politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Suddenly there’s the prospect of a vaccine, perhaps even by th
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Suddenly there’s the prospect of a vaccine, perhaps even by the end of the year
It has repeatedly been said over the last five months that the only way that life can really return back to normal will be if an effective vaccine becomes available. There have been reports that more than 100 research teams around the world are working hard on the challenge and now we’ve got news about two of them.
0
Comments
-
First ... yet again!0
-
"Twitter hack: Obama, Bezos and Kardashian targeted by Bitcoin scam
Hackers break into the accounts of technology moguls, politicians, celebrities and global companies in an apparent Bitcoin scam."
https://news.sky.com/story/twitter-hack-obama-bezos-and-kardashian-targeted-by-bitcoin-scam-120293940 -
I don't much like the idea of scientists leaking information to the media. It makes me suspicious. Science operates through the crucible of empiricism not tabloid journalism.
So I'm taking this vaccine 'news,' in which Astra Zeneca have a massive commercial interest, with a healthy degree of scepticism for now.3 -
The guy that was building the Death Star just got choked...
https://twitter.com/EliStokols/status/12835653156627947530 -
-
I hope it's right. But as OGH says, PM Johnson needs some good news, so I do wonder about this 'leak'.Mysticrose said:I don't much like the idea of scientists leaking information to the media. It makes me suspicious. Science operates through the crucible of empiricism not tabloid journalism.
So I'm taking this vaccine 'news,' in which Astra Zeneca have a massive commercial interest, with a healthy degree of scepticism for now.
So add me to the 'sceptical' list!3 -
(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
7 -
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times0 -
Hey, I've decided the time has come to give something back. Send 0.01 BTC and I'll triple it . BTC.howthickarethepeoplethatfallforthis is the wallet address.1
-
I don’t think the commercial interest will be all that massive for a company the size of Astra Zeneca. They’ll be producing it at a relatively low price, and most of the manufacturing is contracted out to other companies.Mysticrose said:I don't much like the idea of scientists leaking information to the media. It makes me suspicious. Science operates through the crucible of empiricism not tabloid journalism.
So I'm taking this vaccine 'news,' in which Astra Zeneca have a massive commercial interest, with a healthy degree of scepticism for now.
And they’ve nothing to gain from hyping something that doesn’t work.
And it will be at least a couple more months before they know for sure anyway.0 -
-
I reckon its a scam, if you send it to BTC.thiswillprotectyou, you will be safe.Pulpstar said:Hey, I've decided the time has come to give something back. Send 0.01 BTC and I'll triple it . BTC.howthickarethepeoplethatfallforthis is the wallet address.
0 -
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition again. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times0 -
Nice Graphic.eek said:Aheatmap of covid cases in florida- it doesn't look good https://twitter.com/nataliexdean/status/1283134585665200131
Cue the arguments again of splitting society into two completely seperate groups the under 40s and over 40s.0 -
The leaks are more likely related to it's upcoming publication in The Lancet. Lots more people will have seen the paper now.Mysticrose said:I don't much like the idea of scientists leaking information to the media. It makes me suspicious. Science operates through the crucible of empiricism not tabloid journalism.
So I'm taking this vaccine 'news,' in which Astra Zeneca have a massive commercial interest, with a healthy degree of scepticism for now.1 -
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition again. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times1 -
Risk of media filter in Mike’s post. He can only report on what media outlets publish, but bit of a coincidence that English-language media is bragging about two English-language projects. There are an awful lot of other projects out there.
This is about health, but it is also about money and power. A tremendous amount of money. So beware guff.0 -
We need a UK equivalent of the Lincoln project. The Churchill project perhaps?Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times0 -
Deaths will lag any initial infection bomb by loads of this is repeated elsewhereeristdoof said:
Nice Graphic.eek said:Aheatmap of covid cases in florida- it doesn't look good https://twitter.com/nataliexdean/status/1283134585665200131
Cue the arguments again of splitting society into two completely seperate groups the under 40s and over 40s.0 -
It is likely it will be political chaos for years to comenoneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition again. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times0 -
Society seems to manage to do that quite well itself, without any assistance.eristdoof said:
Nice Graphic.eek said:Aheatmap of covid cases in florida- it doesn't look good https://twitter.com/nataliexdean/status/1283134585665200131
Cue the arguments again of splitting society into two completely seperate groups the under 40s and over 40s.1 -
I think it's highly likely that this parliament will come to an end in the next four years, and that there will be an election. In that election, the libdems will be hyped, but will fall short of expectations.noneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition again. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times5 -
To be honest I am very cautious over celebrating too soonStuartDickson said:Risk of media filter in Mike’s post. He can only report on what media outlets publish, but bit of a coincidence that English-language media is bragging about two English-language projects. There are an awful lot of other projects out there.
This is about health, but it is also about money and power. A tremendous amount of money. So beware guff.1 -
To be strictly accurate the BBC (now?) says that 'Sources say Mr Lewis..... told the Tory chief whip he would back Mr Grayling.'.Nigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
Which surely suggests that one of the usual creeps has 'put the word about'!
It will be interesting to see what Lewis' constituency officers say. New Forest East has, recently anyway been 'safe'.
