politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Stoke Central’s down to whether BREXIT’s a big enough issue fo

There I was on the old thread like a fool....

Morning all.

Quick round-up of last night’s vote on the Brexit Bill and everyone’s favourite speaker.

1st amendment. - The House of Commons opposed a Labour amendment to the Brexit bill that would have forced May to make regular reports back to parliament every two months by 333 to 284. Government majority 49.

2nd amendment- Labour calling for the leaders of the devolved administrations to be consulted and have their views taken into account before any final Brexit deal also failed by 333 votes to 276. Government majority of 57.

3rd amendment - Plaid Cymru amendment that would have required the Government to report to Welsh Assembly on effect on Welsh finances of Brexit, defeated by 330 to 267.
Government majority 63

The Speaker for the House of Lords was not consulted before Bercow’s student rant yesterday and will be having a chat with him, later this morning, presumably without coffee.

SimonStClare said:

Morning all.

Quick round-up of last night’s vote on the Brexit Bill and everyone’s favourite speaker.

1st amendment. - The House of Commons opposed a Labour amendment to the Brexit bill that would have forced May to make regular reports back to parliament every two months by 333 to 284. Government majority 49.

2nd amendment- Labour calling for the leaders of the devolved administrations to be consulted and have their views taken into account before any final Brexit deal also failed by 333 votes to 276. Government majority of 57.

3rd amendment - Plaid Cymru amendment that would have required the Government to report to Welsh Assembly on effect on Welsh finances of Brexit, defeated by 330 to 267.
Government majority 63

The Speaker for the House of Lords was not consulted before Bercow’s student rant yesterday and will be having a chat with him, later this morning, presumably without coffee.

Government majority held up well. Mr Bercow might like to reflect on his effusive welcome to the President of China:

https://www.parliament.uk/business/commons/the-speaker/speeches/speeches/speakers-speech-president-xi-jinpings-address-to-parliament/

On topic, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Labour brand trumps the Corbyn catastrophe in Stoke......

kle4 said:

than avowedly political stance which cannot possibly be without some hypocrisy - anything relying on sexism or human rights to not do something will have some , given the reality of nations we deal with in some places - are actually quite troubling coming from the speaker.

The Daily Mail have a helpful round up of Speaker Bercow's favoured dictators & human rights abusers:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4196814/Donald-Trump-faces-BANNED-speaking-Parliament.html

However ghastly Trump is he - and his country - is not remotely in the same league as some of these.....

In any case, I doubt Trump wants to speak to Parliament (neither Reagan nor Bush did) - what he wants is bling - and the Royals have that by the shovel load......

david_herdson said:

RobD said:

There I was on the old thread like a fool....

That sounds like a bad first line to a limerick.

Why stop at one bad line...

'Twas on the old thread like a fool
With bad posts that made me a tool
Had pushed all my luck
Got mad and said f*ck
Mods warn it's not nice to be cruel

Not sure about the last line, but I'm pretty happy for that at 5.30am

CarlottaVance said:

kle4 said:

than avowedly political stance which cannot possibly be without some hypocrisy - anything relying on sexism or human rights to not do something will have some , given the reality of nations we deal with in some places - are actually quite troubling coming from the speaker.

The Daily Mail have a helpful round up of Speaker Bercow's favoured dictators & human rights abusers......

Going back to the 1970s, apparently. I'd no idea he'd been Speaker for so long.

BBC's lead story in politics:

Speaker John Bercow criticised over Donald Trump comments

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38889941

Nigel Farage being in the news, for whatever reason, is likely to be good for UKIP.

A majority of Britons approve of the government's approach to leaving the European Union, a poll indicated on Monday, in a boost to Prime Minister Theresa May after she laid out her priorities for negotiations......

The proportion of the public that approve of the government's preparations for Brexit stood at 53 percent, ORB found, up 15 points from a poll last month when only 38 percent approved, with 62 percent disapproving.

The poll also found that 47 percent agreed that May would get the right deal for Britain, with just 29 percent disagreeing. In January, it was evenly split at 35 percent between those who agreed and disagreed.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-poll-idUKKBN15L1ZE

CarlottaVance said:

The UK could shake off the near-term impact of Brexit to become the fastest-growing economy in the G7 group of rich countries between now and 2050, according to a report that paints a bright outlook for the country’s prospects outside the EU.

Consultants PwC say the UK economy will not escape entirely unscathed from the decision to leave the bloc and that it will dampen growth prospects in the short term. But the brunt of the impact would be felt by 2020 and in the years that follow the UK would outperform its peers thanks to its relatively large working age population and its flexible economy.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/feb/07/uk-g7-economy-trade-pwc-brexit-us

"could"

werent these the muppets who claimed we'd fall off a cliff if Brexit happened

theyre simply trying to ingratiate themselves with thge new govt

CarlottaVance said:

The reaction to Trump — it lacks the rigour of a response — has followed the grammar of identity politics. I am appalled. You are not appalled enough. We are virtuous. They are racists. This is all well and good but achieves nothing beyond giving the speaker a warm glow of virtue.

Racist is bit passe.

2016: Your a racist
2017: Your a white supremacist
2018: ?

Alanbrooke said:

CarlottaVance said:

The UK could shake off the near-term impact of Brexit to become the fastest-growing economy in the G7 group of rich countries between now and 2050, according to a report that paints a bright outlook for the country’s prospects outside the EU.

Consultants PwC say the UK economy will not escape entirely unscathed from the decision to leave the bloc and that it will dampen growth prospects in the short term. But the brunt of the impact would be felt by 2020 and in the years that follow the UK would outperform its peers thanks to its relatively large working age population and its flexible economy.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/feb/07/uk-g7-economy-trade-pwc-brexit-us

"could"

werent these the muppets who claimed we'd fall off a cliff if Brexit happened

theyre simply trying to ingratiate themselves with thge new govt

They can't be looking for business from the French govt:

They see the UK economy remaining in the top 10, slipping down one spot from ninth place now to 10th in purchasing power parity (PPP) terms.....France is forecast to drop out of the top 10, to 12th place in 2050, while Germany is forecast to fall from fifth place to ninth.

