industries since the early 1980's, in the way every major western country does and has protected, and even as Cummings fantasises about creating a new Google.
I don’t really believe this guff about wanting state subsidies to create a tech sector. I think there is another agenda but we have yet to find out what it is. “Tech” feels to me like a cover story, used because it is modern and futuristic. But I think we’re being played.
Have you become a Conspiracy Theorist now?
I would not blame you, I do not think that you are wrong either. One feature of this administration that appears to be reliable is its penchant for lying and dissembling.
It’s just a feeling I have in my investigative bones. Something doesn’t smell quite right about this story. There may be some tech involved somewhere but there is also a lot of spin.
Plus I have some knowledge about some of DC’s associates, which I am unable to share for reasons of confidentiality, which is making me wonder what is really going on.
Am I right in thinking the rule of 6 doesn't apply to gyms? Putting ~20 people in a small spin studio with air con, while they all sweat buckets and breath heavily, ticks so many boxes for transmission.
Correct. My gym temperature checks everyone coming in and seriously restricts numbers in the Spin classes, but that's their choice rather than legal guidelines. Anywhere that makes money is free to carry on regardless. So its very clear - 10 people in a Spin Class indoors - safe and legal. 10 people group cycling outdoors - call the police.
My gym is intent and relentless in disinfecting the fuck out of all the equipment.
Same with mine. Its well thought through and managed. You take my point though - 7 people doing a yoga class inside legal, 7 people doing yoga in the park, illegal.
So, my 9 year old daughter has what appears to be a cold. Sniffles. Minor cough, sore throat. Kept her off school despite various other kids at her school / the school my wife works at having symptoms.
Have had a look on the website for a test. Got a "This Service is Very Busy" message. More tests may be available later apparently. "Do not call the helplines - you will not be able to get a test this way"
My friend who has been told she has been exposed to the pox has had the same message when she's looked multiple times a day. For the last 4 days.
World beating...
Clearly something is going wrong and the system can only clear a reduced number of tests. It isn't a case of unexpected demand.
I, and I think most governments, would do a root cause analysis, explain what was going wrong and let people know what we would do to fix it.
What I don't understand is why X is told to drive 200 miles to station B when station A in the same town has to send the samples to a lab anyway - so why not send the samples to a further lab?
Is it cos the commercial firms have divvied up the test stations and labs?
It could just be that optimising the distribution of thousands of tests an hour to testing stations and labs and people is a really hard problem. Especially when demand is bumping up against the limits of supply. Most of the time, we don't notice or mind, or we simplify the process by splitting it up into smaller localised chunks. Shiny apps are remarkably clever, but can't do everything, even now.
Good thing that there isn't somebody who doesn't really get computing planning to squeeze billions of pounds of efficiency out of the government by increasing the use of centralised dat... oh [insert appropriate word of exasperation here].
Well that guarantees the DUP will vote with the government then, even if Tory rebels vote with the SDLP
I too think the DUP will too vote with the Gov't on this (Regardless of the SDLP's move), which brings the starting majority effectively being 96. Can't see why any other parties would.
They won't, however as I said last night it would be amusing if 50 Tory MPs rebelled and the government only won the vote tonight thanks to DUP votes
HYUFD: what is your prediction? Which way will the vote go?
The government will win thanks to the DUP
The Tory critics will intensify if this happens. Clearly Cummings can't throw out Major, May, Howard, Cox, Hague and Lamont and Cameron.
Interesting times ahead, in the next few weeks.
I think he can and probably will.
But - hubris.
In a way that last year wasn't, that would surely be the end of the modern Conservative and Unionist Party.
I take the view that that party died some time ago and what we have in government is a UKIP/Brexit Party Government masquerading as a Conservative Government.
In a way it would be best for all these people to be expelled so that Boris’s party’s true colours can be seen for what they really are.
If this were really a BXP / UKIP Government, its policies would be far, far to the right of where they are under Boris. We'd be sending migrants back from our borders by force, foreign aid would be zero, and there would be no public health regulations for coronavirus at all, just a straight push for herd immunity. It's pure tosh.
The reason migrants can’t be sent back, whether by force or otherwise, is because the government cannot force other countries to accept people. Deportations only happen when the receiving country agrees to receive them. If they don’t you can’t deport no matter how many laws you tear up or lawyers you bar from acting.
