LEAVE the Conservative Party and save your country!
Comments
-
I'm sure it's not, but seems to be one after another at the mo.rick_chasey said:
As the biggest party by quite some way, the odds are stacked that way....briantrumpet said:Is my perception faulty, or is it nearly always a Tory?
Don't think it's remotely exclusive to Tories.0 -
I do wonder if it's more common among MPs than the general population though.rick_chasey said:
As the biggest party by quite some way, the odds are stacked that way....briantrumpet said:Is my perception faulty, or is it nearly always a Tory?
Don't think it's remotely exclusive to Tories.0 -
Not sure I like suspending MPs. It denies their constituents a voice. Would prefer another sort of penalty.0
-
Go straight for the by-election recall?TheBigBean said:Not sure I like suspending MPs. It denies their constituents a voice. Would prefer another sort of penalty.
0 -
More the other way. I don't think it is parliament's job to decide who should be elected and how they should conduct themselves provided that their actions are within the law. It's too open to politics. If they break the law and are sentenced to x, then I think a recall should be automatic.kingstongraham said:
Go straight for the by-election recall?TheBigBean said:Not sure I like suspending MPs. It denies their constituents a voice. Would prefer another sort of penalty.
If parliament wants to get upset by being misled, then suspend their salaries or something, but deny their constituents representation.
I'd probably enhance the law on lobbying though, so tripping criminal proceedings would be more likely.
0 -
The kind of behaviour Bone has done is not remotely acceptable and I'd argue the bar must be higher than "not criminal".TheBigBean said:
More the other way. I don't think it is parliament's job to decide who should be elected and how they should conduct themselves provided that their actions are within the law. It's too open to politics. If they break the law and are sentenced to x, then I think a recall should be automatic.kingstongraham said:
Go straight for the by-election recall?TheBigBean said:Not sure I like suspending MPs. It denies their constituents a voice. Would prefer another sort of penalty.
If parliament wants to get upset by being misled, then suspend their salaries or something, but deny their constituents representation.
I'd probably enhance the law on lobbying though, so tripping criminal proceedings would be more likely.
Slapping juniors over the head and declaring it'll help because it's one of their "thick days", getting your c0ck out at face level of a junior on a trip out to Madrid and forcing your juniors to sit with their palms up on their lap so you can whip their hands is not acceptable and it shouldn't be up to the electorate to have to opine on that as, bluntly, they have better things to be doing than to track the office behaviour of elected officials.
If I were in charge I'd make professional misconduct an instant by-election offence and if they were a member of a party I would force the party in question to field an additional candidate if they want to back the one found guilty of misconduct, and I would insist that the ruling of professional misconduct be printed at the top of the voting slip as an explanation for why the by election is being called.
You can vote for them again, if you want, but this is why you're having to.0 -
Surely at least one of those is sufficient to be properly illegal (and land you on the sex offender's register)? The only 'mitigation' I can see is if it happened outside the UK's legal jurisdiction,rick_chasey said:
The kind of behaviour Bone has done is not remotely acceptable and I'd argue the bar must be higher than "not criminal".TheBigBean said:
More the other way. I don't think it is parliament's job to decide who should be elected and how they should conduct themselves provided that their actions are within the law. It's too open to politics. If they break the law and are sentenced to x, then I think a recall should be automatic.kingstongraham said:
Go straight for the by-election recall?TheBigBean said:Not sure I like suspending MPs. It denies their constituents a voice. Would prefer another sort of penalty.
If parliament wants to get upset by being misled, then suspend their salaries or something, but deny their constituents representation.
I'd probably enhance the law on lobbying though, so tripping criminal proceedings would be more likely.
Slapping juniors over the head and declaring it'll help because it's one of their "thick days", getting your c0ck out at face level of a junior on a trip out to Madrid and forcing your juniors to sit with their palms up on their lap so you can whip their hands is not acceptable and it shouldn't be up to the electorate to have to opine on that as, bluntly, they have better things to be doing than to track the office behaviour of elected officials.0 -
Only if the victims (who are currently anonymous) want to press charges, right?Pross said:
Surely at least one of those is sufficient to be properly illegal (and land you on the sex offender's register)? The only 'mitigation' I can see is if it happened outside the UK's legal jurisdiction,rick_chasey said:
The kind of behaviour Bone has done is not remotely acceptable and I'd argue the bar must be higher than "not criminal".TheBigBean said:
More the other way. I don't think it is parliament's job to decide who should be elected and how they should conduct themselves provided that their actions are within the law. It's too open to politics. If they break the law and are sentenced to x, then I think a recall should be automatic.kingstongraham said:
Go straight for the by-election recall?TheBigBean said:Not sure I like suspending MPs. It denies their constituents a voice. Would prefer another sort of penalty.
If parliament wants to get upset by being misled, then suspend their salaries or something, but deny their constituents representation.
I'd probably enhance the law on lobbying though, so tripping criminal proceedings would be more likely.
Slapping juniors over the head and declaring it'll help because it's one of their "thick days", getting your c0ck out at face level of a junior on a trip out to Madrid and forcing your juniors to sit with their palms up on their lap so you can whip their hands is not acceptable and it shouldn't be up to the electorate to have to opine on that as, bluntly, they have better things to be doing than to track the office behaviour of elected officials.
0 -
It would be up to the constituents to organise the recall petition and to decide if they want him to continue to represent them after any resulting by election.TheBigBean said:
More the other way. I don't think it is parliament's job to decide who should be elected and how they should conduct themselves provided that their actions are within the law. It's too open to politics. If they break the law and are sentenced to x, then I think a recall should be automatic.kingstongraham said:
Go straight for the by-election recall?TheBigBean said:Not sure I like suspending MPs. It denies their constituents a voice. Would prefer another sort of penalty.
If parliament wants to get upset by being misled, then suspend their salaries or something, but deny their constituents representation.
I'd probably enhance the law on lobbying though, so tripping criminal proceedings would be more likely.
Nobody would be denied representation.0 -
They are if someone is sanctioned for x days. That's x days without representation.kingstongraham said:
It would be up to the constituents to organise the recall petition and to decide if they want him to continue to represent them after any resulting by election.TheBigBean said:
More the other way. I don't think it is parliament's job to decide who should be elected and how they should conduct themselves provided that their actions are within the law. It's too open to politics. If they break the law and are sentenced to x, then I think a recall should be automatic.kingstongraham said:
Go straight for the by-election recall?TheBigBean said:Not sure I like suspending MPs. It denies their constituents a voice. Would prefer another sort of penalty.
If parliament wants to get upset by being misled, then suspend their salaries or something, but deny their constituents representation.
I'd probably enhance the law on lobbying though, so tripping criminal proceedings would be more likely.
Nobody would be denied representation.
I'm guessing you are arguing in favour of an automatic recall petition, and I do agree that it is better than denying representation, but there needs to be strong protections to prevent it being politically motivated. I was unconvinced by the whole Johnson process.0 -
First, no no not first in line by a long long way, there was Pincher, then there was B0ner...
Must be time for a cull shirley?
Edit: even the BR censorbot voted him out 😊0 -
https://www.thenational.scot/news/23857586.liz-truss-unveil-alternative-budget-just-days-jeremy-hunt/briantrumpet said:Pross said:She really does think she’s some kind of political genius who got treated badly by people who weren’t clever enough to understand her. Complete nut job.
An alternative budget for an alternative reality.0 -
I suppose we should just shrug our shoulders now, given how totes normal this is for Sunak.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/oct/20/labour-asks-watchdog-to-investigate-sunak-over-wifes-interest-in-startup-fundLabour has written to the standards watchdog to ask whether Rishi Sunak should have declared that companies co-owned by his wife were given £2m through his government scheme to help startups in the pandemic.
Lucy Powell, the shadow leader of the House of Commons, wrote to the commissioner for standards to ask whether they should have been declared in parliamentary proceedings, after the Guardian reported that four companies linked to Akshata Murty had received investments from the Future Fund.
None of Murty’s investments that benefited from the Future Fund appear publicly on Sunak’s register of ministerial interests and he did not reveal them when mentioning the scheme in the House of Commons.
A government spokesperson said: “Labour are showing their true anti-business colours in attacking a scheme that supported a range of businesses through the pandemic. Labour backed the Future Fund when it was introduced and were aware of the eligibility criteria for the scheme, so this is a deeply cynical U-turn on their position.”
Sunak’s adviser on ministerial interests, whom he appointed this year, has said declaring all shareholdings would be an “excessive degree of intrusion into the private affairs of ministers that would be unreasonable, particularly in respect of their family members”.0 -
Curious what the “bbc is left wing” lot think of this:
0 -
I've given up thinking that there are any Tory MPs left with any convictions (other than for sex crimes)... at one point I thought that Jeremy Cvnt might have had some old-style Tory convictions, but Brexit seems to have consumed him too.
I can't think of a single Tory MP I'd be sorry to see lose their seat. Not one.
1 -
I do like the juxtaposition of "Long-Term Decisions" in there.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
I assume that means things are pretty bad.JACOB REES-MOGG said:The Government is in a torpor not seen since Henry the Sixth was in a catatonic stupor, unable to speak or govern for 18 months in the 15th century.
0 -
I hope he appreciates his own contribution to the situation.focuszing723 said:
I assume that means things are pretty bad.JACOB REES-MOGG said:The Government is in a torpor not seen since Henry the Sixth was in a catatonic stupor, unable to speak or govern for 18 months in the 15th century.
0 -
morstar said:
I hope he appreciates his own contribution to the situation.focuszing723 said:
I assume that means things are pretty bad.JACOB REES-MOGG said:The Government is in a torpor not seen since Henry the Sixth was in a catatonic stupor, unable to speak or govern for 18 months in the 15th century.
0 -
The Nadine Dorries 'Dials' story.
This woman was the minister in charge of digital media.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
rjsterry said:
The Nadine Dorries 'Dials' story.
This woman was the minister in charge of digital media.
For context (along with the context that she is an utter moron):
You can't help but imagine that someone told Dorries that for a dare.0 -
Shame she's no longer part of 1922 and so can't discuss it with Tim Davie when he comes in to chat with them.0
-
To be charitable, I suspect someone has used an analogy and she's gone off and run with it a bit too hard, and I'm sure we've all had that feeling of googling something, then not been able to find it again when you want to show someone.
I think it's right to be concerned about the reinforcing impact of for want to a less misused word, algorithms. It's a shame that the person sent in to represent the population against the big brains of google was Nadine Dorries, and that she seemingly was totally preoccupied with it being a simple left issue.
0 -
If I googled 'Nadine Dorries' and got positive stories, then I'd really be worried about the algorithms.2
-
Sunak's welcome to the new Mid Beds MP at PMQs today was actually quite amusing.0
-
And a good skewering of the inconsistency of Labour's approach to housing into the bargain.Pross said:Sunak's welcome to the new Mid Beds MP at PMQs today was actually quite amusing.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Have to agree to differ there. He accused Starmer of not taking risks then tried to criticise him for a risky policy of building in Greenbelt. It’s classic of this Government that they’ll think people will forget what they just said and miss their inconsistencies.Stevo_666 said:
And a good skewering of the inconsistency of Labour's approach to housing into the bargain.Pross said:Sunak's welcome to the new Mid Beds MP at PMQs today was actually quite amusing.
0 -
He pointed out that the two new Labour MPs had promised to oppose new housing developments and to protect green spaces in their constituencies, rather at odds with Starmer the YIMBY.Pross said:
Have to agree to differ there. He accused Starmer of not taking risks then tried to criticise him for a risky policy of building in Greenbelt. It’s classic of this Government that they’ll think people will forget what they just said and miss their inconsistencies.Stevo_666 said:
And a good skewering of the inconsistency of Labour's approach to housing into the bargain.Pross said:Sunak's welcome to the new Mid Beds MP at PMQs today was actually quite amusing.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Standard procedure for any by-election, no? Is there not a local hospital that needs saving,then? 😁Stevo_666 said:
He pointed out that the two new Labour MPs had promised to oppose new housing developments and to protect green spaces in their constituencies, rather at odds with Starmer the YIMBY.Pross said:
Have to agree to differ there. He accused Starmer of not taking risks then tried to criticise him for a risky policy of building in Greenbelt. It’s classic of this Government that they’ll think people will forget what they just said and miss their inconsistencies.Stevo_666 said:
And a good skewering of the inconsistency of Labour's approach to housing into the bargain.Pross said:Sunak's welcome to the new Mid Beds MP at PMQs today was actually quite amusing.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
How can you tell if a politician is lying? Their lips are moving.
An old one becoming true with more frequency, and not party dependent.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0
