Skip to content

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Lady Chope and their daughter must be so proud of Sir Christop

SystemSystem Posts: 12,651
edited June 2018 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Lady Chope and their daughter must be so proud of Sir Christopher

One thing’s for sure – the MP for Christchurch who was knighted in the last New Year’s Honours, is going to get a lot more media coverage following his blocking on Friday of the private member’s bill to stop what’s known as upskirting.

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    He's a fool. Instead of a knighthood he should have been bumped 'upstairs' to the house of old fools.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,492
    Second
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,678
    While I agree he's a fool, I find it hard to imagine he didn't know what it was.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,027
    edited June 2018
    Chope and his chief partner in crime, Philip Davies really do the Tories no favours whatsoever.
    I'd put them into a completely different category to Mogg for instance who although I often disagree with him always argues his points out in the house, a bit like Peter Hitches does in the press.
    Chope and Davies just enjoy filibustering and objecting to stuff for the sake of it.
  • brendan16brendan16 Posts: 2,315
    While new laws are always welcome perhaps we should ensure that existing laws affecting women's rights are also enforced and appropriate prosecutions undertaken.

    Or is it because this issue is more likely to perhaps affect white middle class women in London rather than poor working class girls from BME communities is it likely to be more vigorously enforced rather than have a blind eye turned to to avoid unnecessary upset?

    Cos while we can spent our time attacking Chope it isn't really addressing the core issue. If its needed why isn't the government introducing its own legislation to address it and then providing resources to enforce it?

    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/fgm-detectives_uk_5a943fdce4b02cb368c45e10?guccounter=1
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    I have already told my man on the inside to tell the Chief Whip that Chope should have the whip removed. Being deselected for an election in 2022 in which he probably won't stand anyway is not enough.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,185
    Evening all :)

    I wonder how many would turn up to a "Conservative Live" event ?

    As for Chope, no one questions bad legislation is worse than no legislation but there are Committee stages to "improve" and redraft legislation if there are problems.

    It was good to see a number of the PB Conservative fraternity condemn Chope last evening but that isn't really the point. Even though, thanks to Corbyn, it won't change anything it does make the Conservatives a less attractive proposition for some voters.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    brendan16 said:

    While new laws are always welcome perhaps we should ensure that existing laws affecting women's rights are also enforced and appropriate prosecutions undertaken.

    Or is it because this issue is more likely to perhaps affect white middle class women in London rather than poor working class girls from BME communities is it likely to be more vigorously enforced rather than have a blind eye turned to to avoid unnecessary upset?

    Cos while we can spent our time attacking Chope it isn't really addressing the core issue. If its needed why isn't the government introducing its own legislation to address it and then providing resources to enforce it?

    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/fgm-detectives_uk_5a943fdce4b02cb368c45e10?guccounter=1

    New laws are always welcome?

    No, no, no. The statute book should not be used to ‘send a message’ as it was under New Labour.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,455
    brendan16 said:

    Cos while we can spent our time attacking Chope it isn't really addressing the core issue. If its needed why isn't the government introducing its own legislation to address it and then providing resources to enforce it?

    The government will now legislate for it.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,027
    edited June 2018
    brendan16 said:

    While new laws are always welcome perhaps we should ensure that existing laws affecting women's rights are also enforced and appropriate prosecutions undertaken.

    Or is it because this issue is more likely to perhaps affect white middle class women in London rather than poor working class girls from BME communities is it likely to be more vigorously enforced rather than have a blind eye turned to to avoid unnecessary upset?

    Cos while we can spent our time attacking Chope it isn't really addressing the core issue. If its needed why isn't the government introducing its own legislation to address it and then providing resources to enforce it?

    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/fgm-detectives_uk_5a943fdce4b02cb368c45e10?guccounter=1

    Do you have an issue with private member's bills in principle as Chope and Davies seem to ?
    The Government passes plenty of legislation and at the moment is very preoccupied with trying to abide by the referendum result. Individual MPs proposing legislation may well come up with better ideas and it'd be a sad day if ALL the laws came from the government. The upskirting law would.have been given appropriate scrutiny (ironically it might not receive proper attention to any defects given the uproar now).
    Much of the anti terror legislation that the courts have difficulty with came directly from the Blair govt.
    Also they may well have scuppered Finn's law, it's an intended function of parliament that backbenchers can propose law and a very positive one to my mind.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,130
    brendan16 said:

    While new laws are always welcome perhaps we should ensure that existing laws affecting women's rights are also enforced and appropriate prosecutions undertaken.

    Or is it because this issue is more likely to perhaps affect white middle class women in London rather than poor working class girls from BME communities is it likely to be more vigorously enforced rather than have a blind eye turned to to avoid unnecessary upset?

    Cos while we can spent our time attacking Chope it isn't really addressing the core issue. If its needed why isn't the government introducing its own legislation to address it and then providing resources to enforce it?

    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/fgm-detectives_uk_5a943fdce4b02cb368c45e10?guccounter=1

    +1
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    edited June 2018
    RoyalBlue said:

    brendan16 said:

    While new laws are always welcome perhaps we should ensure that existing laws affecting women's rights are also enforced and appropriate prosecutions undertaken.

    Or is it because this issue is more likely to perhaps affect white middle class women in London rather than poor working class girls from BME communities is it likely to be more vigorously enforced rather than have a blind eye turned to to avoid unnecessary upset?

    Cos while we can spent our time attacking Chope it isn't really addressing the core issue. If its needed why isn't the government introducing its own legislation to address it and then providing resources to enforce it?

    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/fgm-detectives_uk_5a943fdce4b02cb368c45e10?guccounter=1

    New laws are always welcome?

    No, no, no. The statute book should not be used to ‘send a message’ as it was under New Labour.
    I want to agree strongly with this, whilst a new law such as something to help the police effectively prosecute upskirting (whilst maintaining the need for a reasonable level of proof) is a good thing in general I feel like it can be too easy to crack down on civil liberties to look like you are doing something without really solving the problems you are looking at.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 3,884
    Pulpstar said:

    brendan16 said:

    While new laws are always welcome perhaps we should ensure that existing laws affecting women's rights are also enforced and appropriate prosecutions undertaken.

    Or is it because this issue is more likely to perhaps affect white middle class women in London rather than poor working class girls from BME communities is it likely to be more vigorously enforced rather than have a blind eye turned to to avoid unnecessary upset?

    Cos while we can spent our time attacking Chope it isn't really addressing the core issue. If its needed why isn't the government introducing its own legislation to address it and then providing resources to enforce it?