If a boat is in British territorial waters or lands on a British shore, what are you going to do: shoot them? Drown them? Tow them to France? And what happens if the French close their ports to us?
So you prove my point that it's not a BXP/UKIP Government - they wouldn't give two hoots about your objections, they'd just do it. Meanwhile, Britain under Big Bad Boris is taking people off boats by the thousands. Bit of a discrepancy, no?
Am I right in thinking the rule of 6 doesn't apply to gyms? Putting ~20 people in a small spin studio with air con, while they all sweat buckets and breath heavily, ticks so many boxes for transmission.
Any sort of indoor gym class is a huge vector. Cardio outdoors. Gyms for lifting.
Am I right in thinking the rule of 6 doesn't apply to gyms? Putting ~20 people in a small spin studio with air con, while they all sweat buckets and breath heavily, ticks so many boxes for transmission.
Correct. My gym temperature checks everyone coming in and seriously restricts numbers in the Spin classes, but that's their choice rather than legal guidelines. Anywhere that makes money is free to carry on regardless. So its very clear - 10 people in a Spin Class indoors - safe and legal. 10 people group cycling outdoors - call the police.
But if its a protest involving bikes, thats ok, even if its 1000s.
Well that guarantees the DUP will vote with the government then, even if Tory rebels vote with the SDLP
I too think the DUP will too vote with the Gov't on this (Regardless of the SDLP's move), which brings the starting majority effectively being 96. Can't see why any other parties would.
They won't, however as I said last night it would be amusing if 50 Tory MPs rebelled and the government only won the vote tonight thanks to DUP votes
HYUFD: what is your prediction? Which way will the vote go?
The government will win thanks to the DUP
The Tory critics will intensify if this happens. Clearly Cummings can't throw out Major, May, Howard, Cox, Hague and Lamont and Cameron.
Interesting times ahead, in the next few weeks.
I think he can and probably will.
But - hubris.
In a way that last year wasn't, that would surely be the end of the modern Conservative and Unionist Party.
I take the view that that party died some time ago and what we have in government is a UKIP/Brexit Party Government masquerading as a Conservative Government.
In a way it would be best for all these people to be expelled so that Boris’s party’s true colours can be seen for what they really are.
If this were really a BXP / UKIP Government, its policies would be far, far to the right of where they are under Boris. We'd be sending migrants back from our borders by force, foreign aid would be zero, and there would be no public health regulations for coronavirus at all, just a straight push for herd immunity. It's pure tosh.
The reason migrants can’t be sent back, whether by force or otherwise, is because the government cannot force other countries to accept people. Deportations only happen when the receiving country agrees to receive them. If they don’t you can’t deport no matter how many laws you tear up or lawyers you bar from acting.
If a boat is in British territorial waters or lands on a British shore, what are you going to do: shoot them? Drown them? Tow them to France? And what happens if the French close their ports to us?
So you prove my point that it's not a BXP/UKIP Government - they wouldn't give two hoots about your objections, they'd just do it. Meanwhile, Britain under Big Bad Boris is taking people off boats by the thousands. Bit of a discrepancy, no?
I’m not clear whether you agree with what the government is currently doing or want people in boats to be towed out to sea and left there.
I'm sorry to see the demise of the old masthead - which should have been given Grade 2 listed status before it was demolished. But if a starving graphic designer has earned himself 10 grand for typing out 'politicalbetting" and applying colour and shadow, fair play and congratulations. The only problem is that it appears as "OLITICALBETTING.CO" on my ipad and 'LITICALBETTING.C" on my phone and, at the risk of being waved away as a curmudgeonly old git, I'm bound to say this is not an improvement.
Well that guarantees the DUP will vote with the government then, even if Tory rebels vote with the SDLP
I too think the DUP will too vote with the Gov't on this (Regardless of the SDLP's move), which brings the starting majority effectively being 96. Can't see why any other parties would.
They won't, however as I said last night it would be amusing if 50 Tory MPs rebelled and the government only won the vote tonight thanks to DUP votes
HYUFD: what is your prediction? Which way will the vote go?
The government will win thanks to the DUP
The Tory critics will intensify if this happens. Clearly Cummings can't throw out Major, May, Howard, Cox, Hague and Lamont and Cameron.
Interesting times ahead, in the next few weeks.
I think he can and probably will.
But - hubris.
In a way that last year wasn't, that would surely be the end of the modern Conservative and Unionist Party.
