Think the way some Labour MPs are behaving actually shores up Jezzas support with the membership. After all his policy views on the big issues of Austerity and war is in line with most members.
Regarding this 16 in a pack aspirin thing - if you are male and over 60 presumably your doctor has you on a low dose aspirin regimen (81mg). I get them in bottles of 365 - do they also come 16 to a pack in the UK?
It might be just around here but I haven't been able to buy tablet form half-strength Asprin for a couple of years. Now they are only available as big (choke a horse size) tablets that are to be dissolved in water.
75mgs are available but notoriously more expensive than the 300mg's. Could dissolve them in water and throw 3/4 away. However aspirin has been falling out of favour recently and is secondary prevention only in the UK. I believe it is still primary prevention in the US.
Anyway, as you seem have confessed to being a physician, I am not really sure what to make of your nom-de-plume. Should doctors go under the "ReallyEvil" logo?
The 81mg daily aspirin dose is a stroke prevention thing. At about $6 for a bottle of 365 tablets it's a cheap option.
Obviously if your doctor thinks you are a prime candidate they will prescribe something more.
This is where you need to be careful with recent updates - aspirin used to be more widely used. Now we know it has limited use in stroke prevention if you also have AF. If you have a stroke then after the initial treatment then clopidogril is now known the one that is best. If you can't take clopidogril (rare) then aspirin is normally used mixed with dipyridamole. Aspirin is still the first line post MI. Starts getting more tricky if you have had both though...
You're overthinking this, besides being a show-off.
Most doctors here will automatically put males with no symptoms of AF or incidence of MI over 55-60 onto 81mg daily aspirin as a preventative. That's it. That's all I said.
Throwing out abbreviations most people won't know and drug names for no reason and unasked doesn't make you look good.
Anyone who has been put on those medications who is savvy enough to be on a forum like this will understand those abbreviations. Also in the UK without any sort of preceding event they will not be put on aspirin.
All I am trying to do is suggest to people that the evidence may have changed since they had been started on medications/advised them and it might be a good idea to check in with their GP/Family physician.
Think the way some Labour MPs are behaving actually shores up Jezzas support with the membership. After all his policy views on the big issues of Austerity and war is in line with most members.
I certainly will not be voting for Watson again.
New preferred deputy candidate? I would assume not Ben Bradshaw.
Are you sure? Following your link gets a Stop the War republication of a Guardian article by Simon Jenkins examining a number of previous bombing campaigns and concluding bombing Syria won't work and it needs boots on the ground. The article was published on both sites in September.
The trouble with these predictions, such as "bombing Syria won't work", is that nobody knows. "No battle plan ever survives first contact with the enemy,”
We can get a pointer from what the bombing in Iraq has, or has not, achieved. Iraqi and Iranian forces retook Tikrit from iSIS back in April; although there was purposefully little allied bombing directly in support, it is claimed the bombing pinned down ISIS fighters elsewhere, helping the government forces (who were reportedly reluctant for US help)
Ramadi, which ISIS captured in May after a six-month battle, is now encircled by government troops, and is believed to have been cut off from outside support. Again, there has been limited air support, but reports of some potentially useful targeted attacks.
So it looks as if, in battles itself, some of the groups fighting are reluctant to ask for US help (the Iraqi government itself is less so). That does not mean that strikes to destroy and interrupt ISIS supply lines away from the front are useless.
So, potentially a mixed picture that everyone can find something in to back up their position ...
Incidentally, for anyone wanting to read what happens after a city like Tikrit is recaptured from IS, then the Wiki entry for the second battle of Tikrit is sombre reading for all sorts of reasons.
The reason that the various Western (and other) countries providing airpower have "moderated" their help is almost certainly because of their concern as to what will happen when ISIS is defeated. The probable result will be ethnic cleansing (mass expulsions of the population).
Think the way some Labour MPs are behaving actually shores up Jezzas support with the membership. After all his policy views on the big issues of Austerity and war is in line with most members.
I certainly will not be voting for Watson again.
You will enjoy the morning thread, is about the NHS.
Think the way some Labour MPs are behaving actually shores up Jezzas support with the membership. After all his policy views on the big issues of Austerity and war is in line with most members.
I certainly will not be voting for Watson again.
New preferred deputy candidate? I would assume not Ben Bradshaw.
75mgs are available but notoriously more expensive than the 300mg's. Could dissolve them in water and throw 3/4 away. However aspirin has been falling out of favour recently and is secondary prevention only in the UK. I believe it is still primary prevention in the US.
Thanks, not that I know the difference between secondary and primary prevention. I got told years ago after a DVT to take one half-strength asprin a day and nobody has told me to stop so I still do.
Anyway, as you seem have confessed to being a physician, I am not really sure what to make of your nom-de-plume. Should doctors go under the "ReallyEvil" logo?
The 81mg daily aspirin dose is a stroke prevention thing. At about $6 for a bottle of 365 tablets it's a cheap option.
Obviously if your doctor thinks you are a prime candidate they will prescribe something more.