TheScreamingEagles said:

AlsoIndigo said:

CarlottaVance said:

The reaction to Trump — it lacks the rigour of a response — has followed the grammar of identity politics. I am appalled. You are not appalled enough. We are virtuous. They are racists. This is all well and good but achieves nothing beyond giving the speaker a warm glow of virtue.

Racist is bit passe.

2016: Your a racist
2017: Your a white supremacist
2018: ?

*You're

The difference between 'knowing your shit and knowing you're shit'.......

CarlottaVance said:

Quentin Letts on why Speaker Bercow may have been itching after the limelight:

This is a Speaker who aches to be the centre of attention. The past week or so, when MPs have been grabbing headlines with their Brexit and Trump agitations, has not been easy for him. He has felt upstaged. Yesterday he also had to endure the rare spectacle of Theresa May raising merriment when she snotted Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry.

The details are wearisome but the exchange ended with Mrs May calling chi-chi socialist Miss Thornberry by her married name, ‘Lady Nugee’ (her husband is a judicial knight). Miss Thornberry became comically indignant – Hattie Jacques stung on the rump by a horsefly. She went stomping up to Bercow and made a point of order to complain, all meaty forearms and juddering chins, that ‘I have never been a Lady!’

Mrs May amiably said she was sorry if she had upset the old baggage by uttering her married name but she, May, had always been happy to use her husband’s surname.

This brought another cascade of cheers from the Tories. All this Bercow watched, swishing his tail, desperate to become involved and hating the way the Conservatives were prospering.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4197990/QUENTIN-LETTS-sees-red-mist-come-Speaker-s-chair.html#ixzz4XySvB9oL

A lot of amateur psychoanalysis to cover up that Bercow is a Tory.

DecrepitJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

Quentin Letts on why Speaker Bercow may have been itching after the limelight:

This is a Speaker who aches to be the centre of attention. The past week or so, when MPs have been grabbing headlines with their Brexit and Trump agitations, has not been easy for him. He has felt upstaged. Yesterday he also had to endure the rare spectacle of Theresa May raising merriment when she snotted Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry.

The details are wearisome but the exchange ended with Mrs May calling chi-chi socialist Miss Thornberry by her married name, ‘Lady Nugee’ (her husband is a judicial knight). Miss Thornberry became comically indignant – Hattie Jacques stung on the rump by a horsefly. She went stomping up to Bercow and made a point of order to complain, all meaty forearms and juddering chins, that ‘I have never been a Lady!’

Mrs May amiably said she was sorry if she had upset the old baggage by uttering her married name but she, May, had always been happy to use her husband’s surname.

This brought another cascade of cheers from the Tories. All this Bercow watched, swishing his tail, desperate to become involved and hating the way the Conservatives were prospering.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4197990/QUENTIN-LETTS-sees-red-mist-come-Speaker-s-chair.html#ixzz4XySvB9oL

A lot of amateur psychoanalysis to cover up that Bercow is a Tory.

He's a prat. Responding to this will not be easy for the government but it is necessary.

CarlottaVance said:

Quentin Letts on why Speaker Bercow may have been itching after the limelight:

This is a Speaker who aches to be the centre of attention. The past week or so, when MPs have been grabbing headlines with their Brexit and Trump agitations, has not been easy for him. He has felt upstaged. Yesterday he also had to endure the rare spectacle of Theresa May raising merriment when she snotted Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry.

The details are wearisome but the exchange ended with Mrs May calling chi-chi socialist Miss Thornberry by her married name, ‘Lady Nugee’ (her husband is a judicial knight). Miss Thornberry became comically indignant – Hattie Jacques stung on the rump by a horsefly. She went stomping up to Bercow and made a point of order to complain, all meaty forearms and juddering chins, that ‘I have never been a Lady!’

Mrs May amiably said she was sorry if she had upset the old baggage by uttering her married name but she, May, had always been happy to use her husband’s surname.

This brought another cascade of cheers from the Tories. All this Bercow watched, swishing his tail, desperate to become involved and hating the way the Conservatives were prospering.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4197990/QUENTIN-LETTS-sees-red-mist-come-Speaker-s-chair.html#ixzz4XySvB9oL

Unworthy behaviour by Theresa May, casually mocking every woman who has chosen not to take her husband's name and putting herself on a par with those who refer to Gideon.

TheScreamingEagles said:

CarlottaVance said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

AlsoIndigo said:

CarlottaVance said:

The reaction to Trump — it lacks the rigour of a response — has followed the grammar of identity politics. I am appalled. You are not appalled enough. We are virtuous. They are racists. This is all well and good but achieves nothing beyond giving the speaker a warm glow of virtue.

Racist is bit passe.

2016: Your a racist
2017: Your a white supremacist
2018: ?

*You're

The difference between 'knowing your shit and knowing you're shit'.......

Is why I'm such a fan of the Oxford comma.

So...

Don't keep us in suspense. How did your friend's date go?

AlastairMeeks said:

CarlottaVance said:

Quentin Letts on why Speaker Bercow may have been itching after the limelight:

This is a Speaker who aches to be the centre of attention. The past week or so, when MPs have been grabbing headlines with their Brexit and Trump agitations, has not been easy for him. He has felt upstaged. Yesterday he also had to endure the rare spectacle of Theresa May raising merriment when she snotted Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry.

The details are wearisome but the exchange ended with Mrs May calling chi-chi socialist Miss Thornberry by her married name, ‘Lady Nugee’ (her husband is a judicial knight). Miss Thornberry became comically indignant – Hattie Jacques stung on the rump by a horsefly. She went stomping up to Bercow and made a point of order to complain, all meaty forearms and juddering chins, that ‘I have never been a Lady!’

Mrs May amiably said she was sorry if she had upset the old baggage by uttering her married name but she, May, had always been happy to use her husband’s surname.

