It is hard to see Old Bexley & Sidcup being other than a comfortable CON hold – politicalbetting.com
The Old Bexley & Sidcup by-election has been scheduled for Thursday 2nd December.Here's everything you need to know: pic.twitter.com/n7odqIYwrj
Comments
-
First.0
-
I think this might be closer than Mike expects.0
-
Cup of Tea with Number 3.0
-
Would anyone be able write a header about what France may be like if Le Pen or similar wins the Presidential election next year?
0 -
"since the referendum the party has found it difficult to flourish outside areas that did not vote Remain."
-> Since the coalition the party has found it difficult.0 -
Good morning everybody.
Wonder why OB&S was so heavily for Leave. Agree that under the circumstances. it doesn't seem fertile LD territory, but I expect quite a low turnout, unless someone can find a 'firework' local issue.0 -
If Le Pen or similar wins, that strategy will be a busted flush....rcs1000 said:
You mean, all the big changes likely if a narcissistic French person who like picking fights with the English becomes President?MattW said:Would anyone be able write a header about what France may be like if Le Pen or similar wins the Presidential election next year?
0 -
If Le Pen or similar wins the fox will be in the Brussels hen house and no mistake.0
-
Is it a mistake in a Leave seat for the Cons candidate to be French.0
-
Not really. Le Pen has made progress by moderating her views on the European Union.OldKingCole said:If Le Pen or similar wins the fox will be in the Brussels hen house and no mistake.
I would expect Le Pen-ite France would be an uncomfortable neighbour for southern England.0 -
I hope you are right, but I'm not a very Merry Old Soul this morning! Had some bad news about a medical procedure yesterday.Foxy said:
Not really. Le Pen has made progress by moderating her views on the European Union.OldKingCole said:If Le Pen or similar wins the fox will be in the Brussels hen house and no mistake.
0 -
They couldn't get the rectal camera back out?OldKingCole said:
I hope you are right, but I'm not a very Merry Old Soul this morning! Had some bad news about a medical procedure yesterday.Foxy said:
Not really. Le Pen has made progress by moderating her views on the European Union.OldKingCole said:If Le Pen or similar wins the fox will be in the Brussels hen house and no mistake.
0 -
Scrolling through the comments last night, surely Hyufd didn't mean to say corruption was fine as long as sufficient numbers of MPs approve of it?
I mean - seriously?8 -
LOL. Not quite; once had a nasty experience with one of those though, with the consultant and the junior arguing about exactly where the probe ought to be. While the thing was inside me! "Well push it up a bit further and move it about!" was one of the remarks made.DecrepiterJohnL said:
They couldn't get the rectal camera back out?OldKingCole said:
I hope you are right, but I'm not a very Merry Old Soul this morning! Had some bad news about a medical procedure yesterday.Foxy said:
Not really. Le Pen has made progress by moderating her views on the European Union.OldKingCole said:If Le Pen or similar wins the fox will be in the Brussels hen house and no mistake.
5 -
Wow, these threads are coming thick and fast. Barely time to go off topic.
Some really good medical news for a change: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59148620 The HPV vaccine has cut cervical cancer rates by nearly 90%. I think that the government should be making a fuss about this as yet another example of vaccines saving lives. I know that this is approaching anti vaxxers with reason which is probably futile but its got to be worth a go.11 -
That is the party line...ydoethur said:Scrolling through the comments last night, surely Hyufd didn't mean to say corruption was fine as long as sufficient numbers of MPs approve of it?
I mean - seriously?
Kwarteng gives strong hint the commissioner Kathryn Stone should resign:
"It's difficult to see what the future of the commissioner is, given the fact we are overturning and trying to reform the process".
https://twitter.com/tamcohen/status/14561583024091996170 -
I used to teach for many yearsin nearby Dartford and many of our students- much of the constituency is lower-middle/upper-working class. No 'liberal' tradition that I recall. It stayed blue throughout the Blair years so it would be an unlikely loss. I'd expect a lowish turnout.0
-
Sorry to hear that. Hope you get better news soon.OldKingCole said:
I hope you are right, but I'm not a very Merry Old Soul this morning! Had some bad news about a medical procedure yesterday.Foxy said:
Not really. Le Pen has made progress by moderating her views on the European Union.OldKingCole said:If Le Pen or similar wins the fox will be in the Brussels hen house and no mistake.
1 -
This is where populism gets you.ydoethur said:Scrolling through the comments last night, surely Hyufd didn't mean to say corruption was fine as long as sufficient numbers of MPs approve of it?
I mean - seriously?
Morality, like sanity, is purely statistical.
If you have the votes, you can do whatever you damn well please.9 -
At the moment Macron is like Lord Cardigan:rcs1000 said:
You mean, all the big changes likely if a narcissistic French person who like picking fights with the English becomes President?MattW said:Would anyone be able write a header about what France may be like if Le Pen or similar wins the Presidential election next year?
Rightists to the right of him
Rightists to the left of him
Rightists on all sides of him
He gibbered and chundered ...
Which I think is driving his Putinesque behaviour.
Macron is putting out that he is doing it all to defend all the other members of the EU.
But I'm interested in the impact on France, us, and the EU, if there was a very different government in Paris.0 -
A sane and honest government would be quite nice.MattW said:
At the moment Macron is like Lord Cardigan:rcs1000 said:
You mean, all the big changes likely if a narcissistic French person who like picking fights with the English becomes President?MattW said:Would anyone be able write a header about what France may be like if Le Pen or similar wins the Presidential election next year?
Rightists to the right of him
Rightists to the left of him
Rightists on all sides of him
He gibbered and chundered ...
Which I think is driving his Putinesque behaviour.
Macron is putting out that he is doing it all to defend all the other members of the EU.
But I'm interested in the impact on France, us, and the EU, if there was a very different government in Paris.
I just can't think of the last time there was one in France.0 -
He did. Also that its not corruption as the finding of corruption by the independent standards panel was apparently rendered null and void by the vote.ydoethur said:Scrolling through the comments last night, surely Hyufd didn't mean to say corruption was fine as long as sufficient numbers of MPs approve of it?
I mean - seriously?
Absurd. Even Charles is calling it corruption and he was loathe to call out all of the previous Tory corruption.