0 -
Was there an election in the last 40 years when that was not the case*? The question is by how much.rcs1000 said:
I think it's highly likely that this parliament will come to an end in the next four years, and that there will be an election. In that election, the libdems will be hyped, but will fall short of expectations.noneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition again. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times
*Allowing for party name changes/allianes etc.0 -
One mans chaos is Cummings 4d chess game theory being played out (apparently!).Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is likely it will be political chaos for years to comenoneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition again. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times0 -
Your skepticism is commendable, and well deserved. As I said, beware guff. Especially if a charlatan by the name of Boris Johnson is a potential beneficiary.Mysticrose said:I don't much like the idea of scientists leaking information to the media. It makes me suspicious. Science operates through the crucible of empiricism not tabloid journalism.
So I'm taking this vaccine 'news,' in which Astra Zeneca have a massive commercial interest, with a healthy degree of scepticism for now.
Incidentally, I realise that Astra Zeneca is promoted as a “British” company by English media, but Swedish media puts a different, and more accurate, label on the organisation.
0 -
Lads, it’s Oxford University.
Don’t get your hopes up.0 -
For such a genius (sic), Dom seems pretty bad at actual politicsnoneoftheabove said:One mans chaos is Cummings 4d chess game theory being played out (apparently!).
1 -
Think about your statement for 10 seconds. How many parents do you know over 40? How many teachers are over 40? How many trains/busses insist on over/under40s separation?(The suggestions were not for during lockdow, but to get out of lockdown).StuartDickson said:
Society seems to manage to do that quite well itself, without any assistance.eristdoof said:
Nice Graphic.eek said:Aheatmap of covid cases in florida- it doesn't look good https://twitter.com/nataliexdean/status/1283134585665200131
Cue the arguments again of splitting society into two completely seperate groups the under 40s and over 40s.0 -
Doesnt always happen, one of my first political bets was a 33/1 winner on LD seats in the 97 election well above the line.rcs1000 said:
I think it's highly likely that this parliament will come to an end in the next four years, and that there will be an election. In that election, the libdems will be hyped, but will fall short of expectations.noneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition again. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times0 -
Boris/Cummings have consistently been the source of chaos these past four years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is likely it will be political chaos for years to comenoneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition again. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times1 -
Complete takeover of the Tory party by bluekip, 80 seat majority and referendum win, where did it all go wrong?Scott_xP said:
For such a genius (sic), Dom seems pretty bad at actual politicsnoneoftheabove said:One mans chaos is Cummings 4d chess game theory being played out (apparently!).
1 -
Why on earth does the government get to “vet and approve” opposition members? Very sinister. Slippery slope stuff that.Nigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
In a democracy, it is the electorate that choose the opposition, not the government.1 -
Really?noneoftheabove said:80 seat majority
0 -
You mean they won brexit and you do not like brexitJonathan said:
Boris/Cummings have consistently been the source of chaos these past four years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is likely it will be political chaos for years to comenoneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition qagain. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times2 -
On a security committee I think a level of scrutiny is fair. Should we allow someone who spent a mysterious 3 years in Russia or someone who gets paid 100k to "play tennis" with a Russian oligarch access for example?StuartDickson said:
Why on earth does the government get to “vet and approve” opposition members? Very sinister. Slippery slope stuff that.Nigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
In a democracy, it is the electorate that choose the opposition, not the government.2 -
You think the last few years will be looked back on as a period of good government?Big_G_NorthWales said:
You mean they won brexit and you do not like brexitJonathan said:
Boris/Cummings have consistently been the source of chaos these past four years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is likely it will be political chaos for years to comenoneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition qagain. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times1 -
No, I mean they undermined May by repeatedly opposing BrexitM seeded chaos in the commons and then got into office and unlawfully closed parliament, lied to the Queen and then got an elected on a promise to deliver an oven ready Brexit, which has since proven to be yet another lie.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You mean they won brexit and you do not like brexitJonathan said:
Boris/Cummings have consistently been the source of chaos these past four years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is likely it will be political chaos for years to comenoneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition qagain. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times5 -
Or they sabotaged their own government, illegally prorogued parliament and undermine the civil service? There is that too!Big_G_NorthWales said:
You mean they won brexit and you do not like brexitJonathan said:
Boris/Cummings have consistently been the source of chaos these past four years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is likely it will be political chaos for years to comenoneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition qagain. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times4 -
You can say that about every election the Lib Dems ever fought.rcs1000 said:
... In that election, the libdems will be hyped, but will fall short of expectations.noneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition again. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times0 -
A Brexit deal so bad even David Davis has disowned it...Jonathan said:No, I mean they undermined May by repeatedly opposing BrexitM seeded chaos in the commons and then got into office and unlawfully closed parliament, lied to the Queen and then got an elected on a promise to deliver an oven ready Brexit, which has since proven to be yet another lie.