I take the view that that party died some time ago and what we have in government is a UKIP/Brexit Party Government masquerading as a Conservative Government.
In a way it would be best for all these people to be expelled so that Boris’s party’s true colours can be seen for what they really are.
If this were really a BXP / UKIP Government, its policies would be far, far to the right of where they are under Boris. We'd be sending migrants back from our borders by force, foreign aid would be zero, and there would be no public health regulations for coronavirus at all, just a straight push for herd immunity. It's pure tosh.
The reason migrants can’t be sent back, whether by force or otherwise, is because the government cannot force other countries to accept people. Deportations only happen when the receiving country agrees to receive them. If they don’t you can’t deport no matter how many laws you tear up or lawyers you bar from acting.
If a boat is in British territorial waters or lands on a British shore, what are you going to do: shoot them? Drown them? Tow them to France? And what happens if the French close their ports to us?
So you prove my point that it's not a BXP/UKIP Government - they wouldn't give two hoots about your objections, they'd just do it. Meanwhile, Britain under Big Bad Boris is taking people off boats by the thousands. Bit of a discrepancy, no?
I’m not clear whether you agree with what the government is currently doing or want people in boats to be towed out to sea and left there.
You can be clear that they are not doing what they would be doing if they were what you accuse them of being.
The reason migrants can’t be sent back, whether by force or otherwise, is because the government cannot force other countries to accept people. Deportations only happen when the receiving country agrees to receive them. If they don’t you can’t deport no matter how many laws you tear up or lawyers you bar from acting.
If a boat is in British territorial waters or lands on a British shore, what are you going to do: shoot them? Drown them? Tow them to France? And what happens if the French close their ports to us?
You stick them in partially fuelled lifeboats and tow them to a spot that's outside French territorial waters but in international waters. They only have enough fuel to get to France not the UK.
It could 100% be done if the will were there. I am very surprised Johnson and Patel aren't copping more shit over the channel situation.
You propose leaving women and children in lifeboats in the Atlantic or in the Channel, one of the busiest sea lanes in the world, and hope they will be ok and not drown. Wow!
Dura_Ace is mischievously thinking out loud on behalf of Priti Patel.
Dura_Ace is great, he is the thinking poster's SeanT.!
Am I right in thinking the rule of 6 doesn't apply to gyms? Putting ~20 people in a small spin studio with air con, while they all sweat buckets and breath heavily, ticks so many boxes for transmission.
Any sort of indoor gym class is a huge vector. Cardio outdoors. Gyms for lifting.
Went past about thirty people in a room all huffing away on rowing machines yesterday. But hey, the door was open so I’m sure it was fine, right?
That's not going to the fix the problem of senior opposition in the Lords, and the ex-Prime Mininsters tied to it outside parliament. It's not Autumn 2019, and the Tory party of old is down to its nucleus, playing with which will create some form of explosive results.
Am I right in thinking the rule of 6 doesn't apply to gyms? Putting ~20 people in a small spin studio with air con, while they all sweat buckets and breath heavily, ticks so many boxes for transmission.
Any sort of indoor gym class is a huge vector. Cardio outdoors. Gyms for lifting.
Went past about thirty people in a room all huffing away on rowing machines yesterday. But hey, the door was open so I’m sure it was fine, right?
The one outdoor restriction that does actually make sense is private gardens. You're all out enjoying drinks, it starts to get a bit cold and before you know it everyone is in the house ! Less likely to happen in a park.
It is the same hill that arch-Brexiteer Jeremy Corbyn would have been happy to die on.
One of the best things about BREXIT
It is. But for me state aid means publicly owned utilities and infrastructure not Dominic Cummings running a cowboy tech hedge fund underwritten by the taxpayer.
The reason migrants can’t be sent back, whether by force or otherwise, is because the government cannot force other countries to accept people. Deportations only happen when the receiving country agrees to receive them. If they don’t you can’t deport no matter how many laws you tear up or lawyers you bar from acting.
If a boat is in British territorial waters or lands on a British shore, what are you going to do: shoot them? Drown them? Tow them to France? And what happens if the French close their ports to us?
You stick them in partially fuelled lifeboats and tow them to a spot that's outside French territorial waters but in international waters. They only have enough fuel to get to France not the UK.
It could 100% be done if the will were there. I am very surprised Johnson and Patel aren't copping more shit over the channel situation.