Its the front page of the Daily Mail. The top of all the news bulletins. Remember the expenses scandal? That was also "obscure parliamentary procedure" but it ran and ran and ran. Why - because of the clear sense of right and wrong.
What happened last night is wrong. You don't need to put it through a partisan filter for that judgement - its wrong. And the dripping sneering arrogance of the Tory party - loathsome Leadsom on C4 News, HYUFD on here, Paterson saying "I'd do it all again".
And there's more. People didn't really poke the stick too hard at connections between donations to Tory HQ and MPs and the awarding of vast contracts without tender, peerages, planning consent etc etc etc. Paterson is so outrageous in waving his shilling for Randox that I expect the rest of it to be given another run over by the media as this story continues to have legs.
HYUFD can foam on about voters, but all that is needed to remove this disgrace of a government from office is Tory voters abstaining. They don't need to be persuaded to vote Starmer or Davey or Farage or anyone else. Just to stay at home.12 -
I understand that she has refused to do so.Scott_xP said:
That is the party line...ydoethur said:Scrolling through the comments last night, surely Hyufd didn't mean to say corruption was fine as long as sufficient numbers of MPs approve of it?
I mean - seriously?
Kwarteng gives strong hint the commissioner Kathryn Stone should resign:
"It's difficult to see what the future of the commissioner is, given the fact we are overturning and trying to reform the process".
https://twitter.com/tamcohen/status/1456158302409199617
It's getting a bit like Poland. Only government approved judges permitted, and only as long as they facilitate government corruption.2 -
She should indict every MP who voted for Paterson to be let off for corruption as well. Just for shits and giggles.Foxy said:
I understand that she has refused to do so.Scott_xP said:
That is the party line...ydoethur said:Scrolling through the comments last night, surely Hyufd didn't mean to say corruption was fine as long as sufficient numbers of MPs approve of it?
I mean - seriously?
Kwarteng gives strong hint the commissioner Kathryn Stone should resign:
"It's difficult to see what the future of the commissioner is, given the fact we are overturning and trying to reform the process".
https://twitter.com/tamcohen/status/1456158302409199617
It's getting a bit like Poland. Only government approved judges permitted, and only as long as they facilitate government corruption.0 -
In less good news 40 countries vow to give up coal but these do not include China, India or the US, which makes it all kind of pointless: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-59159018
0 -
I wrote this in May, about the Conservative Party's decision that it no longer cared about right and wrong, only polling.
https://thecritic.co.uk/nothing-matters-to-careless-people/
1 -
She'd be handing out free kayaks at Grande-Synthe.Foxy said:
Not really. Le Pen has made progress by moderating her views on the European Union.OldKingCole said:If Le Pen or similar wins the fox will be in the Brussels hen house and no mistake.
I would expect Le Pen-ite France would be an uncomfortable neighbour for southern England.0 -
The obvious reason that Tories want to kick into touch any serious sanction for paid lobbying for commercial interests is that Owen Paterson was only the tip of the iceberg. Many others, right up to the top of government have their snouts in the same trough.RochdalePioneers said:
He did. Also that its not corruption as the finding of corruption by the independent standards panel was apparently rendered null and void by the vote.ydoethur said:Scrolling through the comments last night, surely Hyufd didn't mean to say corruption was fine as long as sufficient numbers of MPs approve of it?
I mean - seriously?
Absurd. Even Charles is calling it corruption and he was loathe to call out all of the previous Tory corruption.
Its the front page of the Daily Mail. The top of all the news bulletins. Remember the expenses scandal? That was also "obscure parliamentary procedure" but it ran and ran and ran. Why - because of the clear sense of right and wrong.
What happened last night is wrong. You don't need to put it through a partisan filter for that judgement - its wrong. And the dripping sneering arrogance of the Tory party - loathsome Leadsom on C4 News, HYUFD on here, Paterson saying "I'd do it all again".
And there's more. People didn't really poke the stick too hard at connections between donations to Tory HQ and MPs and the awarding of vast contracts without tender, peerages, planning consent etc etc etc. Paterson is so outrageous in waving his shilling for Randox that I expect the rest of it to be given another run over by the media as this story continues to have legs.
HYUFD can foam on about voters, but all that is needed to remove this disgrace of a government from office is Tory voters abstaining. They don't need to be persuaded to vote Starmer or Davey or Farage or anyone else. Just to stay at home.5 -
It might be nice to have one here too.ydoethur said:
A sane and honest government would be quite nice.MattW said:
At the moment Macron is like Lord Cardigan:rcs1000 said:
You mean, all the big changes likely if a narcissistic French person who like picking fights with the English becomes President?MattW said:Would anyone be able write a header about what France may be like if Le Pen or similar wins the Presidential election next year?
Rightists to the right of him
Rightists to the left of him
Rightists on all sides of him
He gibbered and chundered ...
Which I think is driving his Putinesque behaviour.
Macron is putting out that he is doing it all to defend all the other members of the EU.
But I'm interested in the impact on France, us, and the EU, if there was a very different government in Paris.
I just can't think of the last time there was one in France.7 -
I've had a scan through the various Daily Mail stories and the best rated comments.
Wow.
HYUFD really needs to watch it. The Tory Party is getting eviscerated by Tory supporters in a Tory newspaper. The idea that the corrupt and their shills are in the right and the parliamentary commissioner is wrong is laughable.2 -
Le Pen and Zemmour would both act as Putins useful idiots, so if you think of what would Vladimir want, you will be pretty close to it. Withdrawal from NATO for example.MattW said:
At the moment Macron is like Lord Cardigan:rcs1000 said:
You mean, all the big changes likely if a narcissistic French person who like picking fights with the English becomes President?MattW said:Would anyone be able write a header about what France may be like if Le Pen or similar wins the Presidential election next year?
Rightists to the right of him
Rightists to the left of him
Rightists on all sides of him
He gibbered and chundered ...
Which I think is driving his Putinesque behaviour.
Macron is putting out that he is doing it all to defend all the other members of the EU.
But I'm interested in the impact on France, us, and the EU, if there was a very different government in Paris.
Bertrand etc would be more traditional Gaullists.0 -
The DM has been eviscerating this government ever since the change of editor. Doesn't mean that they are not right about this one, of course.RochdalePioneers said:I've had a scan through the various Daily Mail stories and the best rated comments.