This is where you need to be careful with recent updates - aspirin used to be more widely used. Now we know it has limited use in stroke prevention if you also have AF. If you have a stroke then after the initial treatment then clopidogril is now known the one that is best. If you can't take clopidogril (rare) then aspirin is normally used mixed with dipyridamole. Aspirin is still the first line post MI. Starts getting more tricky if you have had both though...
You're overthinking this, besides being a show-off.
Most doctors here will automatically put males with no symptoms of AF or incidence of MI over 55-60 onto 81mg daily aspirin as a preventative. That's it. That's all I said.
Throwing out abbreviations most people won't know and drug names for no reason and unasked doesn't make you look good.
Anyone who has been put on those medications who is savvy enough to be on a forum like this will understand those abbreviations. Also in the UK without any sort of preceding event they will not be put on aspirin.
All I am trying to do is suggest to people that the evidence may have changed since they had been started on medications/advised them and it might be a good idea to check in with their GP/Family physician.
I'm not in the UK. Here (USA) it's normal to start the low dose aspirin regimen assuming good health. As a preventative it's hard to find a more cost-effective one. If you have a 'preceding event' they will prescribe more aggressively. Besides you will not be 'prescribed' low dose aspirin. It costs me about $6 for a year's worth of Bayer's finest from Costco.
It's ALWAYS a good idea to check in regularly with your physician.
Think the way some Labour MPs are behaving actually shores up Jezzas support with the membership. After all his policy views on the big issues of Austerity and war is in line with most members.
I certainly will not be voting for Watson again.
Unlike most Labour members, it seems that most Labour MPs want Labour to start winning elections again at some stage.
Members are not "punishing" MPs by supporting Corbyn, they are turning their backs on voters looking for a credible alternative to the Tories.
Think the way some Labour MPs are behaving actually shores up Jezzas support with the membership. After all his policy views on the big issues of Austerity and war is in line with most members.
I certainly will not be voting for Watson again.
You will enjoy the morning thread, is about the NHS.
Oh good I will double my blood pressure tablets in preparation.
Think the way some Labour MPs are behaving actually shores up Jezzas support with the membership. After all his policy views on the big issues of Austerity and war is in line with most members.
I certainly will not be voting for Watson again.
Unlike most Labour members, it seems that most Labour MPs want Labour to start winning elections again at some stage.
Members are not "punishing" MPs by supporting Corbyn, they are turning their backs on voters looking for a credible alternative to the Tories.
Which credible alternative you referring to Liz Kendall
Think the way some Labour MPs are behaving actually shores up Jezzas support with the membership. After all his policy views on the big issues of Austerity and war is in line with most members.
I certainly will not be voting for Watson again.
You will enjoy the morning thread, is about the NHS.
Oh good I will double my blood pressure tablets in preparation.
Think the way some Labour MPs are behaving actually shores up Jezzas support with the membership. After all his policy views on the big issues of Austerity and war is in line with most members.
I certainly will not be voting for Watson again.
You will enjoy the morning thread, is about the NHS.
Maybe. That depends on what Corbyn does overnight.
Think the way some Labour MPs are behaving actually shores up Jezzas support with the membership. After all his policy views on the big issues of Austerity and war is in line with most members.
I certainly will not be voting for Watson again.
You will enjoy the morning thread, is about the NHS.
Maybe. That depends what Corbyn does overnight.
Too late now, I'm off to bed and I've pressed the autopublish button for 5.30am
Think the way some Labour MPs are behaving actually shores up Jezzas support with the membership. After all his policy views on the big issues of Austerity and war is in line with most members.
I certainly will not be voting for Watson again.
You will enjoy the morning thread, is about the NHS.
Maybe. That depends what Corbyn does overnight.
Many a true word...
Forward planning of threads is becoming very hard.
Think the way some Labour MPs are behaving actually shores up Jezzas support with the membership. After all his policy views on the big issues of Austerity and war is in line with most members.
I certainly will not be voting for Watson again.
You will enjoy the morning thread, is about the NHS.
Maybe. That depends on what Corbyn does overnight.
Or unless it turns out that Grant Shapps is the love child of Ted Heath and Barbara Castle.
75mgs are available but notoriously more expensive than the 300mg's. Could dissolve them in water and throw 3/4 away. However aspirin has been falling out of favour recently and is secondary prevention only in the UK. I believe it is still primary prevention in the US.
Thanks, not that I know the difference between secondary and primary prevention. I got told years ago after a DVT to take one half-strength asprin a day and nobody has told me to stop so I still do.
Anyway, as you seem have confessed to being a physician, I am not really sure what to make of your nom-de-plume. Should doctors go under the "ReallyEvil" logo?
The 81mg daily aspirin dose is a stroke prevention thing. At about $6 for a bottle of 365 tablets it's a cheap option.
Obviously if your doctor thinks you are a prime candidate they will prescribe something more.
You're overthinking this, besides being a show-off.
Most doctors here will automatically put males with no symptoms of AF or incidence of MI over 55-60 onto 81mg daily aspirin as a preventative. That's it. That's all I said.