1 -
The Cameron coalition was good government but then when looking at this government no government anywhere has had a pandemic to deal with so who knows what the final verdict will beOldKingCole said:
You think the last few years will be looked back on as a period of good government?Big_G_NorthWales said:
You mean they won brexit and you do not like brexitJonathan said:
Boris/Cummings have consistently been the source of chaos these past four years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is likely it will be political chaos for years to comenoneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition qagain. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times0 -
Still brexitJonathan said:
No, I mean they undermined May by repeatedly opposing BrexitM seeded chaos in the commons and then got into office and unlawfully closed parliament, lied to the Queen and then got an elected on a promise to deliver an oven ready Brexit, which has since proven to be yet another lie.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You mean they won brexit and you do not like brexitJonathan said:
Boris/Cummings have consistently been the source of chaos these past four years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is likely it will be political chaos for years to comenoneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition qagain. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times0 -
-
Ill make the opposite case, ideal ground for LDs is actually a centrist Labour leader whereas intuitively on first impressions they should do well with a leftist Labour leader. So they wont be as hyped this time, but will do better than with Corbyn around. They may be value on the upside for the first time since Blair.StuartDickson said:
You can say that about every election the Lib Dems ever fought.rcs1000 said:
... In that election, the libdems will be hyped, but will fall short of expectations.noneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition again. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times3 -
I thought Parliamentary committees were supposed to try to avoid being overtly party political? It's incredibly damaging for Johnson to try to enforce party discipline by removing the Tory whip from Julian Lewis.
A degree of independence from backbench MPs has always been a feature of the Westminster system, and we can see now that Johnson is determined to squeeze any independence out of his party on all matters, not just Brexit.
It's a very dangerous development for our political system.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jul/15/chris-grayling-fails-to-become-intelligence-and-security-chair2 -
Er... cool your jets man. It is slightly too early in the morning for ultra-pedantry. It is just possible that I was trying to be amusing. Obviously the wrong forum. I’ll use one of those emoji things the next time, so nobody has to do anything difficult, like think.eristdoof said:
Think about your statement for 10 seconds. How many parents do you know over 40? How many teachers are over 40? How many trains/busses insist on over/under40s separation?(The suggestions were not for during lockdow, but to get out of lockdown).StuartDickson said:
Society seems to manage to do that quite well itself, without any assistance.eristdoof said:
Nice Graphic.eek said:Aheatmap of covid cases in florida- it doesn't look good https://twitter.com/nataliexdean/status/1283134585665200131
Cue the arguments again of splitting society into two completely seperate groups the under 40s and over 40s.0 -
You’re assuming his purpose, there.Scott_xP said:
For such a genius (sic), Dom seems pretty bad at actual politicsnoneoftheabove said:One mans chaos is Cummings 4d chess game theory being played out (apparently!).
0 -
I cannot understand why HMG leads in the polls other than most on this forum do not reflect the public view
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1283554382433464320?s=090 -
On your terms, it's like trading the Mercedes in for an Austin A35. It's still a car!Big_G_NorthWales said:
Still brexitJonathan said:
No, I mean they undermined May by repeatedly opposing BrexitM seeded chaos in the commons and then got into office and unlawfully closed parliament, lied to the Queen and then got an elected on a promise to deliver an oven ready Brexit, which has since proven to be yet another lie.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You mean they won brexit and you do not like brexitJonathan said:
Boris/Cummings have consistently been the source of chaos these past four years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is likely it will be political chaos for years to comenoneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition qagain. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times1 -
It is but it's going to be a clusterf**k Brexit of epic proportions attached to a fundamental restructuring of the economy due to Covid 19...Big_G_NorthWales said:
Still brexitJonathan said:
No, I mean they undermined May by repeatedly opposing BrexitM seeded chaos in the commons and then got into office and unlawfully closed parliament, lied to the Queen and then got an elected on a promise to deliver an oven ready Brexit, which has since proven to be yet another lie.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You mean they won brexit and you do not like brexitJonathan said:
Boris/Cummings have consistently been the source of chaos these past four years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is likely it will be political chaos for years to comenoneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition qagain. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times
We could probably survive one or the other as while they impacted particular sectors of the economy other sectors weren't impacted by the change. But both together and oh boy the next few years are going to be fun for people.0 -
Big_G_NorthWales said:
The Cameron coalition was good government but then when looking at this government no government anywhere has had a pandemic to deal with so who knows what the final verdict will beOldKingCole said:
You think the last few years will be looked back on as a period of good government?Big_G_NorthWales said:
You mean they won brexit and you do not like brexitJonathan said:
Boris/Cummings have consistently been the source of chaos these past four years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is likely it will be political chaos for years to comenoneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition qagain. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times
The current government has been by far the worst of my lifetime. We are currently more divided, poorer, diplomatically isolated and with worse prospects for the future than at any point since the war. And most of this has been due to unforced errors and political chicanery from a PM focussed on his personal career than the benefit of the nation.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The Cameron coalition was good government but then when looking at this government no government anywhere has had a pandemic to deal with so who knows what the final verdict will beOldKingCole said:
You think the last few years will be looked back on as a period of good government?Big_G_NorthWales said:
You mean they won brexit and you do not like brexitJonathan said:
Boris/Cummings have consistently been the source of chaos these past four years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is likely it will be political chaos for years to comenoneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition qagain. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times5 -
Equally such considerations should apply in spades as to who you would want charing such a committee. Someone who manage to unite a majority of the committee against him before even getting the job doesn’t seem ideal.noneoftheabove said:
On a security committee I think a level of scrutiny is fair. Should we allow someone who spent a mysterious 3 years in Russia or someone who gets paid 100k to "play tennis" with a Russian oligarch access for example?StuartDickson said:
Why on earth does the government get to “vet and approve” opposition members? Very sinister. Slippery slope stuff that.Nigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
In a democracy, it is the electorate that choose the opposition, not the government.1 -
Mass unemployment, collapse in international trade, and the dissolution of the Union.noneoftheabove said:
Complete takeover of the Tory party by bluekip, 80 seat majority and referendum win, where did it all go wrong?Scott_xP said:
For such a genius (sic), Dom seems pretty bad at actual politicsnoneoftheabove said:One mans chaos is Cummings 4d chess game theory being played out (apparently!).
0 -
(Except 1997)StuartDickson said:
You can say that about every election the Lib Dems ever fought.rcs1000 said:
... In that election, the libdems will be hyped, but will fall short of expectations.noneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition again. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times0 -
That idiocy is Bozo’s fault in the first place.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Still brexitJonathan said:
No, I mean they undermined May by repeatedly opposing BrexitM seeded chaos in the commons and then got into office and unlawfully closed parliament, lied to the Queen and then got an elected on a promise to deliver an oven ready Brexit, which has since proven to be yet another lie.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You mean they won brexit and you do not like brexitJonathan said:
Boris/Cummings have consistently been the source of chaos these past four years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is likely it will be political chaos for years to comenoneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition qagain. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times0 -
I think the hardcore loyalists wake up a bit later. Before 8 pb speaks a lot of common sense!Big_G_NorthWales said:I cannot understand why HMG leads in the polls other than most on this forum do not reflect the public view
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1283554382433464320?s=092 -
You use Brexit as a device to close your eyes and switch off your brain. If Corbyn has done half the things this government has done you would be on the street. Brexit is more important to you than it is to me, the figleaf that justifies your support for this shambles.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Still brexitJonathan said:
No, I mean they undermined May by repeatedly opposing BrexitM seeded chaos in the commons and then got into office and unlawfully closed parliament, lied to the Queen and then got an elected on a promise to deliver an oven ready Brexit, which has since proven to be yet another lie.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You mean they won brexit and you do not like brexitJonathan said:
Boris/Cummings have consistently been the source of chaos these past four years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is likely it will be political chaos for years to comenoneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition qagain. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times0 -
They need time for their medication to kick in?noneoftheabove said:
I think the hardcore loyalists wake up a bit later. Before 8 pb speaks a lot of common sense!Big_G_NorthWales said:I cannot understand why HMG leads in the polls other than most on this forum do not reflect the public view
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1283554382433464320?s=091 -
If you think this site is predominantly left wing you are not paying attention. BluestBlue, Sandpit, Casino, Square root, LadyG, Pagan, etc, etc will all be along later.Big_G_NorthWales said:I cannot understand why HMG leads in the polls other than most on this forum do not reflect the public view
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1283554382433464320?s=090 -
There is also the issue of whether the failure to spot a plot amongst 5 of his 8 peers might hinder his ability to spot a foreign more sophisticated plot.IanB2 said:
Equally such considerations should apply in spades as to who you would want charing such a committee. Someone who manage to unite a majority of the committee against him before even getting the job doesn’t seem ideal.noneoftheabove said:
On a security committee I think a level of scrutiny is fair. Should we allow someone who spent a mysterious 3 years in Russia or someone who gets paid 100k to "play tennis" with a Russian oligarch access for example?StuartDickson said:
Why on earth does the government get to “vet and approve” opposition members? Very sinister. Slippery slope stuff that.Nigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
In a democracy, it is the electorate that choose the opposition, not the government.1 -
R4: Tory Rifkind accusing the PM of “total incompetence“ over the security committee.
If he has succeeded it would have “destroyed the whole purpose of the intelligence committee”.
Calls for whoever was advising him to be sacked.
Rifkind says PM blocked the Russia report not because of its contents but out of spite because Dominic Grieve did the work on it.0 -
I have never been on the street and nor would IJonathan said:
You use Brexit as a device to close your eyes and switch off your brain. If Corbyn has done half the things this government has done you would be on the street. Brexit is more important to you than it is to me, the figleaf that justifies your support for this shambles.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Still brexitJonathan said:
No, I mean they undermined May by repeatedly opposing BrexitM seeded chaos in the commons and then got into office and unlawfully closed parliament, lied to the Queen and then got an elected on a promise to deliver an oven ready Brexit, which has since proven to be yet another lie.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You mean they won brexit and you do not like brexitJonathan said:
Boris/Cummings have consistently been the source of chaos these past four years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is likely it will be political chaos for years to comenoneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition qagain. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times
Brexit is important to millions and as far as support for HMG I am a conservative member and remain as such0 -
We’re in the middle of a national crisis. If they had done polls in 1940, Chamberlain would have been miles ahead even through the Norway debate.Big_G_NorthWales said:I cannot understand why HMG leads in the polls other than most on this forum do not reflect the public view
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1283554382433464320?s=091 -
Issues such as that ought to be highlighted to the relevant electorate by media and by other parties during a general election or by-election. If the electors in that constituency don’t mind then they are free to elect the MP of their choice. And that MP is then free to serve in parliament and any parliamentary committee. Anything less is the slippery slope.noneoftheabove said:
On a security committee I think a level of scrutiny is fair. Should we allow someone who spent a mysterious 3 years in Russia or someone who gets paid 100k to "play tennis" with a Russian oligarch access for example?StuartDickson said:
Why on earth does the government get to “vet and approve” opposition members? Very sinister. Slippery slope stuff that.Nigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
In a democracy, it is the electorate that choose the opposition, not the government.
This government can’t even “vet” itself, let alone the opposition.0 -
Watch this and ask yourself is this a Country that is accurately reporting Covid deaths.
https://news.sky.com/video/covid-19-cases-are-overwhelming-south-africa-120292810 -
i would suggest it is dominated by pro EU remain posters more than specifically left wingMexicanpete said:
If you think this site is predominantly left wing you are not paying attention. BluestBlue, Sandpit, Casino, Square root, LadyG, Pagan, etc, etc will all be along later.Big_G_NorthWales said:I cannot understand why HMG leads in the polls other than most on this forum do not reflect the public view
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1283554382433464320?s=092 -
I was going to praise Charlie Kennedy, but your dad doesn’t like it.rcs1000 said:
(Except 1997)StuartDickson said:
You can say that about every election the Lib Dems ever fought.rcs1000 said:
... In that election, the libdems will be hyped, but will fall short of expectations.noneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition again. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times0 -
...or Matron doesn't allow them access to the computers before 8 o clock.noneoftheabove said:
I think the hardcore loyalists wake up a bit later. Before 8 pb speaks a lot of common sense!Big_G_NorthWales said:I cannot understand why HMG leads in the polls other than most on this forum do not reflect the public view
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1283554382433464320?s=091 -
i could believe the last paragraphIanB2 said:R4: Tory Rifkind accusing the PM of “total incompetence“ over the security committee.
If he has succeeded it would have “destroyed the whole purpose of the intelligence committee”.
Calls for whoever was advising him to be sacked.
Rifkind says PM blocked the Russia report not because of its contents but out of spite because Dominic Grieve did the work on it.0 -
So what?Big_G_NorthWales said:I cannot understand why HMG leads in the polls other than most on this forum do not reflect the public view
twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1283554382433464320?s=09
It is not the point of the site to be a nationally representative focus group. Aside from people shouting into the void, the purpose of the site is to anticipate changes so that money can be made by making the appropriate bets.
Any old fool can look at the opinion polls and see that the Tories are comfortably ahead. The question is whether they will remain so.
Some people on here think that the leader ratings indicate that they won't. Other people point to other reasons why they will.
Pointing to the current leads says nothing about the future.5 -
It will be and remember those people who have been tested were probably infectious for 3-7 days before becoming ill enough to need a test.Pulpstar said:
Deaths will lag any initial infection bomb by loads of this is repeated elsewhereeristdoof said:
Nice Graphic.eek said:Aheatmap of covid cases in florida- it doesn't look good https://twitter.com/nataliexdean/status/1283134585665200131
Cue the arguments again of splitting society into two completely seperate groups the under 40s and over 40s.
The lag times here are the biggest issue with Covid 19... (3-7 days of being infectious before becoming ill, another 7-10 days before possibly needing hospital treatment, + a few more days before getting better).
1) Florida and Texas are already out of ICU beds and a lot of people are only at the testing stage
2) Most people I know who have had it are still feeling ill 3 months later.0 -
As such you own a part of the shambles we find ourselves in. You have placed and continue to place a nationalist political ideology over pragmatism and administrative competence, the very opposite of what Conservatism was supposed to be about.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I have never been on the street and nor would IJonathan said:
You use Brexit as a device to close your eyes and switch off your brain. If Corbyn has done half the things this government has done you would be on the street. Brexit is more important to you than it is to me, the figleaf that justifies your support for this shambles.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Still brexitJonathan said:
No, I mean they undermined May by repeatedly opposing BrexitM seeded chaos in the commons and then got into office and unlawfully closed parliament, lied to the Queen and then got an elected on a promise to deliver an oven ready Brexit, which has since proven to be yet another lie.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You mean they won brexit and you do not like brexitJonathan said:
Boris/Cummings have consistently been the source of chaos these past four years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is likely it will be political chaos for years to comenoneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition qagain. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times
Brexit is important to millions and as far as support for HMG I am a conservative member and remain as such4 -
Obviously it's a life and death matter, so forgive a robust metaphor.Pulpstar said:
Deaths will lag any initial infection bomb by loads of this is repeated elsewhereeristdoof said:
Nice Graphic.eek said:Aheatmap of covid cases in florida- it doesn't look good https://twitter.com/nataliexdean/status/1283134585665200131
Cue the arguments again of splitting society into two completely seperate groups the under 40s and over 40s.