This brought another cascade of cheers from the Tories. All this Bercow watched, swishing his tail, desperate to become involved and hating the way the Conservatives were prospering.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4197990/QUENTIN-LETTS-sees-red-mist-come-Speaker-s-chair.html#ixzz4XySvB9oL

Unworthy behaviour by Theresa May, casually mocking every woman who has chosen not to take her husband's name and putting herself on a par with those who refer to Gideon.

I found that a bit confusing. Would she not refer to her as the Honourable Member for Islington South and Finsbury? Why was she using a name at all?

ydoethur said:

DavidL said:

On topic have most, pretty much all on here not had this down as a safe and easy hold from the start? UKIP really don't do well at FPTP elections, they have too low a ceiling and are too divisive. It is also not obvious what their point is at the moment. This may change if the government contrives a soft Brexit but at the moment they seem to have very little to add.

Yes - the expectations management has been dreadful. If Labour hold Stoke, even if they lose Copeland that will still be held as a plus for Corbyn even though the loss of any safe seat to the government in a by-election should be terminal for him.

Incidentally the phone call has come and the inspectors are in from 9am. So if anybody who likes me could keep their fingers crossed and Mr Eagles and Mr Wisemann could refrain from sticking pins in their wax models of me for the next couple of days, I would be most grateful.

Hopefully, see you on the other side!

Good luck.

AlastairMeeks said:

CarlottaVance said:

Quentin Letts on why Speaker Bercow may have been itching after the limelight:

This is a Speaker who aches to be the centre of attention. The past week or so, when MPs have been grabbing headlines with their Brexit and Trump agitations, has not been easy for him. He has felt upstaged. Yesterday he also had to endure the rare spectacle of Theresa May raising merriment when she snotted Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry.

The details are wearisome but the exchange ended with Mrs May calling chi-chi socialist Miss Thornberry by her married name, ‘Lady Nugee’ (her husband is a judicial knight). Miss Thornberry became comically indignant – Hattie Jacques stung on the rump by a horsefly. She went stomping up to Bercow and made a point of order to complain, all meaty forearms and juddering chins, that ‘I have never been a Lady!’

Mrs May amiably said she was sorry if she had upset the old baggage by uttering her married name but she, May, had always been happy to use her husband’s surname.

This brought another cascade of cheers from the Tories. All this Bercow watched, swishing his tail, desperate to become involved and hating the way the Conservatives were prospering.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4197990/QUENTIN-LETTS-sees-red-mist-come-Speaker-s-chair.html#ixzz4XySvB9oL

Unworthy behaviour by Theresa May, casually mocking every woman who has chosen not to take her husband's name and putting herself on a par with those who refer to Gideon.

Caught up in the moment and the petty jibe culture of questions in the house no doubt. That said, while it was a petty jibe to refer to thornberry by a name she doesn't like to go by, clearly, it was thornwood who framed it in terms of being called by her husbands name, which could be said, playing devils advocate, to be criticising those who do take their husbands name, like may.

Ultimately May was being petty at thornberry, who then overreacted, looking a bit precious, so may went petty again.

AlastairMeeks said:

Nigel Farage being in the news, for whatever reason, is likely to be good for UKIP.

Tis said that there is no such thing as bad publicity!

I am predicting a fairly comfortable Labour win, with UKIP on less than 20% of the vote. There used to be a significant BNP vote in the constituency, so I think UKIP has a high floor, but low ceiling. When I looked at the 2015 GE results that was the pattern, with UKIP in the high teens in many seats, low twenties in a significant number, but very few close to the threshold for FPTP victory. UKIP have their fervent supporters, but remain a marmite party.

Doc Nuttal in his country tweeds looks very alien in Stoke.

Telegraph, 'undecided'...or.....

The contents of Mr Bercow’s near-hysterical rant about President Donald Trump’s planned state visit to Britain are unacceptable. So too is the fact that Mr Bercow has grossly exceeded his authority, seemingly believing himself entitled to wade deep into British foreign policy by dint of his office and his bottomless self-importance.

Mr Bercow has no business making sweeping statements about Britain’s relationship with the world’s leading economic and military power; the conduct of that relationship is a matter for ministers accountable to voters: Theresa May has sensibly chosen to engage with Mr Trump as a critical friend, eschewing the adolescent gesture politics Mr Bercow practises.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2017/02/06/john-bercow-does-not-speak-britain-just-monstrous-ego/

TheScreamingEagles said:

TOPPING said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

CarlottaVance said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

AlsoIndigo said:

CarlottaVance said:

The reaction to Trump — it lacks the rigour of a response — has followed the grammar of identity politics. I am appalled. You are not appalled enough. We are virtuous. They are racists. This is all well and good but achieves nothing beyond giving the speaker a warm glow of virtue.

Racist is bit passe.

2016: Your a racist
2017: Your a white supremacist
2018: ?

*You're

The difference between 'knowing your shit and knowing you're shit'.......

Is why I'm such a fan of the Oxford comma.

So...

Don't keep us in suspense. How did your friend's date go?

My friend has secured a second date for Thursday.

She's into politics and likes Corbyn.

Your friend is not really trying to match Sean T is he? Presumably not in the never kiss a Tory brigade.

foxinsoxuk said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Nigel Farage being in the news, for whatever reason, is likely to be good for UKIP.

Tis said that there is no such thing as bad publicity!

I am predicting a fairly comfortable Labour win, with UKIP on less than 20% of the vote. There used to be a significant BNP vote in the constituency, so I think UKIP has a high floor, but low ceiling. When I looked at the 2015 GE results that was the pattern, with UKIP in the high teens in many seats, low twenties in a significant number, but very few close to the threshold for FPTP victory. UKIP have their fervent supporters, but remain a marmite party.

Doc Nuttal in his country tweeds looks very alien in Stoke.

maybe he;s auditioning to be the new Dr Who

TheScreamingEagles said:

TOPPING said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

CarlottaVance said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

AlsoIndigo said:

CarlottaVance said:

The reaction to Trump — it lacks the rigour of a response — has followed the grammar of identity politics. I am appalled. You are not appalled enough. We are virtuous. They are racists. This is all well and good but achieves nothing beyond giving the speaker a warm glow of virtue.