Throwing out abbreviations most people won't know and drug names for no reason and unasked doesn't make you look good.
Anyone who has been put on those medications who is savvy enough to be on a forum like this will understand those abbreviations. Also in the UK without any sort of preceding event they will not be put on aspirin.
All I am trying to do is suggest to people that the evidence may have changed since they had been started on medications/advised them and it might be a good idea to check in with their GP/Family physician.
I'm not in the UK. Here (USA) it's normal to start the low dose aspirin regimen assuming good health. As a preventative it's hard to find a more cost-effective one. If you have a 'preceding event' they will prescribe more aggressively. Besides you will not be 'prescribed' low dose aspirin. It costs me about $6 for a year's worth of Bayer's finest from Costco.
It's ALWAYS a good idea to check in regularly with your physician.
Definitely very good for it's cost. Lots of good actions. But everything is prescribed here more or less and it is so so pre event. But it is great for many things! That I take 1 a day from the shop attitude is very rare in the UK but is easy to miss as docs easily assume that the only regular meds they take are prescribed.
I've laid Wayne Rooney out on Betfair a touch. So long as Murray is top 3 I'll be quids in.
Wayne Rooney should not even have a regular place in the United side.
Agreed - he has been very poor for a long time - last season in my opinion
Rooney was terrible today. Time to be dropped as England captain. I wouldn't waste a slot to take him to the Euros. Smalling looks like the future of Englands defence though.
Think the way some Labour MPs are behaving actually shores up Jezzas support with the membership. After all his policy views on the big issues of Austerity and war is in line with most members.
I certainly will not be voting for Watson again.
Unlike most Labour members, it seems that most Labour MPs want Labour to start winning elections again at some stage.
Members are not "punishing" MPs by supporting Corbyn, they are turning their backs on voters looking for a credible alternative to the Tories.
Which credible alternative you referring to Liz Kendall
Think the way some Labour MPs are behaving actually shores up Jezzas support with the membership. After all his policy views on the big issues of Austerity and war is in line with most members.
I certainly will not be voting for Watson again.
Unlike most Labour members, it seems that most Labour MPs want Labour to start winning elections again at some stage.
Members are not "punishing" MPs by supporting Corbyn, they are turning their backs on voters looking for a credible alternative to the Tories.
Which credible alternative you referring to Liz Kendall
The 81mg daily aspirin dose is a stroke prevention thing. At about $6 for a bottle of 365 tablets it's a cheap option.
Obviously if your doctor thinks you are a prime candidate they will prescribe something more.
You're overthinking this, besides being a show-off.
Most doctors here will automatically put males with no symptoms of AF or incidence of MI over 55-60 onto 81mg daily aspirin as a preventative. That's it. That's all I said.
Throwing out abbreviations most people won't know and drug names for no reason and unasked doesn't make you look good.
Anyone who has been put on those medications who is savvy enough to be on a forum like this will understand those abbreviations. Also in the UK without any sort of preceding event they will not be put on aspirin.
All I am trying to do is suggest to people that the evidence may have changed since they had been started on medications/advised them and it might be a good idea to check in with their GP/Family physician.
I'm not in the UK. Here (USA) it's normal to start the low dose aspirin regimen assuming good health. As a preventative it's hard to find a more cost-effective one. If you have a 'preceding event' they will prescribe more aggressively. Besides you will not be 'prescribed' low dose aspirin. It costs me about $6 for a year's worth of Bayer's finest from Costco.
It's ALWAYS a good idea to check in regularly with your physician.
Definitely very good for it's cost. Lots of good actions. But everything is prescribed here more or less and it is so so pre event. But it is great for many things! That I take 1 a day from the shop attitude is very rare in the UK but is easy to miss as docs easily assume that the only regular meds they take are prescribed.
But that's the whole point - if you can delay/prevent the event for $6 a year that's good medicine. My doctor insists I visit him every 4 months so he can track my weight, blood pressure and get my blood work done. It's preventive medicine. His office calls to chase if I don't schedule an appointment.
Lest you think I'm El Gordo, I'm 6 feet tall and weigh 180lbs.
Oooh we might get an electoral reform thread in the morning now
One in five peers could be sacked to help control the size of the House of Lords, David Cameron’s official reviewer into reforming the second chamber will suggest next month.
Lord Strathclyde, who was asked by the Prime Minister to look at the Lords after they blocked Tory tax credit cuts, is expected to give a “nod” to the idea in his report.
The Tory peer also will tell Mr Cameron to create a new law stripping Lords of their ability to veto changes to secondary legislation – his main recommendation.
Think the way some Labour MPs are behaving actually shores up Jezzas support with the membership. After all his policy views on the big issues of Austerity and war is in line with most members.
I certainly will not be voting for Watson again.
Unlike most Labour members, it seems that most Labour MPs want Labour to start winning elections again at some stage.
Members are not "punishing" MPs by supporting Corbyn, they are turning their backs on voters looking for a credible alternative to the Tories.
