politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Cyclefree on invitations to address Parliament and the latest
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Cyclefree on invitations to address Parliament and the latest PB cartoon
Cartoons by Helen Cochrane and Nicholas Leonard.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
"Sometime Tory Cabinet minister Fowler, not always a fan of the free Press, ahem, has been Lord Speaker only five months.
Already he has greater composure and gravitas than Mr Bercow after eight years. How deftly Lord Fowler put down his Commons counterpart. Making a statement to peers, he said he had been telephoned by Mr Bercow that morning.
The little chap had grovelled – had been ‘genuinely sorry’. Lord Fowler spoke of the incident as Downton Abbey’s Lord Grantham might have reported the hand-wringing of an errant under-gardener.
Speaking slowly enough to give us a flavour of his magnanimity, Lord Fowler said he had decided to accept young Bercow’s apology. This was heard in goolie-shrivelling silence... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4201592/Smack-Bercow-given-delicious-spanking.html
Astutely observed.
As today is Mr Letts:
One of these two men is an unstable egomaniac with smallish hands and a trophy wife. The other is Donald Trump.
One is vain, scornful of convention and reacts to criticism with an intolerance so wild you (wrongly) think he must have had one shandy too many. The other is teetotal Donald Trump.
Given how much they have in common, it may seem odd that the House of Commons Speaker John Bercow thinks so little of the American President.
But in his basic character, Mr Bercow is a mini-Donald.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4202112/Special-relationship-Forget-writes-QUENTIN-LETTS.html#ixzz4Y4PbOo5k
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Lords/2017-02-07/debates/91FEFF5B-B3CF-4AC2-A88C-41DF84764453/LordSpeaker’SStatement
https://youtu.be/T7vdRcdBUTU
Do you think:
a) Trump is more sexist than Islam?
b) Islam is more sexist than Trump?
c) Trump and Islam are equally sexist?
Cheers Ms Cyclefree, thoughtful, eloquent and well presented – the threads no bad either.
https://twitter.com/harryph/status/829091392827904000
By conceding a parliamentary vote on her deal with Brussels six months before Britain leaves the EU, forced on the Gov't by a score of Tory MPs, there can be little doubt that Theresa May has as a result hugely increased the prospect of a General Election being held prior to the scheduled date in 2020, especially having regard to her tiny HoC majority.
This brings us to the interesting bit where Corals are offering stand out odds of there being such a GE in either 2018 or 2019. For the former they go 11.0, compared with SkyBet's 8 and BetfairEx's 6.7 (net) and for the latter they go 13.0, compared with Skybet's 8.0 and BetfairEx's 5.1 (net).
Taking into account Coral's generosity, PBers might feel tempted to back both these years in combination, staking 54.17% on 2018 and the remaining 45.83% of their stake on 2019 to produce an equalised return of 5.95 decimal (or almost 5/1) in old money should either element prove successful. I've wagered a nifty Fifty on this basis, but DYOR.
The procedure as it stands means that either Mr Speaker or myself can effectively veto any proposal for a visiting leader to address Parliament, at least as far as Westminster Hall is concerned. It is for Parliament to consider whether there is a better way in which such decisions can be made. Secondly, for the time being, there may be a situation where one of the Speakers decides that he cannot agree. Before we reach that point, there should be, at the very least, some effort to reach consensus and a serious discussion on what the decision should be. I hope that we can now return to that previous practice.
d) Trump is currently more dangerous than Islam
Last night MPs voted on an SNP amendment demanding the Prime Minister seek "an undertaking from the European Council that failure by the Parliament of the United Kingdom to approve the terms of exit for the UK will result in the maintenance of UK membership on existing terms". - In short, the SNP want the Government to be able to make a U-turn once Article 50 is lodged. Amendment rejected by 336 votes to 88. Majority of 248.
Amendment 110 tabled by Labour MP Chris Leslie calling for MPs and peers to have the final say on any deal to leave the EU.
MPs voted 326 to 293 to reject. Majority of 33.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hr5WD5-ZqIw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SqRNUUOk7s
this was Australia's version
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U219eUIZ7Qo
There's a lot of rumours circulating about who's involved
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN15M272
"He said a group of American and Canadian tourists checked into the hotel and booked 22 rooms and paid for day passes for the children to use.
"The children came in dribs and drabs under a day pass," Paret said.
According to the U.S. State Department's 2016 Trafficking in Persons Report, Haiti is a source, transit, and destination country for men, women, and children sold into forced labor, domestic servitude and prostitution.
Traffickers are known to sell children into the sex trade in Haiti and across the porous border into the Dominican Republic
And Happy Birthday for yesterday!
AIDS scared the crap out of me and totally altered my view of casual hook-ups.
FPT: The stat was 'political data' from the charity Shelter to grab headlines.
The root of the misleading comparison is that they are comparing "golf courses" and all their ancillaries with the physical footprint of actual house buildings themselves, combined with some dodgy estimates even for those numbers.
Land allocated to housing in normal perception includes drives, gardens, roads etc.