Wow.
HYUFD really needs to watch it. The Tory Party is getting eviscerated by Tory supporters in a Tory newspaper. The idea that the corrupt and their shills are in the right and the parliamentary commissioner is wrong is laughable.2 -
Well, yes, the thought had occurredFoxy said:
It might be nice to have one here too.ydoethur said:
A sane and honest government would be quite nice.MattW said:
At the moment Macron is like Lord Cardigan:rcs1000 said:
You mean, all the big changes likely if a narcissistic French person who like picking fights with the English becomes President?MattW said:Would anyone be able write a header about what France may be like if Le Pen or similar wins the Presidential election next year?
Rightists to the right of him
Rightists to the left of him
Rightists on all sides of him
He gibbered and chundered ...
Which I think is driving his Putinesque behaviour.
Macron is putting out that he is doing it all to defend all the other members of the EU.
But I'm interested in the impact on France, us, and the EU, if there was a very different government in Paris.
I just can't think of the last time there was one in France.
0 -
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/aug/05/the-guardian-view-on-tory-party-funding-shine-the-lightFoxy said:
The obvious reason that Tories want to kick into touch any serious sanction for paid lobbying for commercial interests is that Owen Paterson was only the tip of the iceberg. Many others, right up to the top of government have their snouts in the same trough.RochdalePioneers said:
He did. Also that its not corruption as the finding of corruption by the independent standards panel was apparently rendered null and void by the vote.ydoethur said:Scrolling through the comments last night, surely Hyufd didn't mean to say corruption was fine as long as sufficient numbers of MPs approve of it?
I mean - seriously?
Absurd. Even Charles is calling it corruption and he was loathe to call out all of the previous Tory corruption.
Its the front page of the Daily Mail. The top of all the news bulletins. Remember the expenses scandal? That was also "obscure parliamentary procedure" but it ran and ran and ran. Why - because of the clear sense of right and wrong.
What happened last night is wrong. You don't need to put it through a partisan filter for that judgement - its wrong. And the dripping sneering arrogance of the Tory party - loathsome Leadsom on C4 News, HYUFD on here, Paterson saying "I'd do it all again".
And there's more. People didn't really poke the stick too hard at connections between donations to Tory HQ and MPs and the awarding of vast contracts without tender, peerages, planning consent etc etc etc. Paterson is so outrageous in waving his shilling for Randox that I expect the rest of it to be given another run over by the media as this story continues to have legs.
HYUFD can foam on about voters, but all that is needed to remove this disgrace of a government from office is Tory voters abstaining. They don't need to be persuaded to vote Starmer or Davey or Farage or anyone else. Just to stay at home.
The whole Tory party is funded on a pay for access model. It is blatantly corrupt. Poor old Neil Hamilton and his brown envelopes of cash seem almost quaint by comparison.3 -
Its the full Hailsham. An elective dictatorship where the public elect a government who can then run rampant all over long established standards and principles whilst saying "we won, get over it". And even worse than when Mr Hogg first proposed it existed, said government remains popular, seemingly rewarded for their actions in trashing natural justice, propriety and decency.Foxy said:
The obvious reason that Tories want to kick into touch any serious sanction for paid lobbying for commercial interests is that Owen Paterson was only the tip of the iceberg. Many others, right up to the top of government have their snouts in the same trough.RochdalePioneers said:
He did. Also that its not corruption as the finding of corruption by the independent standards panel was apparently rendered null and void by the vote.ydoethur said:Scrolling through the comments last night, surely Hyufd didn't mean to say corruption was fine as long as sufficient numbers of MPs approve of it?
I mean - seriously?
Absurd. Even Charles is calling it corruption and he was loathe to call out all of the previous Tory corruption.
Its the front page of the Daily Mail. The top of all the news bulletins. Remember the expenses scandal? That was also "obscure parliamentary procedure" but it ran and ran and ran. Why - because of the clear sense of right and wrong.
What happened last night is wrong. You don't need to put it through a partisan filter for that judgement - its wrong. And the dripping sneering arrogance of the Tory party - loathsome Leadsom on C4 News, HYUFD on here, Paterson saying "I'd do it all again".
And there's more. People didn't really poke the stick too hard at connections between donations to Tory HQ and MPs and the awarding of vast contracts without tender, peerages, planning consent etc etc etc. Paterson is so outrageous in waving his shilling for Randox that I expect the rest of it to be given another run over by the media as this story continues to have legs.
HYUFD can foam on about voters, but all that is needed to remove this disgrace of a government from office is Tory voters abstaining. They don't need to be persuaded to vote Starmer or Davey or Farage or anyone else. Just to stay at home.6 -
At the risk of being accused of being a hypocrite the Today programme was reporting this morning that the flight Boris took yesterday for an urgent meeting was to have dinner with OP's mate.0
-
I'm less interested by what the Heil is saying and more by what their readers are saying. An editor and his team can desperately try to push a line, the question is can they carry the readership with them. On this one they appear to be fully supported by Tory-voting readers with their attacks.DavidL said:
The DM has been eviscerating this government ever since the change of editor. Doesn't mean that they are not right about this one, of course.RochdalePioneers said:I've had a scan through the various Daily Mail stories and the best rated comments.
Wow.
HYUFD really needs to watch it. The Tory Party is getting eviscerated by Tory supporters in a Tory newspaper. The idea that the corrupt and their shills are in the right and the parliamentary commissioner is wrong is laughable.0 -
Politwoops can be such a useful resource on mornings like this. Lucy Allan MP was up very early this morning, deleting a whole bunch of tweets. https://www.politwoops.co.uk/p/conservative/lucyallan This one, to @RhonddaBryant, was beyond outrageous. https://twitter.com/rhodri/status/1456164541612580869/photo/10
-
Chris Bryant, Labour MP and chairman of the committee on standards, says the actions of Owen Paterson is the "definition of corruption" #today
https://twitter.com/kateferguson4/status/14561646437858222080 -
This image sums it up.