Which credible alternative you referring to Liz Kendall
Labour would be ahead in the polls and cruising to victory in Oldham with any of the other three leadership candidates.
Oooh we might get an electoral reform thread in the morning now
One in five peers could be sacked to help control the size of the House of Lords, David Cameron’s official reviewer into reforming the second chamber will suggest next month.
Lord Strathclyde, who was asked by the Prime Minister to look at the Lords after they blocked Tory tax credit cuts, is expected to give a “nod” to the idea in his report.
The Tory peer also will tell Mr Cameron to create a new law stripping Lords of their ability to veto changes to secondary legislation – his main recommendation.
The Tories would have to get the Lords to agree - and a party that only got 36.9% of the national vote would find it hard pressing for major change entirely in its own interest.
"But in recent weeks Labour sources have become ever more anxious. Shadow cabinet members returning from campaigning report that Corbyn has gone down "very badly" with voters, with his original comments on shoot-to-kill particularly toxic. Most MPs expect the party's majority to lie within the 1,000-2,000 range. But one insider told me that the party's majority would likely fall into the hundreds ("I'd be thrilled with 2,000") and warned that defeat was far from unthinkable. The fear is that low turnout and defections to Ukip could allow the Farageists to sneak a win. MPs are further troubled by the likelihood that the contest will take place on the same day as the Syria vote (Thursday), which will badly divide Labour."
Oooh we might get an electoral reform thread in the morning now
One in five peers could be sacked to help control the size of the House of Lords, David Cameron’s official reviewer into reforming the second chamber will suggest next month.
Lord Strathclyde, who was asked by the Prime Minister to look at the Lords after they blocked Tory tax credit cuts, is expected to give a “nod” to the idea in his report.
The Tory peer also will tell Mr Cameron to create a new law stripping Lords of their ability to veto changes to secondary legislation – his main recommendation.
Can't see that going down well. I would presume reducing the size of the chamber, perhaps slightly in the Tory favour - on the justification to begin by culling the ones there the longest - would be sought and the price would be dropping the threat of the other recommendations?
"But in recent weeks Labour sources have become ever more anxious. Shadow cabinet members returning from campaigning report that Corbyn has gone down "very badly" with voters, with his original comments on shoot-to-kill particularly toxic. Most MPs expect the party's majority to lie within the 1,000-2,000 range. But one insider told me that the party's majority would likely fall into the hundreds ("I'd be thrilled with 2,000") and warned that defeat was far from unthinkable. The fear is that low turnout and defections to Ukip could allow the Farageists to sneak a win. MPs are further troubled by the likelihood that the contest will take place on the same day as the Syria vote (Thursday), which will badly divide Labour."
"But in recent weeks Labour sources have become ever more anxious. Shadow cabinet members returning from campaigning report that Corbyn has gone down "very badly" with voters, with his original comments on shoot-to-kill particularly toxic. Most MPs expect the party's majority to lie within the 1,000-2,000 range. But one insider told me that the party's majority would likely fall into the hundreds ("I'd be thrilled with 2,000") and warned that defeat was far from unthinkable. The fear is that low turnout and defections to Ukip could allow the Farageists to sneak a win. MPs are further troubled by the likelihood that the contest will take place on the same day as the Syria vote (Thursday), which will badly divide Labour."
"But in recent weeks Labour sources have become ever more anxious. Shadow cabinet members returning from campaigning report that Corbyn has gone down "very badly" with voters, with his original comments on shoot-to-kill particularly toxic. Most MPs expect the party's majority to lie within the 1,000-2,000 range. But one insider told me that the party's majority would likely fall into the hundreds ("I'd be thrilled with 2,000") and warned that defeat was far from unthinkable. The fear is that low turnout and defections to Ukip could allow the Farageists to sneak a win. MPs are further troubled by the likelihood that the contest will take place on the same day as the Syria vote (Thursday), which will badly divide Labour."
"But in recent weeks Labour sources have become ever more anxious. Shadow cabinet members returning from campaigning report that Corbyn has gone down "very badly" with voters, with his original comments on shoot-to-kill particularly toxic. Most MPs expect the party's majority to lie within the 1,000-2,000 range. But one insider told me that the party's majority would likely fall into the hundreds ("I'd be thrilled with 2,000") and warned that defeat was far from unthinkable. The fear is that low turnout and defections to Ukip could allow the Farageists to sneak a win. MPs are further troubled by the likelihood that the contest will take place on the same day as the Syria vote (Thursday), which will badly divide Labour."
Frankly, I think a Labour loss would be a massive get-out-jail card for the party. They might start to realise what an electoral albatross Corbyn is.
No it won't - the spin on holding seats that should be easy holds anyway is always similar, regardless of how close I imagine. It shows the government is out of touch, doing things wrong, blather blather, never mind we always win this seat, majority not the point, hostile press, iraq war, praise stalin, I mean Jeremy, iraq war iraq war iraq war.
Oooh we might get an electoral reform thread in the morning now
One in five peers could be sacked to help control the size of the House of Lords, David Cameron’s official reviewer into reforming the second chamber will suggest next month.
