politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Well this won’t make John Bercow happy but grumpy if only he h

A key route into the UK for children caught up in Europe's migrant crisis is to close after a total of 350 arrivals.

In a written ministerial statement, the Home Office said it would stop receiving children via the so-called Dubs amendment at the end of March.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38912428

Hilarious
https://twitter.com/nigelmp/status/829401370507767808
Incoming?!...
https://twitter.com/steve_hawkes/status/829383225910894597

Farron loses 340 to 33.

Why did he bother pushing it to a vote.

Narrow Govt win.

MPs have voted down the Lib Dem amendment proposing a second referendum by 340 votes to 33 - a majority of 307.

BudG said:

French election:

Latest poll from Elabe just published shows Macron 5-5.5 points ahead of Fillon

http://elabe.fr/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/08022017_bfmtv_lexpress_intentions-de-vote-presidentielles_vague_1.pdf

Perhaps more ominously, Le Pen 44, Fillon 56...

williamglenn said:

BudG said:

French election:

Latest poll from Elabe just published shows Macron 5-5.5 points ahead of Fillon

http://elabe.fr/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/08022017_bfmtv_lexpress_intentions-de-vote-presidentielles_vague_1.pdf

Perhaps more ominously, Le Pen 44, Fillon 56...

Good spot. Had not checked the hypothetical head to heads.

MikeL said:

Farron loses 340 to 33.

Why did he bother pushing it to a vote.

So he can use Labour's failure to support it as ammunition in the future

https://twitter.com/politicshome/status/829405180366057474

BoJo not running for President...

https://twitter.com/wsj/status/829395715252170756

BudG said:

French election:

Latest poll from Elabe just published shows Macron 5-5.5 points ahead of Fillon

http://elabe.fr/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/08022017_bfmtv_lexpress_intentions-de-vote-presidentielles_vague_1.pdf

Le Pen in first though on 26%. Fillon is on 17-18% (with or without Bayrou) another pollster today him on 20%. If the Macron allegations start to gain traction his share could start to dip too and while 79% of Le Pen voters and 72% of Fillon voters are sure of their choice, 50% of Macron voters could change their mind

Sandpit said:

MikeL said:

BudG said:

French election:

Latest poll from Elabe just published shows Macron 5-5.5 points ahead of Fillon

http://elabe.fr/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/08022017_bfmtv_lexpress_intentions-de-vote-presidentielles_vague_1.pdf

Fillon only beats Le Pen 56-44 in a run-off.

That's not insurmountable.

That's getting awfully close.

About 5 million votes?

The other interesting thing about that French poll is that only about a quarter of Le Pen and Fillon supporters say they might change their minds, while 40% to 50% of the centre/left candidate supporters say they might change theirs. Might imply that people are looking to see who is best placed to take on a right wing contender in the second round before finally deciding which of the three to back.

No_Offence_Alan said:

Sandpit said:

MikeL said:

BudG said:

French election:

Latest poll from Elabe just published shows Macron 5-5.5 points ahead of Fillon

http://elabe.fr/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/08022017_bfmtv_lexpress_intentions-de-vote-presidentielles_vague_1.pdf

Fillon only beats Le Pen 56-44 in a run-off.

That's not insurmountable.

That's getting awfully close.

About 5 million votes?

But it was about eight million a fortnight ago!

Edit: probably closer to 3m and 5m,

williamglenn said:

BudG said:

French election:

Latest poll from Elabe just published shows Macron 5-5.5 points ahead of Fillon

http://elabe.fr/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/08022017_bfmtv_lexpress_intentions-de-vote-presidentielles_vague_1.pdf

Perhaps more ominously, Le Pen 44, Fillon 56...

Melenchon 2012 voters back Le Pen over Fillon by 57% to 43%. 29% of former Hollande voters also back Le Pen

This whole Trump state visit business and its aftermath seems to be a whole series of events where I intently dislike the focus of ire and his policies, that is to say Trump, but find myself erring on the side of those defending what happened, or at least not agreeing that the best response is to throw great big wobblies about it.

Therefore, while I didn't think May should have offered Trump a state visit quite as soon as she did (he's a US President, we'd have to at some point, probably), it's not really viable to take it away once it has been offered, since any of the reasons not to - he's a boorish racist, that sort of thing - applies to plenty of others who have been given a visit, and who usually lead even worse regimes.

And therefore while I don't want Trump to be invited to address parliament, Bercow getting up on his soapbox to talk about how he wouldn't permit it even if it was offered, which it hadn't, and deliberately didn't even give a heads up to the other people who consider such requests, struck me as diminishing the position of Speaker - if he merely wanted to reflect the will of the house, which is at best divided on whether Trump should be granted such an address, should one be offered, then he could and should have replied to the effect that he knew many members had concerns about such an event, which he shared, and that he would raise those concerns very seriously with the other two people involved in the decision.