1 -
Cabinet Minister makes clear yesterday's vote was (at least in part) about forcing the anti-sleaze Tsar out of her job https://twitter.com/tamcohen/status/14561583024091996170
-
Written in May so that would have been, what, after wallpapergate? A couple of sentences from your link:-Scott_xP said:I wrote this in May, about the Conservative Party's decision that it no longer cared about right and wrong, only polling.
https://thecritic.co.uk/nothing-matters-to-careless-people/
It ought to trouble the Tories that they appear to be acting in precisely the way Labour would like to portray them: rich people doing favours for their rich friends, lining their pockets and living lives of reckless extravagance while pensioners are dying alone in care homes.
Conservatives ought to be able to say, with more confidence than they are at the moment, that their leader is an honest man who acted within both the letter and the spirit of the law. That used to be the sort of thing that mattered. But it’s a different party now.0 -
Is this personal for Boris Johnson? Stone has investigated him 3 times and is about to decide whether to launch a 4th into Downing St flat refurb - after the Electoral Commission reports back on the wallpaper saga https://twitter.com/johnestevens/status/14561624863281684492
-
Ultimately every country has to give up coal, which includes the 40 who have promised to do so, which makes this a step forward.DavidL said:In less good news 40 countries vow to give up coal but these do not include China, India or the US, which makes it all kind of pointless: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-59159018
I'd have liked countries to move as fast as technically possible on coal, rather than as fast as economically inevitable - but the economics is going to see off coal now, and I think we'll end up being surprised at how fast the transition ends up being. The news on solar in India is really positive: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/03/indias-huge-uptake-in-solar-is-driving-more-ambitious-climate-goals-says-minister0 -
Sorry to hear. All ok?OldKingCole said:
I hope you are right, but I'm not a very Merry Old Soul this morning! Had some bad news about a medical procedure yesterday.Foxy said:
Not really. Le Pen has made progress by moderating her views on the European Union.OldKingCole said:If Le Pen or similar wins the fox will be in the Brussels hen house and no mistake.
1 -
The Guardian has a fairly good analysis of why Paterson claims the rules didn't apply to him:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/nov/03/owen-paterson-his-claims-and-how-they-stack-up-in-analysis
His argument lacks credibility, to put it mildly. Effectively he's arguing that if an MP believes he's exempt from the rules, that should be the end of the matter.
And it is not an argument which would be significantly altered by any witness statements. The essential facts of the case are not in dispute.1 -
Looks like Leon's "skirts" story has made the press:
1 -
I might be a whole lot more impressed if ..... the only Parliament without any official register of lobbyists, or any restriction on lobbying, is the one that Llafur control.Scott_xP said:Chris Bryant, Labour MP and chairman of the committee on standards, says the actions of Owen Paterson is the "definition of corruption" #today
https://twitter.com/kateferguson4/status/14561646437858222080 -
I'm amazed anyone is surprised about yesterday's vote. As a fish rots from its head, so a political party does from its leader. Corbyn rotted the Labour Party; Johnson's doing the same for the Conservatives.
Johnson has a long history of avoiding any inquiries into his actions. The Garden Bridge debacle is typical: a vainunglorious project, wanted by few except him and his sycophants, with little useful purpose, and which wasted £43 million of public money. He did not cooperate with the inquiry, preferring to ignore and debase it.
I'm unsurprised his party is making this move now. I have some sympathy for Owen Paterson; the actions of his party overwhelm the sympathy. There may be problems with the defined processes; there may be problems with the way Paterson's case was handled. Even if those are both true, that truth will be lose beneath the stinking slurry of yesterday's vote, and those MPs who are swimming in the pigswill.4 -
This is really the problem, as many Tory MPs, never mind Labour, said yesterday. The evidence plainly suggests he is guilty, not innocent. of breaking the rules, and however much he moans there is not some secret third option for ruling on what he did https://twitter.com/aljwhite/status/14561681399270031371
-
It's very good news, since it sets out a realistic development model without coal. And as you say, increased investment will create a virtuous circle of cheaper/more efficient renewables.LostPassword said:
Ultimately every country has to give up coal, which includes the 40 who have promised to do so, which makes this a step forward.DavidL said:In less good news 40 countries vow to give up coal but these do not include China, India or the US, which makes it all kind of pointless: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-59159018
I'd have liked countries to move as fast as technically possible on coal, rather than as fast as economically inevitable - but the economics is going to see off coal now, and I think we'll end up being surprised at how fast the transition ends up being. The news on solar in India is really positive: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/03/indias-huge-uptake-in-solar-is-driving-more-ambitious-climate-goals-says-minister0 -
Despite the protestations in the Commons that this vote was solely about introducing an appeal process.Scott_xP said:Cabinet Minister makes clear yesterday's vote was (at least in part) about forcing the anti-sleaze Tsar out of her job https://twitter.com/tamcohen/status/1456158302409199617
Bait and switch is a favoured technique of grifters.3 -
Edouard Balladurydoethur said:
A sane and honest government would be quite nice.MattW said:
At the moment Macron is like Lord Cardigan:rcs1000 said:
You mean, all the big changes likely if a narcissistic French person who like picking fights with the English becomes President?MattW said:Would anyone be able write a header about what France may be like if Le Pen or similar wins the Presidential election next year?
Rightists to the right of him
Rightists to the left of him
Rightists on all sides of him
He gibbered and chundered ...
Which I think is driving his Putinesque behaviour.
Macron is putting out that he is doing it all to defend all the other members of the EU.
But I'm interested in the impact on France, us, and the EU, if there was a very different government in Paris.
I just can't think of the last time there was one in France.0 -
Google suggests there are restrictions in Wales on lobbying, or at least, on being lobbied:-YBarddCwsc said:
I might be a whole lot more impressed if ..... the only Parliament without any official register of lobbyists, or any restriction on lobbying, is the one that Llafur control.Scott_xP said:Chris Bryant, Labour MP and chairman of the committee on standards, says the actions of Owen Paterson is the "definition of corruption" #today
https://twitter.com/kateferguson4/status/1456164643785822208
https://senedd.wales/how-we-work/code-of-conduct-and-associated-rules-and-guidance-for-members-of-the-senedd/section-2-5-guidance-on-lobbying-and-access-to-assembly-members/
0 -
It's almost simpler than that. I am important and serious. What I do is important and serious. Therefore anything I do falls within the serious wrong exception.Nigelb said:The Guardian has a fairly good analysis of why Paterson claims the rules didn't apply to him:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/nov/03/owen-paterson-his-claims-and-how-they-stack-up-in-analysis
His argument lacks credibility, to put it mildly. Effectively he's arguing that if an MP believes he's exempt from the rules, that should be the end of the matter.