Lord Strathclyde, who was asked by the Prime Minister to look at the Lords after they blocked Tory tax credit cuts, is expected to give a “nod” to the idea in his report.
The Tory peer also will tell Mr Cameron to create a new law stripping Lords of their ability to veto changes to secondary legislation – his main recommendation.
The Tories would have to get the Lords to agree - and a party that only got 36.9% of the national vote would find it hard pressing for major change entirely in its own interest.
If Corbyn can't carry his party with him on this one, he has to go. His whole political existence is predicated on voting against extending bombing to ISIS in Syria.
Hardly. We're all aware that the PLP is mostly of different mind: the only debate is about whether they will cut him some slack/respect his mandate, depending how you put it. If the PLP mostly votes for bombing, I wouldn't think any of his supporters will blame him - he's clearly doing his best to prevent it.
If Corbyn can't carry his party with him on this one, he has to go. His whole political existence is predicated on voting against extending bombing to ISIS in Syria.
Hardly. We're all aware that the PLP is mostly of different mind: the only debate is about whether they will cut him some slack/respect his mandate, depending how you put it. If the PLP mostly votes for bombing, I wouldn't think any of his supporters will blame him - he's clearly doing his best to prevent it.
If Corbyn can't carry his party with him on this one, he has to go. His whole political existence is predicated on voting against extending bombing to ISIS in Syria.
Hardly. We're all aware that the PLP is mostly of different mind: the only debate is about whether they will cut him some slack/respect his mandate, depending how you put it. If the PLP mostly votes for bombing, I wouldn't think any of his supporters will blame him - he's clearly doing his best to prevent it.
If the leader of a party cannot command the majority of his MPs with respect to an issue of war and peace then IMHO he has to go. Or is this an example of the new politics?
If Corbyn can't carry his party with him on this one, he has to go. His whole political existence is predicated on voting against extending bombing to ISIS in Syria.
Hardly. We're all aware that the PLP is mostly of different mind: the only debate is about whether they will cut him some slack/respect his mandate, depending how you put it. If the PLP mostly votes for bombing, I wouldn't think any of his supporters will blame him - he's clearly doing his best to prevent it.
MPs owe their mandates to their electorate - not the membership.
That is what they all need to keep at the forefront of their thinking.
Wonder if Cameron's plan is to threaten the Lords with getting rid of some of them but he then compromises by "settling" for a new rule whereby they can't block Secondary Legislation.
On topic - I'm not sure this will deflect much (if any) pressure from Corbyn. Its a tragic tale - and if the allegations are true, been handled very badly - but it only really affects those directly involved and a demoted Minister has now resigned.
Corbyn, on the other hand, aspires to be Prime Minister in 2020
If Corbyn can't carry his party with him on this one, he has to go. His whole political existence is predicated on voting against extending bombing to ISIS in Syria.
Hardly. We're all aware that the PLP is mostly of different mind: the only debate is about whether they will cut him some slack/respect his mandate, depending how you put it. If the PLP mostly votes for bombing, I wouldn't think any of his supporters will blame him - he's clearly doing his best to prevent it.
Or is this an example of the new politics?
No. Doing an end-run round your Shadow Cabinet to the activist base (and only some of them, and only those on the internet) to pre-empt further discussion is 'the new politics'
Wonder if Cameron's plan is to threaten the Lords with getting rid of some of them but he then compromises by "settling" for a new rule whereby they can't block Secondary Legislation.
That's my guess!
But whatever is proposed has to be agreed by the Lords. Do turkeys vote for Xmas?
The LAB reforms in the 1997 parliament came off the back of a landslide victory and reform had been in the GE1997 manifesto.
Wonder if Cameron's plan is to threaten the Lords with getting rid of some of them but he then compromises by "settling" for a new rule whereby they can't block Secondary Legislation.
That's my guess!
But whatever is proposed has to be agreed by the Lords. Do turkeys vote for Xmas?
The LAB reforms in the 1997 parliament came off the back of a landslide victory and reform had been in the GE1997 manifesto.
A referendum on sacking dozens of Lib Dem peers would surely pass with a massive majority
Surely not, they are apparently the only effective opposition that the country has to the government at the moment, to hear them tell it at least, and that's needed, I'm sure the people see that and will reward their non lord fellows.
Wonder if Cameron's plan is to threaten the Lords with getting rid of some of them but he then compromises by "settling" for a new rule whereby they can't block Secondary Legislation.
That's my guess!
But whatever is proposed has to be agreed by the Lords. Do turkeys vote for Xmas?
Wonder if Cameron's plan is to threaten the Lords with getting rid of some of them but he then compromises by "settling" for a new rule whereby they can't block Secondary Legislation.
That's my guess!
But whatever is proposed has to be agreed by the Lords. Do turkeys vote for Xmas?
The LAB reforms in the 1997 parliament came off the back of a landslide victory and reform had been in the GE1997 manifesto.