You propose leaving women and children in lifeboats in the Atlantic or in the Channel, one of the busiest sea lanes in the world, and hope they will be ok and not drown. Wow!
Dura_Ace is mischievously thinking out loud on behalf of Priti Patel.
Dura_Ace is great, he is the thinking poster's SeanT.!
He's also a hot-shot at Geography, unlike some I could mention.
So what's our spread on the number of Tory rebels tonight? I'm opening the market with a spread of 28-32. (Not for money, just for fun).
You need to make it clear if you mean Con MPs who vot against, or Con MPs who abstain. If it's the latter, how do you treat paired MPs who don't vote?
If it's the former I would sell. I can't see many voting against for a second reading.
I reckon pairing should be done away with, have all votes done by proxy if someone can't physically be there. Pairing gives more power to the whip's office though - marginally likely rebels can be told "You're paired with Sir Keir" rather than asking Cox to abstain for himself and abstain in person for their proxy.
The reason migrants can’t be sent back, whether by force or otherwise, is because the government cannot force other countries to accept people. Deportations only happen when the receiving country agrees to receive them. If they don’t you can’t deport no matter how many laws you tear up or lawyers you bar from acting.
If a boat is in British territorial waters or lands on a British shore, what are you going to do: shoot them? Drown them? Tow them to France? And what happens if the French close their ports to us?
You stick them in partially fuelled lifeboats and tow them to a spot that's outside French territorial waters but in international waters. They only have enough fuel to get to France not the UK.
It could 100% be done if the will were there. I am very surprised Johnson and Patel aren't copping more shit over the channel situation.
You propose leaving women and children in lifeboats in the Atlantic or in the Channel, one of the busiest sea lanes in the world, and hope they will be ok and not drown. Wow!
I don't agree with his idea but to be fair they're putting themselves into that sea lane.
We should be doing whatever it takes to stop that for welfare reasons alone, it is a terrible thing people are doing and seriously jeopardising their safety.
I would allow asylum seekers to work and contribute if only to avoid them being sucked into the black economy and being exploited by the people traffickers, who are thoroughly evil people. We are permitting / turning a blind eye to appalling exploitation and 21st century slavery. I also rather like what @rcs1000 has described as the Swiss approach.
So what's our spread on the number of Tory rebels tonight? I'm opening the market with a spread of 28-32. (Not for money, just for fun).
You need to make it clear if you mean Con MPs who vot against, or Con MPs who abstain. If it's the latter, how do you treat paired MPs who don't vote?
If it's the former I would sell. I can't see many voting against for a second reading.
I reckon pairing should be done away with, have all votes done by proxy if someone can't physically be there. Pairing gives more power to the whip's office though - marginally likely rebels can be told "You're paired with Sir Keir" rather than asking Cox to abstain for himself and abstain in person for their proxy.
If the Tory rebellion is all abstention rather than votes against it's going to need ~96 rebels ! So no chance the legislation gets defeated. With that calculation in mind, labour can oppose knowing the Gov't then completely owns the bill. If it was closer there'd be a potential Lab-whipped abstention I think.
The reason migrants can’t be sent back, whether by force or otherwise, is because the government cannot force other countries to accept people. Deportations only happen when the receiving country agrees to receive them. If they don’t you can’t deport no matter how many laws you tear up or lawyers you bar from acting.
If a boat is in British territorial waters or lands on a British shore, what are you going to do: shoot them? Drown them? Tow them to France? And what happens if the French close their ports to us?
You stick them in partially fuelled lifeboats and tow them to a spot that's outside French territorial waters but in international waters. They only have enough fuel to get to France not the UK.
It could 100% be done if the will were there. I am very surprised Johnson and Patel aren't copping more shit over the channel situation.
You propose leaving women and children in lifeboats in the Atlantic or in the Channel, one of the busiest sea lanes in the world, and hope they will be ok and not drown. Wow!
Dura_Ace is mischievously thinking out loud on behalf of Priti Patel.
Dura_Ace is great, he is the thinking poster's SeanT.!
He's also a hot-shot at Geography, unlike some I could mention.
He needs that sort of knowledge to outrun the rozzers.
So what's our spread on the number of Tory rebels tonight? I'm opening the market with a spread of 28-32. (Not for money, just for fun).
You need to make it clear if you mean Con MPs who vot against, or Con MPs who abstain. If it's the latter, how do you treat paired MPs who don't vote?