It's exactly like those 20 something's are occupying the fourth floor flat of a poorly clad tower block.0 -
You really are not paying attention in that case.Big_G_NorthWales said:
i would suggest it is dominated by pro EU remain posters more than specifically left wingMexicanpete said:
If you think this site is predominantly left wing you are not paying attention. BluestBlue, Sandpit, Casino, Square root, LadyG, Pagan, etc, etc will all be along later.Big_G_NorthWales said:I cannot understand why HMG leads in the polls other than most on this forum do not reflect the public view
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1283554382433464320?s=092 -
Why do you spend so long trying to justify to people why you remain conservative member. To me it just shows that you aren't bright enough to see that the Tory party has become UKIP without Farage...Big_G_NorthWales said:
I have never been on the street and nor would IJonathan said:
You use Brexit as a device to close your eyes and switch off your brain. If Corbyn has done half the things this government has done you would be on the street. Brexit is more important to you than it is to me, the figleaf that justifies your support for this shambles.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Still brexitJonathan said:
No, I mean they undermined May by repeatedly opposing BrexitM seeded chaos in the commons and then got into office and unlawfully closed parliament, lied to the Queen and then got an elected on a promise to deliver an oven ready Brexit, which has since proven to be yet another lie.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You mean they won brexit and you do not like brexitJonathan said:
Boris/Cummings have consistently been the source of chaos these past four years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is likely it will be political chaos for years to comenoneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition qagain. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times
Brexit is important to millions and as far as support for HMG I am a conservative member and remain as such3 -
It’s true that posting here does require a degree of intelligence and judgement.Big_G_NorthWales said:
i would suggest it is dominated by pro EU remain posters more than specifically left wingMexicanpete said:
If you think this site is predominantly left wing you are not paying attention. BluestBlue, Sandpit, Casino, Square root, LadyG, Pagan, etc, etc will all be along later.Big_G_NorthWales said:I cannot understand why HMG leads in the polls other than most on this forum do not reflect the public view
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1283554382433464320?s=09
(although Eadric et al et al et al often do their best to prove me wrong...)2 -
And that tells us what exactly for a GE four years away?Big_G_NorthWales said:I cannot understand why HMG leads in the polls other than most on this forum do not reflect the public view
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1283554382433464320?s=09
If it's, steady as she goes, Johnson and his team are doing a good job, you may be disappointed down the line.
On a more positive note for your boy. It does look like he backed the right horse in the vaccine stakes. If that does come to pass, hats off to him.0 -
I know it's the Daily Mail but it's a link everyone can read
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8527855/One-three-firms-preparing-lay-staff-furlough-ends-October.html
A chamber of commerce survey shows that a 1/3 of firms are planning to lay people off.
And that's just due to low demand due to Covid...0 -
Which Rifkind?IanB2 said:R4: Tory Rifkind accusing the PM of “total incompetence“ over the security committee.
If he has succeeded it would have “destroyed the whole purpose of the intelligence committee”.
Calls for whoever was advising him to be sacked.
Rifkind says PM blocked the Russia report not because of its contents but out of spite because Dominic Grieve did the work on it.
The disgraced former MP for Edinburgh Pentland (and then in exile somewhere in Londonshire)?
Or the young one who does Radio 4 comedy?0 -
Vaccine: reminds me of 1955/6 and the race to get a one for Polio. The US and Uk had produced something, then the first had to be withdrawn and the second was delayed, due to over optimism. I was at school and parents had been told the UK one would be available. But that went wrong so we were offered a vaccine from Canada that appeared tried and tested. We all had that one which worked.. It is a salutory lesson in US and UK thinking they are best. It is places that do things quietly that are best. Again Canada seems to have handled the virus much better than ourselves. See they are keeping the border with US closed for another 6 weeks at least!3
-
According to some on here that matters not a jot, as the Conservatives still have a ten point poll lead.eek said:I know it's the Daily Mail but it's a link everyone can read
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8527855/One-three-firms-preparing-lay-staff-furlough-ends-October.html
A chamber of commerce survey shows that a 1/3 of firms are planning to lay people off.
And that's just due to low demand due to Covid...2 -
Good point. We’ll start paying attention to the thermometers when the dust begins to clear.Jonathan said:
We’re in the middle of a national crisis. If they had done polls in 1940, Chamberlain would have been miles ahead even through the Norway debate.Big_G_NorthWales said:I cannot understand why HMG leads in the polls other than most on this forum do not reflect the public view
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1283554382433464320?s=090 -
I am picking up that experts in the field have big concerns about short-cutting the approvals process for Covid-19 vaccines. See eg here and here on a quick Google search. Drug approvals typically take a decade or so from initial research to full adoption with several years in Phase 3 trials. Time is a precaution to allow issues to be shaken out.
The basic issue I think is that a drug powerful enough to have the desired medical effect is powerful enough to have adverse effects too and these aren't well understood, hence the need for trials. A one in a thousand patient effect could easily be missed in an abbreviated trial but if we are going to vaccinate an entire population of the size of the UK in one go on one vaccine that would result in 50 000 patients affected.
There will be a lot of pressure on authorities to approve these vaccines quickly, particularly if governments have already bought up a specific vaccine ahead of approval that they strongly intend to use. There is also an element of trust here because if people have the slightest doubt about the safety of the vaccine, they won't take it, ensuring herd immunity won't be reached.