Wonder if Cameron's plan is to threaten the Lords with getting rid of some of them but he then compromises by "settling" for a new rule whereby they can't block Secondary Legislation.
That's my guess!
But whatever is proposed has to be agreed by the Lords. Do turkeys vote for Xmas?
The LAB reforms in the 1997 parliament came off the back of a landslide victory and reform had been in the GE1997 manifesto.
But my point is that their overwhelming concern will be to keep their "jobs" (and expenses etc).
They hardly ever block Secondary Legislation anyway so it's only a very small concession to make.
I've said it before, but PBTories complaining about the Lords vetoing government legislation, is like a burglar complaining about how outrageous it is that people install burglar alarms in their home. THE WHOLE POINT of it is to act as a check on the government of the day.
I've said it before, but PBTories complaining about the Lords vetoing government legislation, is like a burglar complaining about how outrageous it is that people install burglar alarms in their home. THE WHOLE POINT of it is to act as a check on the government of the day.
Wonder if Cameron's plan is to threaten the Lords with getting rid of some of them but he then compromises by "settling" for a new rule whereby they can't block Secondary Legislation.
That's my guess!
But whatever is proposed has to be agreed by the Lords. Do turkeys vote for Xmas?
The LAB reforms in the 1997 parliament came off the back of a landslide victory and reform had been in the GE1997 manifesto.
No they don't: Parliament Act.
Wouldn't even that require a number of years (and a lot of political capital)?
Also just been to see Bridge of Spies with Mark Rylance, Alan Alda and Tom Hanks, well worth watching if you like Cold War dramas
It's about the Powers - Abel exchange, isn't it?
Didn't realize you knew Rylance, Alda and Hanks
Yes and an American student US lawyer James Donovan brought into the mix too, yes Mark, Alan, Tom and I go way back or at least to the back of my dvd shelf!
I've said it before, but PBTories complaining about the Lords vetoing government legislation, is like a burglar complaining about how outrageous it is that people install burglar alarms in their home. THE WHOLE POINT of it is to act as a check on the government of the day.
If Corbyn can't carry his party with him on this one, he has to go. His whole political existence is predicated on voting against extending bombing to ISIS in Syria.
Hardly. We're all aware that the PLP is mostly of different mind: the only debate is about whether they will cut him some slack/respect his mandate, depending how you put it. If the PLP mostly votes for bombing, I wouldn't think any of his supporters will blame him - he's clearly doing his best to prevent it.
How can someone who cannot persuade his own Parliamentary colleagues in the party he leads to support his policy be credibly thought of by the electorate as a possible Prime Minister?
I've said it before, but PBTories complaining about the Lords vetoing government legislation, is like a burglar complaining about how outrageous it is that people install burglar alarms in their home. THE WHOLE POINT of it is to act as a check on the government of the day.
That's fine in theory.
The problem is that Peers are now voting almost entirely along party lines on every vote.
Lab + LD combined have 70 more Peers than Con so the Govt is certain to lose every vote - unless they get overwhelming Crossbench support and even then they have to get lucky by much stronger whipping and hoping enough Lab + LD don't turn up.
It's a complete farce. IF enough Lab + LD Peers turn up they can literally defeat everything.
If Corbyn can't carry his party with him on this one, he has to go. His whole political existence is predicated on voting against extending bombing to ISIS in Syria.
Hardly. We're all aware that the PLP is mostly of different mind: the only debate is about whether they will cut him some slack/respect his mandate, depending how you put it. If the PLP mostly votes for bombing, I wouldn't think any of his supporters will blame him - he's clearly doing his best to prevent it.
How can someone who cannot persuade his own Parliamentary colleagues in the party he leads to support his policy be credibly thought of by the electorate as a possible Prime Minister?
I very much hope that the PLP remember that it was the voters who gave them their mandate and it is to them they owe their primary loyalty.
They do not owe the membership the same respect as they do the real voters. The ones they were elected to represent.
Corbyn may have won the leadership but he has displayed none of the traits of being a leader. A serial rebel, he is reaping the rewards of decades of disloyalty. He can expect nothing less than the same.
I've said it before, but PBTories complaining about the Lords vetoing government legislation, is like a burglar complaining about how outrageous it is that people install burglar alarms in their home. THE WHOLE POINT of it is to act as a check on the government of the day.
I've said it before, but PBTories complaining about the Lords vetoing government legislation, is like a burglar complaining about how outrageous it is that people install burglar alarms in their home. THE WHOLE POINT of it is to act as a check on the government of the day.
That's fine in theory.
The problem is that Peers are now voting almost entirely along party lines on every vote.
Lab + LD combined have 70 more Peers than Con so the Govt is certain to lose every vote - unless they get overwhelming Crossbench support and even then they have to get lucky by much stronger whipping and hoping enough Lab + LD don't turn up.
It's a complete farce. IF enough Lab + LD Peers turn up they can literally defeat everything.
But it's the case in a lot of democracies (not least the US) that the government of the day doesn't have a majority in both legislative chambers. All it means is that the govt has to work harder to be more consensual and less extreme, to win over lawmakers from other parties.