If it's the former I would sell. I can't see many voting against for a second reading.
Yes, I meant actively abstain or vote against. I agree it's hard to figure out how many are actively abstaining, although I suppose you can get an idea from the corresponding Labour total.
So what's our spread on the number of Tory rebels tonight? I'm opening the market with a spread of 28-32. (Not for money, just for fun).
You need to make it clear if you mean Con MPs who vot against, or Con MPs who abstain. If it's the latter, how do you treat paired MPs who don't vote?
If it's the former I would sell. I can't see many voting against for a second reading.
I reckon pairing should be done away with, have all votes done by proxy if someone can't physically be there. Pairing gives more power to the whip's office though - marginally likely rebels can be told "You're paired with Sir Keir" rather than asking Cox to abstain for himself and abstain in person for their proxy.
Pairing is archaic.
Isn't this stuff all suspended in favour of remote divisions atm?
So what's our spread on the number of Tory rebels tonight? I'm opening the market with a spread of 28-32. (Not for money, just for fun).
Quote a few MPs are drawing a distinction between Second Reading and amendments/Third Reading, so my guess is lower than that for tonight (Second Reading).
Boris needs to do away with the way Tory MPs are selected. Yes, he's orchestrated purges in the past, but too many are still showing independent thought. Probably best to abolish location associations altogether and have individuals apply to CCHQ in person. Dom vets and then allocates constituencies accordingly. There should also be a clause that means the MP is legally obliged to stand down at any time and force a by-election at the behest of the leadership.
So what's our spread on the number of Tory rebels tonight? I'm opening the market with a spread of 28-32. (Not for money, just for fun).
You need to make it clear if you mean Con MPs who vot against, or Con MPs who abstain. If it's the latter, how do you treat paired MPs who don't vote?
If it's the former I would sell. I can't see many voting against for a second reading.
I reckon pairing should be done away with, have all votes done by proxy if someone can't physically be there. Pairing gives more power to the whip's office though - marginally likely rebels can be told "You're paired with Sir Keir" rather than asking Cox to abstain for himself and abstain in person for their proxy.
Pairing is archaic.
Isn't this stuff all suspended in favour of remote divisions atm?
I think it is, yes. Rees Mogg tried to get trad back but IIRC he was thwarted by a rebel alliance of common sense and reality.
"Active consideration" here means "maybe, maybe not,
...
probably not"
But by saying it, even in a "maybe, maybe not" sense, the government will look weak if they don't do it. And it's not 2019- there isn't going to be another General Election any time soon. So losing the whip is a much less potent threat than last time.
I also don't think Cummings would dare to remove the whip from May ; too much internal fallout and destabilisation.
I think it would be delicious red meat if he did.
Like Starmer removing Corbyn.
That did come to mind for me as well, but partly in the sense that neither is viable for either man.
You're right. I know these are "interesting times" and all that but some things - such as either May or Corbyn losing the whip - can safely be ruled out.
So what's our spread on the number of Tory rebels tonight? I'm opening the market with a spread of 28-32. (Not for money, just for fun).
You need to make it clear if you mean Con MPs who vot against, or Con MPs who abstain. If it's the latter, how do you treat paired MPs who don't vote?
If it's the former I would sell. I can't see many voting against for a second reading.
I reckon pairing should be done away with, have all votes done by proxy if someone can't physically be there. Pairing gives more power to the whip's office though - marginally likely rebels can be told "You're paired with Sir Keir" rather than asking Cox to abstain for himself and abstain in person for their proxy.
I agree with the idea of taking the pairing power away from the whips. My only worry with allowing absentee voting is the long term erosion of MPs voting in person. I think it is reasonable to expect MPs to be in the Palace of Westminster unless they have important governmental/parliamentry responsibilities outside of London or for health/family reasons. I have no idea how that can be effectively enforced though.
So what's our spread on the number of Tory rebels tonight? I'm opening the market with a spread of 28-32. (Not for money, just for fun).
You need to make it clear if you mean Con MPs who vot against, or Con MPs who abstain. If it's the latter, how do you treat paired MPs who don't vote?
If it's the former I would sell. I can't see many voting against for a second reading.
I reckon pairing should be done away with, have all votes done by proxy if someone can't physically be there. Pairing gives more power to the whip's office though - marginally likely rebels can be told "You're paired with Sir Keir" rather than asking Cox to abstain for himself and abstain in person for their proxy.