And therefore while I think Bercow has undermined himself quite considerably through his behaviour, I don't know that leading a coup against him is the best move at this time, perhaps further enforcing the idea the instant a Speaker does something you don't like they should be ousted.

Now the third I am not settled on. Some would say Bercow has crossed the line before and enough is enough, and others even if he has, knifing him in this fashion would be disproportionate and more harmful than merely taking steps to ensure he is not re-elected as Speaker some day, even if that means waiting some while.

kle4 said:

This whole Trump state visit business and its aftermath seems to be a whole series of events where I intently dislike the focus of ire and his policies, that is to say Trump, but find myself erring on the side of those defending what happened, or at least not agreeing that the best response is to throw great big wobblies about it.

There is a non-zero chance he might be facing impeachment before the visit...

Right wing Snowflakes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygg8iVrLWEA

Scott_P said:

Sandpit said:

That's getting awfully close.

https://twitter.com/evanoconnell/status/829336357684256770

The bottom of the barrel is already being scraped in France I see... they didn't reach this stage in the US until just after the anti-establishment victory.

Le Pen could do it - I didn't think it was possible. The establishment have run out of tricks.

SouthamObserver said:

The other interesting thing about that French poll is that only about a quarter of Le Pen and Fillon supporters say they might change their minds, while 40% to 50% of the centre/left candidate supporters say they might change theirs. Might imply that people are looking to see who is best placed to take on a right wing contender in the second round before finally deciding which of the three to back.

Yes, very good point.

Looks good for Macron - surely anyone on the left who is wavering will go for Macron to prevent a Le Pen v Fillon final.

Should be enough to put Macron in the final.

HYUFD said:

Scott_P said:

Sandpit said:

That's getting awfully close.

https://twitter.com/evanoconnell/status/829336357684256770

There are now compromising photos of Macron circulating in Paris apparently after his denials of a homosexual affair

For the first time ever I'm tempted to put tuppence ha penny on a Le Pen.

@GuardianHeather: Moment of truth approaching for potential Labour rebels, including @labourlewis, who have struggled with the idea of voting to trigger A50.

Rumour he will bottle it

kle4 said:

This whole Trump state visit business and its aftermath seems to be a whole series of events where I intently dislike the focus of ire and his policies, that is to say Trump, but find myself erring on the side of those defending what happened, or at least not agreeing that the best response is to throw great big wobblies about it.

Therefore, while I didn't think May should have offered Trump a state visit quite as soon as she did (he's a US President, we'd have to at some point, probably), it's not really viable to take it away once it has been offered, since any of the reasons not to - he's a boorish racist, that sort of thing - applies to plenty of others who have been given a visit, and who usually lead even worse regimes.

And therefore while I don't want Trump to be invited to address parliament, Bercow getting up on his soapbox to talk about how he wouldn't permit it even if it was offered, which it hadn't, and deliberately didn't even give a heads up to the other people who consider such requests, struck me as diminishing the position of Speaker - if he merely wanted to reflect the will of the house, which is at best divided on whether Trump should be granted such an address, should one be offered, then he could and should have replied to the effect that he knew many members had concerns about such an event, which he shared, and that he would raise those concerns very seriously with the other two people involved in the decision.

And therefore while I think Bercow has undermined himself quite considerably through his behaviour, I don't know that leading a coup against him is the best move at this time, perhaps further enforcing the idea the instant a Speaker does something you don't like they should be ousted.

Now the third I am not settled on. Some would say Bercow has crossed the line before and enough is enough, and others even if he has, knifing him in this fashion would be disproportionate and more harmful than merely taking steps to ensure he is not re-elected as Speaker some day, even if that means waiting some while.

I agree.
The Duddridge letter is every bit as self indulgent as Bercow.

@JohnRentoul: Now the big vote, on @HarrietHarman's amendment to protect rights of EU citizens in the UK.

Surely the good thing about being a Labour MP uncertain if you want to enter the Shadow Cabinet but knowing you are one of the few left who has not resigned from it or committed to not being in even if asked, is if things go badly something will come along in a few months which will give you a reason to resign as well, limiting the damage, and there are so many former shadow cabinet members most people probably won't remember you were in it, nor will you have spent that much time with Jeremy himself, since depending on your portfolio he probably ignored you anyway. And of course on the off chance things go well, you reap the reward for being a loyal trooper for that unlikely event.

ReggieCide said:

kle4 said:

This whole Trump state visit business and its aftermath seems to be a whole series of events where I intently dislike the focus of ire and his policies, that is to say Trump, but find myself erring on the side of those defending what happened, or at least not agreeing that the best response is to throw great big wobblies about it.