I've said it before, but PBTories complaining about the Lords vetoing government legislation, is like a burglar complaining about how outrageous it is that people install burglar alarms in their home. THE WHOLE POINT of it is to act as a check on the government of the day.
That's fine in theory.
The problem is that Peers are now voting almost entirely along party lines on every vote.
Lab + LD combined have 70 more Peers than Con so the Govt is certain to lose every vote - unless they get overwhelming Crossbench support and even then they have to get lucky by much stronger whipping and hoping enough Lab + LD don't turn up.
It's a complete farce. IF enough Lab + LD Peers turn up they can literally defeat everything.
Shocking. Perhaps we could have a thread on AV for the House of Lords.
THE WHOLE POINT of it is to act as a check on the government of the day.
Which they exceeded in seeking to extend the franchise in the EU referendum - something not in the manifesto of the party forming the UK government...
I don't understand this argument - that will only go ahead if the (fully-elected) Commons also approves it anyway.
While the Lords (rightly, IMO) has the power to block legislation, they don't have the power (again rightly) to pass legislation of their own without the Commons also approving it.
“I have an opportunity every week to ask two questions [of the Prime Minister], and I put a lot of thought into what are the key questions of the week, and I think in normal circumstances you’d expect the leader of the Labour Party to raise those important questions. Not once since the new leadership took over have I found my intended questions or subject of questioning preceded by the Labour Party.”
Everything that the alleged majority government fails to get through is always the fault of Labour or Nick Clegg and the Lords or the SNP. Nothing in the view of PB comment consensus is ever or has ever been the fault of the Conservative Party, which allegedly won a majority. The harsh lesson is that winning one-third of votes doesn't mean everyone else has to roll over and take it.
Wonder if Cameron's plan is to threaten the Lords with getting rid of some of them but he then compromises by "settling" for a new rule whereby they can't block Secondary Legislation.
That's my guess!
But whatever is proposed has to be agreed by the Lords. Do turkeys vote for Xmas?
The LAB reforms in the 1997 parliament came off the back of a landslide victory and reform had been in the GE1997 manifesto.
Lords reform was in the 2015 Conservative manifesto.
Per tweet on Number Cruncher - McDonnell said earlier that 70,000 members have responded to the email and overwhelming majority are against bombing.
So Corbyn will say he is against bombing and his view is supported by the overwhelming majority of members and he is therefore calling on all MPs to vote against.
That's it. Dead simple. He won't care less about what anyone else says - Shadow Cabinet, Parliamentary Labour Party, anyone.
I've said it before, but PBTories complaining about the Lords vetoing government legislation, is like a burglar complaining about how outrageous it is that people install burglar alarms in their home. THE WHOLE POINT of it is to act as a check on the government of the day.
No it isn't.
Oh yes it is.
I'm trying to troll Danny565 - get out of the way!
THE WHOLE POINT of it is to act as a check on the government of the day.
Which they exceeded in seeking to extend the franchise in the EU referendum - something not in the manifesto of the party forming the UK government...
I don't understand this argument - that will only go ahead if the (fully-elected) Commons also approves it anyway.
While the Lords (rightly, IMO) has the power to block legislation, they don't have the power (again rightly) to pass legislation of their own without the Commons also approving it.
Yes - all true - and fine in theory.
I guess the argument is that the result is gridlock - with it impossible for the Govt to pass any new legislation (and, of course, as you say, the Lords can't pass anything either).
So if Corbyn became PM the Lords could literally block him doing anything - other than Finance Bills.
I didnt know Cameron had effectively sacked Shapps in a Press Conference in Malta:
News of Shapps’ resignation was broken by the Prime Minister at a dramatic press conference in Malta. Mr Cameron effectively sacked Shapps after he was asked if the Minister had his ‘complete confidence.’ He pointedly refused to give it and coldly said a statement ‘would be released’ soon afterwards.
"At the Latin America conference, one of the Labour leader's closest advisers said he hoped a government led by Mr Corbyn would take its inspiration from the radical Left-wing policies of Venezuela – a country that is beset by a soaring crime rate and an ailing economy.
Former MP Chris Williamson said: 'Imagine walking into No 10 with a trade union bill that is based on legislation passed in Venezuela.'"
I suspect there might be trouble getting that Bill through the Lords!!!
Comments
I certainly will not be voting for Watson again.
What it then boils down to is does Cameron feel confident enough that a minimum of approx. 30 Lab MPs will back him?
If not, the vote is off. Simple as that.
And then Corbyn will declare that he stopped the bombing.
It's ALWAYS a good idea to check in regularly with your physician.
Members are not "punishing" MPs by supporting Corbyn, they are turning their backs on voters looking for a credible alternative to the Tories.
Forward planning of threads is becoming very hard.
Happy days at Leicester. We dropped points today.
#itsadraw
I reckon Vlad might be declared winner despite losing in most peoples opinion
Given the nature of this story, that's extraordinary.