    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/fgm-detectives_uk_5a943fdce4b02cb368c45e10?guccounter=1

    Do you have an issue with private member's bills in principle as Chope and Davies seem to ?
    The Government passes plenty of legislation and at the moment is very preoccupied with trying to abide by the referendum result. Individual MPs proposing legislation may well come up with better ideas and it'd be a sad day if ALL the laws came from the government. The upskirting law would.have been given appropriate scrutiny (ironically it might not receive proper attention to any defects given the uproar now).
    Much of the anti terror legislation that the courts have difficulty with came directly from the Blair govt.
    Also they may well have scuppered Finn's law, it's an intended function of parliament that backbenchers can propose law and a very positive one to my mind.
    It occurred to me that they may simply be bored with having to be in parliament, but unwilling to leave an otherwise congenial way of earning money.

    Good evening, everybody.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,027
    TheJezziah said:



    RoyalBlue said:

    brendan16 said:

    While new laws are always welcome perhaps we should ensure that existing laws affecting women's rights are also enforced and appropriate prosecutions undertaken.

    Or is it because this issue is more likely to perhaps affect white middle class women in London rather than poor working class girls from BME communities is it likely to be more vigorously enforced rather than have a blind eye turned to to avoid unnecessary upset?

    Cos while we can spent our time attacking Chope it isn't really addressing the core issue. If its needed why isn't the government introducing its own legislation to address it and then providing resources to enforce it?

    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/fgm-detectives_uk_5a943fdce4b02cb368c45e10?guccounter=1

    New laws are always welcome?

    No, no, no. The statute book should not be used to ‘send a message’ as it was under New Labour.
    I want to agree strongly with this, whilst a new law such as something to help the police effectively prosecute upskirting (whilst maintaining the need for a reasonable level of proof) is a good thing in general I feel like it can be too easy to crack down on civil liberties to look like you are doing something without really solving the problems you are looking at.
    You're looking in the wrong place for the civil liberty angle - the govt anti "extreme" pornography is the place to look for that.
  • brendan16brendan16 Posts: 2,315
    edited June 2018
    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    brendan16 said:

    Cos while we can spent our time attacking Chope it isn't really addressing the core issue. If its needed why isn't the government introducing its own legislation to address it and then providing resources to enforce it?

    The government will now legislate for it.
    So why the fuss over Chope - his actions have probably ensured the legislation now happens more quickly!

    And secondly will this new law be actively persecuted - because of course it's more likely to affect white middle class women from London on trains and tubes etc?

    The government can always find time for small legislative changes - even with Brexit. They put through a bill offering 5 year business rates relief to major telecoms firms like Sky and BT for new telecoms networks in a few weeks recently while retailers still pay full rates and many are going to the wall.

    But then as I have observed some groups have more clout than others.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,752
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    I wonder how many would turn up to a "Conservative Live" event ?

    Last Night of the Proms? Millions......
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 64,186
    RoyalBlue said:

    brendan16 said:

    While new laws are always welcome perhaps we should ensure that existing laws affecting women's rights are also enforced and appropriate prosecutions undertaken.

    Or is it because this issue is more likely to perhaps affect white middle class women in London rather than poor working class girls from BME communities is it likely to be more vigorously enforced rather than have a blind eye turned to to avoid unnecessary upset?

    Cos while we can spent our time attacking Chope it isn't really addressing the core issue. If its needed why isn't the government introducing its own legislation to address it and then providing resources to enforce it?

    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/fgm-detectives_uk_5a943fdce4b02cb368c45e10?guccounter=1

    New laws are always welcome?

    No, no, no. The statute book should not be used to ‘send a message’ as it was under New Labour.
    I think Chris Chope's position is that new laws are guilty until proven innocent, and he applies this principle quite ideologically because he thinks most of the private members bills are driven by trendy causes and political correctness by backbench MPs seeking to jump on backwagons.

    Sometimes, he has a point.

    I don't agree with his veto on this, and I think criminal law should be reviewed to assess its suitability in the age of smartphones and social media, but it should be subjected to extensive scrutiny first.

    Personally, I think the scope for that review is far broader than just snatching shots upskirts.

    There's a much bigger question about invasion of personal privacy in the digital age that I'd like to see legislators examine and address.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,752
    Chope is a twat.

    BUT....if he genuinely didn't know what "upskirting" was, then the Private Members Bill he booted into touch out couldn't have had particularly satisfactory definitions....
  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,185
    brendan16 said:

    So why the fuss over Chope - his actions have probably ensured the legislation now happens more quickly!

    And secondly will this new law be actively persecuted - because of course it's more likely to affect white middle class women from London on trains and tubes etc?

    But then as I have observed some groups have more clout than others.

    How do you figure that ? The Government was already supporting Hobhouse's PMB and would have provided time for it to go through Committee and Report stages starting yesterday with the Second or Third Reading and it seemed probable the Bill would have received rapid approval.

    As a result of Chope's petty and mean-spirited actions, nothing can now happen until July 6th. Valuable time has been lost and the long summer recess is looming.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,941
    Peter Oborne 'Why Corbyn could be the man who saves Brexit'

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-5850479/PETER-OBORNE-Corbyn-man-saves-Brexit.html
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,027
    By the way these sorts of obnoxious MPs can sometimes be mispriced at General Elections.
    Christchurch was 1-8 iirc at the 2015 GE which I managed to get a couple of hundred on.
    It might appear again in the odds, obviously it's a 1-100 or so shot at 2022 for the blues, something to look out for.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    edited June 2018
    MarqueeMark said:

    Chope is a twat.

    BUT....if he genuinely didn't know what "upskirting" was, then the Private Members Bill he booted into touch out couldn't have had particularly satisfactory definitions....

    How do we know he had even read the bill. He kills planned legislation by simply shouting "object" at the right time. I doubt if he does detail
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    I often wonder what David Herdson thinks of Phillip Davis - he was his constituency CON chairman
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    MikeSmithson said:

    I often wonder what David Herdson thinks of Phillip Davis - he was his constituency CON chairman

    Next Saturday's thread ?? .. :smiley:
  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,185
    Pulpstar said:

    By the way these sorts of obnoxious MPs can sometimes be mispriced at General Elections.
    Christchurch was 1-8 iirc at the 2015 GE which I managed to get a couple of hundred on.
    It might appear again in the odds, obviously it's a 1-100 or so shot at 2022 for the blues, something to look out for.

    I remember Diana Maddock's famous victory in 1993. Robert Adley had a majority in excess of 20,000 but Maddock demolished it with one of the biggest swings ever recorded. I went down there and did a couple of visits and the mood in the by election team at that time was buoyant.