Pairing is archaic.
Isn't this stuff all suspended in favour of remote divisions atm?
The last vote I saw was the conga line round the palaces, quite a few proxy votes in that one. Are they back to remote divisions now ?
I very much like the new look but it still cuts off a comment at the bottom of the page for me and doesn't have the "show more" button for comments, so still need to use Vanilla to see older comments. Firefox on Windows if it matters, not tried on mobile yet.
I hope we aren't going to get the same nonsense as when Prince Charles, Boris or Gove got a test and some windbags in the media went nuts about how did they get a test, did they jump the queue, etc.
The reason migrants can’t be sent back, whether by force or otherwise, is because the government cannot force other countries to accept people. Deportations only happen when the receiving country agrees to receive them. If they don’t you can’t deport no matter how many laws you tear up or lawyers you bar from acting.
If a boat is in British territorial waters or lands on a British shore, what are you going to do: shoot them? Drown them? Tow them to France? And what happens if the French close their ports to us?
You stick them in partially fuelled lifeboats and tow them to a spot that's outside French territorial waters but in international waters. They only have enough fuel to get to France not the UK.
It could 100% be done if the will were there. I am very surprised Johnson and Patel aren't copping more shit over the channel situation.
This may be an ignorant question but are there any international waters that can reach France but not the UK? I wouldn't have thought there were.
Boris needs to do away with the way Tory MPs are selected. Yes, he's orchestrated purges in the past, but too many are still showing independent thought. Probably best to abolish location associations altogether and have individuals apply to CCHQ in person. Dom vets and then allocates constituencies accordingly. There should also be a clause that means the MP is legally obliged to stand down at any time and force a by-election at the behest of the leadership.
Better to keep the local associations, but they need to submit the results in secret to CCHQ. If a proposed candidate is considered to be "unaligned with the interests of the party", the local association will be asked to reconsider. That way the control is centralised while still maintaining the illusion of grass roots influence.
Well that guarantees the DUP will vote with the government then, even if Tory rebels vote with the SDLP
I too think the DUP will too vote with the Gov't on this (Regardless of the SDLP's move), which brings the starting majority effectively being 96. Can't see why any other parties would.
They won't, however as I said last night it would be amusing if 50 Tory MPs rebelled and the government only won the vote tonight thanks to DUP votes
HYUFD: what is your prediction? Which way will the vote go?
The government will win thanks to the DUP
The Tory critics will intensify if this happens. Clearly Cummings can't throw out Major, May, Howard, Cox, Hague and Lamont and Cameron.
Interesting times ahead, in the next few weeks.
I think he can and probably will.
But - hubris.
In a way that last year wasn't, that would surely be the end of the modern Conservative and Unionist Party.
I take the view that that party died some time ago and what we have in government is a UKIP/Brexit Party Government masquerading as a Conservative Government.
In a way it would be best for all these people to be expelled so that Boris’s party’s true colours can be seen for what they really are.
If this were really a BXP / UKIP Government, its policies would be far, far to the right of where they are under Boris. We'd be sending migrants back from our borders by force, foreign aid would be zero, and there would be no public health regulations for coronavirus at all, just a straight push for herd immunity. It's pure tosh.
The reason migrants can’t be sent back, whether by force or otherwise, is because the government cannot force other countries to accept people. Deportations only happen when the receiving country agrees to receive them. If they don’t you can’t deport no matter how many laws you tear up or lawyers you bar from acting.
If a boat is in British territorial waters or lands on a British shore, what are you going to do: shoot them? Drown them? Tow them to France? And what happens if the French close their ports to us?
So you prove my point that it's not a BXP/UKIP Government - they wouldn't give two hoots about your objections, they'd just do it. Meanwhile, Britain under Big Bad Boris is taking people off boats by the thousands. Bit of a discrepancy, no?
I’m not clear whether you agree with what the government is currently doing or want people in boats to be towed out to sea and left there.
You can be clear that they are not doing what they would be doing if they were what you accuse them of being.
Why are you so shy about saying what you would like to see happen, which is the question I asked you?
Well that guarantees the DUP will vote with the government then, even if Tory rebels vote with the SDLP
I too think the DUP will too vote with the Gov't on this (Regardless of the SDLP's move), which brings the starting majority effectively being 96. Can't see why any other parties would.