Original piece:
http://blog.shelter.org.uk/2013/11/a-fair-way-do-we-prioritise-golf-or-homes/
Doubling down by quibbling about side issues when they had been debunked on the main point:
http://blog.shelter.org.uk/2014/06/hit-a-bunker-how-more-or-less-got-it-wrong-on-the-golf-stat/
Anybody who trusts Shelter data without a fact check is a little eccentric. They are a self-confessed political campaign.
1) The others could be relied upon to respect the dignity of the occasion.
2) Trump is second only to Putin in his negative ratings amongst the British public (Would we ever invite Putin to address parliament?)
Personally I am looking forward to the visit. It is going to be a festival of protest. It is going to be Hyuuuge.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-24835822
The series is well worth catching up with (despite Shearer's prosthetics never ceasing to look quite alarmingly weird).
Firstly, there was no reason to offer a state visit in the first place and, one having been made, no reason for that visit to include an address to parliament (has this offer ever been made or are people tilting at shadows / pre-empting such an offer?). It is right that we treat our allies with respect but that's not the same as offering them everything, immediately.
And secondly, the problem with Trump is not the absolute level of his values and actions regarding free speech, human rights, respect for others and so on. Clearly, they are considerably better than, say, Kuwait's. What is equally important is the direction of travel. We should encourage those who are improving in such areas, even if from a low level and as such, even where serious failings remain. Part of the messes that were made in the Bush adventures was down to a desire to impose liberal democracy on countries that were unfit and unready for such a society. America already has a liberal democracy; its president shouldn't be lauded for testing the limits.
IIRC both myself and @Morris_Dancer were.
Worth noting that Daw Aung Suu Kyi was a visitor well before the recent expulsions of Rohingya, and that she is not is sole control in Burma, with the Military often acting against her.
Betsy DeVos confirmed as Donald Trump's education secretary https://t.co/egvZq1a0zU https://t.co/Ho8VaIH1Ei
Totally barking
We make standards for all, or for none.
Take a look at ghe word "standard"
"Bannon, described by one associate as “the most well-read person in Washington,” is known for recommending books to colleagues and friends, according to multiple people who have worked alongside him. He is a voracious reader who devours works of history and political theory “in like an hour,” said a former associate whom Bannon urged to read Sun Tzu’s The Art of War. “He’s like the Rain Man of nationalism.”
But, said the source, who requested anonymity to speak candidly about Bannon, “There are some things he’s only going to share with people who he’s tight with and who he trusts.”
Bannon’s readings tend to have one thing in common: the view that technocrats have put Western civilization on a downward trajectory and that only a shock to the system can reverse its decline. And they tend to have a dark, apocalyptic tone that at times echoes Bannon’s own public remarks over the years—a sense that humanity is at a hinge point in history. His ascendant presence in the West Wing is giving once-obscure intellectuals unexpected influence over the highest echelons of government.
Bannon’s 2015 documentary, “Generation Zero,” drew heavily on one of his favorite books, “The Fourth Turning” by William Strauss and Neil Howe. The book explains a theory of history unfolding in 80- to 100-year cycles, or “turnings,” the fourth and final stage of which is marked by periods of cataclysmic change in which the old order is destroyed and replaced—a current period that, in Bannon’s view, was sparked by the 2008 financial crisis and has now been manifested in part by the rise of Trump.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/02/steve-bannon-books-reading-list-214745
I'm not exactly sure what these 'huge' 8anti-Trump demonstrations are meant to achieve. He's sexist, and racist and misogynist, according to these people who know everything. For the record, I suspect he is, but that's only my personal opinion. If they protest enough, will he become a Guardian-reading Liberal?
i went down to Grosvenor Square London in 1067 or 1968, and what did I achieve. I had a good day out. I saw a few middle class Trots assault the police and thought ... they'll get their heads kicked in if they're not careful, and they succeeded in that. At least, they had an issue they cared about (although much of it was anti-Americanism). Even the large anti-Iraq invasion protests had a cause they believed in (as did I). So I was glad when they didn't smash glass or burn cars
These recent protests seem to be against a President that is democratically elected. They may not like it, and they may think they can change it by causing enough trouble. Is that not anti-democratic? To be fair to them, I think it makes them feel better and burnishes their right-on credentials with their peer-group. So I'm happy for them to go ahead.
I voted Labour in 1983. If the Americans had protested against us electing a 'commie', I would have thought ... "What a set of dickheads!"
As to the substance of the decision, the matter seems to have been handled ineptly by all concerned from start to date. I'm agog at how badly a relatively simple thing has been dealt with by the government.
The USA is our biggest single export market, closest political ally and essential to our security. Inviting the new President follows naturally from all of that even without the twist of Brexit. Insulting him by making it clear that he is not getting to speak to Parliament, when it might not have even been sought, is egocentric grandstanding by a prat who has used his position to reflect his own personal and highly inconsistent views in a manner damaging to the policy of the elected government. It is the opposite of realpolitik, it is just plain stupid and an abuse of his position.
https://twitter.com/JenWilliamsMEN/status/829117403225260032
I cannot but think bercow has behaved very poorly. There are valid points that though we have for realpolitik reasons dealt with the abominable, others can be held to a higher moral standard, but the overreach in his position and most critically, that he failed to even attempt to reach consensus and discussed with the Lord speaker is most troubling. I take davidl's point that the role itself is new, however bercow himself felt it important to state the lord speaker was one of the deciders, and he didn't even try to discuss it. His apology, though accepted of course, was the very definition of a hollow, insincere obligation. His statement was obviously prepared with some care and deliberately referenced consulting with the Lord speaker, so it's not like in his moral outrage he forgot.
I don't even want trump to address parliament, and hoped he wouldn't address parliament, but bercow has done his office no good.
I've seen a teeny bit of complaining from Trumpers - but it's the odd tweet - not !!!!!!!!!
Psychologically, he said the unsayable - again.
I met Bercow a couple of years ago at a dinner for women in business. He was - contrary to his public appearances - rather charming and spent time talking to me and others. He seemed genuinely interested in the cause of womens' advancement, insofar as one can tell these things from one conversation. I was struck by the contrast between how he appeared then and how he appears when in the Commons.
I think that if he was representing the views of MPs - and he may well have been - he might have done better to use the "I" pronoun less. There are valid objections to this visit but they do not primarily relate to the objectors' strength of feeling.
Narcissism is never attractive, even when the narcissist may be right on the substance.
At a stretch you could include that on a list of people not adequately homed, as it were, but that sort of definitional trickery, using a definition far removed from the general understanding, is downright underhanded if true, and makes addressing the real problem harder. I know relative poverty can be a tricky one too, but not to that level.
Barack Obama and both Clintons should also be added to that list.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aeNJljuZcI
Another good piece, Miss Cyclefree.
Mr. kle4, that is correct. If not enough people are disadvantaged, just broaden the definition of disadvantage. Hence 'relative poverty'. A perpetual cause for outrage among charities, totally divorced from actual poverty.
I think that the diminished moral standing of charitable works as they professionalise and focus on gouging money with chuggers and churglars is not an especially good turn of events.
The second I take the point about encouraging Or discouraging direction of travel, it seems like how we should operate either these things, and I don't really want trump feted more than necessary, but clearly it's never been how we operate. Plenty of places are bad and getting worse and we still deal with them and laud them if we have to.
Either way, even if bercow's heart is in the right place, and my first reaction to the news was initial approval, that it was grandstanding, seems to have been exceeding his role and deliberately and drew attention to ignoring his comrade ad in the lords, means even if in principle one could appplaud. Him, he was still a massive prat. Which of course we knew - and do etimes we app,and that too. Not this time.
Bercow has pre-empted any possible invitation, embarrassing HMG and HMQ in the process.
Had such an invitation been considered, both speakers would have been sounded out, both would have discussed with members, reached a consensus together and informed HMG - who then would have issued the invitation, or not, depending on the outcome.
Unfortunately the pompous prick has inserted himself into international relations to the detriment of all concerned...
That said, I think what Bercow did was wrong; as was the original invite, of course.
On a personal note, the second hound was from an RSPCA place. She was signed off as in good health but the very first night we had her it was obvious (they were visible) she had a huge number of fleas.
Not impressed with that.
Mr. L, one aims to please
Mr. Indigo, quite: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C16L3Z8oI_E
However, the right or popular thing can still be done in the wrong way, ignoring convention unnecessarily, for glory, and can be badly handled. That the whole thing has been badly handled makes his, in my view, own messes not stand out so much, but still unnecessary to do so in the manner he did.
@britainelects: Scottish independence voting intention:
Yes: 49% (+3)
No: 51% (-3)
(via BMG / 26 - 31 Jan)
Excluding DKs.
Changes with December.
They seemed to be an example of an organisation which thinks that because its cause is noble or their motives pure this permits them to do whatever they want in pursuit of their noble objective/pure motives. A very dangerous belief. Not least because others will be misled into not challenging them precisely because they risk being accused of stopping the person/body from doing their noble thing. But the power mad are no less dangerous because they believe they are good.
Sounded out the House?
“I am grateful…I will say this…I must say…I would myself…I am even more strongly opposed…I operate on advice…I perhaps do not have…I would not wish to…I conclude by saying…I feel very strongly.”
It's hard to see how the UK stays together now given that Scotland and England are drifting so far apart. No doubt May will do exactly what Sturgeon wants and deny the opportunity for a second referendum.
It's a pity, because trying to prevent the abuse of animals is a good thing.
Demonstrations often shift opinion. The '68 Grosvenor Square demonstrations put some backbone into Wilson resisting US pressure to get involved in Vietnam. The anti war Iraq demonstrations should have been listened to.
The right of peaceful protest is a hallmark of democracy, enshrined in Ammendment 1 of the US Constitution. Would that we had such protection here!
I shall be protesting against a trade deal that reduces Britains consumer protections and protects British interests, May would sell us down the river if she could.