politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Times reporting that the Tories are “deeply worried” about
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Times reporting that the Tories are “deeply worried” about possible action over the GE2015 expenses investigation
Times says Downing St fears 2015 results in up to 6 seats cld be void if prosecutions follow #C4News expenses inquiry pic.twitter.com/AjF2vWm5qn
Comments
-
The problem for Mrs May is that she can't pin this on the ancien régime given how much her Chief of Staff is implicated in all of this.0
-
WHere are the other 5 seats ?0
-
Off topic, Tyrone Mings is a disgrace. He deserves a twenty match ban, that I sympathise with a Manchester United player.
Jamie Carragher is right, Mings deserves a slap.
Kevin Friend lost it, this match won't end well.0 -
Not specified.Pulpstar said:WHere are the other 5 seats ?
0 -
I've laid Juppe back to pretty much zero this morning. Hoping for Fillon to be a stubborn old goat tommorow at the Troc.0
-
In some ways I hope this matter does reach court. Main parties are always playing fast and loose with election expense rules.0
-
At least Labour can't lose any seats if the by-elections are all in Tory constituencies.
I agree that Labour gains are highly unlikely even on the back of electoral dodginess.0 -
Surely by-elections would only happen after successful prosecutions?
ie CPS has to decide to prosecute and the MP then has to be convicted.
0 -
Trump accuses Obama of tapping his phone
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-391671100 -
I like the way in the course of reposting you've gone from hoping he has a good rally to hoping he's a stubborn old goat.Pulpstar said:I've laid Juppe back to pretty much zero this morning. Hoping for Fillon to be a stubborn old goat tommorow at the Troc.
Obviously not too confident about the rally! 0 -
Either works, obviously I hope his rally goes well. Plenty of French flags there I expect.williamglenn said:
I like the way in the course of reposting you've gone from hoping he has a good rally to hoping he's a stubborn old goat.Pulpstar said:I've laid Juppe back to pretty much zero this morning. Hoping for Fillon to be a stubborn old goat tommorow at the Troc.
Obviously not too confident about the rally!0 -
This could be the lifeline we Remainers have been yearning for - Tories lose their majority and parliament scuppers Brexit with a spoiling motion. Well done Michael Crick! Well done Channel 4! The plebs thought they had the pro-European liberal elite bested, but we were only biding our time.0
-
Watergate-MK2 already,unless DT has been listening to too many conservative commentators.0
-
All parties get up to shady election expenses stuff, or so it seems, but the Tories seem to have been particularly egregious if this is true. It would be worrisome if they escaped punishment (should they be guilty) on the basis that it is so many it would cause too much of a problem.0
-
Huge amounts of ifs there and if may loses her majority you don't think she will go for a GE...Given she is only 14 points ahead.Stark_Dawning said:This could be the lifeline we Remainers have been yearning for - Tories lose their majority and parliament scuppers Brexit with a spoiling motion. Well done Michael Crick! Well done Channel 4! The plebs thought they had the pro-European liberal elite bested, but we were only biding our time.
0 -
If this is true, Obama's looking at prison time. An enormous scandal.FrancisUrquhart said:Trump accuses Obama of tapping his phone
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-391671100 -
Yeah that would go down really well. It is also why UKIP need to keep going, because the public can not let their guard down, the "establishment" will be all too happy to thwart Brexit by any means.Stark_Dawning said:This could be the lifeline we Remainers have been yearning for - Tories lose their majority and parliament scuppers Brexit with a spoiling motion. Well done Michael Crick! Well done Channel 4! The plebs thought they had the pro-European liberal elite bested, but we were only biding our time.
0 -
It didn't remove the option, it just made doing it politically much more difficult, to the point of in-feasibility.Alanbrooke said:
left to its own sentiment HoC would overwhemiingly vote to stay in the EU.williamglenn said:
It's amazing how after 40 years of 'sending power' to Brussels and to the home nations, Westminster still has absolute power to do anything, as we're seeing with Article 50. It can impose direct rule on Northern Ireland, just as it can impose direct rule on the United Kingdom as a whole.Alanbrooke said:
Westminster has been happily voting to send power to Brussels for the last 40 years and has approved 3 regional assembliesSouthamObserver said:
Yep - I was an advocate of a Constitutional convention and suggested a few times on here to much derision after the Scottish independence referendum. But we are moving past that window now. Sacrificing power to keep the UK together is something that Westminster simply would not contemplate.kle4 said:
Really we needed a big constitutional settlement some time ago. A daunting, perhaps impossible task, but as much faith as I have in the British approach of almost accidental reform, it's being sorely tested right now.SouthamObserver said:
It is increasingly hard to see how the UK stays together. We are living in a deeply divided country and there is no sign that these divisions can be healed. Planned separation may now be the best bet.daodao said:
The % votes/seats are as follows:ydoethur said:
An unhelpful parallel because prior to 1972 the Stormont Parliament was gerrymandered on a grand scale. The most egregious example was Londonderry - in the 1950s 60% of voters were Catholic but 60% of representatives were Protestant. So those figures are actually menaningless.Theuniondivvie said:It appears that regardless of 'business as usua'l and the durability of the DUP, NI Unionism is heading one way.
https://twitter.com/St_Anderson38/status/837867338179436544
You should probably keep to the numbers since 1998 - and also compare them relative to the Nationalists to exclude non-sectarian parties. These show pretty consistent if narrow Unionisit majorities, with a sudden drop when their leader stands accused of vast corruption and incompetence.
Nationalist 41.6%/40 (SF/SDLP/PBP)
Unionist 44.6%/40 (DUP/UUP/TUV/PUP/Con), including 1 IND seat
Non-sectarian/others 14.0%/10 (Alliance/Green/others)
NI is now very close to a tipping point, like Scotland, and the Brexit vote hasn't helped with regard to maintaining the integrity of the UK.
The referendum removed that option.0 -
If she loses her majority she can't orchestrate an early election.FrancisUrquhart said:
Huge amounts of ifs there and if may loses her majority you don't think she will go for a GE...Given she is only 14 points ahead.Stark_Dawning said:This could be the lifeline we Remainers have been yearning for - Tories lose their majority and parliament scuppers Brexit with a spoiling motion. Well done Michael Crick! Well done Channel 4! The plebs thought they had the pro-European liberal elite bested, but we were only biding our time.
0 -
She wouldn't let it get to that though. In the unlikely scenario of it seeming like there will be a huge number of reruns of elections before 2020, she can engineer one.Stark_Dawning said:
If she loses her majority she can't orchestrate an early election.FrancisUrquhart said:
Huge amounts of ifs there and if may loses her majority you don't think she will go for a GE...Given she is only 14 points ahead.Stark_Dawning said:This could be the lifeline we Remainers have been yearning for - Tories lose their majority and parliament scuppers Brexit with a spoiling motion. Well done Michael Crick! Well done Channel 4! The plebs thought they had the pro-European liberal elite bested, but we were only biding our time.
Besides there are so many ifs in the nuclear scenario. Have for the cps to prosecute, the candidates to be found guilty, the punishment to be more than fines, Tories to lose seats against corbyn labour and Walter Mitty led ukip...0 -
Nice try.TheScreamingEagles said:The problem for Mrs May is that she can't pin this on the ancien régime given how much her Chief of Staff is implicated in all of this.
The problem for the Cameroons is they can't blame shift given how long and how often they have told us how brilliant Dave and George were on winning seats.
0 -
It doesn't appear to be Trump's fevered imagination, it will be very interesting to hear what grounds the FISA court had for granting a warrant, they had better be good.braeside02 said:Watergate-MK2 already,unless DT has been listening to too many conservative commentators.
0 -
Don't you need 2/3 to vote to call an early election? Having a slim majority or not wouldn't factor into that would it, they still need Labour to play ball? And the more convoluted vote of no confidence route would be on the table still, if still problematic for different reasons?Stark_Dawning said:
If she loses her majority she can't orchestrate an early election.FrancisUrquhart said:
Huge amounts of ifs there and if may loses her majority you don't think she will go for a GE...Given she is only 14 points ahead.Stark_Dawning said:This could be the lifeline we Remainers have been yearning for - Tories lose their majority and parliament scuppers Brexit with a spoiling motion. Well done Michael Crick! Well done Channel 4! The plebs thought they had the pro-European liberal elite bested, but we were only biding our time.