There is a tension between achieving a herd immunity quickly through vaccination and ensuring confidence in the safety of the vaccine.3 -
I'm sceptical that any report compiled by MPs will be filled with forensic, technical detail.IanB2 said:R4: Tory Rifkind accusing the PM of “total incompetence“ over the security committee.
If he has succeeded it would have “destroyed the whole purpose of the intelligence committee”.
Calls for whoever was advising him to be sacked.
Rifkind says PM blocked the Russia report not because of its contents but out of spite because Dominic Grieve did the work on it.1 -
You shouldn't speak ill of (by LadyG.'s account) of the departed.IanB2 said:
It’s true that posting here does require a degree of intelligence and judgement.Big_G_NorthWales said:
i would suggest it is dominated by pro EU remain posters more than specifically left wingMexicanpete said:
If you think this site is predominantly left wing you are not paying attention. BluestBlue, Sandpit, Casino, Square root, LadyG, Pagan, etc, etc will all be along later.Big_G_NorthWales said:I cannot understand why HMG leads in the polls other than most on this forum do not reflect the public view
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1283554382433464320?s=09
(although Eadric et al et al et al often do their best to prove me wrong...)0 -
The Tories will have a lead until they no longer do.Mexicanpete said:
According to some on here that matters not a jot, as the Conservatives still have a ten point poll lead.eek said:I know it's the Daily Mail but it's a link everyone can read
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8527855/One-three-firms-preparing-lay-staff-furlough-ends-October.html
A chamber of commerce survey shows that a 1/3 of firms are planning to lay people off.
And that's just due to low demand due to Covid...
And the election is 4 years away so they can do a lot in that time.
The bit I'm really waiting for is when it dawns on Cummings and co that the best way to win the 2024 election would be to ensure 59 MPs no longer sit in Parliament.0 -
Doesn’t seem to be working for Trump, though.StuartDickson said:
Good point. We’ll start paying attention to the thermometers when the dust begins to clear.Jonathan said:
We’re in the middle of a national crisis. If they had done polls in 1940, Chamberlain would have been miles ahead even through the Norway debate.Big_G_NorthWales said:I cannot understand why HMG leads in the polls other than most on this forum do not reflect the public view
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1283554382433464320?s=090 -
Note also that most of those polled do not reflect the "public view" if that means support for the government. They are well clear of Labour still, but dont have majority support, so if this site is representative it should indeed have more critics than loyalists to the govt (particularly once you include the critics who still feel Tories are the best option).Big_G_NorthWales said:I cannot understand why HMG leads in the polls other than most on this forum do not reflect the public view
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1283554382433464320?s=090 -
He doesn't care. He's wanted to be PM his whole life and now that he's here everyone should be supporting the amazing job that he's doing. We shouldn't be providing scrutiny or asking questions or having doubts, we should just be agreeing with Him and supporting Him and don't you know who He is. He has a majority ofLostPassword said:I thought Parliamentary committees were supposed to try to avoid being overtly party political? It's incredibly damaging for Johnson to try to enforce party discipline by removing the Tory whip from Julian Lewis.
A degree of independence from backbench MPs has always been a feature of the Westminster system, and we can see now that Johnson is determined to squeeze any independence out of his party on all matters, not just Brexit.
It's a very dangerous development for our political system.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jul/15/chris-grayling-fails-to-become-intelligence-and-security-chair8078 and according to chief impartiality officer HYUFD that means he should do whatever he likes to ensurethe prosperity of the countrythe future electoral prospects of the Conservative Party.
We know that Dom wants to reshape the system in his own Compo image. Perhaps that means we will see the parliamentarians banished to York so that He can simply rule by edict.1 -
If that is a pop at me it is just so wrongMexicanpete said:
According to some on here that matters not a jot, as the Conservatives still have a ten point poll lead.eek said:I know it's the Daily Mail but it's a link everyone can read
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8527855/One-three-firms-preparing-lay-staff-furlough-ends-October.html
A chamber of commerce survey shows that a 1/3 of firms are planning to lay people off.
And that's just due to low demand due to Covid...
I have consistently supported the return to work and warned that prolonged lockdown will see thousands of job loses, each one a crisis for someone
Indeed it looks like a member of my family is going to be affected shortly
To suggest it does not matter to me or my family is just unjustified0 -
I am not sure I am with you. Are you suggesting a spot of gerrymandering might be in order?eek said:
The Tories will have a lead until they no longer do.Mexicanpete said:
According to some on here that matters not a jot, as the Conservatives still have a ten point poll lead.eek said:I know it's the Daily Mail but it's a link everyone can read
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8527855/One-three-firms-preparing-lay-staff-furlough-ends-October.html
A chamber of commerce survey shows that a 1/3 of firms are planning to lay people off.
And that's just due to low demand due to Covid...
And the election is 4 years away so they can do a lot in that time.
The bit I'm really waiting for is when it dawns on Cummings and co that the best way to win the 2024 election would be to ensure 59 MPs no longer sit in Parliament.1 -
Boris is not my boy and I look on with dismay at some of the decisions.Mexicanpete said:
And that tells us what exactly for a GE four years away?Big_G_NorthWales said:I cannot understand why HMG leads in the polls other than most on this forum do not reflect the public view
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1283554382433464320?s=09
If it's, steady as she goes, Johnson and his team are doing a good job, you may be disappointed down the line.
On a more positive note for your boy. It does look like he backed the right horse in the vaccine stakes. If that does come to pass, hats off to him.
Indeed I called it a shambles earlier today
0 -
I wonder what the proportion is normally, its probably higher than people think, maybe 20-25% of firms cutting jobs each year?eek said:I know it's the Daily Mail but it's a link everyone can read
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8527855/One-three-firms-preparing-lay-staff-furlough-ends-October.html
A chamber of commerce survey shows that a 1/3 of firms are planning to lay people off.
And that's just due to low demand due to Covid...0 -
The only problem for the Democrats is the trap they fell into last time. They hate Trump so much they become hysterical. Yes, he's a moron, but they have become children. I still watch CNN but it's become 'the bitch continually at Trump for being alive' channel.
They've become cartoon characters themselves. Joe may win, but it wil be narrower than it shoud be. In the end, that was Corbyn's problem. He couldn't shake off the juvenile hatred that permeated his campaign.1 -
Why the insultseek said:
Why do you spend so long trying to justify to people why you remain conservative member. To me it just shows that you aren't bright enough to see that the Tory party has become UKIP without Farage...Big_G_NorthWales said:
I have never been on the street and nor would IJonathan said:
You use Brexit as a device to close your eyes and switch off your brain. If Corbyn has done half the things this government has done you would be on the street. Brexit is more important to you than it is to me, the figleaf that justifies your support for this shambles.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Still brexitJonathan said:
No, I mean they undermined May by repeatedly opposing BrexitM seeded chaos in the commons and then got into office and unlawfully closed parliament, lied to the Queen and then got an elected on a promise to deliver an oven ready Brexit, which has since proven to be yet another lie.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You mean they won brexit and you do not like brexitJonathan said:
Boris/Cummings have consistently been the source of chaos these past four years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is likely it will be political chaos for years to comenoneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition qagain. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times
Brexit is important to millions and as far as support for HMG I am a conservative member and remain as such0 -
What do you define UKIP without Farage as though?eek said:
Why do you spend so long trying to justify to people why you remain conservative member. To me it just shows that you aren't bright enough to see that the Tory party has become UKIP without Farage...Big_G_NorthWales said:
I have never been on the street and nor would IJonathan said:
You use Brexit as a device to close your eyes and switch off your brain. If Corbyn has done half the things this government has done you would be on the street. Brexit is more important to you than it is to me, the figleaf that justifies your support for this shambles.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Still brexitJonathan said:
No, I mean they undermined May by repeatedly opposing BrexitM seeded chaos in the commons and then got into office and unlawfully closed parliament, lied to the Queen and then got an elected on a promise to deliver an oven ready Brexit, which has since proven to be yet another lie.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You mean they won brexit and you do not like brexitJonathan said:
Boris/Cummings have consistently been the source of chaos these past four years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is likely it will be political chaos for years to comenoneoftheabove said:
Or a coalition. Or get elected twice more and delay the process for ten years. Or a hung parliament with no govt able to be formed and a second election straight away. Or.......the possibilities are endless, none are individually predictable or particularly likely.Nigelb said:
By the end of this parliament, the Tories might be ready for a long spell in opposition qagain. Or pull off another 1992, and delay the process for five more years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The government is a shambles and how it leads in the polls I do not knowNigelb said:(FPT)
The chief whip had no business being involved in the election of the committee chair in the first place.Charles said:
According to the BBC he lied to the Chief Whip. A parliamentary party only works as a collaboration. If someone doesn’t play by the rules they can’t be in the partyRichard_Tyndall said:
I think you mean he followed the rules and allowed the committee to choose its own chairman rather than being dictated to by the Government.Charles said:
Lewis didn’t just vote for another candidate. He conspired with the opposition and broke ranksNickPalmer said:
Interesting. When I was put on the Treasury Select Committee, a rival to the favoured Labour chair asked for my support, and I said I'd consider it. The Chief Whip, Nick Brown, asked me in and pleaded with me to support the favoured candidate (which I eventually did). It wasn't strictly proper for him to have a view at all, but he certainly didn't threaten expulsion if I didn't do what he said. In fact I don't remember any examples of that threat being made to anyone.bigjohnowls said:
Cummings is a complete fascistScott_xP said:
Lewis is a cold warrior of the old school - I'd expect him to be stern on China. But he's also an independent mind, and the Government seems unkeen on those. Ironically, this restores the tradition (hitherto respected by both parties) that no one party has a majority on that committee.
In an ideal world the Speaker would be calling Johnson to parliament and asking him to explain his unparliamentary behaviour.
The government gets to appoint the committee members from its own party; its gets to vet and approve all nominated opposition members. Once that is done, it is supposed to be entirely hands off.
As Grieve noted last night, the committee issues all its reports unanimously; it has to operate by consensus, There is no room for party politics in its operation.
And I still remain a loyal member but do despair at times
Brexit is important to millions and as far as support for HMG I am a conservative member and remain as such
If you simply mean pro Brexit then that's a meaningless tautology.1
This discussion has been closed.