Racist is bit passe.

2016: Your a racist
2017: Your a white supremacist
2018: ?

*You're

The difference between 'knowing your shit and knowing you're shit'.......

Is why I'm such a fan of the Oxford comma.

So...

Don't keep us in suspense. How did your friend's date go?

My friend has secured a second date for Thursday.

She's into politics and likes Corbyn.

Perhaps your friend could get her interested in council byelection results, as it is a Thursday date...

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks said:

CarlottaVance said:

Quentin Letts on why Speaker Bercow may have been itching after the limelight:

This is a Speaker who aches to be the centre of attention. The past week or so, when MPs have been grabbing headlines with their Brexit and Trump agitations, has not been easy for him. He has felt upstaged. Yesterday he also had to endure the rare spectacle of Theresa May raising merriment when she snotted Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry.

The details are wearisome but the exchange ended with Mrs May calling chi-chi socialist Miss Thornberry by her married name, ‘Lady Nugee’ (her husband is a judicial knight). Miss Thornberry became comically indignant – Hattie Jacques stung on the rump by a horsefly. She went stomping up to Bercow and made a point of order to complain, all meaty forearms and juddering chins, that ‘I have never been a Lady!’

Mrs May amiably said she was sorry if she had upset the old baggage by uttering her married name but she, May, had always been happy to use her husband’s surname.

This brought another cascade of cheers from the Tories. All this Bercow watched, swishing his tail, desperate to become involved and hating the way the Conservatives were prospering.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4197990/QUENTIN-LETTS-sees-red-mist-come-Speaker-s-chair.html#ixzz4XySvB9oL

Unworthy behaviour by Theresa May, casually mocking every woman who has chosen not to take her husband's name and putting herself on a par with those who refer to Gideon.

I found that a bit confusing. Would she not refer to her as the Honourable Member for Islington South and Finsbury? Why was she using a name at all?

Yes, the speaker clarified that the proper form of address is by constituency or job title.

May was responding to Thornberry's heckle, and heckled back.

I'm not sure Thornberry expressed her point of order as felicitously as she might have wished:

for the record, I have never been a lady, and it will take a great deal more than being married to a knight of the realm to make me one.

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2017-02-06/debates/800ae29b-2bdf-46e7-94d6-0a2cf60317b7/CommonsChamber

CarlottaVance said:

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks said:

CarlottaVance said:

Quentin Letts on why Speaker Bercow may have been itching after the limelight:

This is a Speaker who aches to be the centre of attention. The past week or so, when MPs have been grabbing headlines with their Brexit and Trump agitations, has not been easy for him. He has felt upstaged. Yesterday he also had to endure the rare spectacle of Theresa May raising merriment when she snotted Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry.

The details are wearisome but the exchange ended with Mrs May calling chi-chi socialist Miss Thornberry by her married name, ‘Lady Nugee’ (her husband is a judicial knight). Miss Thornberry became comically indignant – Hattie Jacques stung on the rump by a horsefly. She went stomping up to Bercow and made a point of order to complain, all meaty forearms and juddering chins, that ‘I have never been a Lady!’

Mrs May amiably said she was sorry if she had upset the old baggage by uttering her married name but she, May, had always been happy to use her husband’s surname.

This brought another cascade of cheers from the Tories. All this Bercow watched, swishing his tail, desperate to become involved and hating the way the Conservatives were prospering.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4197990/QUENTIN-LETTS-sees-red-mist-come-Speaker-s-chair.html#ixzz4XySvB9oL

Unworthy behaviour by Theresa May, casually mocking every woman who has chosen not to take her husband's name and putting herself on a par with those who refer to Gideon.

I found that a bit confusing. Would she not refer to her as the Honourable Member for Islington South and Finsbury? Why was she using a name at all?

Yes, the speaker clarified that the proper form of address is by constituency or job title.

May was responding to Thornberry's heckle, and heckled back.

I'm not sure Thornberry expressed her point of order as felicitously as she might have wished:

for the record, I have never been a lady, and it will take a great deal more than being married to a knight of the realm to make me one.

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2017-02-06/debates/800ae29b-2bdf-46e7-94d6-0a2cf60317b7/CommonsChamber

In fairness that is quite hard to disagree with.

CarlottaVance said:

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks said:

CarlottaVance said:

Quentin Letts on why Speaker Bercow may have been itching after the limelight:

This is a Speaker who aches to be the centre of attention. The past week or so, when MPs have been grabbing headlines with their Brexit and Trump agitations, has not been easy for him. He has felt upstaged. Yesterday he also had to endure the rare spectacle of Theresa May raising merriment when she snotted Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry.

The details are wearisome but the exchange ended with Mrs May calling chi-chi socialist Miss Thornberry by her married name, ‘Lady Nugee’ (her husband is a judicial knight). Miss Thornberry became comically indignant – Hattie Jacques stung on the rump by a horsefly. She went stomping up to Bercow and made a point of order to complain, all meaty forearms and juddering chins, that ‘I have never been a Lady!’

Mrs May amiably said she was sorry if she had upset the old baggage by uttering her married name but she, May, had always been happy to use her husband’s surname.

This brought another cascade of cheers from the Tories. All this Bercow watched, swishing his tail, desperate to become involved and hating the way the Conservatives were prospering.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4197990/QUENTIN-LETTS-sees-red-mist-come-Speaker-s-chair.html#ixzz4XySvB9oL

Unworthy behaviour by Theresa May, casually mocking every woman who has chosen not to take her husband's name and putting herself on a par with those who refer to Gideon.

I found that a bit confusing. Would she not refer to her as the Honourable Member for Islington South and Finsbury? Why was she using a name at all?

Yes, the speaker clarified that the proper form of address is by constituency or job title.

May was responding to Thornberry's heckle, and heckled back.