And it is not an argument which would be significantly altered by any witness statements. The essential facts of the case are not in dispute.
I am not sure what is the scarier: that someone with so little insight was once a cabinet minister or that Leadsom was once a non joke candidate (at least in some eyes) for the leadership of the Tory party. Its a shameful episode which reduces standards in public life significantly.3 -
You mean the PM might have exploited the plight of a desperate man (OP's greatest sin was being stupid and getting caught) to further his own ends?Scott_xP said:Is this personal for Boris Johnson? Stone has investigated him 3 times and is about to decide whether to launch a 4th into Downing St flat refurb - after the Electoral Commission reports back on the wallpaper saga https://twitter.com/johnestevens/status/1456162486328168449
Say it isn't so.3 -
The party of govt trying to force the sleaze watchdog out of office. How history repeats
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/12140345.anger-as-watchdog-for-mps-loses-her-job-standards-commissioner-ruffled-a-few-feathers/1 -
Bryant was very good on R4 this morning, and the Paterson manoeuvre is looking more shabby than ever3
-
I didn’t call this case corruption because I have no knowledge of the facts.RochdalePioneers said:
He did. Also that its not corruption as the finding of corruption by the independent standards panel was apparently rendered null and void by the vote.ydoethur said:Scrolling through the comments last night, surely Hyufd didn't mean to say corruption was fine as long as sufficient numbers of MPs approve of it?
I mean - seriously?
Absurd. Even Charles is calling it corruption and he was loathe to call out all of the previous Tory corruption.
Its the front page of the Daily Mail. The top of all the news bulletins. Remember the expenses scandal? That was also "obscure parliamentary procedure" but it ran and ran and ran. Why - because of the clear sense of right and wrong.
What happened last night is wrong. You don't need to put it through a partisan filter for that judgement - its wrong. And the dripping sneering arrogance of the Tory party - loathsome Leadsom on C4 News, HYUFD on here, Paterson saying "I'd do it all again".
And there's more. People didn't really poke the stick too hard at connections between donations to Tory HQ and MPs and the awarding of vast contracts without tender, peerages, planning consent etc etc etc. Paterson is so outrageous in waving his shilling for Randox that I expect the rest of it to be given another run over by the media as this story continues to have legs.
HYUFD can foam on about voters, but all that is needed to remove this disgrace of a government from office is Tory voters abstaining. They don't need to be persuaded to vote Starmer or Davey or Farage or anyone else. Just to stay at home.
But I was disturbed by @HYUFD argument that it was all ok because the House had voted it was ok.
The idea of a completely independent body having the ability to suspend elected representatives doesn’t sit well with me. But a system where MPs vote in judgement on their peers falls apart when it becomes partisan. May be you need something like a panel of former Speakers? I don’t see a particularly good way out.1 -
Labour going hard on Kwasi's comments this morning.
Frontbencher Thangam Debbonaire says it "is appalling" the government is "trying to bully the standards commissioner out of her job".
“Boris Johnson must distance himself from these latest attempts to poison British politics." https://twitter.com/kateferguson4/status/14561651331730186361 -
Blimey. That's straying into @Leon territory.OldKingCole said:
LOL. Not quite; once had a nasty experience with one of those though, with the consultant and the junior arguing about exactly where the probe ought to be. While the thing was inside me! "Well push it up a bit further and move it about!" was one of the remarks made.DecrepiterJohnL said:
They couldn't get the rectal camera back out?OldKingCole said:
I hope you are right, but I'm not a very Merry Old Soul this morning! Had some bad news about a medical procedure yesterday.Foxy said:
Not really. Le Pen has made progress by moderating her views on the European Union.OldKingCole said:If Le Pen or similar wins the fox will be in the Brussels hen house and no mistake.
0 -
Hailsham would not have approved of government. It’s not kind to associate his name with themRochdalePioneers said:
Its the full Hailsham. An elective dictatorship where the public elect a government who can then run rampant all over long established standards and principles whilst saying "we won, get over it". And even worse than when Mr Hogg first proposed it existed, said government remains popular, seemingly rewarded for their actions in trashing natural justice, propriety and decency.Foxy said:
The obvious reason that Tories want to kick into touch any serious sanction for paid lobbying for commercial interests is that Owen Paterson was only the tip of the iceberg. Many others, right up to the top of government have their snouts in the same trough.RochdalePioneers said:
He did. Also that its not corruption as the finding of corruption by the independent standards panel was apparently rendered null and void by the vote.ydoethur said:Scrolling through the comments last night, surely Hyufd didn't mean to say corruption was fine as long as sufficient numbers of MPs approve of it?
I mean - seriously?
Absurd. Even Charles is calling it corruption and he was loathe to call out all of the previous Tory corruption.
Its the front page of the Daily Mail. The top of all the news bulletins. Remember the expenses scandal? That was also "obscure parliamentary procedure" but it ran and ran and ran. Why - because of the clear sense of right and wrong.
What happened last night is wrong. You don't need to put it through a partisan filter for that judgement - its wrong. And the dripping sneering arrogance of the Tory party - loathsome Leadsom on C4 News, HYUFD on here, Paterson saying "I'd do it all again".
And there's more. People didn't really poke the stick too hard at connections between donations to Tory HQ and MPs and the awarding of vast contracts without tender, peerages, planning consent etc etc etc. Paterson is so outrageous in waving his shilling for Randox that I expect the rest of it to be given another run over by the media as this story continues to have legs.
HYUFD can foam on about voters, but all that is needed to remove this disgrace of a government from office is Tory voters abstaining. They don't need to be persuaded to vote Starmer or Davey or Farage or anyone else. Just to stay at home.1 -
If this is the primary aim, then I'd suggest the outlook for Paterson is not very good.Stuartinromford said:
You mean the PM might have exploited the plight of a desperate man (OP's greatest sin was being stupid and getting caught) to further his own ends?Scott_xP said:Is this personal for Boris Johnson? Stone has investigated him 3 times and is about to decide whether to launch a 4th into Downing St flat refurb - after the Electoral Commission reports back on the wallpaper saga https://twitter.com/johnestevens/status/1456162486328168449
Say it isn't so.0 -
Paterson's argument is essentially that the loophole that applies to warning about dangers to public health should apply to him, when what he was actually doing was trying to get a competitor's product - competitor to one of the pharma companies who just happened to be paying him £££££, that is - relabelled.Nigelb said:The Guardian has a fairly good analysis of why Paterson claims the rules didn't apply to him:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/nov/03/owen-paterson-his-claims-and-how-they-stack-up-in-analysis
His argument lacks credibility, to put it mildly. Effectively he's arguing that if an MP believes he's exempt from the rules, that should be the end of the matter.