They won't, however as I said last night it would be amusing if 50 Tory MPs rebelled and the government only won the vote tonight thanks to DUP votes
HYUFD: what is your prediction? Which way will the vote go?
The government will win thanks to the DUP
The Tory critics will intensify if this happens. Clearly Cummings can't throw out Major, May, Howard, Cox, Hague and Lamont and Cameron.
Interesting times ahead, in the next few weeks.
I think he can and probably will.
But - hubris.
In a way that last year wasn't, that would surely be the end of the modern Conservative and Unionist Party.
I take the view that that party died some time ago and what we have in government is a UKIP/Brexit Party Government masquerading as a Conservative Government.
In a way it would be best for all these people to be expelled so that Boris’s party’s true colours can be seen for what they really are.
If this were really a BXP / UKIP Government, its policies would be far, far to the right of where they are under Boris. We'd be sending migrants back from our borders by force, foreign aid would be zero, and there would be no public health regulations for coronavirus at all, just a straight push for herd immunity. It's pure tosh.
The reason migrants can’t be sent back, whether by force or otherwise, is because the government cannot force other countries to accept people. Deportations only happen when the receiving country agrees to receive them. If they don’t you can’t deport no matter how many laws you tear up or lawyers you bar from acting.
If a boat is in British territorial waters or lands on a British shore, what are you going to do: shoot them? Drown them? Tow them to France? And what happens if the French close their ports to us?
So you prove my point that it's not a BXP/UKIP Government - they wouldn't give two hoots about your objections, they'd just do it. Meanwhile, Britain under Big Bad Boris is taking people off boats by the thousands. Bit of a discrepancy, no?
I’m not clear whether you agree with what the government is currently doing or want people in boats to be towed out to sea and left there.
You can be clear that they are not doing what they would be doing if they were what you accuse them of being.
Why are you so shy about saying what you would like to see happen, which is the question I asked you?
I am full of admiration that you could decipher Mr Blue's code. I still haven't a clue what he is on about.
Boris needs to do away with the way Tory MPs are selected. Yes, he's orchestrated purges in the past, but too many are still showing independent thought. Probably best to abolish location associations altogether and have individuals apply to CCHQ in person. Dom vets and then allocates constituencies accordingly. There should also be a clause that means the MP is legally obliged to stand down at any time and force a by-election at the behest of the leadership.
Better to keep the local associations, but they need to submit the results in secret to CCHQ. If a proposed candidate is considered to be "unaligned with the interests of the party", the local association will be asked to reconsider. That way the control is centralised while still maintaining the illusion of grass roots influence.
Isn't this how David Cameron kept Boris's dear old dad off the A-list?
Comments
** buffs nails and blushes **
#2020bingo
SpaceX gearing up for 12-mile-high test flight with Starship SN8 prototype
https://www.space.com/spacex-starship-sn8-prototype-test-flight-soon.html
Plus I have some knowledge about some of DC’s associates, which I am unable to share for reasons of confidentiality, which is making me wonder what is really going on.
I think Mike should have thrown his hat into the ring for next LD leader. What might have been...
Good thing that there isn't somebody who doesn't really get computing planning to squeeze billions of pounds of efficiency out of the government by increasing the use of centralised dat... oh [insert appropriate word of exasperation here].
https://twitter.com/DavidGHFrost/status/1305121862255599623?s=20
https://twitter.com/Rehman_Chishti/status/1305455985058816003
Dura_Ace is great, he is the thinking poster's SeanT.!
All parliamentarians must be heard even if isolating at any rate.
If it's the former I would sell. I can't see many voting against for a second reading.
Airbrushed from history. I last heard it a couple of years ago at breakfast in a Cologne hotel.
...
probably not"
Like Starmer removing Corbyn.
So no chance the legislation gets defeated. With that calculation in mind, labour can oppose knowing the Gov't then completely owns the bill. If it was closer there'd be a potential Lab-whipped abstention I think.
Returned Accepted Ballots
Dems: 14184
GOP: 3385
Other: 7318
Requested Ballots
CONSTITUTION 159
DEMOCRATIC 388,711
GREEN 333
LIBERTARIAN 2,303
REPUBLICAN 127,226
UNAFFILIATED 239,325
Grand Total 758,057
Return Rate
Dems: 3.6%
GOP: 2.7%
Is abstention being counted as rebellion?
Trafalgar polling - The bad
Wisconsin courts - The ugly
The man we need
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54120753