I'm not sure Thornberry expressed her point of order as felicitously as she might have wished:

for the record, I have never been a lady, and it will take a great deal more than being married to a knight of the realm to make me one.

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2017-02-06/debates/800ae29b-2bdf-46e7-94d6-0a2cf60317b7/CommonsChamber

I rather liked her response!

Charles said:

DavidL said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

Quentin Letts on why Speaker Bercow may have been itching after the limelight:

This is a Speaker who aches to be the centre of attention. The past week or so, when MPs have been grabbing headlines with their Brexit and Trump agitations, has not been easy for him. He has felt upstaged. Yesterday he also had to endure the rare spectacle of Theresa May raising merriment when she snotted Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry.

The details are wearisome but the exchange ended with Mrs May calling chi-chi socialist Miss Thornberry by her married name, ‘Lady Nugee’ (her husband is a judicial knight). Miss Thornberry became comically indignant – Hattie Jacques stung on the rump by a horsefly. She went stomping up to Bercow and made a point of order to complain, all meaty forearms and juddering chins, that ‘I have never been a Lady!’

Mrs May amiably said she was sorry if she had upset the old baggage by uttering her married name but she, May, had always been happy to use her husband’s surname.

This brought another cascade of cheers from the Tories. All this Bercow watched, swishing his tail, desperate to become involved and hating the way the Conservatives were prospering.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4197990/QUENTIN-LETTS-sees-red-mist-come-Speaker-s-chair.html#ixzz4XySvB9oL

A lot of amateur psychoanalysis to cover up that Bercow is a Tory.

He's a prat. Responding to this will not be easy for the government but it is necessary.

He's a prat covers it pretty well...

The problem is that if you do go ahead with The speech I can see various leftie MPs not turning up or keckling or something equally asinine

Do we know if he was going to be invited to address parliament or not? I could easily see him not wanting too until this very moment.

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TOPPING said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

CarlottaVance said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

AlsoIndigo said:

CarlottaVance said:

The reaction to Trump — it lacks the rigour of a response — has followed the grammar of identity politics. I am appalled. You are not appalled enough. We are virtuous. They are racists. This is all well and good but achieves nothing beyond giving the speaker a warm glow of virtue.

Racist is bit passe.

2016: Your a racist
2017: Your a white supremacist
2018: ?

*You're

The difference between 'knowing your shit and knowing you're shit'.......

Is why I'm such a fan of the Oxford comma.

So...

Don't keep us in suspense. How did your friend's date go?

My friend has secured a second date for Thursday.

She's into politics and likes Corbyn.

Your friend is not really trying to match Sean T is he? Presumably not in the never kiss a Tory brigade.

She's a Manchester United fan which might be a deal breaker.

Well at least your friend can give her plenty to laugh about.

DavidL said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

Quentin Letts on why Speaker Bercow may have been itching after the limelight:

This is a Speaker who aches to be the centre of attention. The past week or so, when MPs have been grabbing headlines with their Brexit and Trump agitations, has not been easy for him. He has felt upstaged. Yesterday he also had to endure the rare spectacle of Theresa May raising merriment when she snotted Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry.

The details are wearisome but the exchange ended with Mrs May calling chi-chi socialist Miss Thornberry by her married name, ‘Lady Nugee’ (her husband is a judicial knight). Miss Thornberry became comically indignant – Hattie Jacques stung on the rump by a horsefly. She went stomping up to Bercow and made a point of order to complain, all meaty forearms and juddering chins, that ‘I have never been a Lady!’

Mrs May amiably said she was sorry if she had upset the old baggage by uttering her married name but she, May, had always been happy to use her husband’s surname.

This brought another cascade of cheers from the Tories. All this Bercow watched, swishing his tail, desperate to become involved and hating the way the Conservatives were prospering.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4197990/QUENTIN-LETTS-sees-red-mist-come-Speaker-s-chair.html#ixzz4XySvB9oL

A lot of amateur psychoanalysis to cover up that Bercow is a Tory.

He's a prat. Responding to this will not be easy for the government but it is necessary.

The correct response would be to wait for a better opportunity over which to make capital from a Bercow screw up and then let the backbenchers off the leash to express their loss of confidence in him, with regret but with firmness.

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks said:

CarlottaVance said:

Quentin Letts on why Speaker Bercow may have been itching after the limelight:

This is a Speaker who aches to be the centre of attention. The past week or so, when MPs have been grabbing headlines with their Brexit and Trump agitations, has not been easy for him. He has felt upstaged. Yesterday he also had to endure the rare spectacle of Theresa May raising merriment when she snotted Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry.

The details are wearisome but the exchange ended with Mrs May calling chi-chi socialist Miss Thornberry by her married name, ‘Lady Nugee’ (her husband is a judicial knight). Miss Thornberry became comically indignant – Hattie Jacques stung on the rump by a horsefly. She went stomping up to Bercow and made a point of order to complain, all meaty forearms and juddering chins, that ‘I have never been a Lady!’

Mrs May amiably said she was sorry if she had upset the old baggage by uttering her married name but she, May, had always been happy to use her husband’s surname.

This brought another cascade of cheers from the Tories. All this Bercow watched, swishing his tail, desperate to become involved and hating the way the Conservatives were prospering.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4197990/QUENTIN-LETTS-sees-red-mist-come-Speaker-s-chair.html#ixzz4XySvB9oL

Unworthy behaviour by Theresa May, casually mocking every woman who has chosen not to take her husband's name and putting herself on a par with those who refer to Gideon.

I found that a bit confusing. Would she not refer to her as the Honourable Member for Islington South and Finsbury? Why was she using a name at all?

I don't have my copy of erskine May to hand, but there are times members are referred to by title, usually leader of the opposition, shadow x and so on, but perhaps those who are entities to a, er, title can go by that too? Could Douglas Hogg have been called viscount hailsham in the chamber? On the basis the lords have to use such as they don't have constituencies, nor does their title name necessarily match their surname, so those with a title in the commons could too?