0 -
The opposition parties could get out of playing ball easily - just say that in these turbulent times the nation needs stability and certainty, not a government indulging in the shoddily dangerous opportunism of contrived elections. Cant probably, but it would still work.kle4 said:
Don't you need 2/3 to vote to call an early election? Having a slim majority or not wouldn't factor into that would it, they still need Labour to play ball? And the more convoluted vote of no confidence route would be on the table still, if still problematic for different reasons?Stark_Dawning said:
If she loses her majority she can't orchestrate an early election.FrancisUrquhart said:
Huge amounts of ifs there and if may loses her majority you don't think she will go for a GE...Given she is only 14 points ahead.Stark_Dawning said:This could be the lifeline we Remainers have been yearning for - Tories lose their majority and parliament scuppers Brexit with a spoiling motion. Well done Michael Crick! Well done Channel 4! The plebs thought they had the pro-European liberal elite bested, but we were only biding our time.
0 -
A simple majority will do - a government can not be bound by its predecessors.kle4 said:
Don't you need 2/3 to vote to call an early election? Having a slim majority or not wouldn't factor into that would it, they still need Labour to play ball? And the more convoluted vote of no confidence route would be on the table still, if still problematic for different reasons?Stark_Dawning said:
If she loses her majority she can't orchestrate an early election.FrancisUrquhart said:
Huge amounts of ifs there and if may loses her majority you don't think she will go for a GE...Given she is only 14 points ahead.Stark_Dawning said:This could be the lifeline we Remainers have been yearning for - Tories lose their majority and parliament scuppers Brexit with a spoiling motion. Well done Michael Crick! Well done Channel 4! The plebs thought they had the pro-European liberal elite bested, but we were only biding our time.
But the Government does need to first repeal the FTPA, which will require some dedicated effort.
Other wise yes a (Frankly unahcievable) 2/3 majority is needed.0 -
Labour suddenly going to say they no longer respect the decision of the referendum? Even though Labour voted for the referendum bill?Stark_Dawning said:This could be the lifeline we Remainers have been yearning for - Tories lose their majority and parliament scuppers Brexit with a spoiling motion.
What about the government losing its majority affects that Labour voted for the referendum bill and have just recently, despite rebellion, voted to authorise the enacting of the result? Sure, depending on what government was formed had the Tories not won these seats it allegedly cheated in the bill may never have been proposed and become law, but Labour's actions during its progression and the referendum aftermath would seem to indicate they will not be interested in seizing this opportunity.
Labour's position is critical, and since they are not going the LD route, if they were to change tack it would be because they think the public can be convinced such is ok, it would be because they think the public have already shifted into a position where that is what they want. That is where any real opportunity would come.
0 -
The government won't go for an election precisely because it is focusing all of its efforts on Brexit.Stark_Dawning said:In these turbulent times the nation needs stability and certainty
There is a clear majority for that in the commons, it is the other place that is giving May grief - and a GE does diddly squat to the Lords.
0 -
The other thing with cricks investigation is that in many seats he has made shall we say a huge leap of "logic" to be able to claim Tories exceeded spending, whereby he decided all of certain spending should 100% be claimed as local not national or a bit of both.
It is one thing crick making these claims, making it stand up in court is quite another eg how many journos were found guilty of phone hacking in the end and got jail time.0 -
I believe that, its one of several reasons I think May has so far and will continue to resist the temptation which must be there to try to call one, but my point was losing her majority doesn't seem to impact that much whether she would try to make the attempt or not. She needed Labour to play ball either way for the easiest route at the least, and as you say they could have done so (it would be ridiculed, but better ridicule than consenting to an election they'd lose).Stark_Dawning said:
The opposition parties could get out of playing ball easily - just say that in these turbulent times the nation needs stability and certainty, not a government indulging in the shoddily dangerous opportunism of contrived elections. Cant probably, but it would still work.kle4 said:
Don't you need 2/3 to vote to call an early election? Having a slim majority or not wouldn't factor into that would it, they still need Labour to play ball? And the more convoluted vote of no confidence route would be on the table still, if still problematic for different reasons?Stark_Dawning said:
If she loses her majority she can't orchestrate an early election.FrancisUrquhart said:
Huge amounts of ifs there and if may loses her majority you don't think she will go for a GE...Given she is only 14 points ahead.Stark_Dawning said:This could be the lifeline we Remainers have been yearning for - Tories lose their majority and parliament scuppers Brexit with a spoiling motion. Well done Michael Crick! Well done Channel 4! The plebs thought they had the pro-European liberal elite bested, but we were only biding our time.
0 -
The Cameroons having problems doesn't matter because they are not in situ, so it doesn't work as a distraction.CarlottaVance said:
Nice try.TheScreamingEagles said:The problem for Mrs May is that she can't pin this on the ancien régime given how much her Chief of Staff is implicated in all of this.
The problem for the Cameroons is they can't blame shift given how long and how often they have told us how brilliant Dave and George were on winning seats.0 -
Depends how far off they are. Labour might be better placed to win such seats in 12 months time.SandyRentool said:At least Labour can't lose any seats if the by-elections are all in Tory constituencies.
I agree that Labour gains are highly unlikely even on the back of electoral dodginess.0 -
Corbyn is unlikely to help her call an election.FrancisUrquhart said:
Huge amounts of ifs there and if may loses her majority you don't think she will go for a GE...Given she is only 14 points ahead.Stark_Dawning said:This could be the lifeline we Remainers have been yearning for - Tories lose their majority and parliament scuppers Brexit with a spoiling motion. Well done Michael Crick! Well done Channel 4! The plebs thought they had the pro-European liberal elite bested, but we were only biding our time.
0 -
Unless someone were to propose abolishing or hobbling it and then won I suppose, although of course they could always choose to do that now if they wanted.Pulpstar said:
The government won't go for an election precisely because it is focusing all of its efforts on Brexit.Stark_Dawning said:In these turbulent times the nation needs stability and certainty
There is a clear majority for that in the commons, it is the other place that is giving May grief - and a GE does diddly squat to the Lords.0 -
What do you mean - IF it's true?MonikerDiCanio said:
If this is true, Obama's looking at prison time. An enormous scandal.FrancisUrquhart said:Trump accuses Obama of tapping his phone
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39167110
Surely you're not suggesting that Donald Trump would tweet anything but God's honest truth? :-)0 -
True enough, although the defences requires a lot of weaselling excuses and justifications so far, which is dodgy even if it is not illegal.FrancisUrquhart said:The other thing with cricks investigation is that in many seats he has made shall we say a huge leap of "logic" to be able to claim Tories exceeded spending, whereby he decided all of certain spending should 100% be claimed as local not national or a bit of both.
It is one thing crick making these claims, making it stand up in court is quite another eg how many journos were found guilty of phone hacking in the end and got jail time.0 -
Preposterous, of course.Chris said:
What do you mean - IF it's true?MonikerDiCanio said:
If this is true, Obama's looking at prison time. An enormous scandal.FrancisUrquhart said:Trump accuses Obama of tapping his phone
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39167110
Surely you're not suggesting that Donald Trump would tweet anything but God's honest truth? :-)
You don't get to where Trump is by being a complete fool, no matter how charismatic you are or how bad your opponent, even if he is clearly misinformed on a whole bunch of things, so I guess he's just throwing out red meat for his supporters, or why else ask if it was legal over twitter rather than, say, counsel?0 -
The FTPA should remain.Pulpstar said:
A simple majority will do - a government can not be bound by its predecessors.kle4 said:
Don't you need 2/3 to vote to call an early election? Having a slim majority or not wouldn't factor into that would it, they still need Labour to play ball? And the more convoluted vote of no confidence route would be on the table still, if still problematic for different reasons?Stark_Dawning said:
If she loses her majority she can't orchestrate an early election.FrancisUrquhart said:
Huge amounts of ifs there and if may loses her majority you don't think she will go for a GE...Given she is only 14 points ahead.Stark_Dawning said:This could be the lifeline we Remainers have been yearning for - Tories lose their majority and parliament scuppers Brexit with a spoiling motion. Well done Michael Crick! Well done Channel 4! The plebs thought they had the pro-European liberal elite bested, but we were only biding our time.
But the Government does need to first repeal the FTPA, which will require some dedicated effort.
Other wise yes a (Frankly unahcievable) 2/3 majority is needed.
A general election should not be called at the whim of the PM for their own political advantage.0 -
Trump would have to be insane to issue that explosive tweet unless he had absolute proof. I don't believe he's insane.Chris said:
What do you mean - IF it's true?MonikerDiCanio said:
If this is true, Obama's looking at prison time. An enormous scandal.FrancisUrquhart said:Trump accuses Obama of tapping his phone
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39167110
Surely you're not suggesting that Donald Trump would tweet anything but God's honest truth? :-)0 -
It seemed a decent act to me, for all it as crafted at the least in part for narrow political intent. Some seem really exercised about it, but I'm yet to be convinced it is so bad it requires repeal.JackW said:
The FTPA should remain.Pulpstar said:
A simple majority will do - a government can not be bound by its predecessors.kle4 said:
Don't you need 2/3 to vote to call an early election? Having a slim majority or not wouldn't factor into that would it, they still need Labour to play ball? And the more convoluted vote of no confidence route would be on the table still, if still problematic for different reasons?Stark_Dawning said:
If she loses her majority she can't orchestrate an early election.FrancisUrquhart said:
Huge amounts of ifs there and if may loses her majority you don't think she will go for a GE...Given she is only 14 points ahead.Stark_Dawning said:This could be the lifeline we Remainers have been yearning for - Tories lose their majority and parliament scuppers Brexit with a spoiling motion. Well done Michael Crick! Well done Channel 4! The plebs thought they had the pro-European liberal elite bested, but we were only biding our time.
But the Government does need to first repeal the FTPA, which will require some dedicated effort.
Other wise yes a (Frankly unahcievable) 2/3 majority is needed.
A general election should not be called at the whim of the PM for their own political advantage.0 -
This reminds me of the happy days of Summer 2010.
'General Election by October'
'Won't last beyond Spring 2011'
'Cameron rode a horse!'
'Osborne cried at a funeral!'
May will be Prime Minister in May 2020. And also in June 2020.
But these expenses revelations must place a question mark over Osborne's return to the Front Bench.....0 -
If the authorities weren't able/willing to prosecute Lutfur Rahman, I'd be surprised if they did so here.kle4 said:
True enough, although the defences requires a lot of weaselling excuses and justifications so far, which is dodgy even if it is not illegal.FrancisUrquhart said:The other thing with cricks investigation is that in many seats he has made shall we say a huge leap of "logic" to be able to claim Tories exceeded spending, whereby he decided all of certain spending should 100% be claimed as local not national or a bit of both.
It is one thing crick making these claims, making it stand up in court is quite another eg how many journos were found guilty of phone hacking in the end and got jail time.0 -
But any re-habilitation of Osborne has surely been put off?kle4 said:
The Cameroons having problems doesn't matter because they are not in situ, so it doesn't work as a distraction.CarlottaVance said:
Nice try.TheScreamingEagles said:The problem for Mrs May is that she can't pin this on the ancien régime given how much her Chief of Staff is implicated in all of this.
The problem for the Cameroons is they can't blame shift given how long and how often they have told us how brilliant Dave and George were on winning seats.0 -
I wish I had a penny for every time Trump had done things he would have to be insane to do.MonikerDiCanio said:
Trump would have to be insane to ...Chris said:
What do you mean - IF it's true?MonikerDiCanio said:
If this is true, Obama's looking at prison time. An enormous scandal.FrancisUrquhart said:Trump accuses Obama of tapping his phone
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39167110
Surely you're not suggesting that Donald Trump would tweet anything but God's honest truth? :-)0 -
Sounds as if Trump's proof is an article on Breitbart:MonikerDiCanio said:
Trump would have to be insane to issue that explosive tweet unless he had absolute proof. I don't believe he's insane.Chris said:
What do you mean - IF it's true?MonikerDiCanio said:
If this is true, Obama's looking at prison time. An enormous scandal.FrancisUrquhart said:Trump accuses Obama of tapping his phone
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39167110
Surely you're not suggesting that Donald Trump would tweet anything but God's honest truth? :-)
the Obama administration sought, and eventually obtained, authorization to eavesdrop on the Trump campaign; continued monitoring the Trump team even when no evidence of wrongdoing was found; then relaxed the NSA rules to allow evidence to be shared widely within the government, virtually ensuring that the information, including the conversations of private citizens, would be leaked to the media.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/03/03/mark-levin-obama-used-police-state-tactics-undermine-trump/0 -
Obviously I do not know how much truth is in such claims, but is Trump really as credulous as he sometimes seems? He cannot be, surely? Because he acts like he always believes the last thing he sees or hears, even where some on the right think it is nuts.Stark_Dawning said:
Sounds as if Trump's proof is an article on Breitbart:MonikerDiCanio said:
Trump would have to be insane to issue that explosive tweet unless he had absolute proof. I don't believe he's insane.Chris said:
What do you mean - IF it's true?MonikerDiCanio said:
If this is true, Obama's looking at prison time. An enormous scandal.FrancisUrquhart said:Trump accuses Obama of tapping his phone
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39167110
Surely you're not suggesting that Donald Trump would tweet anything but God's honest truth? :-)
the Obama administration sought, and eventually obtained, authorization to eavesdrop on the Trump campaign; continued monitoring the Trump team even when no evidence of wrongdoing was found; then relaxed the NSA rules to allow evidence to be shared widely within the government, virtually ensuring that the information, including the conversations of private citizens, would be leaked to the media.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/03/03/mark-levin-obama-used-police-state-tactics-undermine-trump/0 -
Surely you're not suggesting that Breitbart would report anything but God's honest truth? :-)Stark_Dawning said:
Sounds as if Trump's proof is an article on Breitbart:MonikerDiCanio said:
Trump would have to be insane to issue that explosive tweet unless he had absolute proof. I don't believe he's insane.Chris said:
What do you mean - IF it's true?MonikerDiCanio said:
If this is true, Obama's looking at prison time. An enormous scandal.FrancisUrquhart said:Trump accuses Obama of tapping his phone
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39167110
Surely you're not suggesting that Donald Trump would tweet anything but God's honest truth? :-)
the Obama administration sought, and eventually obtained, authorization to eavesdrop on the Trump campaign; continued monitoring the Trump team even when no evidence of wrongdoing was found; then relaxed the NSA rules to allow evidence to be shared widely within the government, virtually ensuring that the information, including the conversations of private citizens, would be leaked to the media.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/03/03/mark-levin-obama-used-police-state-tactics-undermine-trump/0 -
Quite so.kle4 said:It seemed a decent act to me, for all it as crafted at the least in part for narrow political intent. Some seem really exercised about it, but I'm yet to be convinced it is so bad it requires repeal.
The origin of the FTPA was to ensure the long term viability of the Coaltion but like much of our constitution it will prove to have longer term unintended but fortuitous consequences.
0 -
I think there's a ton of method in his madness. He didn't get to where he is today by making allegations founded on proof.MonikerDiCanio said:
Trump would have to be insane to issue that explosive tweet unless he had absolute proof. I don't believe he's insane.Chris said:
What do you mean - IF it's true?MonikerDiCanio said:
If this is true, Obama's looking at prison time. An enormous scandal.FrancisUrquhart said:Trump accuses Obama of tapping his phone
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39167110
Surely you're not suggesting that Donald Trump would tweet anything but God's honest truth? :-)0 -
On topic. - If maximum expense limits have been exceeded, then the Electoral Commission should impose fines on those found guilty. I doubt the electoral results in the six unnamed constituencies will be overturned however, the whole issue will be treated just as with the Lib Dems and their 20K maximum fine. - Not that we know much of the who, what ands where’s.0
-
Maybe that will embolden them this time. But perhaps not. I recall the judgement in that one essentially lambasting the authorities for leaving it to private citizens to bring the case.Sean_F said:
If the authorities weren't able/willing to prosecute Lutfur Rahman, I'd be surprised if they did so here.kle4 said:
True enough, although the defences requires a lot of weaselling excuses and justifications so far, which is dodgy even if it is not illegal.FrancisUrquhart said:The other thing with cricks investigation is that in many seats he has made shall we say a huge leap of "logic" to be able to claim Tories exceeded spending, whereby he decided all of certain spending should 100% be claimed as local not national or a bit of both.
It is one thing crick making these claims, making it stand up in court is quite another eg how many journos were found guilty of phone hacking in the end and got jail time.0 -
And some less desirable ones. E.g. if T May loses her 6 seats and Corbyn stays in post, the next three years will look like a lame duck race, or whatever the opposite is of irresistible force meeting immovable obstacle. It might be thought, partisan considerations left entirely aside, that a snap election giving a workable majority was the best thing for the body politic.JackW said:
Quite so.kle4 said:It seemed a decent act to me, for all it as crafted at the least in part for narrow political intent. Some seem really exercised about it, but I'm yet to be convinced it is so bad it requires repeal.
The origin of the FTPA was to ensure the long term viability of the Coaltion but like much of our constitution it will prove to have longer term unintended but fortuitous consequences.
It would be a cool double to serve Art 50 notice and call a GE on the same day.0 -
Jack, I've heard it from the horse's (Party chair)'s mouth himself at a private event - there will be no early election.JackW said:
The FTPA should remain.Pulpstar said:
A simple majority will do - a government can not be bound by its predecessors.kle4 said:
Don't you need 2/3 to vote to call an early election? Having a slim majority or not wouldn't factor into that would it, they still need Labour to play ball? And the more convoluted vote of no confidence route would be on the table still, if still problematic for different reasons?Stark_Dawning said:
If she loses her majority she can't orchestrate an early election.FrancisUrquhart said:
Huge amounts of ifs there and if may loses her majority you don't think she will go for a GE...Given she is only 14 points ahead.Stark_Dawning said:This could be the lifeline we Remainers have been yearning for - Tories lose their majority and parliament scuppers Brexit with a spoiling motion. Well done Michael Crick! Well done Channel 4! The plebs thought they had the pro-European liberal elite bested, but we were only biding our time.
But the Government does need to first repeal the FTPA, which will require some dedicated effort.
Other wise yes a (Frankly unahcievable) 2/3 majority is needed.
A general election should not be called at the whim of the PM for their own political advantage.0 -
One of the seats which has been highlighted is Thanet South where the Tories beat off a challenge by UKIP’s Nigel Farage
If there is a by-election in Thanet South, the ideal Con candidate would be Douglas Carswell.0 -
But TM cannot call an election like that. There would have to be a parliamentary vote - and doubtless some notice of that would have to be given.Ishmael_Z said:
And some less desirable ones. E.g. if T May loses her 6 seats and Corbyn stays in post, the next three years will look like a lame duck race, or whatever the opposite is of irresistible force meeting immovable obstacle. It might be thought, partisan considerations left entirely aside, that a snap election giving a workable majority was the best thing for the body politic.JackW said:
Quite so.kle4 said:It seemed a decent act to me, for all it as crafted at the least in part for narrow political intent. Some seem really exercised about it, but I'm yet to be convinced it is so bad it requires repeal.
The origin of the FTPA was to ensure the long term viability of the Coaltion but like much of our constitution it will prove to have longer term unintended but fortuitous consequences.
It would be a cool double to serve Art 50 notice and call a GE on the same day.0 -
Yes, I appreciate that - my hypothetical was a hypothetical.justin124 said:
But TM cannot call an election like that. There would have to be a parliamentary vote - and doubtless some notice of that would have to be given.Ishmael_Z said:
And some less desirable ones. E.g. if T May loses her 6 seats and Corbyn stays in post, the next three years will look like a lame duck race, or whatever the opposite is of irresistible force meeting immovable obstacle. It might be thought, partisan considerations left entirely aside, that a snap election giving a workable majority was the best thing for the body politic.JackW said:
Quite so.kle4 said:It seemed a decent act to me, for all it as crafted at the least in part for narrow political intent. Some seem really exercised about it, but I'm yet to be convinced it is so bad it requires repeal.
The origin of the FTPA was to ensure the long term viability of the Coaltion but like much of our constitution it will prove to have longer term unintended but fortuitous consequences.
It would be a cool double to serve Art 50 notice and call a GE on the same day.0 -
Before 2010 "partisan considerations" were never left aside when the timing of the general election was determined by the PM. Now If an electorate hands a government a difficult hand then so be it.Ishmael_Z said:
And some less desirable ones. E.g. if T May loses her 6 seats and Corbyn stays in post, the next three years will look like a lame duck race, or whatever the opposite is of irresistible force meeting immovable obstacle. It might be thought, partisan considerations left entirely aside, that a snap election giving a workable majority was the best thing for the body politic.JackW said:
Quite so.kle4 said:It seemed a decent act to me, for all it as crafted at the least in part for narrow political intent. Some seem really exercised about it, but I'm yet to be convinced it is so bad it requires repeal.
The origin of the FTPA was to ensure the long term viability of the Coaltion but like much of our constitution it will prove to have longer term unintended but fortuitous consequences.
It would be a cool double to serve Art 50 notice and call a GE on the same day.0 -
I understand the Representation of the People Act to be very prescriptive. If an MP is found to have been elected improperly he is barred from public office for a period, so there will necessarily be a new election where be won't be allowed to stand.SimonStClare said:On topic. - If maximum expense limits have been exceeded, then the Electoral Commission should impose fines on those found guilty. I doubt the electoral results in the six unnamed constituencies will be overturned however, the whole issue will be treated just as with the Lib Dems and their 20K maximum fine. - Not that we know much of the who, what ands where’s.
0 -
Obama seeking to eavesdrop on an opposition’s Presidential campaign must surely go against ever rule there is. Explosive stuff, if true.Stark_Dawning said:
Sounds as if Trump's proof is an article on Breitbart:MonikerDiCanio said:
Trump would have to be insane to issue that explosive tweet unless he had absolute proof. I don't believe he's insane.Chris said:
What do you mean - IF it's true?MonikerDiCanio said:
If this is true, Obama's looking at prison time. An enormous scandal.FrancisUrquhart said:Trump accuses Obama of tapping his phone
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39167110
Surely you're not suggesting that Donald Trump would tweet anything but God's honest truth? :-)
the Obama administration sought, and eventually obtained, authorization to eavesdrop on the Trump campaign; continued monitoring the Trump team even when no evidence of wrongdoing was found; then relaxed the NSA rules to allow evidence to be shared widely within the government, virtually ensuring that the information, including the conversations of private citizens, would be leaked to the media.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/03/03/mark-levin-obama-used-police-state-tactics-undermine-trump/0 -
Chortle ....david_herdson said:One of the seats which has been highlighted is Thanet South where the Tories beat off a challenge by UKIP’s Nigel Farage
If there is a by-election in Thanet South, the ideal Con candidate would be Douglas Carswell.
0 -
Well of course they aren't, but there are times when they can coincide with what is also the best outcome for the country.JackW said:
Before 2010 "partisan considerations" were never left aside when the timing of the general election was determined by the PM. Now If an electorate hands a government a difficult hand then so be it.Ishmael_Z said:
And some less desirable ones. E.g. if T May loses her 6 seats and Corbyn stays in post, the next three years will look like a lame duck race, or whatever the opposite is of irresistible force meeting immovable obstacle. It might be thought, partisan considerations left entirely aside, that a snap election giving a workable majority was the best thing for the body politic.JackW said:
Quite so.kle4 said:It seemed a decent act to me, for all it as crafted at the least in part for narrow political intent. Some seem really exercised about it, but I'm yet to be convinced it is so bad it requires repeal.
The origin of the FTPA was to ensure the long term viability of the Coaltion but like much of our constitution it will prove to have longer term unintended but fortuitous consequences.
It would be a cool double to serve Art 50 notice and call a GE on the same day.
The FTPA was always vulnerable to repeal by a simple majority, and some clever legal bod pointed out the other day that it can also be leapfrogged by a "Notwithstanding the FTPA, let's just this once have an election in 2017" Act also passed by simple majority.0 -
Daisley:
Mrs May’s speech was mostly boilerplate but parse a word here and a clause there and you have the makings of a fresh approach to devolution. Mr Cameron’s respect agenda — which involved him being respectful to the SNP and them respectfully telling him to b****r off — has been replaced by a mutual respect agenda. Downing Street would seek to work with the devolved administration but the good of the Union, not appeasement of the Nationalists, would be the priority.
The Prime Minister was relaxed, even allowing herself the odd smile. She looks less apprehensive when speaking in Scotland than her old boss did; her shoulders are less hunched, her words less halted by fear of saying the wrong thing. Every few months, Mr Cameron would come north to deliver a ‘defence’ of the Union and every time it would fall flat. By seeking to defend the United Kingdom, he accepted that it was on trial. Mrs May celebrated our shared values and prosecuted a strong case against separatism.
She gets what Mr Cameron seemed not to: Scotland is her country too, and she needn’t be afraid to talk about it.
https://stephendaisley.com/2017/03/04/theresa-mays-hymn-to-unity-was-heartfelt-and-robust/0 -
TM holds all the cards at the moment.The only problem she could have would be 30 or so remain Tory MPs flexing their muscles.However they do not seem to be any bastards as Major had just some nice MPs making debating points to the media .JackW said:
Before 2010 "partisan considerations" were never left aside when the timing of the general election was determined by the PM. Now If an electorate hands a government a difficult hand then so be it.Ishmael_Z said:
And some less desirable ones. E.g. if T May loses her 6 seats and Corbyn stays in post, the next three years will look like a lame duck race, or whatever the opposite is of irresistible force meeting immovable obstacle. It might be thought, partisan considerations left entirely aside, that a snap election giving a workable majority was the best thing for the body politic.JackW said:
Quite so.kle4 said:It seemed a decent act to me, for all it as crafted at the least in part for narrow political intent. Some seem really exercised about it, but I'm yet to be convinced it is so bad it requires repeal.
The origin of the FTPA was to ensure the long term viability of the Coaltion but like much of our constitution it will prove to have longer term unintended but fortuitous consequences.
It would be a cool double to serve Art 50 notice and call a GE on the same day.0 -
Have the Conservatives been particularly egregious or has Michael Crick's investigation focussed on the Conservatives?kle4 said:All parties get up to shady election expenses stuff, or so it seems, but the Tories seem to have been particularly egregious if this is true. It would be worrisome if they escaped punishment (should they be guilty) on the basis that it is so many it would cause too much of a problem.
Surely before taking action that would alter the outcome of the GE, all constituencies must be vetted with equal rigour and the results made public so we can all verify there has been no political bias?
Only after that will we know whether none/some/many/all MPs are in situ fraudulently.
The knock-on effects are not trivial, after all. If the Conservatives hadn't won a majority, there would have been no EU referendum; but as it is, the EU now knows how many people in the UK are not at all happy with the Grand Project. Would the EU be willing to pretend the referendum never happened?
Good afternoon, everybody.0 -
Governments will always decide that their return to government, with an increased majority, is the "best outcome for the country".Ishmael_Z said:
Well of course they aren't, but there are times when they can coincide with what is also the best outcome for the country.JackW said:
Before 2010 "partisan considerations" were never left aside when the timing of the general election was determined by the PM. Now If an electorate hands a government a difficult hand then so be it.Ishmael_Z said:
And some less desirable ones. E.g. if T May loses her 6 seats and Corbyn stays in post, the next three years will look like a lame duck race, or whatever the opposite is of irresistible force meeting immovable obstacle. It might be thought, partisan considerations left entirely aside, that a snap election giving a workable majority was the best thing for the body politic.JackW said:
Quite so.kle4 said:It seemed a decent act to me, for all it as crafted at the least in part for narrow political intent. Some seem really exercised about it, but I'm yet to be convinced it is so bad it requires repeal.
The origin of the FTPA was to ensure the long term viability of the Coaltion but like much of our constitution it will prove to have longer term unintended but fortuitous consequences.
It would be a cool double to serve Art 50 notice and call a GE on the same day.
The FTPA was always vulnerable to repeal by a simple majority, and some clever legal bod pointed out the other day that it can also be leapfrogged by a "Notwithstanding the FTPA, let's just this once have an election in 2017" Act also passed by simple majority.
Many liberal democracies seem to struggle on without recourse to the manipulation of election timing by a Prime Minister or President and the FTPA should now be woven seamlessly into the fabric of our politics.0 -
They will want to make sure any misdemeanor is pinned on the party or the agent, and not the MP. The party would get a fine; the agent would be barred from acting I the future, but that doesn't matter. If the MP is found to be responsible he will have to resign and a new election will be calledFF43 said:
I understand the Representation of the People Act to be very prescriptive. If an MP is found to have been elected improperly he is barred from public office for a period, so there will necessarily be a new election where be won't be allowed to stand.SimonStClare said:On topic. - If maximum expense limits have been exceeded, then the Electoral Commission should impose fines on those found guilty. I doubt the electoral results in the six unnamed constituencies will be overturned however, the whole issue will be treated just as with the Lib Dems and their 20K maximum fine. - Not that we know much of the who, what ands where’s.
0 -
Cameron went to Scotland pleaded and begged that the Scottish people save the Union they did .He was successful in that regard.CarlottaVance said:Daisley:
Mrs May’s speech was mostly boilerplate but parse a word here and a clause there and you have the makings of a fresh approach to devolution. Mr Cameron’s respect agenda — which involved him being respectful to the SNP and them respectfully telling him to b****r off — has been replaced by a mutual respect agenda. Downing Street would seek to work with the devolved administration but the good of the Union, not appeasement of the Nationalists, would be the priority.
The Prime Minister was relaxed, even allowing herself the odd smile. She looks less apprehensive when speaking in Scotland than her old boss did; her shoulders are less hunched, her words less halted by fear of saying the wrong thing. Every few months, Mr Cameron would come north to deliver a ‘defence’ of the Union and every time it would fall flat. By seeking to defend the United Kingdom, he accepted that it was on trial. Mrs May celebrated our shared values and prosecuted a strong case against separatism.
She gets what Mr Cameron seemed not to: Scotland is her country too, and she needn’t be afraid to talk about it.
https://stephendaisley.com/2017/03/04/theresa-mays-hymn-to-unity-was-heartfelt-and-robust/0 -
I suspect that the Referendum would still have happened had the Tories fallen a few seats short of a majority in 2015. There would probably be at least 10 Labour MPs who would have supported it - plus the DUP.AnneJGP said:
Have the Conservatives been particularly egregious or has Michael Crick's investigation focussed on the Conservatives?kle4 said:All parties get up to shady election expenses stuff, or so it seems, but the Tories seem to have been particularly egregious if this is true. It would be worrisome if they escaped punishment (should they be guilty) on the basis that it is so many it would cause too much of a problem.
Surely before taking action that would alter the outcome of the GE, all constituencies must be vetted with equal rigour and the results made public so we can all verify there has been no political bias?
Only after that will we know whether none/some/many/all MPs are in situ fraudulently.
The knock-on effects are not trivial, after all. If the Conservatives hadn't won a majority, there would have been no EU referendum; but as it is, the EU now knows how many people in the UK are not at all happy with the Grand Project. Would the EU be willing to pretend the referendum never happened?
Good afternoon, everybody.0 -
The PM's reticence is most likely caused by the ace up her sleeve - One Rt Hon Jeremy Bernard Corbyn MP.Yorkcity said:TM holds all the cards at the moment.The only problem she could have would be 30 or so remain Tory MPs flexing their muscles.However they do not seem to be any bastards as Major had just some nice MPs making debating points to the media .
0 -
So telling them they are playing games with people's lives is respectful? I'd hate to see Theresa May deliberately being offensive.CarlottaVance said:Mr Cameron’s respect agenda — which involved him being respectful to the SNP and them respectfully telling him to b****r off — has been replaced by a mutual respect agenda.
0 -
As you can see, the claim is that there was authorised tapping. According to the Washington Post, that would require a finding by a federal judge that the person concerned "had committed a crime or was an agent of a foreign power." I can't help wondering whether Trump appreciates that.SimonStClare said:
Obama seeking to eavesdrop on an opposition’s Presidential campaign must surely go against ever rule there is. Explosive stuff, if true.Stark_Dawning said:
Sounds as if Trump's proof is an article on Breitbart:MonikerDiCanio said:
Trump would have to be insane to issue that explosive tweet unless he had absolute proof. I don't believe he's insane.Chris said:
What do you mean - IF it's true?MonikerDiCanio said:
If this is true, Obama's looking at prison time. An enormous scandal.FrancisUrquhart said:Trump accuses Obama of tapping his phone
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39167110
Surely you're not suggesting that Donald Trump would tweet anything but God's honest truth? :-)
the Obama administration sought, and eventually obtained, authorization to eavesdrop on the Trump campaign; continued monitoring the Trump team even when no evidence of wrongdoing was found; then relaxed the NSA rules to allow evidence to be shared widely within the government, virtually ensuring that the information, including the conversations of private citizens, would be leaked to the media.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/03/03/mark-levin-obama-used-police-state-tactics-undermine-trump/0 -
Hardly an expert on the subject, but I’m not sure the Representation of the People Act applies in this case, this looks like a simple case of electoral funding irregularities rather than what Phil Woolas did, to be stripped of his MP status.FF43 said:
They will want to make sure any misdemeanor is pinned on the party or the agent, and not the MP. The party would get a fine; the agent would be barred from acting I the future, but that doesn't matter. If the MP is found to be responsible he will have to resign and a new election will be calledFF43 said:
I understand the Representation of the People Act to be very prescriptive. If an MP is found to have been elected improperly he is barred from public office for a period, so there will necessarily be a new election where be won't be allowed to stand.SimonStClare said:On topic. - If maximum expense limits have been exceeded, then the Electoral Commission should impose fines on those found guilty. I doubt the electoral results in the six unnamed constituencies will be overturned however, the whole issue will be treated just as with the Lib Dems and their 20K maximum fine. - Not that we know much of the who, what ands where’s.
0 -
Agreed however opposition takes many forms and if you never play the ace you might as well have the two of spades.JackW said:
The PM's reticence is most likely caused by the ace up her sleeve - One Rt Hon Jeremy Bernard Corbyn MP.Yorkcity said:TM holds all the cards at the moment.The only problem she could have would be 30 or so remain Tory MPs flexing their muscles.However they do not seem to be any bastards as Major had just some nice MPs making debating points to the media .
0 -
The two of spades trumps a joker every time ....Yorkcity said:
Agreed however opposition takes many forms and if you never play the ace you might as well have the two of spades.JackW said:
The PM's reticence is most likely caused by the ace up her sleeve - One Rt Hon Jeremy Bernard Corbyn MP.Yorkcity said:TM holds all the cards at the moment.The only problem she could have would be 30 or so remain Tory MPs flexing their muscles.However they do not seem to be any bastards as Major had just some nice MPs making debating points to the media .
0 -
Haha. Good try Mr Eagles.TheScreamingEagles said:The problem for Mrs May is that she can't pin this on the ancien régime given how much her Chief of Staff is implicated in all of this.
0 -
Not if you never use it.JackW said:
The two of spades trumps a joker every time ....Yorkcity said:
Agreed however opposition takes many forms and if you never play the ace you might as well have the two of spades.JackW said:
The PM's reticence is most likely caused by the ace up her sleeve - One Rt Hon Jeremy Bernard Corbyn MP.Yorkcity said:TM holds all the cards at the moment.The only problem she could have would be 30 or so remain Tory MPs flexing their muscles.However they do not seem to be any bastards as Major had just some nice MPs making debating points to the media .
0 -
David 'The Martyr' Mundell obviously hasn't received the mutual respect memo.williamglenn said:
So telling them they are playing games with people's lives is respectful? I'd hate to see Theresa May deliberately being offensive.CarlottaVance said:Mr Cameron’s respect agenda — which involved him being respectful to the SNP and them respectfully telling him to b****r off — has been replaced by a mutual respect agenda.
https://twitter.com/BBCPhilipSim/status/8379676370491842570 -
South African president Jacob Zuma has called on lawmakers to help seize white-owned land without compensation - to establish 'pre-colonial' patterns.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4281088/Zuma-wants-land-owned-white-occupiers-taken.html0 -
Sell the rand lolFrancisUrquhart said:South African president Jacob Zuma has called on lawmakers to help seize white-owned land without compensation - to establish 'pre-colonial' patterns.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4281088/Zuma-wants-land-owned-white-occupiers-taken.html
0 -
He was - but I'm not sure he connected in the same way May does:Yorkcity said:
Cameron went to Scotland pleaded and begged that the Scottish people save the Union they did .He was successful in that regard.CarlottaVance said:Daisley:
Mrs May’s speech was mostly boilerplate but parse a word here and a clause there and you have the makings of a fresh approach to devolution. Mr Cameron’s respect agenda — which involved him being respectful to the SNP and them respectfully telling him to b****r off — has been replaced by a mutual respect agenda. Downing Street would seek to work with the devolved administration but the good of the Union, not appeasement of the Nationalists, would be the priority.
The Prime Minister was relaxed, even allowing herself the odd smile. She looks less apprehensive when speaking in Scotland than her old boss did; her shoulders are less hunched, her words less halted by fear of saying the wrong thing. Every few months, Mr Cameron would come north to deliver a ‘defence’ of the Union and every time it would fall flat. By seeking to defend the United Kingdom, he accepted that it was on trial. Mrs May celebrated our shared values and prosecuted a strong case against separatism.
She gets what Mr Cameron seemed not to: Scotland is her country too, and she needn’t be afraid to talk about it.
https://stephendaisley.com/2017/03/04/theresa-mays-hymn-to-unity-was-heartfelt-and-robust/
The hall loved it. Conservative conferences are a tale of two Tories. The mini-Mogg — suit from John Lewis, politics from John Redwood — and the No-Nonsense Auntie: A doughty, reliable type who knocks the doors, bakes the scones, and handbags Central Office when it gets too carried away with itself. The libertarian mini-Moggs set aside their iffiness about collectivism to rah-rah the Prime Minister’s words while the Aunties, terribly proud to be British but one doesn’t go on about it, thundered in applause.0 -
Banking on an Alain slide?Mortimer said:Ditto. I've also backed Fillon more on the basis that he will shorten again once the Juppgasm subsides....
0 -
Heh If Juppe does win it'll be tremendous for my Betfair account ( Only £226 allowance remaining for the premium charge), less good for my Hills account..Mortimer said:
Ditto. I've also backed Fillon more on the basis that he will shorten again once the Juppgasm subsides....Pulpstar said:I've laid Juppe back to pretty much zero this morning. Hoping for Fillon to be a stubborn old goat tommorow at the Troc.
0 -
I know it's off topic but the e petition to replace the unelected HOL is within 500 votes of 100,000 requiring it to be considered by the HOC0
-
-
May certainly connects better with the Unionists and Conservatives.However I have my doubts she can convince the uncommited who might switch and get Scottish Independence over the 50%.CarlottaVance said:
He was - but I'm not sure he connected in the same way May does:Yorkcity said:
Cameron went to Scotland pleaded and begged that the Scottish people save the Union they did .He was successful in that regard.CarlottaVance said:Daisley:
Mrs May’s speech was mostly boilerplate but parse a word here and a clause there and you have the makings of a fresh approach to devolution. Mr Cameron’s respect agenda — which involved him being respectful to the SNP and them respectfully telling him to b****r off — has been replaced by a mutual respect agenda. Downing Street would seek to work with the devolved administration but the good of the Union, not appeasement of the Nationalists, would be the priority.
The Prime Minister was relaxed, even allowing herself the odd smile. She looks less apprehensive when speaking in Scotland than her old boss did; her shoulders are less hunched, her words less halted by fear of saying the wrong thing. Every few months, Mr Cameron would come north to deliver a ‘defence’ of the Union and every time it would fall flat. By seeking to defend the United Kingdom, he accepted that it was on trial. Mrs May celebrated our shared values and prosecuted a strong case against separatism.
She gets what Mr Cameron seemed not to: Scotland is her country too, and she needn’t be afraid to talk about it.
https://stephendaisley.com/2017/03/04/theresa-mays-hymn-to-unity-was-heartfelt-and-robust/
The hall loved it. Conservative conferences are a tale of two Tories. The mini-Mogg — suit from John Lewis, politics from John Redwood — and the No-Nonsense Auntie: A doughty, reliable type who knocks the doors, bakes the scones, and handbags Central Office when it gets too carried away with itself. The libertarian mini-Moggs set aside their iffiness about collectivism to rah-rah the Prime Minister’s words while the Aunties, terribly proud to be British but one doesn’t go on about it, thundered in applause.0 -
I know the petition is gaining traction due to the Brexit stuff, but quite aside from that I believe it should be replaced with an elected body. Perhaps PR in thirds, or some such - like the US senate. Its a relic.Big_G_NorthWales said:I know it's off topic but the e petition to replace the unelected HOL is within 500 votes of 100,000 requiring it to be considered by the HOC
0 -
That job is for Ruth Davidson complimented by Theresa MayYorkcity said:
May certainly connects better with the Unionists and Conservatives.However I have my doubts she can convince the uncommited who might switch and get Scottish Independence over the 50%.CarlottaVance said:
He was - but I'm not sure he connected in the same way May does:Yorkcity said:
Cameron went to Scotland pleaded and begged that the Scottish people save the Union they did .He was successful in that regard.CarlottaVance said:Daisley:
Mrs May’s speech was mostly boilerplate but parse a word here and a clause there and you have the makings of a fresh approach to devolution. Mr Cameron’s respect agenda — which involved him being respectful to the SNP and them respectfully telling him to b****r off — has been replaced by a mutual respect agenda. Downing Street would seek to work with the devolved administration but the good of the Union, not appeasement of the Nationalists, would be the priority.
The Prime Minister was relaxed, even allowing herself the odd smile. She looks less apprehensive when speaking in Scotland than her old boss did; her shoulders are less hunched, her words less halted by fear of saying the wrong thing. Every few months, Mr Cameron would come north to deliver a ‘defence’ of the Union and every time it would fall flat. By seeking to defend the United Kingdom, he accepted that it was on trial. Mrs May celebrated our shared values and prosecuted a strong case against separatism.
She gets what Mr Cameron seemed not to: Scotland is her country too, and she needn’t be afraid to talk about it.
https://stephendaisley.com/2017/03/04/theresa-mays-hymn-to-unity-was-heartfelt-and-robust/
The hall loved it. Conservative conferences are a tale of two Tories. The mini-Mogg — suit from John Lewis, politics from John Redwood — and the No-Nonsense Auntie: A doughty, reliable type who knocks the doors, bakes the scones, and handbags Central Office when it gets too carried away with itself. The libertarian mini-Moggs set aside their iffiness about collectivism to rah-rah the Prime Minister’s words while the Aunties, terribly proud to be British but one doesn’t go on about it, thundered in applause.0 -
-
-
It has to be overhauled and is likely to feature in the 2020 manifestos. While Brexit may have made it's reform more likely that in itself is a good thingPulpstar said:
I know the petition is gaining traction due to the Brexit stuff, but quite aside from that I believe it should be replaced with an elected body. Perhaps PR in thirds, or some such - like the US senate. Its a relic.Big_G_NorthWales said:I know it's off topic but the e petition to replace the unelected HOL is within 500 votes of 100,000 requiring it to be considered by the HOC
0 -
What you are saying is roughly this: there can be no investigation unless an equivalent number of opposition constituencies are investigated as well.AnneJGP said:
Have the Conservatives been particularly egregious or has Michael Crick's investigation focussed on the Conservatives?kle4 said:All parties get up to shady election expenses stuff, or so it seems, but the Tories seem to have been particularly egregious if this is true. It would be worrisome if they escaped punishment (should they be guilty) on the basis that it is so many it would cause too much of a problem.
Surely before taking action that would alter the outcome of the GE, all constituencies must be vetted with equal rigour and the results made public so we can all verify there has been no political bias?
Only after that will we know whether none/some/many/all MPs are in situ fraudulently.
The knock-on effects are not trivial, after all. If the Conservatives hadn't won a majority, there would have been no EU referendum; but as it is, the EU now knows how many people in the UK are not at all happy with the Grand Project. Would the EU be willing to pretend the referendum never happened?
Good afternoon, everybody.
What stops you finding those constituencies ? Usually only the Tories can afford such hotel bills.0 -
What's your prediction for the Scottish council elections, the ones that Tessy wants to be a poll on whether there should be an Indy ref II?Big_G_NorthWales said:
That job is for Ruth Davidson complimented by Theresa MayYorkcity said:
May certainly connects better with the Unionists and Conservatives.However I have my doubts she can convince the uncommited who might switch and get Scottish Independence over the 50%.CarlottaVance said:
He was - but I'm not sure he connected in the same way May does:Yorkcity said:
Cameron went to Scotland pleaded and begged that the Scottish people save the Union they did .He was successful in that regard.CarlottaVance said:Daisley:
Mrs May’s speech was mostly boilerplate but parse a word here and a clause there and you have the makings of a fresh approach to devolution. Mr Cameron’s respect agenda — which involved him being respectful to the SNP and them respectfully telling him to b****r off — has been replaced by a mutual respect agenda. Downing Street would seek to work with the devolved administration but the good of the Union, not appeasement of the Nationalists, would be the priority.
The Prime Minister was relaxed, even allowing herself the odd smile. She looks less apprehensive when speaking in Scotland than her old boss did; her shoulders are less hunched, her words less halted by fear of saying the wrong thing. Every few months, Mr Cameron would come north to deliver a ‘defence’ of the Union and every time it would fall flat. By seeking to defend the United Kingdom, he accepted that it was on trial. Mrs May celebrated our shared values and prosecuted a strong case against separatism.
She gets what Mr Cameron seemed not to: Scotland is her country too, and she needn’t be afraid to talk about it.
https://stephendaisley.com/2017/03/04/theresa-mays-hymn-to-unity-was-heartfelt-and-robust/
The hall loved it. Conservative conferences are a tale of two Tories. The mini-Mogg — suit from John Lewis, politics from John Redwood — and the No-Nonsense Auntie: A doughty, reliable type who knocks the doors, bakes the scones, and handbags Central Office when it gets too carried away with itself. The libertarian mini-Moggs set aside their iffiness about collectivism to rah-rah the Prime Minister’s words while the Aunties, terribly proud to be British but one doesn’t go on about it, thundered in applause.0 -
Sanctimony much?Theuniondivvie said:
What's your prediction for the Scottish council elections, the ones that Tessy wants to be a poll on whether there should be an Indy ref II?Big_G_NorthWales said:
That job is for Ruth Davidson complimented by Theresa MayYorkcity said:
May certainly connects better with the Unionists and Conservatives.However I have my doubts she can convince the uncommited who might switch and get Scottish Independence over the 50%.CarlottaVance said:
He was - but I'm not sure he connected in the same way May does:Yorkcity said:
Cameron went to Scotland pleaded and begged that the Scottish people save the Union they did .He was successful in that regard.CarlottaVance said:Daisley:
Mrs May’s speech was mostly boilerplate but parse a word here and a clause there and you have the makings of a fresh approach to devolution. Mr Cameron’s respect agenda — which involved him being respectful to the SNP and them respectfully telling him to b****r off — has been replaced by a mutual respect agenda. Downing Street would seek to work with the devolved administration but the good of the Union, not appeasement of the Nationalists, would be the priority.
The Prime Minister was relaxed, even allowing herself the odd smile. She looks less apprehensive when speaking in Scotland than her old boss did; her shoulders are less hunched, her words less halted by fear of saying the wrong thing. Every few months, Mr Cameron would come north to deliver a ‘defence’ of the Union and every time it would fall flat. By seeking to defend the United Kingdom, he accepted that it was on trial. Mrs May celebrated our shared values and prosecuted a strong case against separatism.
She gets what Mr Cameron seemed not to: Scotland is her country too, and she needn’t be afraid to talk about it.
https://stephendaisley.com/2017/03/04/theresa-mays-hymn-to-unity-was-heartfelt-and-robust/
The hall loved it. Conservative conferences are a tale of two Tories. The mini-Mogg — suit from John Lewis, politics from John Redwood — and the No-Nonsense Auntie: A doughty, reliable type who knocks the doors, bakes the scones, and handbags Central Office when it gets too carried away with itself. The libertarian mini-Moggs set aside their iffiness about collectivism to rah-rah the Prime Minister’s words while the Aunties, terribly proud to be British but one doesn’t go on about it, thundered in applause.0 -
What utter shite ! It is perfectly natural to eavesdrop on a KGB agent.SimonStClare said:
Obama seeking to eavesdrop on an opposition’s Presidential campaign must surely go against ever rule there is. Explosive stuff, if true.Stark_Dawning said:
Sounds as if Trump's proof is an article on Breitbart:MonikerDiCanio said:
Trump would have to be insane to issue that explosive tweet unless he had absolute proof. I don't believe he's insane.Chris said:
What do you mean - IF it's true?MonikerDiCanio said:
If this is true, Obama's looking at prison time. An enormous scandal.FrancisUrquhart said:Trump accuses Obama of tapping his phone
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39167110
Surely you're not suggesting that Donald Trump would tweet anything but God's honest truth? :-)
the Obama administration sought, and eventually obtained, authorization to eavesdrop on the Trump campaign; continued monitoring the Trump team even when no evidence of wrongdoing was found; then relaxed the NSA rules to allow evidence to be shared widely within the government, virtually ensuring that the information, including the conversations of private citizens, would be leaked to the media.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/03/03/mark-levin-obama-used-police-state-tactics-undermine-trump/0 -
Good point .Big_G_NorthWales said:
That job is for Ruth Davidson complimented by Theresa MayYorkcity said:
May certainly connects better with the Unionists and Conservatives.However I have my doubts she can convince the uncommited who might switch and get Scottish Independence over the 50%.CarlottaVance said:
He was - but I'm not sure he connected in the same way May does:Yorkcity said:
Cameron went to Scotland pleaded and begged that the Scottish people save the Union they did .He was successful in that regard.CarlottaVance said:Daisley:
Mrs May’s speech was mostly boilerplate but parse a word here and a clause there and you have the makings of a fresh approach to devolution. Mr Cameron’s respect agenda — which involved him being respectful to the SNP and them respectfully telling him to b****r off — has been replaced by a mutual respect agenda. Downing Street would seek to work with the devolved administration but the good of the Union, not appeasement of the Nationalists, would be the priority.
The Prime Minister was relaxed, even allowing herself the odd smile. She looks less apprehensive when speaking in Scotland than her old boss did; her shoulders are less hunched, her words less halted by fear of saying the wrong thing. Every few months, Mr Cameron would come north to deliver a ‘defence’ of the Union and every time it would fall flat. By seeking to defend the United Kingdom, he accepted that it was on trial. Mrs May celebrated our shared values and prosecuted a strong case against separatism.
She gets what Mr Cameron seemed not to: Scotland is her country too, and she needn’t be afraid to talk about it.
https://stephendaisley.com/2017/03/04/theresa-mays-hymn-to-unity-was-heartfelt-and-robust/
The hall loved it. Conservative conferences are a tale of two Tories. The mini-Mogg — suit from John Lewis, politics from John Redwood — and the No-Nonsense Auntie: A doughty, reliable type who knocks the doors, bakes the scones, and handbags Central Office when it gets too carried away with itself. The libertarian mini-Moggs set aside their iffiness about collectivism to rah-rah the Prime Minister’s words while the Aunties, terribly proud to be British but one doesn’t go on about it, thundered in applause.0 -
From a LibDem perspective, I can assure you that when we travel to help other constituency campaigns our members are willing to pay their own expenses. We don't expect our party to lay on free coach transport and free bed and board, as Tory HQ provided to its activists. The question is how on Earth the Tories thought that spending lots of money transporting activists to Thanet or Torbay, or wherever, and accommodating and feeding them while they were there, could possibly be passed off as "national" campaign expenditure?surbiton said:
What you are saying is roughly this: there can be no investigation unless an equivalent number of opposition constituencies are investigated as well.AnneJGP said:
Have the Conservatives been particularly egregious or has Michael Crick's investigation focussed on the Conservatives?kle4 said:All parties get up to shady election expenses stuff, or so it seems, but the Tories seem to have been particularly egregious if this is true. It would be worrisome if they escaped punishment (should they be guilty) on the basis that it is so many it would cause too much of a problem.
Surely before taking action that would alter the outcome of the GE, all constituencies must be vetted with equal rigour and the results made public so we can all verify there has been no political bias?
Only after that will we know whether none/some/many/all MPs are in situ fraudulently.
The knock-on effects are not trivial, after all. If the Conservatives hadn't won a majority, there would have been no EU referendum; but as it is, the EU now knows how many people in the UK are not at all happy with the Grand Project. Would the EU be willing to pretend the referendum never happened?
Good afternoon, everybody.
What stops you finding those constituencies ? Usually only the Tories can afford such hotel bills.0 -
Inability to write something coherent much?Mortimer said:
Sanctimony much?Theuniondivvie said:
What's your prediction for the Scottish council elections, the ones that Tessy wants to be a poll on whether there should be an Indy ref II?Big_G_NorthWales said:
That job is for Ruth Davidson complimented by Theresa MayYorkcity said:
May certainly connects better with the Unionists and Conservatives.However I have my doubts she can convince the uncommited who might switch and get Scottish Independence over the 50%.CarlottaVance said:
He was - but I'm not sure he connected in the same way May does:Yorkcity said:
Cameron went to Scotland pleaded and begged that the Scottish people save the Union they did .He was successful in that regard.CarlottaVance said:Daisley:
Mrs May’s speech was mostly boilerplate but parse a word here and a clause there and you have the makings of a fresh approach to devolution. Mr Cameron’s respect agenda — which involved him being respectful to the SNP and them respectfully telling him to b****r off — has been replaced by a mutual respect agenda. Downing Street would seek to work with the devolved administration but the good of the Union, not appeasement of the Nationalists, would be the priority.
The Prime Minister was relaxed, even allowing herself the odd smile. She looks less apprehensive when speaking in Scotland than her old boss did; her shoulders are less hunched, her words less halted by fear of saying the wrong thing. Every few months, Mr Cameron would come north to deliver a ‘defence’ of the Union and every time it would fall flat. By seeking to defend the United Kingdom, he accepted that it was on trial. Mrs May celebrated our shared values and prosecuted a strong case against separatism.
She gets what Mr Cameron seemed not to: Scotland is her country too, and she needn’t be afraid to talk about it.
https://stephendaisley.com/2017/03/04/theresa-mays-hymn-to-unity-was-heartfelt-and-robust/
The hall loved it. Conservative conferences are a tale of two Tories. The mini-Mogg — suit from John Lewis, politics from John Redwood — and the No-Nonsense Auntie: A doughty, reliable type who knocks the doors, bakes the scones, and handbags Central Office when it gets too carried away with itself. The libertarian mini-Moggs set aside their iffiness about collectivism to rah-rah the Prime Minister’s words while the Aunties, terribly proud to be British but one doesn’t go on about it, thundered in applause.0 -
Whatever happened to Dair? He was lots of fun. Especially when pontificating on VAT...Theuniondivvie said:
Inability to write something coherent much?Mortimer said:
Sanctimony much?Theuniondivvie said:
What's your prediction for the Scottish council elections, the ones that Tessy wants to be a poll on whether there should be an Indy ref II?Big_G_NorthWales said:
That job is for Ruth Davidson complimented by Theresa MayYorkcity said:
May certainly connects better with the Unionists and Conservatives.However I have my doubts she can convince the uncommited who might switch and get Scottish Independence over the 50%.CarlottaVance said:
He was - but I'm not sure he connected in the same way May does:Yorkcity said:
Cameron went to Scotland pleaded and begged that the Scottish people save the Union they did .He was successful in that regard.CarlottaVance said:Daisley:
Mrs May’s speech was mostly boilerplate but parse a word here and a clause there and you have the makings of a fresh approach to devolution. Mr Cameron’s respect agenda — which involved him being respectful to the SNP and them respectfully telling him to b****r off — has been replaced by a mutual respect agenda. Downing Street would seek to work with the devolved administration but the good of the Union, not appeasement of the Nationalists, would be the priority.
The Prime Minister was relaxed, even allowing herself the odd smile. She looks less apprehensive when speaking in Scotland than her old boss did; her shoulders are less hunched, her words less halted by fear of saying the wrong thing. Every few months, Mr Cameron would come north to deliver a ‘defence’ of the Union and every time it would fall flat. By seeking to defend the United Kingdom, he accepted that it was on trial. Mrs May celebrated our shared values and prosecuted a strong case against separatism.
She gets what Mr Cameron seemed not to: Scotland is her country too, and she needn’t be afraid to talk about it.
https://stephendaisley.com/2017/03/04/theresa-mays-hymn-to-unity-was-heartfelt-and-robust/
The hall loved it. Conservative conferences are a tale of two Tories. The mini-Mogg — suit from John Lewis, politics from John Redwood — and the No-Nonsense Auntie: A doughty, reliable type who knocks the doors, bakes the scones, and handbags Central Office when it gets too carried away with itself. The libertarian mini-Moggs set aside their iffiness about collectivism to rah-rah the Prime Minister’s words while the Aunties, terribly proud to be British but one doesn’t go on about it, thundered in applause.0 -
The US president has the power to telease all relevant info. Presumably Trump will now do that - including what persuaded a judge to issue any order there might have been. Let's see if he does.Chris said:
As you can see, the claim is that there was authorised tapping. According to the Washington Post, that would require a finding by a federal judge that the person concerned "had committed a crime or was an agent of a foreign power." I can't help wondering whether Trump appreciates that.SimonStClare said:
Obama seeking to eavesdrop on an opposition’s Presidential campaign must surely go against ever rule there is. Explosive stuff, if true.Stark_Dawning said:
Sounds as if Trump's proof is an article on Breitbart:MonikerDiCanio said:
Trump would have to be insane to issue that explosive tweet unless he had absolute proof. I don't believe he's insane.Chris said:
What do you mean - IF it's true?MonikerDiCanio said:
If this is true, Obama's looking at prison time. An enormous scandal.FrancisUrquhart said:Trump accuses Obama of tapping his phone
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39167110
Surely you're not suggesting that Donald Trump would tweet anything but God's honest truth? :-)
the Obama administration sought, and eventually obtained, authorization to eavesdrop on the Trump campaign; continued monitoring the Trump team even when no evidence of wrongdoing was found; then relaxed the NSA rules to allow evidence to be shared widely within the government, virtually ensuring that the information, including the conversations of private citizens, would be leaked to the media.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/03/03/mark-levin-obama-used-police-state-tactics-undermine-trump/
0
