Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Local By-Election Review : November 2018

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited December 2 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Local By-Election Review : November 2018

The nights may be starting to draw in and people’s minds are starting to turn to the thoughts of Christmas presents, but for the electors in the 22 council wards where there were local by-elections in November, the main discussion point was who to vote for in those local by-elections.

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 28,058
    First like the Tories!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,855
    edited December 2
    Still got that UKIP plunge. Interesting as ever to see the LD changes, given their national position as Harry notes.

    First like the Tories!

    For how much longer?
    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    As a remainer I see the most likely way we remain in the EU coming from a no deal crash. The government will quickly lose any last vestige of authority it has when it becomes clear there has been no real planning for the scenario.

    There appears to be a naive assumption from leavers that somehow the country will come together in the case of a hard brexit. I see absolutely no evidence for this.

    Wonderful.

    To be quite frank, I don't care overmuch about the EU one way or another. But I voted Remain becuase I believe that the economic dislocation leaving would cause outweighed the marginal increase in political sovereignty we would gain.

    The idea of causing economic Armageddon to rejoin an organisation as corrupt and ineffectual as the EU due to some abstract political theorising is anathema to me and I am sure to many other Remainers. It would certainly not be worth remaining or rejoining at such a price. It is certainly not something to cause hardship and misery for.

    And it is for these reasons that, having lost the key arguments, I want to see Parliament grow up and pass this deal.
    Good post
    That doesn’t look as though that’s going to happen. Then what?
    Disaster.

    And I hope and believe that every single last MP who votes against this deal loses their seats, as some small compensation for those whose jobs and lives they wantonly destroyed by their complacency.
    I can see hoping that, but you cannot seriously 'believe' they will lose their seats. Opposing it is too popular to see so many people lose their seats.
    I think it will suddenly become much less popular if we don't pass it and the realistic alternative kicks in.
    At which point no MP is going to want an election if they are all being tarred with that brush!
    Too late. There will be one within three years. People will remember.
    They'll remember their own tribalism. Who, exactly, will be defeating them? A series of 'you should have taken the damn deal' candidates, working on a cross party basis to take down Labour, LDs, SNP, 100 Tories etc? Come on.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,321
    Third
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,855

    ydoethur said:

    As a remainer I see the most likely way we remain in the EU coming from a no deal crash. The government will quickly lose any last vestige of authority it has when it becomes clear there has been no real planning for the scenario.

    There appears to be a naive assumption from leavers that somehow the country will come together in the case of a hard brexit. I see absolutely no evidence for this.

    Wonderful.

    To be quite frank, I don't care overmuch about the EU one way or another. But I voted Remain becuase I believe that the economic dislocation leaving would cause outweighed the marginal increase in political sovereignty we would gain.

    The idea of causing economic Armageddon to rejoin an organisation as corrupt and ineffectual as the EU due to some abstract political theorising is anathema to me and I am sure to many other Remainers. It would certainly not be worth remaining or rejoining at such a price. It is certainly not something to cause hardship and misery for.

    And it is for these reasons that, having lost the key arguments, I want to see Parliament grow up and pass this deal.
    Good post
    That doesn’t look as though that’s going to happen. Then what?
    She should keep presenting it every week - through Christmas if necessary - until the HoC get it right.
    Kind of wish the ERG had succeeding in a vote of no confidence being called which she would win, so that she was secure enough in the role to do just that, it would be hilarious. The Commons keeps telling her no, come up with something else, and she says no right back.

    Not necessarily sterling governance, but we're not about to get that anyway.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 14,352
    That Parliament would be better hung than Lloyd George.

    How would anyone form a government?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,321
    As with the opinion polls the remarkable thing about the local by-election vote tally is how well the Tory vote she is holding up, considering.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 8,699
    Thanks Harry
  • RobDRobD Posts: 34,780
    Thanks for compiling the figures, Harry.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 14,352
    IanB2 said:

    As with the opinion polls the remarkable thing about the local by-election vote tally is how well the Tory vote she is holding up, considering.

    That is a superb Freudian slip.
  • IanB2 said:

    As with the opinion polls the remarkable thing about the local by-election vote tally is how well the Tory vote she is holding up, considering.

    TM is an asset to the party - the rest are not at this time
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 815
    Lib Dems proving surprisingly resilient locally. We’ve had two by-elections to Oxfordshire County Council in the last month, both Lib Dem defences which the Conservatives have fought furiously (in the hope they could then unship the Independents from their ruling coalition, and govern alone). In both cases the Lib Dems have romped home. Maybe the cockroach tendencies are returning...
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,321
    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    As with the opinion polls the remarkable thing about the local by-election vote tally is how well the Tory vote she is holding up, considering.

    That is a superb Freudian slip.
    Indeed. Share, of course. But Big G is right that people are thinking TM when they vote Tory, and (as even HY would have to concede from the polling) the likelihood is that a change of leadership right now could put their vote share significantly at risk. Particularly if they went for one of the people that gotten us into this fine mess in the first place.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 11,032

    Lib Dems proving surprisingly resilient locally. We’ve had two by-elections to Oxfordshire County Council in the last month, both Lib Dem defences which the Conservatives have fought furiously (in the hope they could then unship the Independents from their ruling coalition, and govern alone). In both cases the Lib Dems have romped home. Maybe the cockroach tendencies are returning...

    Incidentally, the resilience of the Tories in local govt is in marked contrast to the 1990s. Very significant and the increased organisational strength of being the largest party of local Govt really helps GE campaigning.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 21,057
    FPT @ydoethur
    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    I see they are at it again today in France.

    The stereotypical Frenchman is always at it.

    And they riot a lot as well...
    Unlike the supine UK the French are still able to walk upright and do not act like sheeple when their politicians stiff them. If only they could sell the UK some backbones.
    Everyone gets my puns on doors, but not my awesome puns about the French being always at it! Very annoying.

    They missed my puns about the bangs on Nelson's Column as well.
    Did you know the story about the lions at Nelson’s Column? It would appeal to your sense of humour...
    No. Did they suck?
    If you’ve ever looked closely at them there’s something a little ... odd ... about them

    Landseer was commissioned to design them. Problem was he had never been to Africa or seen a lion so he had no idea what they looked like. Fortunately (albeit not for the lion) one at London Zoo had recently died so he had them send over the remains.

    Now this was obviously a very important commission so he was keen to get it just right. However he took so long about the sketches that the lion began to decompose and the hind quarters fell off before he’d drawn them. In a panic he did the only thing he could think of and used his pet Labrador as a model for the lion’s legs and back....

    I guess that shows you have to be careful when working with a deadline.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 23,321
    Mortimer said:

    Lib Dems proving surprisingly resilient locally. We’ve had two by-elections to Oxfordshire County Council in the last month, both Lib Dem defences which the Conservatives have fought furiously (in the hope they could then unship the Independents from their ruling coalition, and govern alone). In both cases the Lib Dems have romped home. Maybe the cockroach tendencies are returning...

    Incidentally, the resilience of the Tories in local govt is in marked contrast to the 1990s. Very significant and the increased organisational strength of being the largest party of local Govt really helps GE campaigning.
    It's a good point. During the last long Tory government they were hollowed out to the point the MPs were the last to go. Much the same happened to Labour. The Tories this time are very much holding their own.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 6,222
    @HarryHayfield

    Good as ever, sir: thank you.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 14,352
    edited December 2
    Charles said:

    FPT @ydoethur

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    I see they are at it again today in France.

    The stereotypical Frenchman is always at it.

    And they riot a lot as well...
    Unlike the supine UK the French are still able to walk upright and do not act like sheeple when their politicians stiff them. If only they could sell the UK some backbones.
    Everyone gets my puns on doors, but not my awesome puns about the French being always at it! Very annoying.

    They missed my puns about the bangs on Nelson's Column as well.
    Did you know the story about the lions at Nelson’s Column? It would appeal to your sense of humour...
    No. Did they suck?
    If you’ve ever looked closely at them there’s something a little ... odd ... about them

    Landseer was commissioned to design them. Problem was he had never been to Africa or seen a lion so he had no idea what they looked like. Fortunately (albeit not for the lion) one at London Zoo had recently died so he had them send over the remains.

    Now this was obviously a very important commission so he was keen to get it just right. However he took so long about the sketches that the lion began to decompose and the hind quarters fell off before he’d drawn them. In a panic he did the only thing he could think of and used his pet Labrador as a model for the lion’s legs and back....

    I guess that shows you have to be careful when working with a deadline.

    Did this dog his later career? Or did it just tail off?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,675

    Lib Dems proving surprisingly resilient locally. We’ve had two by-elections to Oxfordshire County Council in the last month, both Lib Dem defences which the Conservatives have fought furiously (in the hope they could then unship the Independents from their ruling coalition, and govern alone). In both cases the Lib Dems have romped home. Maybe the cockroach tendencies are returning...

    Locally, they are often the only alternative. And if they do a good job locally, then good for them. But when it comes to national politics, I have very little time for them.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 6,222
    Incidentally, what is the date beyond which the reduction of seats from 650 to 600 cannot take effect?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 21,057
    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    FPT @ydoethur

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    I see they are at it again today in France.

    The stereotypical Frenchman is always at it.

    And they riot a lot as well...
    Unlike the supine UK the French are still able to walk upright and do not act like sheeple when their politicians stiff them. If only they could sell the UK some backbones.
    Everyone gets my puns on doors, but not my awesome puns about the French being always at it! Very annoying.

    They missed my puns about the bangs on Nelson's Column as well.
    Did you know the story about the lions at Nelson’s Column? It would appeal to your sense of humour...
    No. Did they suck?
    If you’ve ever looked closely at them there’s something a little ... odd ... about them

    Landseer was commissioned to design them. Problem was he had never been to Africa or seen a lion so he had no idea what they looked like. Fortunately (albeit not for the lion) one at London Zoo had recently died so he had them send over the remains.

    Now this was obviously a very important commission so he was keen to get it just right. However he took so long about the sketches that the lion began to decompose and the hind quarters fell off before he’d drawn them. In a panic he did the only thing he could think of and used his pet Labrador as a model for the lion’s legs and back....

    I guess that shows you have to be careful when working with a deadline.

    Did this dog his later career? Or did it just tail off?
    I’ll ig-gnaw that barking remark.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 11,032
    edited December 2
    DavidL said:

    Mortimer said:

    Lib Dems proving surprisingly resilient locally. We’ve had two by-elections to Oxfordshire County Council in the last month, both Lib Dem defences which the Conservatives have fought furiously (in the hope they could then unship the Independents from their ruling coalition, and govern alone). In both cases the Lib Dems have romped home. Maybe the cockroach tendencies are returning...

    Incidentally, the resilience of the Tories in local govt is in marked contrast to the 1990s. Very significant and the increased organisational strength of being the largest party of local Govt really helps GE campaigning.
    It's a good point. During the last long Tory government they were hollowed out to the point the MPs were the last to go. Much the same happened to Labour. The Tories this time are very much holding their own.
    It’s part of how I see the country outside London and the big cities moving towards Conservatism since 2005. Dorset, for example, now has seats that were LD in 2014 with 15k+ Tory majorities, and Labour in 2009 with 12k plus Tory majorities.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 14,352
    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    FPT @ydoethur

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    I see they are at it again today in France.

    The stereotypical Frenchman is always at it.

    And they riot a lot as well...
    Unlike the supine UK the French are still able to walk upright and do not act like sheeple when their politicians stiff them. If only they could sell the UK some backbones.
    Everyone gets my puns on doors, but not my awesome puns about the French being always at it! Very annoying.

    They missed my puns about the bangs on Nelson's Column as well.
    Did you know the story about the lions at Nelson’s Column? It would appeal to your sense of humour...
    No. Did they suck?
    If you’ve ever looked closely at them there’s something a little ... odd ... about them

    Landseer was commissioned to design them. Problem was he had never been to Africa or seen a lion so he had no idea what they looked like. Fortunately (albeit not for the lion) one at London Zoo had recently died so he had them send over the remains.

    Now this was obviously a very important commission so he was keen to get it just right. However he took so long about the sketches that the lion began to decompose and the hind quarters fell off before he’d drawn them. In a panic he did the only thing he could think of and used his pet Labrador as a model for the lion’s legs and back....

    I guess that shows you have to be careful when working with a deadline.

    Did this dog his later career? Or did it just tail off?
    I’ll ig-gnaw that barking remark.
    I'd be lion if I said I didn't admire the puns, but I still think you're being a big catty.
  • Outside the top 4... Like spurs

    #sadface
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 21,057
    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    FPT @ydoethur

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    I see they are at it again today in France.

    The stereotypical Frenchman is always at it.

    And they riot a lot as well...
    Unlike the supine UK the French are still able to walk upright and do not act like sheeple when their politicians stiff them. If only they could sell the UK some backbones.
    Everyone gets my puns on doors, but not my awesome puns about the French being always at it! Very annoying.

    They missed my puns about the bangs on Nelson's Column as well.
    Did you know the story about the lions at Nelson’s Column? It would appeal to your sense of humour...
    No. Did they suck?
    If you’ve ever looked closely at them there’s something a little ... odd ... about them

    Landseer was commissioned to design them. Problem was he had never been to Africa or seen a lion so he had no idea what they looked like. Fortunately (albeit not for the lion) one at London Zoo had recently died so he had them send over the remains.

    Now this was obviously a very important commission so he was keen to get it just right. However he took so long about the sketches that the lion began to decompose and the hind quarters fell off before he’d drawn them. In a panic he did the only thing he could think of and used his pet Labrador as a model for the lion’s legs and back....

    I guess that shows you have to be careful when working with a deadline.

    Did this dog his later career? Or did it just tail off?
    I’ll ig-gnaw that barking remark.
    I'd be lion if I said I didn't admire the puns, but I still think you're being a big catty.
    Why of course. Cats voted Leave
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 28,058
    Charles said:

    FPT @ydoethur

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    I see they are at it again today in France.

    The stereotypical Frenchman is always at it.

    And they riot a lot as well...
    Unlike the supine UK the French are still able to walk upright and do not act like sheeple when their politicians stiff them. If only they could sell the UK some backbones.
    Everyone gets my puns on doors, but not my awesome puns about the French being always at it! Very annoying.

    They missed my puns about the bangs on Nelson's Column as well.
    Did you know the story about the lions at Nelson’s Column? It would appeal to your sense of humour...
    No. Did they suck?
    If you’ve ever looked closely at them there’s something a little ... odd ... about them

    Landseer was commissioned to design them. Problem was he had never been to Africa or seen a lion so he had no idea what they looked like. Fortunately (albeit not for the lion) one at London Zoo had recently died so he had them send over the remains.

    Now this was obviously a very important commission so he was keen to get it just right. However he took so long about the sketches that the lion began to decompose and the hind quarters fell off before he’d drawn them. In a panic he did the only thing he could think of and used his pet Labrador as a model for the lion’s legs and back....

    I guess that shows you have to be careful when working with a deadline.

    Landseer, the sculptor, had asked for a lion that had died at the London Zoo to be brought to his studio. He took so long to complete sketches that its corpse began to decompose and some parts had to be improvised. The statues have paws that resemble cats more than lions.[33]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trafalgar_Square
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 5,973
    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    FPT @ydoethur

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    I see they are at it again today in France.

    The stereotypical Frenchman is always at it.

    And they riot a lot as well...
    Unlike the supine UK the French are still able to walk upright and do not act like sheeple when their politicians stiff them. If only they could sell the UK some backbones.
    Everyone gets my puns on doors, but not my awesome puns about the French being always at it! Very annoying.

    They missed my puns about the bangs on Nelson's Column as well.
    Did you know the story about the lions at Nelson’s Column? It would appeal to your sense of humour...
    No. Did they suck?
    If you’ve ever looked closely at them there’s something a little ... odd ... about them

    Landseer was commissioned to design them. Problem was he had never been to Africa or seen a lion so he had no idea what they looked like. Fortunately (albeit not for the lion) one at London Zoo had recently died so he had them send over the remains.

    Now this was obviously a very important commission so he was keen to get it just right. However he took so long about the sketches that the lion began to decompose and the hind quarters fell off before he’d drawn them. In a panic he did the only thing he could think of and used his pet Labrador as a model for the lion’s legs and back....

    I guess that shows you have to be careful when working with a deadline.

    Did this dog his later career? Or did it just tail off?
    I’ll ig-gnaw that barking remark.
    I'd be lion if I said I didn't admire the puns, but I still think you're being a big catty.
    Why of course. Cats voted Leave
    Well that's another reason to annul the referendum result - how many of those 17.4m were cats?!

    :wink:
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 1,227

    Lib Dems proving surprisingly resilient locally. We’ve had two by-elections to Oxfordshire County Council in the last month, both Lib Dem defences which the Conservatives have fought furiously (in the hope they could then unship the Independents from their ruling coalition, and govern alone). In both cases the Lib Dems have romped home. Maybe the cockroach tendencies are returning...

    It's possible that the local Conservatives fought too furiously.
    In the Wantage and Grove one, for example, the Conservatives put out a late attack leaflet on the retiring Lib Dem Councillor, accusing her of fleeing the electorate and calling an unnecessary by-election.

    Unfortunately, she was fairly well-known, so the fact that she'd been fighting cancer for some time, was physically exhausted, and had still been keeping up a long schedule of public engagements, wasn't unknown to the electors. This made the Conservatives look extremely unpleasant.

    The thing is - the people on whom it would have worked to try to swing around were probably the less engaged and less likely to turn out anyway. Those who were more engaged became more likely to turn out against them. On a wet and dark November evening, that sort of thing really helps the attackee.

    Long story short - there can be local factors in these local elections. I'd say it's encouraging for the Lib Dems (and very necessary), yes, but not necessarily (yet) a sign of wider recovery. To be honest, I think that Brexit being resolved one way or another is necessary for a wider Lib Dem revival - they've become associated almost solely with "anti-Brexit" to the point where any non-Brexit policies or stances are ignored or forgotten.

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 21,255

    Charles said:

    FPT @ydoethur

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    I see they are at it again today in France.

    The stereotypical Frenchman is always at it.

    And they riot a lot as well...
    Unlike the supine UK the French are still able to walk upright and do not act like sheeple when their politicians stiff them. If only they could sell the UK some backbones.
    Everyone gets my puns on doors, but not my awesome puns about the French being always at it! Very annoying.

    They missed my puns about the bangs on Nelson's Column as well.
    Did you know the story about the lions at Nelson’s Column? It would appeal to your sense of humour...
    No. Did they suck?
    If you’ve ever looked closely at them there’s something a little ... odd ... about them

    Landseer was commissioned to design them. Problem was he had never been to Africa or seen a lion so he had no idea what they looked like. Fortunately (albeit not for the lion) one at London Zoo had recently died so he had them send over the remains.

    Now this was obviously a very important commission so he was keen to get it just right. However he took so long about the sketches that the lion began to decompose and the hind quarters fell off before he’d drawn them. In a panic he did the only thing he could think of and used his pet Labrador as a model for the lion’s legs and back....

    I guess that shows you have to be careful when working with a deadline.

    Landseer, the sculptor, had asked for a lion that had died at the London Zoo to be brought to his studio. He took so long to complete sketches that its corpse began to decompose and some parts had to be improvised. The statues have paws that resemble cats more than lions.[33]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trafalgar_Square
    Landseer had the ability to draw two pictures simultaneously, one with his right hand, the other with his left.....
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,855
    viewcode said:

    Incidentally, what is the date beyond which the reduction of seats from 650 to 600 cannot take effect?

    I was wondering the same thing. It seems pretty complicated by the fact that plenty of people expect an early GE next year, in which case the government would hold off laying it before parliament (even if they were not, in any case, delaying now because it would fail at present). Labour apparently waited a year for the Welsh part of the review before laying it before parliament, so perhaps there is no end date and, assuming no early GE, it could be approve in late 2021 for the 2022 election?
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 859
    Mortimer said:

    Lib Dems proving surprisingly resilient locally. We’ve had two by-elections to Oxfordshire County Council in the last month, both Lib Dem defences which the Conservatives have fought furiously (in the hope they could then unship the Independents from their ruling coalition, and govern alone). In both cases the Lib Dems have romped home. Maybe the cockroach tendencies are returning...

    Incidentally, the resilience of the Tories in local govt is in marked contrast to the 1990s. Very significant and the increased organisational strength of being the largest party of local Govt really helps GE campaigning.
    The Tories have only been in power 8 years whereas in the 1990s they had been in power nationally for 13 years plus. It has also to be remembered the Tories had a vintage year in gains in May 1992, although being just one month after the GE this suppressed opposition turnout. So long periods of Government nationally do not automatically mean the annihilation of a parties local Cllrs. I think Corbyn's Labour being the alternative will sustain the Tories for a while yet!
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 28,058

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    FPT @ydoethur

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    I see they are at it again today in France.

    The stereotypical Frenchman is always at it.

    And they riot a lot as well...
    Unlike the supine UK the French are still able to walk upright and do not act like sheeple when their politicians stiff them. If only they could sell the UK some backbones.
    Everyone gets my puns on doors, but not my awesome puns about the French being always at it! Very annoying.

    They missed my puns about the bangs on Nelson's Column as well.
    Did you know the story about the lions at Nelson’s Column? It would appeal to your sense of humour...
    No. Did they suck?
    If you’ve ever looked closely at them there’s something a little ... odd ... about them

    Landseer was commissioned to design them. Problem was he had never been to Africa or seen a lion so he had no idea what they looked like. Fortunately (albeit not for the lion) one at London Zoo had recently died so he had them send over the remains.

    Now this was obviously a very important commission so he was keen to get it just right. However he took so long about the sketches that the lion began to decompose and the hind quarters fell off before he’d drawn them. In a panic he did the only thing he could think of and used his pet Labrador as a model for the lion’s legs and back....

    I guess that shows you have to be careful when working with a deadline.

    Did this dog his later career? Or did it just tail off?
    I’ll ig-gnaw that barking remark.
    I'd be lion if I said I didn't admire the puns, but I still think you're being a big catty.
    Why of course. Cats voted Leave
    Well that's another reason to annul the referendum result - how many of those 17.4m were cats?!

    :wink:
    You need to paws for thought!
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 6,222
    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    Incidentally, what is the date beyond which the reduction of seats from 650 to 600 cannot take effect?

    I was wondering the same thing. It seems pretty complicated by the fact that plenty of people expect an early GE next year, in which case the government would hold off laying it before parliament (even if they were not, in any case, delaying now because it would fail at present). Labour apparently waited a year for the Welsh part of the review before laying it before parliament, so perhaps there is no end date and, assuming no early GE, it could be approve in late 2021 for the 2022 election?
    Damn. I appreciate some people want the reduction, but having the same seats for 2010, 2015 and 2017 have made them very useful from a statistical point of view, so I was hoping the next elec would have the same seats. :(
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 14,352

    You need to paws for thought!

    Well, I am going to paws for sleep. I am hanging on to my energy levels by a whisker as it is, and an early night is my mane hope of building them up.

    Good night.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 28,058
    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    Incidentally, what is the date beyond which the reduction of seats from 650 to 600 cannot take effect?

    I was wondering the same thing. It seems pretty complicated by the fact that plenty of people expect an early GE next year, in which case the government would hold off laying it before parliament (even if they were not, in any case, delaying now because it would fail at present). Labour apparently waited a year for the Welsh part of the review before laying it before parliament, so perhaps there is no end date and, assuming no early GE, it could be approve in late 2021 for the 2022 election?
    Damn. I appreciate some people want the reduction, but having the same seats for 2010, 2015 and 2017 have made them very useful from a statistical point of view, so I was hoping the next elec would have the same seats. :(
    Reduce the number of Unelected Has-Beens Lords, NOT elected MPs!
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 859

    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    Incidentally, what is the date beyond which the reduction of seats from 650 to 600 cannot take effect?

    I was wondering the same thing. It seems pretty complicated by the fact that plenty of people expect an early GE next year, in which case the government would hold off laying it before parliament (even if they were not, in any case, delaying now because it would fail at present). Labour apparently waited a year for the Welsh part of the review before laying it before parliament, so perhaps there is no end date and, assuming no early GE, it could be approve in late 2021 for the 2022 election?
    Damn. I appreciate some people want the reduction, but having the same seats for 2010, 2015 and 2017 have made them very useful from a statistical point of view, so I was hoping the next elec would have the same seats. :(
    Reduce the number of Unelected Has-Beens Lords, NOT elected MPs!
    They should get rid of the H of L altogether IMO. The sheer number of peers and the fact some of them have done little public service to even get their places: the hereditary element or the people who have bought them! The rest of them retired from politics and expect this cushy number where they get paid tax free for sitting on their arses and breathing and occasionally making comments.

    The only thing the H of L does is bring in some expert knowledge from experts but they could give advice to H of C select committees and elected officials could validate the contribution or discard it.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,855
    edited December 2
    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    Incidentally, what is the date beyond which the reduction of seats from 650 to 600 cannot take effect?

    I was wondering the same thing. It seems pretty complicated by the fact that plenty of people expect an early GE next year, in which case the government would hold off laying it before parliament (even if they were not, in any case, delaying now because it would fail at present). Labour apparently waited a year for the Welsh part of the review before laying it before parliament, so perhaps there is no end date and, assuming no early GE, it could be approve in late 2021 for the 2022 election?
    Damn. I appreciate some people want the reduction, but having the same seats for 2010, 2015 and 2017 have made them very useful from a statistical point of view, so I was hoping the next elec would have the same seats. :(
    I really don't think they will change. Who is going to make it a priority now? It is mere speculation on my part.

    The reduction seems almost incidental to just the need to review because of the updated figures.

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    FPT @ydoethur

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    I see they are at it again today in France.

    The stereotypical Frenchman is always at it.

    And they riot a lot as well...
    Unlike the supine UK the French are still able to walk upright and do not act like sheeple when their politicians stiff them. If only they could sell the UK some backbones.
    Everyone gets my puns on doors, but not my awesome puns about the French being always at it! Very annoying.

    They missed my puns about the bangs on Nelson's Column as well.
    Did you know the story about the lions at Nelson’s Column? It would appeal to your sense of humour...
    No. Did they suck?
    If you’ve ever looked

    Did this dog his later career? Or did it just tail off?
    I’ll ig-gnaw that barking remark.
    I'd be lion if I said I didn't admire the puns, but I still think you're being a big catty.
    Why of course. Cats voted Leave
    Well that's another reason to annul the referendum result - how many of those 17.4m were cats?!

    :wink:
    Outrageous suggestion - there were barely any cheetahs.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,855

    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    Incidentally, what is the date beyond which the reduction of seats from 650 to 600 cannot take effect?

    I was wondering the same thing. It seems pretty complicated by the fact that plenty of people expect an early GE next year, in which case the government would hold off laying it before parliament (even if they were not, in any case, delaying now because it would fail at present). Labour apparently waited a year for the Welsh part of the review before laying it before parliament, so perhaps there is no end date and, assuming no early GE, it could be approve in late 2021 for the 2022 election?
    Damn. I appreciate some people want the reduction, but having the same seats for 2010, 2015 and 2017 have made them very useful from a statistical point of view, so I was hoping the next elec would have the same seats. :(
    Reduce the number of Unelected Has-Beens Lords, NOT elected MPs!
    At this rate we're not even going to get rid of our MEPs, so not much reduction going on all around.
  • See Jose Mourinho announced yesterday he was targeting Jordan Pickford of Everton as a replacement for David De Gea.

    And today Pickford made an absolute horlicks of a mistake against Liverpool at Anfield in added time handing Liverpool victory

    Is there anyone Mourinho doesn't destroy. He has to go
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 5,973

    See Jose Mourinho announced yesterday he was targeting Jordan Pickford of Everton as a replacement for David De Gea.

    And today Pickford made an absolute horlicks of a mistake against Liverpool at Anfield in added time handing Liverpool victory

    Is there anyone Mourinho doesn't destroy. He has to go

    A bit hard to blame Jose for Pickford's howler, surely?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,855

    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    Incidentally, what is the date beyond which the reduction of seats from 650 to 600 cannot take effect?

    I was wondering the same thing. It seems pretty complicated by the fact that plenty of people expect an early GE next year, in which case the government would hold off laying it before parliament (even if they were not, in any case, delaying now because it would fail at present). Labour apparently waited a year for the Welsh part of the review before laying it before parliament, so perhaps there is no end date and, assuming no early GE, it could be approve in late 2021 for the 2022 election?
    Damn. I appreciate some people want the reduction, but having the same seats for 2010, 2015 and 2017 have made them very useful from a statistical point of view, so I was hoping the next elec would have the same seats. :(
    Reduce the number of Unelected Has-Beens Lords, NOT elected MPs!
    They should get rid of the H of L altogether IMO. The sheer number of peers and the fact some of them have done little public service to even get their places: the hereditary element or the people who have bought them! The rest of them retired from politics and expect this cushy number where they get paid tax free for sitting on their arses and breathing and occasionally making comments.

    The only thing the H of L does is bring in some expert knowledge from experts but they could give advice to H of C select committees and elected officials could validate the contribution or discard it.
    I was going to say it was Labour policy to get rid of the HoL, but looking at it I can see it was a bit more equivocal, being a 'fundamental belief' the second chamber should be democratically elected but only explicitly talking about measures for the 'interim period'. The LD one was a bit punchier about reforming it with a 'proper democratic mandate' but unclear on how that would be or when.

    So I wouldn't get your hopes up that it would be swift, even if Corbyn gets in - no doubt there would be plans to abolish it, but seems like the parties are still keeping it flexible on how they would do it.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 859
    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    Incidentally, what is the date beyond which the reduction of seats from 650 to 600 cannot take effect?

    I was wondering the same thing. It seems pretty complicated by the fact that plenty of people expect an early GE next year, in which case the government would hold off laying it before parliament (even if they were not, in any case, delaying now because it would fail at present). Labour apparently waited a year for the Welsh part of the review before laying it before parliament, so perhaps there is no end date and, assuming no early GE, it could be approve in late 2021 for the 2022 election?
    Damn. I appreciate some people want the reduction, but having the same seats for 2010, 2015 and 2017 have made them very useful from a statistical point of view, so I was hoping the next elec would have the same seats. :(
    Reduce the number of Unelected Has-Beens Lords, NOT elected MPs!
    At this rate we're not even going to get rid of our MEPs, so not much reduction going on all around.
    MEP's are at least elected! Mind you if the system in the UK had not been changed from FPTP I doubt UKIP would ever have gained the traction they did. No Nigel Farage/UKIP - No Brexit as a Tory leader would never have had to fight for votes on that issue.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 10,406
    My fantasy football team had a good week, only Salah/Mane let me down.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,855
    edited December 2

    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    Incidentally, what is the date beyond which the reduction of seats from 650 to 600 cannot take effect?

    I was wondering the same thing. It seems pretty complicated by the fact that plenty of people expect an early GE next year, in which case the government would hold off laying it before parliament (even if they were not, in any case, delaying now because it would fail at present). Labour apparently waited a year for the Welsh part of the review before laying it before parliament, so perhaps there is no end date and, assuming no early GE, it could be approve in late 2021 for the 2022 election?
    Damn. I appreciate some people want the reduction, but having the same seats for 2010, 2015 and 2017 have made them very useful from a statistical point of view, so I was hoping the next elec would have the same seats. :(
    Reduce the number of Unelected Has-Beens Lords, NOT elected MPs!
    At this rate we're not even going to get rid of our MEPs, so not much reduction going on all around.
    MEP's are at least elected! .
    True, but so are MPs and it was still all the rage to suggest reducing their number a few years back and it was at least one reduction in political expenses we could have expected!.
  • Dec on I'm a celeb... Who puts pineapple on pizza.... Perverts that's who.. . and Australians....

    Same thing really..... "

    Runs off screen ..
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 5,973
    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    I was wondering the same thing. It seems pretty complicated by the fact that plenty of people expect an early GE next year, in which case the government would hold off laying it before parliament (even if they were not, in any case, delaying now because it would fail at present). Labour apparently waited a year for the Welsh part of the review before laying it before parliament, so perhaps there is no end date and, assuming no early GE, it could be approve in late 2021 for the 2022 election?
    Damn. I appreciate some people want the reduction, but having the same seats for 2010, 2015 and 2017 have made them very useful from a statistical point of view, so I was hoping the next elec would have the same seats. :(
    I really don't think they will change. Who is going to make it a priority now? It is mere speculation on my part.

    The reduction seems almost incidental to just the need to review because of the updated figures.

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    FPT @ydoethur

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    I see they are at it again today in France.

    The stereotypical Frenchman is always at it.

    And they riot a lot as well...
    Unlike the supine UK the French are still able to walk upright and do not act like sheeple when their politicians stiff them. If only they could sell the UK some backbones.
    Everyone gets my puns on doors, but not my awesome puns about the French being always at it! Very annoying.

    They missed my puns about the bangs on Nelson's Column as well.
    Did you know the story about the lions at Nelson’s Column? It would appeal to your sense of humour...
    No. Did they suck?
    If you’ve ever looked

    Did this dog his later career? Or did it just tail off?
    I’ll ig-gnaw that barking remark.
    I'd be lion if I said I didn't admire the puns, but I still think you're being a big catty.
    Why of course. Cats voted Leave
    Well that's another reason to annul the referendum result - how many of those 17.4m were cats?!

    :wink:
    Outrageous suggestion - there were barely any cheetahs.
    What do you mean? Leave.EU were always lion!
  • FishingFishing Posts: 382
    Damn your facts, Harry. Everybody knows that Brexit is finishing the Tories forever as a party of government.

    How could trying to deliver a policy that people voted for possibly do otherwise?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 21,255
    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    Incidentally, what is the date beyond which the reduction of seats from 650 to 600 cannot take effect?

    I was wondering the same thing. It seems pretty complicated by the fact that plenty of people expect an early GE next year, in which case the government would hold off laying it before parliament (even if they were not, in any case, delaying now because it would fail at present). Labour apparently waited a year for the Welsh part of the review before laying it before parliament, so perhaps there is no end date and, assuming no early GE, it could be approve in late 2021 for the 2022 election?
    Damn. I appreciate some people want the reduction, but having the same seats for 2010, 2015 and 2017 have made them very useful from a statistical point of view, so I was hoping the next elec would have the same seats. :(
    I really don't think they will change. Who is going to make it a priority now? It is mere speculation on my part.

    The reduction seems almost incidental to just the need to review because of the updated figures.

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    FPT @ydoethur

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    I see they are at it again today in France.

    The stereotypical Frenchman is always at it.

    And they riot a lot as well...
    Unlike the supine UK the French are still able to walk upright and do not act like sheeple when their politicians stiff them. If only they could sell the UK some backbones.
    Everyone gets my puns on doors, but not my awesome puns about the French being always at it! Very annoying.

    They missed my puns about the bangs on Nelson's Column as well.
    Did you know the story about the lions at Nelson’s Column? It would appeal to your sense of humour...
    No. Did they suck?
    If you’ve ever looked

    Did this dog his later career? Or did it just tail off?
    I’ll ig-gnaw that barking remark.
    I'd be lion if I said I didn't admire the puns, but I still think you're being a big catty.
    Why of course. Cats voted Leave
    Well that's another reason to annul the referendum result - how many of those 17.4m were cats?!

    :wink:
    Outrageous suggestion - there were barely any cheetahs.
    The numbers ocelot wildly.....
  • NotchNotch Posts: 145
    edited December 2
    The biggest story of the next few days is likely to be the Government's alleged contempt against the Commons. The Commons decided unanimously to demand that the Government hand over the full legal advice it received from Attorney General (and cabinet minister) Geoffrey Cox on its draft withdrawal agreement. Theresa May refused on the grounds that the advice any client receives from their lawyers is privileged. "That’s the same for government as it is for any member of the public," she says. Rupert Murdoch's Sunday Times has since published leaked details. What the prime minister omits to take account of is that Parliament has privileges which are not the same as those held by any other institution or person. The Commons has the authority to commit an MP to the clocktower of the Palace of Westminster (cue an easy decision for picture editors around the world - Big Ben plus portcullis), and to suspend them or expel them from membership of Parliament.

    Pass the popcorn.

    And since there is cabinet collective responsibility...
  • See Jose Mourinho announced yesterday he was targeting Jordan Pickford of Everton as a replacement for David De Gea.

    And today Pickford made an absolute horlicks of a mistake against Liverpool at Anfield in added time handing Liverpool victory

    Is there anyone Mourinho doesn't destroy. He has to go

    A bit hard to blame Jose for Pickford's howler, surely?
    Not really. Pickford distracted by Jose

    But seriously I was making a wider point.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,855
    edited December 2
    I'm always being told how wrong he is about everything, so I know for certain that objectors will not take his words at face value, that would be just silly.
  • kle4 said:

    I'm always being told how wrong he is about everything, so I know for certain that objectors will not take his words at face value, that would be just silly.
    I do not believe anything in the Telegraph. It is UKIP central these days
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 5,973

    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    I was wondering the same thing. It seems pretty complicated by the fact that plenty of people expect an early GE next year, in which case the government would hold off laying it before parliament (even if they were not, in any case, delaying now because it would fail at present). Labour apparently waited a year for the Welsh part of the review before laying it before parliament, so perhaps there is no end date and, assuming no early GE, it could be approve in late 2021 for the 2022 election?
    Damn. I appreciate some people want the reduction, but having the same seats for 2010, 2015 and 2017 have made them very useful from a statistical point of view, so I was hoping the next elec would have the same seats. :(
    I really don't think they will change. Who is going to make it a priority now? It is mere speculation on my part.

    The reduction seems almost incidental to just the need to review because of the updated figures.

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    FPT @ydoethur

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    I see they are at it again today in France.

    The stereotypical Frenchman is always at it.

    And they riot a lot as well...
    Unlike the supine UK the French are still able to walk upright and do not act like sheeple when their politicians stiff them. If only they could sell the UK some backbones.
    Everyone gets my puns on doors, but not my awesome puns about the French being always at it! Very annoying.

    They missed my puns about the bangs on Nelson's Column as well.
    Did you know the story about the lions at Nelson’s Column? It would appeal to your sense of humour...
    No. Did they suck?
    If you’ve ever looked

    Did this dog his later career? Or did it just tail off?
    I’ll ig-gnaw that barking remark.
    I'd be lion if I said I didn't admire the puns, but I still think you're being a big catty.
    Why of course. Cats voted Leave
    Well that's another reason to annul the referendum result - how many of those 17.4m were cats?!

    :wink:
    Outrageous suggestion - there were barely any cheetahs.
    The numbers ocelot wildly.....
    Any lynx to support that assertion?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,855
    Notch said:

    The biggest story of the next few days is likely to be the Government's alleged contempt against the Commons. The Commons decided unanimously to demand that the Government hand over the full legal advice it received from Attorney General (and cabinet minister) Geoffrey Cox on its draft withdrawal agreement. Theresa May refused on the grounds that the advice any client receives from their lawyers is privileged. "That’s the same for government as it is for any member of the public," she says. Rupert Murdoch's Sunday Times has since published leaked details. What the prime minister omits to take account of is that Parliament has privileges which are not the same as those held by any other institution or person. The Commons has the authority to commit an MP to the clocktower of the Palace of Westminster (cue an easy decision for picture editors around the world - Big Ben plus portcullis), and to suspend them or expel them from membership of Parliament.