He's no longer Douglas Hogg, but Douglas Hailsham (or that's what he calls himself)

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TOPPING said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

CarlottaVance said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

AlsoIndigo said:

CarlottaVance said:

The reaction to Trump — it lacks the rigour of a response — has followed the grammar of identity politics. I am appalled. You are not appalled enough. We are virtuous. They are racists. This is all well and good but achieves nothing beyond giving the speaker a warm glow of virtue.

Racist is bit passe.

2016: Your a racist
2017: Your a white supremacist
2018: ?

*You're

The difference between 'knowing your shit and knowing you're shit'.......

Is why I'm such a fan of the Oxford comma.

So...

Don't keep us in suspense. How did your friend's date go?

My friend has secured a second date for Thursday.

She's into politics and likes Corbyn.

Your friend is not really trying to match Sean T is he? Presumably not in the never kiss a Tory brigade.

She's a Manchester United fan which might be a deal breaker.

Well at least your friend can give her plenty to laugh about.

On Sunday Leicester were very poor, but United are looking a much better team than last year. I think they will make top four.

foxinsoxuk said:

Charles said:

DavidL said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

Quentin Letts on why Speaker Bercow may have been itching after the limelight:

This is a Speaker who aches to be the centre of attention. The past week or so, when MPs have been grabbing headlines with their Brexit and Trump agitations, has not been easy for him. He has felt upstaged. Yesterday he also had to endure the rare spectacle of Theresa May raising merriment when she snotted Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry.

The details are wearisome but the exchange ended with Mrs May calling chi-chi socialist Miss Thornberry by her married name, ‘Lady Nugee’ (her husband is a judicial knight). Miss Thornberry became comically indignant – Hattie Jacques stung on the rump by a horsefly. She went stomping up to Bercow and made a point of order to complain, all meaty forearms and juddering chins, that ‘I have never been a Lady!’

Mrs May amiably said she was sorry if she had upset the old baggage by uttering her married name but she, May, had always been happy to use her husband’s surname.

This brought another cascade of cheers from the Tories. All this Bercow watched, swishing his tail, desperate to become involved and hating the way the Conservatives were prospering.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4197990/QUENTIN-LETTS-sees-red-mist-come-Speaker-s-chair.html#ixzz4XySvB9oL

A lot of amateur psychoanalysis to cover up that Bercow is a Tory.

He's a prat. Responding to this will not be easy for the government but it is necessary.

He's a prat covers it pretty well...

The problem is that if you do go ahead with The speech I can see various leftie MPs not turning up or keckling or something equally asinine

It would be popcorn time. Trump does rallies in front of tame audiences, not speeches. His Inaugeration address showed how inarticulate he is.

Perhaps #twitler could tweet it in...

I didn't think his inauguration speech was inarticulate. I found it a bit shocking as he doubled down on various apparently off the cuff comments in his election campaign and showed he really meant it. It was as far from a unity speech as I have ever heard on such an occasion but I wouldn't call it inarticulate.

kle4 said:

Sounds like a pretty comfortable hold is incoming. For all the corbyn woes, enough people in the party are motivated to get off their butts to avoid electoral embarrassment, and stoke (get it!?) a fire under local support.

I can see it was gone over plenty yesterday, but for what it's worth my initial reaction to bercows statement was that initially it sounded reasonable, it wasn't up to him to invite trump to the uk but it's not up to the pm to invite someone to speak in Westminster hall, but that for all I dislike trump and am discouraged by May, the implications of such an avowedly political stance which cannot possibly be without some hypocrisy - anything relying on sexism or human rights to not do something will have some , given the reality of nations we deal with in some places - are actually quite troubling coming from the speaker. Nice eyes to see or ears to hear but that the house directs him perhaps, but it seems an unnecessary complication with his office.

But then bercow can be a bit false at Hines - his excuse for trying to hire someone unsuited to the role of clerk was he was t allowed to split the two aspects of the job -which may well have been a good idea - for which he apparently saw no recourse other than hiring someone unable to do both aspects rather than find so done who could.

The Tories do not pose an existential risk to Labour, UKIP does. In addition, whether fairly or unfairly within Labour ranks UKIP is seen as a party of the far right that it is important to defeat for that reason alone. All wings of the party are deeply motivated to ensure that UKIP does not get a foothold. Whether it is enough or not remains to be seen.

Lady Nugee Emily Thornberry's Point of Order:

Points of Order

Emily Thornberry (Islington South and Finsbury) (Lab)
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. First, is it in order for the Prime Minister to refer to a Member of this House not by her own name, but by the name of her husband? Secondly, for the record, I have never been a lady, and it will take a great deal more than being married to a knight of the realm to make me one.

The Prime Minister (Mrs Theresa May)
Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. I did not in any way intend to be disorderly in this House, and if the hon. Lady is concerned about the reference that I made to her, then of course I will apologise for that. I have to say to her, though, that for the last 36 years I have been referred to by my husband’s name. [Interruption.]

Mr Speaker
Order. No sedentary shrieking from the hon. Member for Rhondda (Chris Bryant) is required. I have the matter in hand. Two points, very simply: first of all, I thank the Prime Minister for what she has just said. Secondly, in so far as there is any uncertainty on this matter, let me dispel that uncertainty. I do so from my own knowledge and on the professional advice of the Clerk. We refer in this Chamber to Members by their constituencies or, if they have a title—for example, shadow Minister—by their title. To refer to them by another name is not the right thing to do. But the Prime Minister has said what she has said, and I thank her for that. We will leave this matter there.

SquareRoot said:

I see John Bercow is making a fool of himself over Trump.

You say that but then I see Piers Morgan criticising Bercow and I think perhaps Bercow is right.

Charles said:

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks said:

CarlottaVance said:

Quentin Letts on why Speaker Bercow may have been itching after the limelight:

This is a Speaker who aches to be the centre of attention. The past week or so, when MPs have been grabbing headlines with their Brexit and Trump agitations, has not been easy for him. He has felt upstaged. Yesterday he also had to endure the rare spectacle of Theresa May raising merriment when she snotted Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry.