Lest you think I'm El Gordo, I'm 6 feet tall and weigh 180lbs.
A chemist/drug store is a 'shop'.
Richie Woodhall 100% correct had it 116/111
One in five peers could be sacked to help control the size of the House of Lords, David Cameron’s official reviewer into reforming the second chamber will suggest next month.
Lord Strathclyde, who was asked by the Prime Minister to look at the Lords after they blocked Tory tax credit cuts, is expected to give a “nod” to the idea in his report.
The Tory peer also will tell Mr Cameron to create a new law stripping Lords of their ability to veto changes to secondary legislation – his main recommendation.
http://bit.ly/1RdBlTM
Goodnight
"But in recent weeks Labour sources have become ever more anxious. Shadow cabinet members returning from campaigning report that Corbyn has gone down "very badly" with voters, with his original comments on shoot-to-kill particularly toxic. Most MPs expect the party's majority to lie within the 1,000-2,000 range. But one insider told me that the party's majority would likely fall into the hundreds ("I'd be thrilled with 2,000") and warned that defeat was far from unthinkable. The fear is that low turnout and defections to Ukip could allow the Farageists to sneak a win. MPs are further troubled by the likelihood that the contest will take place on the same day as the Syria vote (Thursday), which will badly divide Labour."
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2015/11/could-labour-lose-oldham-election
Absolutely NSFW
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zm-2S0fSCVw
Didn't realize you knew Rylance, Alda and Hanks
That is what they all need to keep at the forefront of their thinking.
That's my guess!
Corbyn, on the other hand, aspires to be Prime Minister in 2020
I shall be editing PB on Friday (the day after the Oldham by election)
As you all know, nothing major happens when Mike is away from the site.
The LAB reforms in the 1997 parliament came off the back of a landslide victory and reform had been in the GE1997 manifesto.
Good night.
They hardly ever block Secondary Legislation anyway so it's only a very small concession to make.
How can someone who cannot persuade his own Parliamentary colleagues in the party he leads to support his policy be credibly thought of by the electorate as a possible Prime Minister?
The problem is that Peers are now voting almost entirely along party lines on every vote.
Lab + LD combined have 70 more Peers than Con so the Govt is certain to lose every vote - unless they get overwhelming Crossbench support and even then they have to get lucky by much stronger whipping and hoping enough Lab + LD don't turn up.
It's a complete farce. IF enough Lab + LD Peers turn up they can literally defeat everything.
They do not owe the membership the same respect as they do the real voters. The ones they were elected to represent.
Corbyn may have won the leadership but he has displayed none of the traits of being a leader. A serial rebel, he is reaping the rewards of decades of disloyalty. He can expect nothing less than the same.
While the Lords (rightly, IMO) has the power to block legislation, they don't have the power (again rightly) to pass legislation of their own without the Commons also approving it.
“I have an opportunity every week to ask two questions [of the Prime Minister], and I put a lot of thought into what are the key questions of the week, and I think in normal circumstances you’d expect the leader of the Labour Party to raise those important questions. Not once since the new leadership took over have I found my intended questions or subject of questioning preceded by the Labour Party.”
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/angus-robertson-snp-westminster-leader-on-being-the-new-star-of-prime-ministers-questions-a6752851.html
Per tweet on Number Cruncher - McDonnell said earlier that 70,000 members have responded to the email and overwhelming majority are against bombing.
So Corbyn will say he is against bombing and his view is supported by the overwhelming majority of members and he is therefore calling on all MPs to vote against.
That's it. Dead simple. He won't care less about what anyone else says - Shadow Cabinet, Parliamentary Labour Party, anyone.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/28/labour-ukip-oldham-west-byelection-fight
If Labour don't win it appears the PLP will have been denied a talented politician....
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3337901/Shell-suited-shell-shocked-Jezza-faces-defeat-Bedraggled-Corbyn-heads-home-two-cups-coffee-1980s-style-baggy-synthetic-Wilson-tracksuit.html
I guess the argument is that the result is gridlock - with it impossible for the Govt to pass any new legislation (and, of course, as you say, the Lords can't pass anything either).
So if Corbyn became PM the Lords could literally block him doing anything - other than Finance Bills.
News of Shapps’ resignation was broken by the Prime Minister at a dramatic press conference in Malta. Mr Cameron effectively sacked Shapps after he was asked if the Minister had his ‘complete confidence.’ He pointedly refused to give it and coldly said a statement ‘would be released’ soon afterwards.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3337837/Tatler-Tory-scandal-forces-minister-amid-blackmail-plot-Conservative-MP-s-affair-Cameron-s-friend-go.html
Former MP Chris Williamson said: 'Imagine walking into No 10 with a trade union bill that is based on legislation passed in Venezuela.'"
I suspect there might be trouble getting that Bill through the Lords!!!
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3337901/Shell-suited-shell-shocked-Jezza-faces-defeat-Bedraggled-Corbyn-heads-home-two-cups-coffee-1980s-style-baggy-synthetic-Wilson-tracksuit.html#ixzz3spyEldd3
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook