[Politics] Tory meltdown finally arrived [was: incoming]...

[aolstudios]

Beth Rigby

@BethRigby
Follow

On the matter on pressure on Speaker. Am told that many MPs made a personal pleas to Sir Lindsay about amendments. MPs' have growing concerns for personal safety after incidents of confrontations & protests over the Israel-Hamas war.


Those peaceful protests again, police should have nipped the fringe element of those protests in the bud when it first started.

"Fringe"?..

 

[Greenbag50]

Last one tonight
SNP ceasefire amendment has no caveats. Ceasefire now with no addendums.
Some labour MP’s need conditions attached , such as release of all Israeli hostages held by Hamas, peace talks etc.
These Labour MP’s are getting threats to vote for no caveat immediate ceasefire by Israel when they won’t vote for that.
Parliament is changing behaviour as a direct result of threats to MP’s.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

'Ignored member' alert (above)

I love he ignore function. But maybe I could live without the alerts.

Whoever you are, you're a twat

 

[Greenbag50]

 

[A1X]

trying to understand this: Labour MPs have been threaten, so Hoyle on his own decides to break protocol to put the Labour amendment first, so they can vote in favour. presumably to register their vote in favour of a non-SNP specified ceasfire declaration. and this is considered a good response to threats. hmmm.

It’s not a good response but it’s a response from an “I wouldn’t start from here” perspective. We know MPs are regularly threatened. In the last 10 years, two of them have been murdered in broad daylight. You can understand why Hoyle didn’t want a contentious debate such as this to lead to increased risks for sitting MPs.

As I’ve said, he’s now compromised and should be replaced, but I can at least understand his thought process as to why he allowed it (even if his failure to properly articulate this (twice) has just made things worse).

 

[Greenbag50]

It’s not a good response but it’s a response from an “I wouldn’t start from here” perspective. We know MPs are regularly threatened. In the last 10 years, two of them have been murdered in broad daylight. You can understand why Hoyle didn’t want a contentious debate such as this to lead to increased risks for sitting MPs.

As I’ve said, he’s now compromised and should be replaced, but I can at least understand his thought process as to why he allowed it (even if his failure to properly articulate this (twice) has just made things worse).

The whole point is MP’s getting threatened should not interrupt the democratic process of an elected official.
If we go down this path, those threatening will be emboldened and know they can influence what is being discussed and ultimately what laws are being passed in the House of Commons.
The UK will therefore will be no more than an activist haven where MP’s will act on threats to themselves and their families and not on the platform they were elected upon.
The vocal minority will rule.
I don’t want that

 

[Baldseagull]

The key point for me is the reason Labour MP’s wanted the amendment is due to threats from the public on abstaining from an SNP vote in November in the ceasefire.
Democracy in any country cannot be bullied by intimidating MP’s into voting one way or another by threats of violence.
This can’t be tolerated, otherwise it’s not democracy.

I find it less worrying for democracy if MPs are intimidated by a mob than bought by some individuals, but yes, neither situation results in proper democracy.

 

[clapham_gull]

Probably the worst indictment of the current administration from Johnson and after is everything is viewed through the lens of right wing versus left.

It has crippled debate on a number of issues and has infected all parties and a large chunk of their supporters.

We all accepted a few years ago (with a bit of grumbling) that it would be fair better if we took out own bags to the supermarket.

Imagine that debate now ?

Anyone with bags in the back of their car would be labelled a woke communist by the Tories with the backing of the Daily Mail.

 

[wellquickwoody]

I'm saving a days leave for the Friday after GE night. I intend to stay up all night watching interviews like this as various Tory arseholes lose their seats. Even JRM is looking less than certain to be an MP in the next parliament.

70% would be a fairly average turnout for a GE, but I though that by-elections were always quite low.

Can he do that? I thought it'd need to be voted through parliament (not that there'd be much opposition from most opposition parties).

I did the staying up thing when Kinnock was expected to win. Young, heart on sleeve, and rather unaware of how economics need to work in those days. I felt heartbroken when it all went tits up.

Now having voted Tory ever since Blair was ousted I will certainly not be doing so this time around. Either Labour or not bother, probably the former as I do like a strong government.

 

[TomandJerry]

Liz Truss, the former British prime minister, spoke at a far-right conference in America on Wednesday, styling herself as a populist who took on America’s equivalent of the “deep state” in her own country.

Former Conservative PM, tells CPAC she fell victim to UK’s ‘establishment … its bureaucrats and lawyers’"

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I did the staying up thing when Kinnock was expected to win. Young, heart on sleeve, and rather unaware of how economics need to work in those days. I felt heartbroken when it all went tits up.

Now having voted Tory ever since Blair was ousted I will certainly not be doing so this time around. Either Labour or not bother, probably the former as I do like a strong government.

I assume you mean a massive majority.

Nobody likes a weak government, surely? Lin-Lab pact and all that.

 

[WATFORD zero]

I did the staying up thing when Kinnock was expected to win. Young, heart on sleeve, and rather unaware of how economics need to work in those days. I felt heartbroken when it all went tits up.

Now having voted Tory ever since Blair was ousted I will certainly not be doing so this time around. Either Labour or not bother, probably the former as I do like a strong government.

Interesting idea. I don't care who I vote into Government on the other side of the world as long as they have a big majority

You must have been very pleased with your vote and result in 2019. That worked out well

 

[A1X]

Liz Truss, the former British prime minister, spoke at a far-right conference in America on Wednesday, styling herself as a populist who took on America’s equivalent of the “deep state” in her own country.

Former Conservative PM, tells CPAC she fell victim to UK’s ‘establishment … its bureaucrats and lawyers’"

Will she be using the fee to pay the extra I have to pay for my mortgage thanks to her, I wonder?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Liz Truss, the former British prime minister, spoke at a far-right conference in America on Wednesday, styling herself as a populist who took on America’s equivalent of the “deep state” in her own country.

Former Conservative PM, tells CPAC she fell victim to UK’s ‘establishment … its bureaucrats and lawyers’"

Her Labour supporting parents must despair of how she turned out. She started out as a Liberal. Still, grifters gonna grift.

 

[nicko31]

Her Labour supporting parents must despair of how she turned out. She started out as a Liberal. Still, grifters gonna grift.

I have a friend who used to work with her before she went into politics, always said she's got some strange ideas.

 

[wellquickwoody]

Interesting idea. I don't care who I vote into Government on the other side of the world as long as they have a big majority

You must have been very pleased with your vote and result in 2019. That worked out well

I only voted last time for the party that said that they would act upon the referendum result, even though I disagreed with the outcome. If Labour had the balls to do as the electorate had requested I would have voted for them.

 

[BBassic]

Former Conservative PM, tells CPAC she fell victim to UK’s ‘establishment … its bureaucrats and lawyers’"

Liz Truss fell victim to being a f***ing half-wit.

 

[BBassic]

I sometimes wonder if Liz Truss just can't eat lettuce now.

Does she recoil in fear at the sight of our leafy green vegetable, never again to enjoy the simple pleasure of a well made BLT?

 

[chickens]

I sometimes wonder if Liz Truss just can't eat lettuce now.

Does she recoil in fear at the sight of our leafy green vegetable, never again to enjoy the simple pleasure of a well made BLT?

A Bloody Liz Truss?

The bacon represents pork markets.
The lettuce invokes memories of her short lived reign.
The tomato is a reminder to vote for the Labour Party at the next election.

 

[ROSM]

The whole issue of yesterday is that politicians of all hues were playing games with a serious issue. Some were worse than others.

The snp motion went beyond calling for a ceasefire it aimed to apportion blame. Knowing this would be problematic for both tories and labour. More the latter as the former are shameless.

The tories were not planning to offer an amendment as they saw labour as the only losers in this debate. Labour then did offer an amendement which in normal circs would have been ok. Labour's amendment took blame out and did explain a ceasefire needs work from bot sides and did offer a what next element. Ironically thos is where france, nz, australia and canada alreay are as states national policy and US are moving there too. Should labour have got there quicker? Yes definitely

Tories then offer an amendment as they could see the snp trap has failed. Playing the system as it were.

Hoyle did break convention but he didnt break the rules or indeed precedent. As the letter above explains

Tories then pulled their amendment because they knew they would be subject to a rebellion of their own as many on their party would back the labour position (indeed many in snp do too). Point is their amendment never had the votes and was only put forward to try and stop the labour amendment being debated. That was trying to use the convention for party political games.

But rather than just losing they decided to take their ball home too. Snp then walked out too.

If tories hadnt offered an amendment there wouldn't have been the issue we had yesterday. As for tories ditching Hoyle? He has been ineffective at pmq's so they need to be careful what they wish for as the replacement could be a lot worse for them