The details are wearisome but the exchange ended with Mrs May calling chi-chi socialist Miss Thornberry by her married name, ‘Lady Nugee’ (her husband is a judicial knight). Miss Thornberry became comically indignant – Hattie Jacques stung on the rump by a horsefly. She went stomping up to Bercow and made a point of order to complain, all meaty forearms and juddering chins, that ‘I have never been a Lady!’

Mrs May amiably said she was sorry if she had upset the old baggage by uttering her married name but she, May, had always been happy to use her husband’s surname.

This brought another cascade of cheers from the Tories. All this Bercow watched, swishing his tail, desperate to become involved and hating the way the Conservatives were prospering.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4197990/QUENTIN-LETTS-sees-red-mist-come-Speaker-s-chair.html#ixzz4XySvB9oL

Unworthy behaviour by Theresa May, casually mocking every woman who has chosen not to take her husband's name and putting herself on a par with those who refer to Gideon.

I found that a bit confusing. Would she not refer to her as the Honourable Member for Islington South and Finsbury? Why was she using a name at all?

I don't have my copy of erskine May to hand, but there are times members are referred to by title, usually leader of the opposition, shadow x and so on, but perhaps those who are entities to a, er, title can go by that too? Could Douglas Hogg have been called viscount hailsham in the chamber? On the basis the lords have to use such as they don't have constituencies, nor does their title name necessarily match their surname, so those with a title in the commons could too?

He's no longer Douglas Hogg, but Douglas Hailsham (or that's what he calls himself)

From a sample size of one I recall on tv (I suspect you move in such circles more than I) I imagine that's common behaviour (that is, not unusual, not 'the behaviour of a commoner'), as I heard once my favourite named peer, Thomas Galloway Dunlop du Roy de bliquy Galbraith, second baron Strathclyde, tends to go by tom Strathclyde. And of course there was Michael ancram.

Charles said:

DavidL said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

Quentin Letts on why Speaker Bercow may have been itching after the limelight:

This is a Speaker who aches to be the centre of attention. The past week or so, when MPs have been grabbing headlines with their Brexit and Trump agitations, has not been easy for him. He has felt upstaged. Yesterday he also had to endure the rare spectacle of Theresa May raising merriment when she snotted Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry.

The details are wearisome but the exchange ended with Mrs May calling chi-chi socialist Miss Thornberry by her married name, ‘Lady Nugee’ (her husband is a judicial knight). Miss Thornberry became comically indignant – Hattie Jacques stung on the rump by a horsefly. She went stomping up to Bercow and made a point of order to complain, all meaty forearms and juddering chins, that ‘I have never been a Lady!’

Mrs May amiably said she was sorry if she had upset the old baggage by uttering her married name but she, May, had always been happy to use her husband’s surname.

This brought another cascade of cheers from the Tories. All this Bercow watched, swishing his tail, desperate to become involved and hating the way the Conservatives were prospering.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4197990/QUENTIN-LETTS-sees-red-mist-come-Speaker-s-chair.html#ixzz4XySvB9oL

A lot of amateur psychoanalysis to cover up that Bercow is a Tory.

He's a prat. Responding to this will not be easy for the government but it is necessary.

He's a prat covers it pretty well...

The problem is that if you do go ahead with The speech I can see various leftie MPs not turning up or keckling or something equally asinine

I can see MPs of all parties not turning up or would the Tories three line whip it. Bercow should not have done what he did - it was genuinely shocking. Parliamentarians, though, have every right not to attend a speech given by a lying narcissist who they believe degrades the office of the President of the United States. Their constituents can then choose to deliver a verdict at the ballot box, if they so wish.

ydoethur said:

DavidL said:

On topic have most, pretty much all on here not had this down as a safe and easy hold from the start? UKIP really don't do well at FPTP elections, they have too low a ceiling and are too divisive. It is also not obvious what their point is at the moment. This may change if the government contrives a soft Brexit but at the moment they seem to have very little to add.

Yes - the expectations management has been dreadful. If Labour hold Stoke, even if they lose Copeland that will still be held as a plus for Corbyn even though the loss of any safe seat to the government in a by-election should be terminal for him.

Incidentally the phone call has come and the inspectors are in from 9am. So if anybody who likes me could keep their fingers crossed and Mr Eagles and Mr Wisemann could refrain from sticking pins in their wax models of me for the next couple of days, I would be most grateful.

Hopefully, see you on the other side!

Good luck.

You'll triumph like Scipio Africanus at Zama.

TheScreamingEagles said:

SquareRoot said:

I see John Bercow is making a fool of himself over Trump.

You say that but then I see Piers Morgan criticising Bercow and I think perhaps Bercow is right.

Piers Morgan.. if it concerns you, just think that Clarkson thumped him.. Marvellous and no doubt deserved.

SouthamObserver said:

kle4 said:

Sounds like a pretty comfortable hold is incoming. For all the corbyn woes, enough people in the party are motivated to get off their butts to avoid electoral embarrassment, and stoke (get it!?) a fire under local support.

I can see it was gone over plenty yesterday, but for what it's worth my initial reaction to bercows statement was that initially it sounded reasonable, it wasn't up to him to invite trump to the uk but it's not up to the pm to invite someone to speak in Westminster hall, but that for all I dislike trump and am discouraged by May, the implications of such an avowedly political stance which cannot possibly be without some hypocrisy - anything relying on sexism or human rights to not do something will have some , given the reality of nations we deal with in some places - are actually quite troubling coming from the speaker. Nice eyes to see or ears to hear but that the house directs him perhaps, but it seems an unnecessary complication with his office.

But then bercow can be a bit false at Hines - his excuse for trying to hire someone unsuited to the role of clerk was he was t allowed to split the two aspects of the job -which may well have been a good idea - for which he apparently saw no recourse other than hiring someone unable to do both aspects rather than find so done who could.