Therefore, while I didn't think May should have offered Trump a state visit quite as soon as she did (he's a US President, we'd have to at some point, probably), it's not really viable to take it away once it has been offered, since any of the reasons not to - he's a boorish racist, that sort of thing - applies to plenty of others who have been given a visit, and who usually lead even worse regimes.

And therefore while I don't want Trump to be invited to address parliament, Bercow getting up on his soapbox to talk about how he wouldn't permit it even if it was offered, which it hadn't, and deliberately didn't even give a heads up to the other people who consider such requests, struck me as diminishing the position of Speaker - if he merely wanted to reflect the will of the house, which is at best divided on whether Trump should be granted such an address, should one be offered, then he could and should have replied to the effect that he knew many members had concerns about such an event, which he shared, and that he would raise those concerns very seriously with the other two people involved in the decision.

And therefore while I think Bercow has undermined himself quite considerably through his behaviour, I don't know that leading a coup against him is the best move at this time, perhaps further enforcing the idea the instant a Speaker does something you don't like they should be ousted.

Now the third I am not settled on. Some would say Bercow has crossed the line before and enough is enough, and others even if he has, knifing him in this fashion would be disproportionate and more harmful than merely taking steps to ensure he is not re-elected as Speaker some day, even if that means waiting some while.

You omitted one quite important factor. Bercow becomes more turd-like by the day. We just have to hope that he doesn't start to grow.

Dwarfs don't grow silly, thats why there dwarfs.

https://twitter.com/reuters/status/829413638943469568

Get your blood diamonds here...

Great piece on the British Alt Right on Ch 4. Batshit crazy. Seriously! Hitler's the man!

Watching Young alt right on C4 news...at least they will never breed.

GnomeinZurich said:

HYUFD said:

Scott_P said:

Sandpit said:

That's getting awfully close.

https://twitter.com/evanoconnell/status/829336357684256770

There are now compromising photos of Macron circulating in Paris apparently after his denials of a homosexual affair

For the first time ever I'm tempted to put tuppence ha penny on a Le Pen.

I've been thinking the same this week.

Maybe she will do it after all. France's establishment can't really blame anyone but themselves if she does...

JohnLilburne said:

Pauly said:

Scott_P said:

chestnut said:

Do we have the full list of free trade objectors from all parties?

68 Labour, 50 SNP, 3 PC, 2 Independent(SNP), 2 SDLP and Caroline Lucas

I thought the SNP where pro free trade and pro-EU... an odd one. Just a spiteful vote?

You can't be simultaneously pro-free-trade and pro-EU. The EU is ä protectionist cartel.

I quite agree. I'm not arguing with the consistency of their positions, just their failure to follow their self-acclaimed beliefs.

So much height mockery! We shorties are the last acceptable target in society I tells you! I stand with Bercow! (albeit from the same limited vantage)

Mortimer said:

GnomeinZurich said:

HYUFD said:

Scott_P said:

Sandpit said:

That's getting awfully close.

https://twitter.com/evanoconnell/status/829336357684256770

There are now compromising photos of Macron circulating in Paris apparently after his denials of a homosexual affair

For the first time ever I'm tempted to put tuppence ha penny on a Le Pen.

I've been thinking the same this week.

Maybe she will do it after all. France's establishment can't really blame anyone but themselves if she does...

She has no chance whatsoever.

kle4 said:

Surely the good thing about being a Labour MP uncertain if you want to enter the Shadow Cabinet but knowing you are one of the few left who has not resigned from it or committed to not being in even if asked, is if things go badly something will come along in a few months which will give you a reason to resign as well, limiting the damage, and there are so many former shadow cabinet members most people probably won't remember you were in it, nor will you have spent that much time with Jeremy himself, since depending on your portfolio he probably ignored you anyway. And of course on the off chance things go well, you reap the reward for being a loyal trooper for that unlikely event.

Quite right. And if you are a woman he is certain to have forgotten you were in the shadow cabinet, because he ignores female MPs. Ergo Debbie Abrahams could resign tonight, be reinstated, stand as a staking horse, be sacked, fail as a stalking horse, be reinstated to the Corbyn shadow cabinet again, resign to run Lisa Nandy's campaign, be successful, then be appointed to Lisa's shadow cabinet. After all this has happened, Debbie could go around to Jezza's gaff in N1 for some quiet retirement drinks with the old boss, and he still wouldn't have the faintest idea who she was.

Roger said:

She has no chance whatsoever.

Roger opines.

Fill yer boots...

GnomeinZurich said:

ReggieCide said:

kle4 said:

This whole Trump state visit business and its aftermath seems to be a whole series of events where I intently dislike the focus of ire and his policies, that is to say Trump, but find myself erring on the side of those defending what happened, or at least not agreeing that the best response is to throw great big wobblies about it.