And it is not an argument which would be significantly altered by any witness statements. The essential facts of the case are not in dispute.
As Bryant said this morning, if there was genuinely a risk to public health, how come Paterson as an MP with access to the media did nothing else about it - no speeches, no articles, no other letters, nothing?1 -
While I agree, I think it important to point out that Paterson's claims appear to have no merit.DavidL said:
It's almost simpler than that. I am important and serious. What I do is important and serious. Therefore anything I do falls within the serious wrong exception.Nigelb said:The Guardian has a fairly good analysis of why Paterson claims the rules didn't apply to him:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/nov/03/owen-paterson-his-claims-and-how-they-stack-up-in-analysis
His argument lacks credibility, to put it mildly. Effectively he's arguing that if an MP believes he's exempt from the rules, that should be the end of the matter.
And it is not an argument which would be significantly altered by any witness statements. The essential facts of the case are not in dispute.
I am not sure what is the scarier: that someone with so little insight was once a cabinet minister or that Leadsom was once a non joke candidate (at least in some eyes) for the leadership of the Tory party. Its a shameful episode which reduces standards in public life significantly.
You might make them in the context of the Covid pandemic*, but they are considerably less convincing in the case of paid lobbying to get a competitor's products relabelled.
*Some might recall this.
In March 2020, Randox was awarded a £133 million contract from the Department of Health and Social Care to produce testing kits (at a cost of £49 each)[61] during the coronavirus pandemic without any other firms being given the opportunity to bid for the work.[62] Paterson represented Randox in a call with James Bethell, the minister responsible for awarding contracts to the private sector during the pandemic in April 2020.[61] A further £347 million contract was awarded to Randox six months later without other companies being able to bid...2 -
Attorney General and Solicitor General voted to stop normal disciplinary process against Owen Patterson just as it was about to find him in breach. Flagrant breach of the rule of law. They are supposed to be law officers, with obligations to the law, not just government stooges.
https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/14560357738961715231 -
The Mail, not pulling any punches:
1 -
Betting on the Tories in that local by-election with headlines on polling day like this looks a little brave, even though on paper it should be safe:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-591584580 -
No, that was the sausage company,IanB2 said:
Paterson's argument is essentially that the loophole that applies to warning about dangers to public health should apply to him, when what he was actually doing was trying to get a competitor's product - competitor to one of the pharma companies who just happened to be paying him £££££, that is - relabelled. ...Nigelb said:The Guardian has a fairly good analysis of why Paterson claims the rules didn't apply to him:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/nov/03/owen-paterson-his-claims-and-how-they-stack-up-in-analysis
His argument lacks credibility, to put it mildly. Effectively he's arguing that if an MP believes he's exempt from the rules, that should be the end of the matter.
And it is not an argument which would be significantly altered by any witness statements. The essential facts of the case are not in dispute.
The serious emergency argument appears to be infinitely flexible.
0 -
ConservativeHome’s @PaulGoodmanCH - closely followed in No10 - writes:
There is now no good option for the Prime Minister. The choice is between backing any reform plan advanced by the new Tory-only committee, or not doing so for fear of that slender majority of 18 vanishing
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/14561732653665280000 -
Surely it is in Johnson's interests to be rid of the wretched woman, what with reports on wallpaper and curtains just around the corner.Scott_xP said:Labour going hard on Kwasi's comments this morning.
Frontbencher Thangam Debbonaire says it "is appalling" the government is "trying to bully the standards commissioner out of her job".
“Boris Johnson must distance himself from these latest attempts to poison British politics." https://twitter.com/kateferguson4/status/1456165133173018636
Sack her sorry arse and let John Whittingdale give the Number 10 refurbishment a clean bill of health.0 -
Considering what drove this was serious allegations of a tainted process and that the "Tsar" was prejudiced and unfair, is that really a surprise?Scott_xP said:Cabinet Minister makes clear yesterday's vote was (at least in part) about forcing the anti-sleaze Tsar out of her job https://twitter.com/tamcohen/status/1456158302409199617
If as alleged the process followed was unfair and the "Tsar" was biased then that's an issue, isn't it?0 -
To adapt the famous adage over treason:Nigelb said:
Pretty much that.ydoethur said:Scrolling through the comments last night, surely Hyufd didn't mean to say corruption was fine as long as sufficient numbers of MPs approve of it?
I mean - seriously?
Though his line is that if Tory MPs approve then it's not corruption.
Corruption never prospers, for if it does no-one dare call it corruption.2 -
His case looks pretty flimsy, for all he wants another appeal.tlg86 said:
If this is the primary aim, then I'd suggest the outlook for Paterson is not very good.Stuartinromford said:
You mean the PM might have exploited the plight of a desperate man (OP's greatest sin was being stupid and getting caught) to further his own ends?Scott_xP said:Is this personal for Boris Johnson? Stone has investigated him 3 times and is about to decide whether to launch a 4th into Downing St flat refurb - after the Electoral Commission reports back on the wallpaper saga https://twitter.com/johnestevens/status/1456162486328168449
Say it isn't so.
And it wouldn't exactly be out of character for BoJo to use the (genuine, I think) personal sympathy for OP to get something that will make Johnson's life easier.
The smash'n'grab nature of this vote is classic Bozza.1 -
Am I the only optimist about global warning? The CO2 levels will eventually fall owing to a combination of PR and technology. The Times' dire warning about horse-shit levels in London were superseded by the invention of the motor car with no one nailing themselves to the floor.
Activists never 'do' anything - they perform a mutual onanism ritual to show they are better than the hoi poloi. But they will claim they are the cause. Even the recalcitrant nations will eventually take a bribe to fall into line.