The Tories do not pose an existential risk to Labour, UKIP does. In addition, whether fairly or unfairly within Labour ranks UKIP is seen as a party of the far right that it is important to defeat for that reason alone. All wings of the party are deeply motivated to ensure that UKIP does not get a foothold. Whether it is enough or not remains to be seen.

Which also implies a willingness to divert resources from Copeland if necessary, even at the cost of losing to the Tories, if the prize is keeping UKIP from winning (or even being close to winning?) Stoke?

Good morning, everyone.

F1: Wehrlein's got a neck injury. Not too severe but he may miss the first test (starts 27 February). Particularly tricky as there are only two ahead of this season.

Edited extra bit: and it would be useful to include the link, wouldn't it? http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/38887608

kle4 said:

Charles said:

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks said:

CarlottaVance said:

Quentin Letts on why Speaker Bercow may have been itching after the limelight:


:
:

Mrs May amiably said she was sorry if she had upset the old baggage by uttering her married name but she, May, had always been happy to use her husband’s surname.

This brought another cascade of cheers from the Tories. All this Bercow watched, swishing his tail, desperate to become involved and hating the way the Conservatives were prospering.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4197990/QUENTIN-LETTS-sees-red-mist-come-Speaker-s-chair.html#ixzz4XySvB9oL

Unworthy behaviour by Theresa May, casually mocking every woman who has chosen not to take her husband's name and putting herself on a par with those who refer to Gideon.

I found that a bit confusing. Would she not refer to her as the Honourable Member for Islington South and Finsbury? Why was she using a name at all?

I don't have my copy of erskine May to hand, but there are times members are referred to by title, usually leader of the opposition, shadow x and so on, but perhaps those who are entities to a, er, title can go by that too? Could Douglas Hogg have been called viscount hailsham in the chamber? On the basis the lords have to use such as they don't have constituencies, nor does their title name necessarily match their surname, so those with a title in the commons could too?

He's no longer Douglas Hogg, but Douglas Hailsham (or that's what he calls himself)

From a sample size of one I recall on tv (I suspect you move in such circles more than I) I imagine that's common behaviour (that is, not unusual, not 'the behaviour of a commoner'), as I heard once my favourite named peer, Thomas Galloway Dunlop du Roy de bliquy Galbraith, second baron Strathclyde, tends to go by tom Strathclyde. And of course there was Michael ancram.

To fully understand the er... the comment about Lt Colonel Thornberry... well, she has been know to make restaurant reservations under the title that Mrs May used. With MP added at the end.

@bbcnickrobinson What makes the Speaker's snub to Trump so extraordinary is that it's a deliberate & very public assault on Prime Minister's foreign policy.

CarlottaVance said:

@bbcnickrobinson What makes the Speaker's snub to Trump so extraordinary is that it's a deliberate & very public assault on Prime Minister's foreign policy.

Didn't his former comrades try to oust bercow shortly before the ge, by trying to change the rules on electing speakers ? Waiting for his moment of revenge, perhaps.

CarlottaVance said:

kle4 said:

than avowedly political stance which cannot possibly be without some hypocrisy - anything relying on sexism or human rights to not do something will have some , given the reality of nations we deal with in some places - are actually quite troubling coming from the speaker.

The Daily Mail have a helpful round up of Speaker Bercow's favoured dictators & human rights abusers:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4196814/Donald-Trump-faces-BANNED-speaking-Parliament.html

However ghastly Trump is he - and his country - is not remotely in the same league as some of these.....

In any case, I doubt Trump wants to speak to Parliament (neither Reagan nor Bush did) - what he wants is bling - and the Royals have that by the shovel load......

I think the point is that Trump has personally been shown to be a racist and misogynist which is why Bercow doesn't want him in parliament. Parliament has a plaque where Barack Obama spoke to parliament. It's all about Barack Obama not Mr President.

It is the person of Trump who's being rejected not his office. The same I'm sure would have applied to the the Chinese leader if he had ever been recorded saying his money entitled him to grab whomever he wished by the pussy and and banned various religeous groups on a whim and then damned his own judiciary for declaring his edicts illegal.

MarqueeMark said:

daodao said:

AlastairMeeks said:

CarlottaVance said:

Quentin Letts on why Speaker Bercow may have been itching after the limelight:

This is a Speaker who aches to be the centre of attention. The past week or so, when MPs have been grabbing headlines with their Brexit and Trump agitations, has not been easy for him. He has felt upstaged. Yesterday he also had to endure the rare spectacle of Theresa May raising merriment when she snotted Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry.

The details are wearisome but the exchange ended with Mrs May calling chi-chi socialist Miss Thornberry by her married name, ‘Lady Nugee’ (her husband is a judicial knight). Miss Thornberry became comically indignant – Hattie Jacques stung on the rump by a horsefly. She went stomping up to Bercow and made a point of order to complain, all meaty forearms and juddering chins, that ‘I have never been a Lady!’

Mrs May amiably said she was sorry if she had upset the old baggage by uttering her married name but she, May, had always been happy to use her husband’s surname.

This brought another cascade of cheers from the Tories. All this Bercow watched, swishing his tail, desperate to become involved and hating the way the Conservatives were prospering.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4197990/QUENTIN-LETTS-sees-red-mist-come-Speaker-s-chair.html#ixzz4XySvB9oL

Unworthy behaviour by Theresa May, casually mocking every woman who has chosen not to take her husband's name and putting herself on a par with those who refer to Gideon.

The self-righteous b..tches on the Labour benches (Lady Nugee, Harridan Harperson, Diane Abbott et al) deserve to be put down.

On topic, I would dearly like UKIP to win Stoke Central, but I really don't expect it to do so.

I hope you aren't speaking as a vet?

For UKIP to win the by-election, it will require lots of Tories to lend them their vote. With satisfaction ratings for Mrs May so high, I just don't think anywhere near enough will be inclined to send her such a snub.

If there is to be a surprise in Stoke, it might just be the Tory vote holding up very well.

I have had some UKIP voters switching to the Tories in Copeland to stop Labour, I would expect some Tories will tactically vote UKIP in Stoke too