    After Newbury, the LDs at the time thought anything was possible and everywhere was winnable and Christchurch seemed to confirm that. Maddock didn't lose by much to Chope in 1997 but it was a shame she couldn't hang on.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,941
    edited June 2018
    Pulpstar said:

    By the way these sorts of obnoxious MPs can sometimes be mispriced at General Elections.
    Christchurch was 1-8 iirc at the 2015 GE which I managed to get a couple of hundred on.
    It might appear again in the odds, obviously it's a 1-100 or so shot at 2022 for the blues, something to look out for.

    Christchurch was the safest Tory seat at the last general election with Chope having a huge majority of 25,171 so if he stands again he will almost certainly be re elected.

    Although the LDs did win the seat at a by election in 1993 though the Tories won it back at the 1997 general election despite being trounced elsewhere.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    Pulpstar said:

    TheJezziah said:



    RoyalBlue said:

    brendan16 said:

    While new laws are always welcome perhaps we should ensure that existing laws affecting women's rights are also enforced and appropriate prosecutions undertaken.

    Or is it because this issue is more likely to perhaps affect white middle class women in London rather than poor working class girls from BME communities is it likely to be more vigorously enforced rather than have a blind eye turned to to avoid unnecessary upset?

    Cos while we can spent our time attacking Chope it isn't really addressing the core issue. If its needed why isn't the government introducing its own legislation to address it and then providing resources to enforce it?

    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/fgm-detectives_uk_5a943fdce4b02cb368c45e10?guccounter=1

    New laws are always welcome?

    No, no, no. The statute book should not be used to ‘send a message’ as it was under New Labour.
    I want to agree strongly with this, whilst a new law such as something to help the police effectively prosecute upskirting (whilst maintaining the need for a reasonable level of proof) is a good thing in general I feel like it can be too easy to crack down on civil liberties to look like you are doing something without really solving the problems you are looking at.
    You're looking in the wrong place for the civil liberty angle - the govt anti "extreme" pornography is the place to look for that.
    Yeah this isn't a valid example but I do agree with the general point of not making rules that sound good to people as opposed to a need (which is what upskirting actually comes under)
  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,185
    HYUFD said:


    Christchurch was the safest Tory seat at the last general election with Chope having a huge majority of 25,171 so if he stands again he will almost certainly be re elected.

    Although the LDs did win the seat at a by election in 1993 though the Tories won it back at the 1997 general election despite being trounced elsewhere.

    What do you think of Chope's actions ? Would you support him if he were seeking re-selection as your constituency MP ?

  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 22,107
    One day we will see the Tory safe seats tumble in Southern England as Labour’s safe seats fell in Scotland . The power base is as hollow. A lot of dead wood will go and electorates will no longer taken for granted. It will be cathartic.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    I wonder how many would turn up to a "Conservative Live" event ?

    They had 'Tory Glastonbury' which must had at least 3 figures in terms of attendance...
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited June 2018
    brendan16 said:

    While new laws are always welcome perhaps we should ensure that existing laws affecting women's rights are also enforced and appropriate prosecutions undertaken.

    Or is it because this issue is more likely to perhaps affect white middle class women in London rather than poor working class girls from BME communities is it likely to be more vigorously enforced rather than have a blind eye turned to to avoid unnecessary upset?

    Cos while we can spent our time attacking Chope it isn't really addressing the core issue. If its needed why isn't the government introducing its own legislation to address it and then providing resources to enforce it?

    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/fgm-detectives_uk_5a943fdce4b02cb368c45e10?guccounter=1

    FGM has been illegal since 1985. How many successful prosecutions have there been? Zero, which is disgraceful.

    https://www.barcouncil.org.uk/media-centre/bar-blog/contributing-writers/2018/february/2018/march/guest-blog-fgm-making-the-law-work/
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    Jonathan said:

    One day we will see the Tory safe seats tumble in Southern England as Labour’s safe seats fell in Scotland . The power base is as hollow. A lot of dead wood will go and electorates will no longer taken for granted. It will be cathartic.

    Wishful thinking.. Southern England will never vote for the loony left
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    Jonathan said:

    One day we will see the Tory safe seats tumble in Southern England as Labour’s safe seats fell in Scotland . The power base is as hollow. A lot of dead wood will go and electorates will no longer taken for granted. It will be cathartic.

    Lets hope the Labour seats in South Wales go first. It will be truly cathartic.

    A larger collection of more useless individuals it would be hard to find than the South Walien Labour MPs
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,941
    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:


    Christchurch was the safest Tory seat at the last general election with Chope having a huge majority of 25,171 so if he stands again he will almost certainly be re elected.

    Although the LDs did win the seat at a by election in 1993 though the Tories won it back at the 1997 general election despite being trounced elsewhere.

    What do you think of Chope's actions ? Would you support him if he were seeking re-selection as your constituency MP ?

    Probably not but the fact he has such a big majority suggests most of his constituents think he has done a good job up to now
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 30,854
    I almost feel sorry for the man. Our society has evolved markedly and rapidly and he simply can't keep up with events. His problem is that politically it at best make the Tories look like a bunch of ancient old dinosaurs and at worst a bunch of misogynist ancient old dinosaurs. Yes I know its the Tories who brought in gay marriage. But most apolitical punters don't identify them with that - they see someone like Chope apparently defending the right of the man to have a peek at a pair of pants and aren't surprised by the blue rosette
  • hunchmanhunchman Posts: 2,591
    Well his directorship of carclew Ltd should make waves as well as his idiotic behaviour over the past week .
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,941
    edited June 2018
    Jonathan said:

    One day we will see the Tory safe seats tumble in Southern England as Labour’s safe seats fell in Scotland . The power base is as hollow. A lot of dead wood will go and electorates will no longer taken for granted. It will be cathartic.

    Tory safe seats in Southern England have always been vulnerable to the LDs at by elections, see Christchurch, Romsey and Newbury etc and occasionally at general elections too, particularly from 1997-2010 but they will almost certainly never vote Labour. Even in 1997 Labour's gains came mainly in the suburbs, London, the Midlands and more working class seats in Kent and Essex, Portsmouth and Plymouth not Tory seats in the shires in the south.

    In Scotland the SNP did in 2015 a similar function to the LDs in southern England, Labour safe seats which would never vote Tory were prepared to vote SNP
  • hunchmanhunchman Posts: 2,591
    Jonathan said:

    One day we will see the Tory safe seats tumble in Southern England as Labour’s safe seats fell in Scotland . The power base is as hollow. A lot of dead wood will go and electorates will no longer taken for granted. It will be cathartic.

    For once I agree with you Jonathan! And it will happen when people find out about all their terrible corruption related to you know which road historically.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,451
    RochdalePioneers said:

    I almost feel sorry for the man. Our society has evolved markedly and rapidly and he simply can't keep up with events. His problem is that politically it at best make the Tories look like a bunch of ancient old dinosaurs and at worst a bunch of misogynist ancient old dinosaurs. Yes I know its the Tories who brought in gay marriage. But most apolitical punters don't identify them with that - they see someone like Chope apparently defending the right of the man to have a peek at a pair of pants and aren't surprised by the blue rosette

    It seems perfectly normal to me.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    SquareRoot said:

    Jonathan said:

    One day we will see the Tory safe seats tumble in Southern England as Labour’s safe seats fell in Scotland . The power base is as hollow. A lot of dead wood will go and electorates will no longer taken for granted. It will be cathartic.

    Wishful thinking.. Southern England will never vote for the loony left
    They don't need to. Scottish Labour didn't fall to the Tories, if a moderate centre-right rival party could spring up (I'm not thinking UKIP in any guise here) then that could do the trick.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    There have been convictions for upskirting under outraging public decency.

    "Allington-Smith further admitted outraging public decency, between September 2009 and September 2014, for a series of acts of a “lewd, obscene or disgusting nature” by taking images up women’s skirts without their knowledge. "

    So, what are the offences that are not covered by existing legislation?
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 3,884
    Jonathan said:

    One day we will see the Tory safe seats tumble in Southern England as Labour’s safe seats fell in Scotland . The power base is as hollow. A lot of dead wood will go and electorates will no longer taken for granted. It will be cathartic.

    ISTR they did have a pretty good clear-out at the time of the expanses scandal, so it may not be quite the same.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,451
    SquareRoot said:

    Jonathan said:

    One day we will see the Tory safe seats tumble in Southern England as Labour’s safe seats fell in Scotland . The power base is as hollow. A lot of dead wood will go and electorates will no longer taken for granted. It will be cathartic.

    Wishful thinking.. Southern England will never vote for the loony left
    But, the seats might switch to parties to the right of the Coservatives.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 66,595
    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:


    Christchurch was the safest Tory seat at the last general election with Chope having a huge majority of 25,171 so if he stands again he will almost certainly be re elected.

    Although the LDs did win the seat at a by election in 1993 though the Tories won it back at the 1997 general election despite being trounced elsewhere.

    What do you think of Chope's actions ? Would you support him if he were seeking re-selection as your constituency MP ?

    I was clear yesterday. No matter his motives he has brought shame on the party and his chairman needs to have a word. I hope he does not stand again. I am beyond annoyance with him but pleased he has been roasted by the party including TM

    I am sure many of his constituents and supporters are furious with him
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    YBarddCwsc said:

    There have been convictions for upskirting under outraging public decency.

    "Allington-Smith further admitted outraging public decency, between September 2009 and September 2014, for a series of acts of a “lewd, obscene or disgusting nature” by taking images up women’s skirts without their knowledge. "

    So, what are the offences that are not covered by existing legislation?

    Recently a victim was told that the guy who did that couldn't be prosecuted under that law because she was wearing underwear. F===ed up loophole to have.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,038
    Flooding involves deluging the citizen with a torrent of information – some accurate, some phoney, some biased – with the aim of making people overwhelmed. In a digital world, flooding is child’s play: it’s cheap, effective and won’t generate backlash. (En passant, it’s what Russia – and Trump – do.)

    In her book, Roberts provides abundant evidence of how the Chinese authorities deploy these three techniques. She also suggests that other authoritarian regimes are now taking lessons from the Beijing playbook. This is significant because there are only two systems of governance left in our world: some version of liberal – or, as in Hungary – illiberal democracy; and the Chinese model of networked authoritarianism. Up to now, we in the west – high on Francis Fukuyama’s “end of history” narrative – have tended to assume that our system would triumph and that digital technology would help make that happen. The Chinese take a different view. And in the end they may have the last laugh.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jun/16/how-china-censors-internet-information
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,941
    Philip_Thompson said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Jonathan said:

    One day we will see the Tory safe seats tumble in Southern England as Labour’s safe seats fell in Scotland . The power base is as hollow. A lot of dead wood will go and electorates will no longer taken for granted. It will be cathartic.

    Wishful thinking.. Southern England will never vote for the loony left
    They don't need to. Scottish Labour didn't fall to the Tories, if a moderate centre-right rival party could spring up (I'm not thinking UKIP in any guise here) then that could do the trick.
    The Tories already are a moderate centre right party
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,130
    Sort of on topic, I must say I'm glad that the fashion of young men and women having their trousers hanging low seems to have ended.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    HYUFD said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Jonathan said:

    One day we will see the Tory safe seats tumble in Southern England as Labour’s safe seats fell in Scotland . The power base is as hollow. A lot of dead wood will go and electorates will no longer taken for granted. It will be cathartic.

    Wishful thinking.. Southern England will never vote for the loony left
    They don't need to. Scottish Labour didn't fall to the Tories, if a moderate centre-right rival party could spring up (I'm not thinking UKIP in any guise here) then that could do the trick.
    The Tories already are a moderate centre right party
    Yes but they're not "a moderate centre-right rival party".
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    edited June 2018
    Philip_Thompson said:

    YBarddCwsc said:

    There have been convictions for upskirting under outraging public decency.

    "Allington-Smith further admitted outraging public decency, between September 2009 and September 2014, for a series of acts of a “lewd, obscene or disgusting nature” by taking images up women’s skirts without their knowledge. "

    So, what are the offences that are not covered by existing legislation?

    Recently a victim was told that the guy who did that couldn't be prosecuted under that law because she was wearing underwear. F===ed up loophole to have.
    By whom? The police ? The Crown Prosecution Service?

    It seems to me as though a prosecution should have gone ahead to test the (claimed) interpretation of the existing law.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 22,107
    edited June 2018
    HYUFD said:

    Jonathan said:

    One day we will see the Tory safe seats tumble in Southern England as Labour’s safe seats fell in Scotland . The power base is as hollow. A lot of dead wood will go and electorates will no longer taken for granted. It will be cathartic.

    Tory safe seats in Southern England have always been vulnerable to the LDs at by elections, see Christchurch, Romsey and Newbury etc and occasionally at general elections too, particularly from 1997-2010 but they will almost certainly never vote Labour. Even in 1997 Labour's gains came mainly in the suburbs, London, the Midlands and more working class seats in Kent and Essex, Portsmouth and Plymouth not Tory seats in the shires in the south.

    In Scotland the SNP did in 2015 a similar function to the LDs in southern England, Labour safe seats which would never vote Tory were prepared to vote SNP
    The Labour vote in the South used to tactically back the LDs, the Coalition killed that stone dead, the LDs lost their seats and are no longer the challenger in dozens of others. . I doubt they will come back without some kind of rebrand or merger.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    YBarddCwsc said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    YBarddCwsc said:

    There have been convictions for upskirting under outraging public decency.

    "Allington-Smith further admitted outraging public decency, between September 2009 and September 2014, for a series of acts of a “lewd, obscene or disgusting nature” by taking images up women’s skirts without their knowledge. "

    So, what are the offences that are not covered by existing legislation?

    Recently a victim was told that the guy who did that couldn't be prosecuted under that law because she was wearing underwear. F===ed up loophole to have.
    By whom? The police ? The Crown Prosecution Service?

    It seems to me as though a prosecution should have gone ahead to test the (claimed) interpretation of the existing law.
    The Police IIRC. You may be right but that's how the law as it is has been getting interpreted so unless we get a clear change in the law by trials then its Parliaments job to address loopholes in the law.
  • dodradedodrade Posts: 597
    MikeSmithson said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Chope is a twat.

    BUT....if he genuinely didn't know what "upskirting" was, then the Private Members Bill he booted into touch out couldn't have had particularly satisfactory definitions....

    How do we know he had even read the bill. He kills planned legislation by simply shouting "object" at the right time. I doubt if he does detail
    Surely the real problem is that parliamentary procedure still allows a single MP to effectively veto a private members bill?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    dodrade said:

    MikeSmithson said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Chope is a twat.

    BUT....if he genuinely didn't know what "upskirting" was, then the Private Members Bill he booted into touch out couldn't have had particularly satisfactory definitions....

    How do we know he had even read the bill. He kills planned legislation by simply shouting "object" at the right time. I doubt if he does detail
    Surely the real problem is that parliamentary procedure still allows a single MP to effectively veto a private members bill?
    Though if it didn't then chances are enough Parliamentary time would have been taken by other proposed bills before this one that this one would not have even reached the Commons by now.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,941
    Jonathan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Jonathan said:

    One day we will see the Tory safe seats tumble in Southern England as Labour’s safe seats fell in Scotland . The power base is as hollow. A lot of dead wood will go and electorates will no longer taken for granted. It will be cathartic.

    Tory safe seats in Southern England have always been vulnerable to the LDs at by elections, see Christchurch, Romsey and Newbury etc and occasionally at general elections too, particularly from 1997-2010 but they will almost certainly never vote Labour. Even in 1997 Labour's gains came mainly in the suburbs, London, the Midlands and more working class seats in Kent and Essex, Portsmouth and Plymouth not Tory seats in the shires in the south.

    In Scotland the SNP did in 2015 a similar function to the LDs in southern England, Labour safe seats which would never vote Tory were prepared to vote SNP
    The Labour vote in the South used to tactically back the LDs, the Coalition killed that stone dead, the LDs lost their seats and are no longer the challenger in dozens of others. . I doubt they will come back without some kind of rebrand or merger.
    That does not mean Labour are suddenly going to start winning shire seats.

    Not one of Corbyn's 2017 gains came in the rural southern market town shires.


    Even Canterbury was technically a city where Labour scraped home because of the student vote at Kent University.


    The only viable alternative to actually win some of those seats from the Tories is a revived LDs or a new centrist party
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,451
    FPT Sinn Fein. They will now require all representatives to support abortion up to 12 weeks, rather than treating it as a conscience issue. That will certainly not win support from SDLP voters, but may win support from Alliance and Greens. It won't win one iota from Unionists.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,941
    edited June 2018
    Philip_Thompson said:

    HYUFD said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Jonathan said:

    One day we will see the Tory safe seats tumble in Southern England as Labour’s safe seats fell in Scotland . The power base is as hollow. A lot of dead wood will go and electorates will no longer taken for granted. It will be cathartic.

    Wishful thinking.. Southern England will never vote for the loony left
    They don't need to. Scottish Labour didn't fall to the Tories, if a moderate centre-right rival party could spring up (I'm not thinking UKIP in any guise here) then that could do the trick.
    The Tories already are a moderate centre right party
    Yes but they're not "a moderate centre-right rival party".
    Which would be utterly pointless as given a choice between the Tories or pale imitation Tories voters will always prefer the real thing
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,027
    Whats happened to football in Africa ?
    Every African performance so far has been woeful.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,038
    edited June 2018
    Pulpstar said:

    Whats happened to football in Africa ?
    Every African performance so far has been woeful.

    There was an article on BBC website the other day, total lack of organization and professionalism (plus massive corruption).
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,130
    Pulpstar said:

    Whats happened to football in Africa ?
    Every African performance so far has been woeful.

    I reckon Senegal will be Africa's one decent team at this tournament. I'll remind you of your post when they defeat England in the last 16.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    MarqueeMark said:

    Chope is a twat.

    BUT....if he genuinely didn't know what "upskirting" was, then the Private Members Bill he booted into touch out couldn't have had particularly satisfactory definitions....

    Chances are he never read the bill.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Chope voted against lowering the age of consent for homosexuality.

    So if you hear him talk about wanting the government to be less interfering busy body then he is talking utter shit. That's just cover for his reactionary twatitudeness.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,180
    He is one of several Tory MPs in safe seats who should retire before the next GE.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    HYUFD said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    HYUFD said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Jonathan said:

    One day we will see the Tory safe seats tumble in Southern England as Labour’s safe seats fell in Scotland . The power base is as hollow. A lot of dead wood will go and electorates will no longer taken for granted. It will be cathartic.

    Wishful thinking.. Southern England will never vote for the loony left
    They don't need to. Scottish Labour didn't fall to the Tories, if a moderate centre-right rival party could spring up (I'm not thinking UKIP in any guise here) then that could do the trick.
    The Tories already are a moderate centre right party
    Yes but they're not "a moderate centre-right rival party".
    Which would be utterly pointless as given a choice between the Tories or pale imitation Tories voters will always prefer the real thing
    Not necessarily. The SNP took Labour seats by being a moderate centre-left rival party with a unique selling point. If a centre-right party can launch with a USP then nothing is guaranteed.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    YBarddCwsc said:

    There have been convictions for upskirting under outraging public decency.

    "Allington-Smith further admitted outraging public decency, between September 2009 and September 2014, for a series of acts of a “lewd, obscene or disgusting nature” by taking images up women’s skirts without their knowledge. "

    So, what are the offences that are not covered by existing legislation?

    That was part of an omnibus of offences including possession of child porn and filming people undressing.

    Scant chance of it being prosecuting it on it's own.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,451
    I don't agree with him on this issue, but he was an outstanding leader of Wandsworth.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Alistair said:

    Chope voted against lowering the age of consent for homosexuality.

    So if you hear him talk about wanting the government to be less interfering busy body then he is talking utter shit. That's just cover for his reactionary twatitudeness.

    He also voted against liberalising Sunday Trading Laws. He's not a libertarian.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Sean_F said:

    FPT Sinn Fein. They will now require all representatives to support abortion up to 12 weeks, rather than treating it as a conscience issue. That will certainly not win support from SDLP voters, but may win support from Alliance and Greens. It won't win one iota from Unionists.

    Why not? I'm sure there's plenty of 21st century Unionists who have more respect for women than the Church.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    Alistair said:

    YBarddCwsc said:

    There have been convictions for upskirting under outraging public decency.

    "Allington-Smith further admitted outraging public decency, between September 2009 and September 2014, for a series of acts of a “lewd, obscene or disgusting nature” by taking images up women’s skirts without their knowledge. "

    So, what are the offences that are not covered by existing legislation?

    That was part of an omnibus of offences including possession of child porn and filming people undressing.

    Scant chance of it being prosecuting it on it's own.
    I wonder if anyone has actually asked Chope why he called it down? He must have proper reason surely... and not just hating private members bills. If he does hate private members bills as alleged, he has a screw loose somewhere.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679
    HYUFD said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Jonathan said:

    One day we will see the Tory safe seats tumble in Southern England as Labour’s safe seats fell in Scotland . The power base is as hollow. A lot of dead wood will go and electorates will no longer taken for granted. It will be cathartic.

    Wishful thinking.. Southern England will never vote for the loony left
    They don't need to. Scottish Labour didn't fall to the Tories, if a moderate centre-right rival party could spring up (I'm not thinking UKIP in any guise here) then that could do the trick.
    The Tories already are a moderate centre right party
    If only.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,941
    Philip_Thompson said:

    Sean_F said:

    FPT Sinn Fein. They will now require all representatives to support abortion up to 12 weeks, rather than treating it as a conscience issue. That will certainly not win support from SDLP voters, but may win support from Alliance and Greens. It won't win one iota from Unionists.

    Why not? I'm sure there's plenty of 21st century Unionists who have more respect for women than the Church.
    In which case they will vote Alliance or UUP not Sinn Fein
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,941
    edited June 2018
    Philip_Thompson said:

    HYUFD said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    HYUFD said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Jonathan said:

    One day we will see the Tory safe seats tumble in Southern England as Labour’s safe seats fell in Scotland . The power base is as hollow. A lot of dead wood will go and electorates will no longer taken for granted. It will be cathartic.

    Wishful thinking.. Southern England will never vote for the loony left
    They don't need to. Scottish Labour didn't fall to the Tories, if a moderate centre-right rival party could spring up (I'm not thinking UKIP in any guise here) then that could do the trick.
    The Tories already are a moderate centre right party
    Yes but they're not "a moderate centre-right rival party".
    Which would be utterly pointless as given a choice between the Tories or pale imitation Tories voters will always prefer the real thing
    Not necessarily. The SNP took Labour seats by being a moderate centre-left rival party with a unique selling point. If a centre-right party can launch with a USP then nothing is guaranteed.
    The SNP took Labour seats by being a pro Scotland, nationalist party in a nation which wanted more powers for Holyrood even if not outright independence not by being a copycat of Labour.

    A copycat centre right party which has no distinguishing features at all from the Tories will make no headway at all, if the Tories had abandoned Brexit then there may have been an opening for a moderate centre right pro Brexit Party after the Leave vote, but they haven't so there won't be.

    There already is a separate UK Libertarian Party and far right parties like 'For Britain' but those really represent purist versions of right of centre ideology not a moderate, pragmatic centre right party
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 2,038
    Philip_Thompson said:

    Alistair said:

    Chope voted against lowering the age of consent for homosexuality.

    So if you hear him talk about wanting the government to be less interfering busy body then he is talking utter shit. That's just cover for his reactionary twatitudeness.

    He also voted against liberalising Sunday Trading Laws. He's not a libertarian.
    I dislike his far right views but he's free to say what he likes in parliament even if it's the word 'object'. Parliament should change the rules if it dislikes this procedure.

    The Daily Mail and Sun are the price we pay for a free press. Having some truly obnoxious MPs may be the price we have to pay for democracy. He's not the only objectionable individual in the HoC.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    I have been looking at Wikipedia for Christopher Chope. He has a long history of making odd interjections on some quite astonishing policies:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Chope

    I don't agree with what he has done but I cannot see the Tories been usurped in Christchurch. This is the problem with such safe seats, it is hard to get rid of them. Maybe the Knighthood was given to him to make way at the right time i.e. so well connected and influential people can be installed with little competition?
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 28,180
    Pulpstar said:

    Whats happened to football in Africa ?
    Every African performance so far has been woeful.

    Its never been impressive but they really should be able to do better.

    Especially when you remember that Nigeria has about 50x the population of Croatia and Egypt 25x the population of Uruguay.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    HYUFD said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    Sean_F said:

    FPT Sinn Fein. They will now require all representatives to support abortion up to 12 weeks, rather than treating it as a conscience issue. That will certainly not win support from SDLP voters, but may win support from Alliance and Greens. It won't win one iota from Unionists.

    Why not? I'm sure there's plenty of 21st century Unionists who have more respect for women than the Church.
    In which case they will vote Alliance or UUP not Sinn Fein
    I read it as Sean was saying Unionists would object to treating abortion not as a woman's rights rather than a conscience issue, not that Unionists would object to Sinn Fein come what may.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,630
    edited June 2018
    The_Taxman said:

    I have been looking at Wikipedia for Christopher Chope. He has a long history of making odd interjections on some quite astonishing policies:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Chope

    I don't agree with what he has done but I cannot see the Tories been usurped in Christchurch. This is the problem with such safe seats, it is hard to get rid of them. Maybe the Knighthood was given to him to make way at the right time i.e. so well connected and influential people can be installed with little competition?

    Couldn't the party deselect him?
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 28,180
    Benpointer said:

    The_Taxman said:

    I have been looking at Wikipedia for Christopher Chope. He has a long history of making odd interjections on some quite astonishing policies:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Chope

    I don't agree with what he has done but I cannot see the Tories been usurped in Christchurch. This is the problem with such safe seats, it is hard to get rid of them. Maybe the Knighthood was given to him to make way at the right time i.e. so well connected and influential people can be installed with little competition?

    Couldn't the party deselect him?
    I doubt he'd stand at the next election given his age.

    And he may well have cost himself a place in the HoL.
  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,487
    tlg86 said:

    Sort of on topic, I must say I'm glad that the fashion of young men and women having their trousers hanging low seems to have ended.

    Trousers have been replaced by threadbare leggings in the female case. Or gym wear.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 28,180
    Today's Tesco Strawberry score is a repeat of yesterday's nine:

    Aberdeenshire
    Perthshire
    Fife
    Nottinghamshire
    Staffordshire
    Cambridgeshire
    Herefordshire
    Surrey
    Kent

    The only changes being a gain of Cambridgeshire and a loss of Somerset.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    Benpointer said:

    The_Taxman said:

    I have been looking at Wikipedia for Christopher Chope. He has a long history of making odd interjections on some quite astonishing policies:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Chope

    I don't agree with what he has done but I cannot see the Tories been usurped in Christchurch. This is the problem with such safe seats, it is hard to get rid of them. Maybe the Knighthood was given to him to make way at the right time i.e. so well connected and influential people can be installed with little competition?

    Couldn't the party deselect him?
    I don't think a party would deselect an MP for just shouting "object". I don't agree with what he has done over the years but I have seen worse. It may also be the case that Chope has a personal following in the constituency party, which means he is safe.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,451
    Philip_Thompson said:

    Sean_F said:

    FPT Sinn Fein. They will now require all representatives to support abortion up to 12 weeks, rather than treating it as a conscience issue. That will certainly not win support from SDLP voters, but may win support from Alliance and Greens. It won't win one iota from Unionists.

    Why not? I'm sure there's plenty of 21st century Unionists who have more respect for women than the Church.
    It won't cause them to switch to Sinn Fein.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    Alistair said:

    YBarddCwsc said:

    There have been convictions for upskirting under outraging public decency.

    "Allington-Smith further admitted outraging public decency, between September 2009 and September 2014, for a series of acts of a “lewd, obscene or disgusting nature” by taking images up women’s skirts without their knowledge. "

    So, what are the offences that are not covered by existing legislation?

    That was part of an omnibus of offences including possession of child porn and filming people undressing.

    Scant chance of it being prosecuting it on it's own.
    He committed other offences, for sure.

    However, the upskirting was specifically prosecuted, and it was specifically prosecuted under outraging public decency.

    Clearly, Allington-Smith was a multiple offender. However, the law was sufficient to obtain a conviction for up skirting (and also additional convictions for the other offences).

    If there is scant chance of it being prosecuted on its own, then the blame lies with the police or CPS

    (Actually -- I don't think it has been shown that there is scant chance of prosecution on its own).
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    rural_voter said:

    Parliament should change the rules if it dislikes this procedure.

    Did he not also vote against changing the rules?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,451
    rural_voter said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    Alistair said:

    Chope voted against lowering the age of consent for homosexuality.

    So if you hear him talk about wanting the government to be less interfering busy body then he is talking utter shit. That's just cover for his reactionary twatitudeness.

    He also voted against liberalising Sunday Trading Laws. He's not a libertarian.
    I dislike his far right views but he's free to say what he likes in parliament even if it's the word 'object'. Parliament should change the rules if it dislikes this procedure.

    The Daily Mail and Sun are the price we pay for a free press. Having some truly obnoxious MPs may be the price we have to pay for democracy. He's not the only objectionable individual in the HoC.
    Likewise the Guardian is the price we pay for a free press.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,630
    The_Taxman said:

    Benpointer said:

    The_Taxman said:

    I have been looking at Wikipedia for Christopher Chope. He has a long history of making odd interjections on some quite astonishing policies:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Chope

    I don't agree with what he has done but I cannot see the Tories been usurped in Christchurch. This is the problem with such safe seats, it is hard to get rid of them. Maybe the Knighthood was given to him to make way at the right time i.e. so well connected and influential people can be installed with little competition?

    Couldn't the party deselect him?
    I don't think a party would deselect an MP for just shouting "object". I don't agree with what he has done over the years but I have seen worse. It may also be the case that Chope has a personal following in the constituency party, which means he is safe.
    I would have thought deselect him for bringing the party into disrepute.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,315
    edited June 2018
    I cannot say I'm ever a fan of this type of headline. For all I think that his actions in blocking bills, whatever their contents and with no assessment on his part of if they can be salvaged in committee stage it seems, are disproportionate to his stated aims and this one is a particularly egregious example of that, I don't see what bringing his wife and daughter into it accomplishes. For all I know they are fully supportive of his actions against this type of bill, even if they supported the intentions behind this particular one.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Sean_F said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    Sean_F said:

    FPT Sinn Fein. They will now require all representatives to support abortion up to 12 weeks, rather than treating it as a conscience issue. That will certainly not win support from SDLP voters, but may win support from Alliance and Greens. It won't win one iota from Unionists.

    Why not? I'm sure there's plenty of 21st century Unionists who have more respect for women than the Church.
    It won't cause them to switch to Sinn Fein.
    If there were any DUP/Sinn Fein wavering voters it might but since I doubt there are any its rather moot.

    Hopefully one day there will be DUP/Sinn Fein swing voters. There are afterall Labour/Tory ones. Northern Ireland's sectarian history will only truly be behind it once people feel comfortable to swing like that.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,315
    another_richard said:

    Benpointer said:

    The_Taxman said:

    I have been looking at Wikipedia for Christopher Chope. He has a long history of making odd interjections on some quite astonishing policies:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Chope

    I don't agree with what he has done but I cannot see the Tories been usurped in Christchurch. This is the problem with such safe seats, it is hard to get rid of them. Maybe the Knighthood was given to him to make way at the right time i.e. so well connected and influential people can be installed with little competition?

    Couldn't the party deselect him?
    I doubt he'd stand at the next election given his age.

    He's only 71. There's several MPs 80 and above, one considerably so. And several more intheir mid to late 70s

    So while it would not be unexpected, it would also not be a big shock if he continued, or had intended to.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,678
    More evidence the bus was a lie:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/06/16/350m-extra-week-nhs-hunt-announces-theresa-may-locks-britain/

    384mn rather than 350mn....
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,315
    Benpointer said:

    The_Taxman said:

    Benpointer said:

    The_Taxman said:

    I have been looking at Wikipedia for Christopher Chope. He has a long history of making odd interjections on some quite astonishing policies:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Chope

    I don't agree with what he has done but I cannot see the Tories been usurped in Christchurch. This is the problem with such safe seats, it is hard to get rid of them. Maybe the Knighthood was given to him to make way at the right time i.e. so well connected and influential people can be installed with little competition?

    Couldn't the party deselect him?
    I don't think a party would deselect an MP for just shouting "object". I don't agree with what he has done over the years but I have seen worse. It may also be the case that Chope has a personal following in the constituency party, which means he is safe.
    I would have thought deselect him for bringing the party into disrepute.
    I'd guess parties are reluctant to break that out as a reason, in case it becomes overused. Causing a media storm, however justified, is probably something seen as inevitable at some point in an MPs career, and I doubt parties want to appear as though they toss people too eagerly to the wolves.