Therefore, while I didn't think May should have offered Trump a state visit quite as soon as she did (he's a US President, we'd have to at some point, probably), it's not really viable to take it away once it has been offered, since any of the reasons not to - he's a boorish racist, that sort of thing - applies to plenty of others who have been given a visit, and who usually lead even worse regimes.

And therefore while I don't want Trump to be invited to address parliament, Bercow getting up on his soapbox to talk about how he wouldn't permit it even if it was offered, which it hadn't, and deliberately didn't even give a heads up to the other people who consider such requests, struck me as diminishing the position of Speaker - if he merely wanted to reflect the will of the house, which is at best divided on whether Trump should be granted such an address, should one be offered, then he could and should have replied to the effect that he knew many members had concerns about such an event, which he shared, and that he would raise those concerns very seriously with the other two people involved in the decision.

And therefore while I think Bercow has undermined himself quite considerably through his behaviour, I don't know that leading a coup against him is the best move at this time, perhaps further enforcing the idea the instant a Speaker does something you don't like they should be ousted.

Now the third I am not settled on. Some would say Bercow has crossed the line before and enough is enough, and others even if he has, knifing him in this fashion would be disproportionate and more harmful than merely taking steps to ensure he is not re-elected as Speaker some day, even if that means waiting some while.

You omitted one quite important factor. Bercow becomes more turd-like by the day. We just have to hope that he doesn't start to grow.

Dwarfs don't grow silly, thats why there dwarfs.

I'm properly chastised

Roger said:

Mortimer said:

GnomeinZurich said:

HYUFD said:

Scott_P said:

Sandpit said:

That's getting awfully close.

https://twitter.com/evanoconnell/status/829336357684256770

There are now compromising photos of Macron circulating in Paris apparently after his denials of a homosexual affair

For the first time ever I'm tempted to put tuppence ha penny on a Le Pen.

I've been thinking the same this week.

Maybe she will do it after all. France's establishment can't really blame anyone but themselves if she does...

She has no chance whatsoever.

That seals it. Rogerdamus has spoken.

Govt wins on EU nationals:

332-290

Not much difference from other votes.

https://twitter.com/reuters/status/829416145459503104

Scott_P said:

@CarolineLucas: Unforgivable - majority of MPs vote against guaranteeing EU citizens #RightToStay - these are people's lives not commodities @The3Million

She should tell that to the EU.

@PickardJE: All those who were furious about the Supreme Court must be cross that they don't have anyone to be angry about any more.

Right on cue for Le Pen a new Chatham House poll has 55% of European voters wanting to end all immigration from majority Islamic nations
http://www.westmonster.com/shock-poll-55-of-europeans-want-to-end-immigration-from-muslim-countries/

@danbloom1: Confirmed, Clive Lewis voted 'aye' for both clauses in the 2-clause Bill to remain intact - strongly suggesting he ain't going to resign

I can't see them shafting the poison dwarf just now.

But I would raise a glass or 2 if he does get toppled.

MikeL said:

Govt wins on EU nationals:

332-290

Not much difference from other votes.

Tory whips doing a very good job of getting everyone in, with the exception of Ken Clarke.

A lot of pressure now on the Lords to pass the bill unamended, following both the wishes of the Commons and the People in the referendum.

@paulwaugh: The 3-line whip really isn't working.
Lab shad ministers Zeichner, West, Huq, Slaughter + Brown ordered to abstain - but voted for 2nd ref.

Sandpit said:

MikeL said:

Govt wins on EU nationals:

332-290

Not much difference from other votes.

Tory whips doing a very good job of getting everyone in, with the exception of Ken Clarke.

A lot of pressure now on the Lords to pass the bill unamended, following both the wishes of the Commons and the People in the referendum.

Even if Lords do pass any amendments, Commons will obviously reverse them and then I imagine they'll stay all night continually bouncing back until the Lords cave.

Sandpit said:

MikeL said:

Govt wins on EU nationals:

332-290

Not much difference from other votes.

Tory whips doing a very good job of getting everyone in, with the exception of Ken Clarke.

A lot of pressure now on the Lords to pass the bill unamended, following both the wishes of the Commons and the People in the referendum.

I think it's an existential decision for the Lords and they must surely know it.

No deal...

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/829418114815291392

Sandpit said:

MikeL said:

Govt wins on EU nationals:

332-290

Not much difference from other votes.

Tory whips doing a very good job of getting everyone in, with the exception of Ken Clarke.

A lot of pressure now on the Lords to pass the bill unamended, following both the wishes of the Commons and the People in the referendum.

They surely are entitled to a bit of parliamentary ping pong? That's not unusual practice, so they could amend, send back, commons rejects, sends back, then probably time for the Lords to pass.

As for Ken, bit hard to whip a guy who's been there 47 years and already saying he's not standing again. Not that it seems probable, but if they ever went nuclear and suspended him or something, he might just bother to stand as an Indy, even if only as a paper candidate.