From a scientific point of view, it will be interesting to see how much effect the fall in CO2 has. No one can predict what percentage of global warming is caused by this gas. I won't live to see it but I think I know what will be claimed.
If there's no change - it would have been much worse if we hadn't done it.
If there's little change - we didn't reduce methane and X, Y, and Z. And reducing pollution in the air cooled the atmosphere, but it had to be done.
If there's a large change, the onanists did it all.
Then they'll have to find another six-year-old with a cause.
0 -
Which is to fail to understand the procedure. Chris Bryant explained it during the debate.Philip_Thompson said:
Considering what drove this was serious allegations of a tainted process and that the "Tsar" was prejudiced and unfair, is that really a surprise?Scott_xP said:Cabinet Minister makes clear yesterday's vote was (at least in part) about forcing the anti-sleaze Tsar out of her job https://twitter.com/tamcohen/status/1456158302409199617
If as alleged the process followed was unfair and the "Tsar" was biased then that's an issue, isn't it?
Chris Bryant's closing contribution to the Owen Paterson debate is one of the most quietly effective and damning Commons speeches you'll hear in a while. Worth watching in full.
https://t.co/Wf9RdBpaRk
https://twitter.com/peterwalker99/status/1455928741067214853?t=nuMMRUcqAqTCfZrJRmNdlg&s=193 -
I reckon a few MPs might be regretting not voting No yesterday.Stuartinromford said:
His case looks pretty flimsy, for all he wants another appeal.tlg86 said:
If this is the primary aim, then I'd suggest the outlook for Paterson is not very good.Stuartinromford said:
You mean the PM might have exploited the plight of a desperate man (OP's greatest sin was being stupid and getting caught) to further his own ends?Scott_xP said:Is this personal for Boris Johnson? Stone has investigated him 3 times and is about to decide whether to launch a 4th into Downing St flat refurb - after the Electoral Commission reports back on the wallpaper saga https://twitter.com/johnestevens/status/1456162486328168449
Say it isn't so.
And it wouldn't exactly be out of character for BoJo to use the (genuine, I think) personal sympathy for OP to get something that will make Johnson's life easier.
The smash'n'grab nature of this vote is classic Bozza.2 -
From the doc you linked to:"There is currently no voluntary or statutory scheme for registering professional lobbyists operating in Wales."DecrepiterJohnL said:
Google suggests there are restrictions in Wales on lobbying, or at least, on being lobbied:-YBarddCwsc said:
I might be a whole lot more impressed if ..... the only Parliament without any official register of lobbyists, or any restriction on lobbying, is the one that Llafur control.Scott_xP said:Chris Bryant, Labour MP and chairman of the committee on standards, says the actions of Owen Paterson is the "definition of corruption" #today
https://twitter.com/kateferguson4/status/1456164643785822208
https://senedd.wales/how-we-work/code-of-conduct-and-associated-rules-and-guidance-for-members-of-the-senedd/section-2-5-guidance-on-lobbying-and-access-to-assembly-members/
It is up to the Senedd member to determine whether the person he/she is talking to is a lobbyist. It is self-regulation 😉
Is what Owen Patterson did against the rules of the Senedd ?1 -
Paterson is a venal disgrace but I have a feeling his won't be the only transgression. I would love to see a full audit of EVERY MP'S income. I suspect that would show we are well on the way to having a replica of the corrupt US Senate, where professional politicians obtain huge wealth through outside lobbying. The expenses scandal was possibly the thin end of the wedge.2
-
There was a good article on this in the FT yesterday, and projections. Basically for every degree of warming, 1 billion people have to live in tperatures over 29C. Currently only 58 million do, but on current trajectory 3 billion will by 2070. Most are in Africa, Middle East, India and SE Asia.CD13 said:Am I the only optimist about global warning? The CO2 levels will eventually fall owing to a combination of PR and technology. The Times' dire warning about horse-shit levels in London were superseded by the invention of the motor car with no one nailing themselves to the floor.
Activists never 'do' anything - they perform a mutual onanism ritual to show they are better than the hoi poloi. But they will claim they are the cause. Even the recalcitrant nations will eventually take a bribe to fall into line.
From a scientific point of view, it will be interesting to see how much effect the fall in CO2 has. No one can predict what percentage of global warming is caused by this gas. I won't live to see it but I think I know what will be claimed.
If there's no change - it would have been much worse if we hadn't done it.
If there's little change - we didn't reduce methane and X, Y, and Z. And reducing pollution in the air cooled the atmosphere, but it had to be done.
If there's a large change, the onanists did it all.
Then they'll have to find another six-year-old with a cause.
The penalty for complacency would be a billion or so climate refugees in Europe by 2070.
https://www.ft.com/content/072b5c87-7330-459b-a947-be6767a1099d0 -
Good morning
I just cannot understand why Boris or his advisors thought this was a good idea.
Paterson should take his punishment, and if there is an issue with the procedures then it is sensible to address it in the future
The media say this morning that Paterson's 30 day exclusion has been suspended pending this new procedure but we all know that that is a long way away
@HYUFD comments last night have rightly been called out as I did when he made them
And to add to Parliament's woes Claudia Webbe is to be sentenced today0 -
However if the punishment is a whopping 9 day suspension rather than an outrageously hard ten...no recall!Scott_xP said:This is really the problem, as many Tory MPs, never mind Labour, said yesterday. The evidence plainly suggests he is guilty, not innocent. of breaking the rules, and however much he moans there is not some secret third option for ruling on what he did https://twitter.com/aljwhite/status/1456168139927003137
0 -
Why would someone who voted to reprieve Paterson and neuter the process yesterday change their tune? They can have been under no illusions what it looked like regardless of the butter wouldn't melt in their mouth protestations.Scott_xP said:ConservativeHome’s @PaulGoodmanCH - closely followed in No10 - writes:
There is now no good option for the Prime Minister. The choice is between backing any reform plan advanced by the new Tory-only committee, or not doing so for fear of that slender majority of 18 vanishing
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1456173265366528000
Eyes on the prize - call it the Paterson Principle.0 -
I see Paterson is saying that the process of having his lobbying examined was a major contributor to his wife’s suicide while also saying that he would act in exactly the same way if he had the time again.Nigelb said:The Guardian has a fairly good analysis of why Paterson claims the rules didn't apply to him:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/nov/03/owen-paterson-his-claims-and-how-they-stack-up-in-analysis
His argument lacks credibility, to put it mildly. Effectively he's arguing that if an MP believes he's exempt from the rules, that should be the end of the matter.
And it is not an argument which would be significantly altered by any witness statements. The essential facts of the case are not in dispute.
Apart from all the other egregiousness, he strikes me as a deeply stupid man.8 -
Good morning, everyone.
Mr. NorthWales, if that's the Labour MP I think it is then not only has the idiot in Number 10 been stupid with the vote yesterday all by itself, he's also created a negative Conservative headline to eclipse a negative Labour one.
And for what? One man, to be suspended for 30 days?0 -
Pulled some punches surely, blaming "shameless MPs" not "shameless Tories".CarlottaVance said:The Mail, not pulling any punches:
4 -
He was very good and I said so at the timeFoxy said:
Which is to fail to understand the procedure. Chris Bryant explained it during the debate.Philip_Thompson said:
Considering what drove this was serious allegations of a tainted process and that the "Tsar" was prejudiced and unfair, is that really a surprise?Scott_xP said:Cabinet Minister makes clear yesterday's vote was (at least in part) about forcing the anti-sleaze Tsar out of her job https://twitter.com/tamcohen/status/1456158302409199617
If as alleged the process followed was unfair and the "Tsar" was biased then that's an issue, isn't it?
Chris Bryant's closing contribution to the Owen Paterson debate is one of the most quietly effective and damning Commons speeches you'll hear in a while. Worth watching in full.
https://t.co/Wf9RdBpaRk
https://twitter.com/peterwalker99/status/1455928741067214853?t=nuMMRUcqAqTCfZrJRmNdlg&s=192 -
I agree with OGH.
Old Bexley and Sidcup stayed Conservative even in 1997 and 2001. It was over 60% Leave and the LDs got just 8% there in 2019, so it offers little chance for a LD by election upset.
The Conservatives have also selected a local candidate, the former deputy leader of Bexley council, who is well known in the area.
Indeed the question will be more the size of the Conseervative majority, not whether the Tories win or not.
The more interesting thing will be whether Labour can hold second from the LDs and ReformUK, whose leader Richard Tice will be their candidate in the by election0 -
I disagree the economics will see coal come back in countries like ours where production has pretty much ceased.LostPassword said:
Ultimately every country has to give up coal, which includes the 40 who have promised to do so, which makes this a step forward.DavidL said:In less good news 40 countries vow to give up coal but these do not include China, India or the US, which makes it all kind of pointless: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-59159018
I'd have liked countries to move as fast as technically possible on coal, rather than as fast as economically inevitable - but the economics is going to see off coal now, and I think we'll end up being surprised at how fast the transition ends up being. The news on solar in India is really positive: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/03/indias-huge-uptake-in-solar-is-driving-more-ambitious-climate-goals-says-minister1 -
Dr Fox,
I would hardly call what we are undergoing is complacency, but with activists, nothing will ever be good enough, otherwise they'll be out of a job.
Compared to the vagaries of planet Earth, projected estimates for a mere virus are a piece of piss.
As always, we'll muddle through.0 -
And the kind of people who are currently denying it is a problem will be denying any responsibility for the billion climate refugees, guaranteed.Foxy said:
There was a good article on this in the FT yesterday, and projections. Basically for every degree of warming, 1 billion people have to live in tperatures over 29C. Currently only 58 million do, but on current trajectory 3 billion will by 2070. Most are in Africa, Middle East, India and SE Asia.CD13 said:Am I the only optimist about global warning? The CO2 levels will eventually fall owing to a combination of PR and technology. The Times' dire warning about horse-shit levels in London were superseded by the invention of the motor car with no one nailing themselves to the floor.
Activists never 'do' anything - they perform a mutual onanism ritual to show they are better than the hoi poloi. But they will claim they are the cause. Even the recalcitrant nations will eventually take a bribe to fall into line.
From a scientific point of view, it will be interesting to see how much effect the fall in CO2 has. No one can predict what percentage of global warming is caused by this gas. I won't live to see it but I think I know what will be claimed.
If there's no change - it would have been much worse if we hadn't done it.
If there's little change - we didn't reduce methane and X, Y, and Z. And reducing pollution in the air cooled the atmosphere, but it had to be done.
If there's a large change, the onanists did it all.
Then they'll have to find another six-year-old with a cause.
The penalty for complacency would be a billion or so climate refugees in Europe by 2070.
https://www.ft.com/content/072b5c87-7330-459b-a947-be6767a1099d0 -
Just when you think the government can’t get much worse, it finds new ways to surprise you.2
-
There is a significant confusion in your account. You refer to 'fall' in CO2. This can mean two very distinct things:CD13 said:Am I the only optimist about global warning? The CO2 levels will eventually fall owing to a combination of PR and technology. The Times' dire warning about horse-shit levels in London were superseded by the invention of the motor car with no one nailing themselves to the floor.
Activists never 'do' anything - they perform a mutual onanism ritual to show they are better than the hoi poloi. But they will claim they are the cause. Even the recalcitrant nations will eventually take a bribe to fall into line.
From a scientific point of view, it will be interesting to see how much effect the fall in CO2 has. No one can predict what percentage of global warming is caused by this gas. I won't live to see it but I think I know what will be claimed.
If there's no change - it would have been much worse if we hadn't done it.
If there's little change - we didn't reduce methane and X, Y, and Z. And reducing pollution in the air cooled the atmosphere, but it had to be done.
If there's a large change, the onanists did it all.
Then they'll have to find another six-year-old with a cause.
Firstly it can mean a fall in the amount of CO2 (PPM) in the atmosphere.
Secondly it can mean a reduction in the rate at which CO2 is being added to the atmosphere (currently at record high and increasing after 30 years of 'last chance' talk).
The first will, if the science is right, save us but the technology does not exist.
The second, if the science is right, will eventually destroy life as we know it
and meanwhile will make us all variously uncomfortable.
Because of the radical difference between the outcomes in 'CO2 fall' it is important for politicians to get them confused - like deficit and debt. So it is massively important for people who like clarity and truth to not confuse them.
Which did you mean?
0