    But they can act quickly of course. Didn't an Isle of Wight MP announce he wouldn't stand at the next election mere hours or days after causing a storm over his views on homosexuals?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,038
    RobD said:

    More evidence the bus was a lie:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/06/16/350m-extra-week-nhs-hunt-announces-theresa-may-locks-britain/

    384mn rather than 350mn....

    Imagine if May had done this last year for the GE.....bloody total and utter numpty.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,315
    YBarddCwsc said:

    There have been convictions for upskirting under outraging public decency.

    "Allington-Smith further admitted outraging public decency, between September 2009 and September 2014, for a series of acts of a “lewd, obscene or disgusting nature” by taking images up women’s skirts without their knowledge. "

    So, what are the offences that are not covered by existing legislation?

    The issue seems to be it can be quite difficult in some circumstances to prosecute without a specific offence, even when it is clear something outrageous has occurred. That some prosecutions have been successful does not in itself speak as to whether there is a need for this to be covered under a specific offence. I'm no legislative expert (and Chope in any case was not making a point about the specifics of this bill, so he certainly wasn't making a judgement about it), but from the news write ups on the face of it the change appears justified.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    kle4 said:

    Benpointer said:

    The_Taxman said:

    Benpointer said:

    The_Taxman said:

    I have been looking at Wikipedia for Christopher Chope. He has a long history of making odd interjections on some quite astonishing policies:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Chope

    I don't agree with what he has done but I cannot see the Tories been usurped in Christchurch. This is the problem with such safe seats, it is hard to get rid of them. Maybe the Knighthood was given to him to make way at the right time i.e. so well connected and influential people can be installed with little competition?

    Couldn't the party deselect him?
    I don't think a party would deselect an MP for just shouting "object". I don't agree with what he has done over the years but I have seen worse. It may also be the case that Chope has a personal following in the constituency party, which means he is safe.
    I would have thought deselect him for bringing the party into disrepute.
    I'd guess parties are reluctant to break that out as a reason, in case it becomes overused. Causing a media storm, however justified, is probably something seen as inevitable at some point in an MPs career, and I doubt parties want to appear as though they toss people too eagerly to the wolves.

    But they can act quickly of course. Didn't an Isle of Wight MP announce he wouldn't stand at the next election mere hours or days after causing a storm over his views on homosexuals?
    I thought he( Isle of Wight MP) announced his intention not to seek re-election due to marital problems and his constituency party being vociferous in their contempt for him?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,038
    1 in 10 of Iceland's population is in Russia...

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5852295/Iceland-charms-World-Cup-debut-against-Argentina.html
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 67,575
    I see Javid's steady march to No 10 continues tonight: lead on bbc news.
  • NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 2,329
    kle4 said:

    I cannot say I'm ever a fan of this type of headline. For all I think that his actions in blocking bills, whatever their contents and with no assessment on his part of if they can be salvaged in committee stage it seems, are disproportionate to his stated aims and this one is a particularly egregious example of that, I don't see what bringing his wife and daughter into it accomplishes. For all I know they are fully supportive of his actions against this type of bill, even if they supported the intentions behind this particular one.

    Can't agree more. The guy is clearly a tool but no need to drag his family into it.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,315
    The_Taxman said:

    kle4 said:

    Benpointer said:

    The_Taxman said:

    Benpointer said:

    The_Taxman said:

    I have been looking at Wikipedia for Christopher Chope. He has a long history of making odd interjections on some quite astonishing policies:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Chope

    I don't agree with what he has done but I cannot see the Tories been usurped in Christchurch. This is the problem with such safe seats, it is hard to get rid of them. Maybe the Knighthood was given to him to make way at the right time i.e. so well connected and influential people can be installed with little competition?

    Couldn't the party deselect him?
    I don't think a party would deselect an MP for just shouting "object". I don't agree with what he has done over the years but I have seen worse. It may also be the case that Chope has a personal following in the constituency party, which means he is safe.
    I would have thought deselect him for bringing the party into disrepute.
    I'd guess parties are reluctant to break that out as a reason, in case it becomes overused. Causing a media storm, however justified, is probably something seen as inevitable at some point in an MPs career, and I doubt parties want to appear as though they toss people too eagerly to the wolves.

    But they can act quickly of course. Didn't an Isle of Wight MP announce he wouldn't stand at the next election mere hours or days after causing a storm over his views on homosexuals?
    I thought he( Isle of Wight MP) announced his intention not to seek re-election due to marital problems and his constituency party being vociferous in their contempt for him?
    In fairness I just sort of assumed that pressure within the party most notably around that incident was behind it - whatever the other issues behind it my recollection was he intention not to seek re-election was only announced in the immediate aftermath of said incident, which would suggest to me (if my recollection of the timing is correct) that the party put a lot of pressure on him to do that so they would not have to do something formal.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    The_Taxman said:

    kle4 said:

    Benpointer said:

    The_Taxman said:

    Benpointer said:

    The_Taxman said:

    I have been looking at Wikipedia for Christopher Chope. He has a long history of making odd interjections on some quite astonishing policies:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Chope

    I don't agree with what he has done but I cannot see the Tories been usurped in Christchurch. This is the problem with such safe seats, it is hard to get rid of them. Maybe the Knighthood was given to him to make way at the right time i.e. so well connected and influential people can be installed with little competition?

    Couldn't the party deselect him?
    I don't think a party would deselect an MP for just shouting "object". I don't agree with what he has done over the years but I have seen worse. It may also be the case that Chope has a personal following in the constituency party, which means he is safe.
    I would have thought deselect him for bringing the party into disrepute.
    I'd guess parties are reluctant to break that out as a reason, in case it becomes overused. Causing a media storm, however justified, is probably something seen as inevitable at some point in an MPs career, and I doubt parties want to appear as though they toss people too eagerly to the wolves.

    But they can act quickly of course. Didn't an Isle of Wight MP announce he wouldn't stand at the next election mere hours or days after causing a storm over his views on homosexuals?
    I thought he( Isle of Wight MP) announced his intention not to seek re-election due to marital problems and his constituency party being vociferous in their contempt for him? Actually reading through his Wikipedia it is his stance on Homosexuality that got him.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,038
    Oh dear, Mr Mastermind has lost his cool.

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6548828/mp-david-lammy-grapples-with-sun-reporter-and-storms-out-of-interview-and-after-we-dared-ask-about-anti-semitism-row-at-labour-live-festival/
This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025