    Pass the popcorn.

    Not sure why the government is fighting this one, frankly. The deal is already as close to dead as is possible before any vote, leaked details and rumours of what the advice contains is assumed by everyone to be terrible for the government anyway, so unless they perversely regard a quarrel about disclosure of legal advice to be an actual distraction from the corpse like state of the deal, not sure what they hope to gain from resisting.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 19,777
    edited December 2
    Notch said:

    The biggest story of the next few days is likely to be the Government's alleged contempt against the Commons. The Commons decided unanimously to demand that the Government hand over the full legal advice it received from Attorney General (and cabinet minister) Geoffrey Cox on its draft withdrawal agreement. Theresa May refused on the grounds that the advice any client receives from their lawyers is privileged. "That’s the same for government as it is for any member of the public," she says. Rupert Murdoch's Sunday Times has since published leaked details. What the prime minister omits to take account of is that Parliament has privileges which are not the same as those held by any other institution or person. The Commons has the authority to commit an MP to the clocktower of the Palace of Westminster (cue an easy decision for picture editors around the world - Big Ben plus portcullis), and to suspend them or expel them from membership of Parliament.

    Pass the popcorn.

    And since there is cabinet collective responsibility...

    Labour need to be careful. It cabinet legal advice has to be published imagine all labour's legal advice and their decisions if they go into government. I know, it is a big if
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 3,159
    Notch said:

    The biggest story of the next few days is likely to be the Government's alleged contempt against the Commons. The Commons decided unanimously to demand that the Government hand over the full legal advice it received from Attorney General (and cabinet minister) Geoffrey Cox on its draft withdrawal agreement. Theresa May refused on the grounds that the advice any client receives from their lawyers is privileged. "That’s the same for government as it is for any member of the public," she says. Rupert Murdoch's Sunday Times has since published leaked details. What the prime minister omits to take account of is that Parliament has privileges which are not the same as those held by any other institution or person. The Commons has the authority to commit an MP to the clocktower of the Palace of Westminster (cue an easy decision for picture editors around the world - Big Ben plus portcullis), and to suspend them or expel them from membership of Parliament.

    Pass the popcorn.

    Yes. A really weak argument. If it was so fundamental, why did they abstain (because they were facing defeat obvs). Parliament, unlike any other institution can make stuff illegal, nationalise or requisition property and a whole range of other stuff.
    It surely therefore has a right to see what it likes.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 5,973

    Notch said:

    The biggest story of the next few days is likely to be the Government's alleged contempt against the Commons. The Commons decided unanimously to demand that the Government hand over the full legal advice it received from Attorney General (and cabinet minister) Geoffrey Cox on its draft withdrawal agreement. Theresa May refused on the grounds that the advice any client receives from their lawyers is privileged. "That’s the same for government as it is for any member of the public," she says. Rupert Murdoch's Sunday Times has since published leaked details. What the prime minister omits to take account of is that Parliament has privileges which are not the same as those held by any other institution or person. The Commons has the authority to commit an MP to the clocktower of the Palace of Westminster (cue an easy decision for picture editors around the world - Big Ben plus portcullis), and to suspend them or expel them from membership of Parliament.

    Pass the popcorn.

    And since there is cabinet collective responsibility...

    Labour need to be careful. It cabinet legal advice has to be published imagine all labour's legal advice and their decisions
    Surely it only has to be published because the Commons decided unanimously that it should be - in this instance.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,855

    kle4 said:

    I'm always being told how wrong he is about everything, so I know for certain that objectors will not take his words at face value, that would be just silly.
    I do not believe anything in the Telegraph. It is UKIP central these days
    That's a rather Trumpian/Corbynite view to take on their entire output.
  • NotchNotch Posts: 145
    kle4 said:

    Notch said:

    The biggest story of the next few days is likely to be the Government's alleged contempt against the Commons. The Commons decided unanimously to demand that the Government hand over the full legal advice it received from Attorney General (and cabinet minister) Geoffrey Cox on its draft withdrawal agreement. Theresa May refused on the grounds that the advice any client receives from their lawyers is privileged. "That’s the same for government as it is for any member of the public," she says. Rupert Murdoch's Sunday Times has since published leaked details. What the prime minister omits to take account of is that Parliament has privileges which are not the same as those held by any other institution or person. The Commons has the authority to commit an MP to the clocktower of the Palace of Westminster (cue an easy decision for picture editors around the world - Big Ben plus portcullis), and to suspend them or expel them from membership of Parliament.

    Pass the popcorn.

    Not sure why the government is fighting this one, frankly. The deal is already as close to dead as is possible before any vote, leaked details and rumours of what the advice contains is assumed by everyone to be terrible for the government anyway, so unless they perversely regard a quarrel about disclosure of legal advice to be an actual distraction from the corpse like state of the deal, not sure what they hope to gain from resisting.
    They could be trying to set John Bercow up, but given the Commons unanimity that would be...crazy!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,855

    Notch said:

    The biggest story of the next few days is likely to be the Government's alleged contempt against the Commons. The Commons decided unanimously to demand that the Government hand over the full legal advice it received from Attorney General (and cabinet minister) Geoffrey Cox on its draft withdrawal agreement. Theresa May refused on the grounds that the advice any client receives from their lawyers is privileged. "That’s the same for government as it is for any member of the public," she says. Rupert Murdoch's Sunday Times has since published leaked details. What the prime minister omits to take account of is that Parliament has privileges which are not the same as those held by any other institution or person. The Commons has the authority to commit an MP to the clocktower of the Palace of Westminster (cue an easy decision for picture editors around the world - Big Ben plus portcullis), and to suspend them or expel them from membership of Parliament.

    Pass the popcorn.

    And since there is cabinet collective responsibility...

    Labour need to be careful. It cabinet legal advice has to be published imagine all labour's legal advice and their decisions
    Labour didn't say all legal advice needs to be published, it wants this advice published and the Commons agreed. Necessary or not, political or not, if the Commons wants this specific part it doesn't seem to follow that every piece will forevermore need to be released, or that Labour would have to reciprocate. Party advice is presumably not the same thing at all.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 3,159

    See Jose Mourinho announced yesterday he was targeting Jordan Pickford of Everton as a replacement for David De Gea.

    And today Pickford made an absolute horlicks of a mistake against Liverpool at Anfield in added time handing Liverpool victory

    Is there anyone Mourinho doesn't destroy. He has to go

    A bit hard to blame Jose for Pickford's howler, surely?
    Not really. Pickford distracted by Jose

    But seriously I was making a wider point.
    Maybe he did it on purpose to avoid stepping down to United?
  • Notch said:

    The biggest story of the next few days is likely to be the Government's alleged contempt against the Commons. The Commons decided unanimously to demand that the Government hand over the full legal advice it received from Attorney General (and cabinet minister) Geoffrey Cox on its draft withdrawal agreement. Theresa May refused on the grounds that the advice any client receives from their lawyers is privileged. "That’s the same for government as it is for any member of the public," she says. Rupert Murdoch's Sunday Times has since published leaked details. What the prime minister omits to take account of is that Parliament has privileges which are not the same as those held by any other institution or person. The Commons has the authority to commit an MP to the clocktower of the Palace of Westminster (cue an easy decision for picture editors around the world - Big Ben plus portcullis), and to suspend them or expel them from membership of Parliament.

    Pass the popcorn.

    And since there is cabinet collective responsibility...

    Labour need to be careful. It cabinet legal advice has to be published imagine all labour's legal advice and their decisions
    Surely it only has to be published because the Commons decided unanimously that it should be - in this instance.
    Maybe but it will rebound some day

    Mind you tomorrow with Cox at the despatch box will be very interesting.

    He is a brexiterr and a powerful speaker
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 23,321
    kle4 said:

    Notch said:

    The biggest story of the next few days is likely to be the Government's alleged contempt against the Commons. The Commons decided unanimously to demand that the Government hand over the full legal advice it received from Attorney General (and cabinet minister) Geoffrey Cox on its draft withdrawal agreement. Theresa May refused on the grounds that the advice any client receives from their lawyers is privileged. "That’s the same for government as it is for any member of the public," she says. Rupert Murdoch's Sunday Times has since published leaked details. What the prime minister omits to take account of is that Parliament has privileges which are not the same as those held by any other institution or person. The Commons has the authority to commit an MP to the clocktower of the Palace of Westminster (cue an easy decision for picture editors around the world - Big Ben plus portcullis), and to suspend them or expel them from membership of Parliament.

    Pass the popcorn.

    Not sure why the government is fighting this one, frankly. The deal is already as close to dead as is possible before any vote, leaked details and rumours of what the advice contains is assumed by everyone to be terrible for the government anyway, so unless they perversely regard a quarrel about disclosure of legal advice to be an actual distraction from the corpse like state of the deal, not sure what they hope to gain from resisting.
    I think that the difference between the government and others with a lawyer is that their advice is ultimately being paid for by someone else, namely Parliament itself. The closest analogy I can think of is a party who has legal expenses insurance. Who would doubt that the Insurance company would have the right to see the advice given, particularly if it indicated that there was a problem.

    I can see why governments would want to resist this precedent but it is right that they lost this one and now they really must comply.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 815
    edited December 2

    Lib Dems proving surprisingly resilient locally. We’ve had two by-elections to Oxfordshire County Council in the last month, both Lib Dem defences which the Conservatives have fought furiously (in the hope they could then unship the Independents from their ruling coalition, and govern alone). In both cases the Lib Dems have romped home. Maybe the cockroach tendencies are returning...

    It's possible that the local Conservatives fought too furiously.
    In the Wantage and Grove one, for example, the Conservatives put out a late attack leaflet on the retiring Lib Dem Councillor, accusing her of fleeing the electorate and calling an unnecessary by-election.

    Unfortunately, she was fairly well-known, so the fact that she'd been fighting cancer for some time, was physically exhausted, and had still been keeping up a long schedule of public engagements, wasn't unknown to the electors. This made the Conservatives look extremely unpleasant.

    The thing is - the people on whom it would have worked to try to swing around were probably the less engaged and less likely to turn out anyway. Those who were more engaged became more likely to turn out against them. On a wet and dark November evening, that sort of thing really helps the attackee.
    That’s very interesting. We had a similar situation in the last round of County elections where the (incumbent) Conservative put out a pretty nasty attack leaflet over the final weekend. I’m 100% certain it swung a bunch of votes to the Lib Dems (who ended up taking the seat). Interesting to see they haven’t learned.
  • kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    I'm always being told how wrong he is about everything, so I know for certain that objectors will not take his words at face value, that would be just silly.
    I do not believe anything in the Telegraph. It is UKIP central these days
    That's a rather Trumpian/Corbynite view to take on their entire output.
    Trumpian has become their narrative with Boris as their leader
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,855
    DavidL said:

    kle4 said:

    Notch said:

    The biggest story of the next few days is likely to be the Government's alleged contempt against the Commons. The Commons decided unanimously to demand that the Government hand over the full legal advice it received from Attorney General (and cabinet minister) Geoffrey Cox on its draft withdrawal agreement. Theresa May refused on the grounds that the advice any client receives from their lawyers is privileged. "That’s the same for government as it is for any member of the public," she says. Rupert Murdoch's Sunday Times has since published leaked details. What the prime minister omits to take account of is that Parliament has privileges which are not the same as those held by any other institution or person. The Commons has the authority to commit an MP to the clocktower of the Palace of Westminster (cue an easy decision for picture editors around the world - Big Ben plus portcullis), and to suspend them or expel them from membership of Parliament.

    Pass the popcorn.

    Not sure why the government is fighting this one, frankly. The deal is already as close to dead as is possible before any vote, leaked details and rumours of what the advice contains is assumed by everyone to be terrible for the government anyway, so unless they perversely regard a quarrel about disclosure of legal advice to be an actual distraction from the corpse like state of the deal, not sure what they hope to gain from resisting.
    I think that the difference between the government and others with a lawyer is that their advice is ultimately being paid for by someone else, namely Parliament itself. The closest analogy I can think of is a party who has legal expenses insurance. Who would doubt that the Insurance company would have the right to see the advice given, particularly if it indicated that there was a problem.

    I can see why governments would want to resist this precedent but it is right that they lost this one and now they really must comply.
    Indeed. Governments, like anyone else, are not likely to be happy to disclose their legal advice to anyone, but they didn't even fight the Commons on this, so they need to just get to it already.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,321

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    FPT @ydoethur

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    I see they are at it again today in France.

    The stereotypical Frenchman is always at it.

    And they riot a lot as well...
    Unlike the supine UK the French are still able to walk upright and do not act like sheeple when their politicians stiff them. If only they could sell the UK some backbones.
    Everyone gets my puns on doors, but not my awesome puns about the French being always at it! Very annoying.

    They missed my puns about the bangs on Nelson's Column as well.
    Did you know the story about the lions at Nelson’s Column? It would appeal to your sense of humour...
    No. Did they suck?
    If you’ve ever looked closely at them there’s something a little ... odd ... about them

    Landseer was commissioned to design them. Problem was he had never been to Africa or seen a lion so he had no idea what they looked like. Fortunately (albeit not for the lion) one at London Zoo had recently died so he had them send over the remains.

    Now this was obviously a very important commission so he was keen to get it just right. However he took so long about the sketches that the lion began to decompose and the hind quarters fell off before he’d drawn them. In a panic he did the only thing he could think of and used his pet Labrador as a model for the lion’s legs and back....

    I guess that shows you have to be careful when working with a deadline.

    Did this dog his later career? Or did it just tail off?
    I’ll ig-gnaw that barking remark.
    I'd be lion if I said I didn't admire the puns, but I still think you're being a big catty.
    Why of course. Cats voted Leave
    Well that's another reason to annul the referendum result - how many of those 17.4m were cats?!

    :wink:
    You need to paws for thought!
    I did once canvass someone who had put his dog on the electoral register. In the days before IER, of course.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 4,686
    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    Incidentally, what is the date beyond which the reduction of seats from 650 to 600 cannot take effect?

    I was wondering the same thing. It seems pretty complicated by the fact that plenty of people expect an early GE next year, in which case the government would hold off laying it before parliament (even if they were not, in any case, delaying now because it would fail at present). Labour apparently waited a year for the Welsh part of the review before laying it before parliament, so perhaps there is no end date and, assuming no early GE, it could be approve in late 2021 for the 2022 election?
    Correct - there is no end date.

    All that must happen is they must be approved by Commons and Lords and then approved by the next Privy Council meeting (which happens about once a month).

    As long as the above happens any time before dissolution of Parliament the new boundaries then apply at next GE.

    It's even possible to have the next GE on old boundaries and then all the above could happen after the next GE in which case they would be used at GE after that.
  • dixiedean said:

    Notch said:

    The biggest story of the next few days is likely to be the Government's alleged contempt against the Commons. The Commons decided unanimously to demand that the Government hand over the full legal advice it received from Attorney General (and cabinet minister) Geoffrey Cox on its draft withdrawal agreement. Theresa May refused on the grounds that the advice any client receives from their lawyers is privileged. "That’s the same for government as it is for any member of the public," she says. Rupert Murdoch's Sunday Times has since published leaked details. What the prime minister omits to take account of is that Parliament has privileges which are not the same as those held by any other institution or person. The Commons has the authority to commit an MP to the clocktower of the Palace of Westminster (cue an easy decision for picture editors around the world - Big Ben plus portcullis), and to suspend them or expel them from membership of Parliament.

    Pass the popcorn.

    Yes. A really weak argument. If it was so fundamental, why did they abstain (because they were facing defeat obvs). Parliament, unlike any other institution can make stuff illegal, nationalise or requisition property and a whole range of other stuff.
    It surely therefore has a right to see what it likes.
    Not really. All governments depend on confidential legal advice and making that available in the public domain needs caution. Indeed Starmer said as much today but he maintains this is an exceptional case
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,855
    MikeL said:

    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    Incidentally, what is the date beyond which the reduction of seats from 650 to 600 cannot take effect?

    I was wondering the same thing. It seems pretty complicated by the fact that plenty of people expect an early GE next year, in which case the government would hold off laying it before parliament (even if they were not, in any case, delaying now because it would fail at present). Labour apparently waited a year for the Welsh part of the review before laying it before parliament, so perhaps there is no end date and, assuming no early GE, it could be approve in late 2021 for the 2022 election?
    Correct - there is no end date.

    All that must happen is they must be approved by Commons and Lords and then approved by the next Privy Council meeting (which happens about once a month).

    As long as the above happens any time before dissolution of Parliament the new boundaries then apply at next GE.

    It's even possible to have the next GE on old boundaries and then all the above could happen after the next GE in which case they would be used at GE after that.
    Sure, but I was just thinking how much practical work there would be after it is approved by the Privy Council - I assume it would require at least a few months work from electoral services teams!
  • dixiedean said:

    See Jose Mourinho announced yesterday he was targeting Jordan Pickford of Everton as a replacement for David De Gea.

    And today Pickford made an absolute horlicks of a mistake against Liverpool at Anfield in added time handing Liverpool victory

    Is there anyone Mourinho doesn't destroy. He has to go

    A bit hard to blame Jose for Pickford's howler, surely?
    Not really. Pickford distracted by Jose

    But seriously I was making a wider point.
    Maybe he did it on purpose to avoid stepping down to United?
    That is funny
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,855

    dixiedean said:

    Notch said:

    The biggest story of the next few days is likely to be the Government's alleged contempt against the Commons. The Commons decided unanimously to demand that the Government hand over the full legal advice it received from Attorney General (and cabinet minister) Geoffrey Cox on its draft withdrawal agreement. Theresa May refused on the grounds that the advice any client receives from their lawyers is privileged. "That’s the same for government as it is for any member of the public," she says. Rupert Murdoch's Sunday Times has since published leaked details. What the prime minister omits to take account of is that Parliament has privileges which are not the same as those held by any other institution or person. The Commons has the authority to commit an MP to the clocktower of the Palace of Westminster (cue an easy decision for picture editors around the world - Big Ben plus portcullis), and to suspend them or expel them from membership of Parliament.

    Pass the popcorn.

    Yes. A really weak argument. If it was so fundamental, why did they abstain (because they were facing defeat obvs). Parliament, unlike any other institution can make stuff illegal, nationalise or requisition property and a whole range of other stuff.
    It surely therefore has a right to see what it likes.
    Not really. All governments depend on confidential legal advice and making that available in the public domain needs caution. Indeed Starmer said as much today but he maintains this is an exceptional case
    Parliament has to be relied upon to be sensible in making such demands. Granted, that is not their strong suit right now, particularly not Starmer who is practically ignoring anything other than seeking Remain above all else regardless of the risks, but we can hope.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 3,159
    kle4 said:

    Notch said:

    The biggest story of the next few days is likely to be the Government's alleged contempt against the Commons. The Commons decided unanimously to demand that the Government hand over the full legal advice it received from Attorney General (and cabinet minister) Geoffrey Cox on its draft withdrawal agreement. Theresa May refused on the grounds that the advice any client receives from their lawyers is privileged. "That’s the same for government as it is for any member of the public," she says. Rupert Murdoch's Sunday Times has since published leaked details. What the prime minister omits to take account of is that Parliament has privileges which are not the same as those held by any other institution or person. The Commons has the authority to commit an MP to the clocktower of the Palace of Westminster (cue an easy decision for picture editors around the world - Big Ben plus portcullis), and to suspend them or expel them from membership of Parliament.

    Pass the popcorn.

    And since there is cabinet collective responsibility...

    Labour need to be careful. It cabinet legal advice has to be published imagine all labour's legal advice and their decisions
    Labour didn't say all legal advice needs to be published, it wants this advice published and the Commons agreed. Necessary or not, political or not, if the Commons wants this specific part it doesn't seem to follow that every piece will forevermore need to be released, or that Labour would have to reciprocate. Party advice is presumably not the same thing at all.
    Point of Order. Whilst I agree with this, it was not Labour at all, but EVERY MP who could be arsed voting.
    Don't vote, don't moan about the result.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 859

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    I'm always being told how wrong he is about everything, so I know for certain that objectors will not take his words at face value, that would be just silly.
    I do not believe anything in the Telegraph. It is UKIP central these days
    That's a rather Trumpian/Corbynite view to take on their entire output.
    Trumpian has become their narrative with Boris as their leader
    + 1. They continue to peddle out their Brexit bollocks even as the whole mess that they help create begins to tear apart the pillars supporting the continuation of the United Kingdom. The DT used to be a good paper until they gradually got sucked into this Brexit madness, they were always Eurosceptic but now I feel instead of realising Brexit is not viable they seem to be going out of their way to inflict harm on the country! This creeping Brexit neurosis has engulfed too many people and perverted their whole belief system.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,855
    edited December 2
    dixiedean said:

    kle4 said:

    Notch said:

    The biggest story of the next few days is likely to be the Government's alleged contempt against the Commons. The Commons decided unanimously to demand that the Government hand over the full legal advice it received from Attorney General (and cabinet minister) Geoffrey Cox on its draft withdrawal agreement. Theresa May refused on the grounds that the advice any client receives from their lawyers is privileged. "That’s the same for government as it is for any member of the public," she says. Rupert Murdoch's Sunday Times has since published leaked details. What the prime minister omits to take account of is that Parliament has privileges which are not the same as those held by any other institution or person. The Commons has the authority to commit an MP to the clocktower of the Palace of Westminster (cue an easy decision for picture editors around the world - Big Ben plus portcullis), and to suspend them or expel them from membership of Parliament.

    Pass the popcorn.

    And since there is cabinet collective responsibility...

    Labour need to be careful. It cabinet legal advice has to be published imagine all labour's legal advice and their decisions
    Labour didn't say all legal advice needs to be published, it wants this advice published and the Commons agreed. Necessary or not, political or not, if the Commons wants this specific part it doesn't seem to follow that every piece will forevermore need to be released, or that Labour would have to reciprocate. Party advice is presumably not the same thing at all.
    Point of Order. Whilst I agree with this, it was not Labour at all, but EVERY MP who could be arsed voting.
    Don't vote, don't moan about the result.
    I only led with Labour are they were the initiators of the demand, and I did point out the Commons as a whole agreed with that stance.

    I think that was more a point of clarification than a point of order.
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 940
    Lead headline on the Torygraph online is that Olly Robbins has written a letter to T May telling her the customs backstop is a bad outcome for Britain. Leaked by a concerned Minister, obviously concerned for the reputation of Mr Robbins.
    When it rains it pours.
  • kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    I'm always being told how wrong he is about everything, so I know for certain that objectors will not take his words at face value, that would be just silly.
    I do not believe anything in the Telegraph. It is UKIP central these days
    That's a rather Trumpian/Corbynite view to take on their entire output.
    Trumpian has become their narrative with Boris as their leader
    + 1. They continue to peddle out their Brexit bollocks even as the whole mess that they help create begins to tear apart the pillars supporting the continuation of the United Kingdom. The DT used to be a good paper until they gradually got sucked into this Brexit madness, they were always Eurosceptic but now I feel instead of realising Brexit is not viable they seem to be going out of their way to inflict harm on the country! This creeping Brexit neurosis has engulfed too many people and perverted their whole belief system.
    Indeed and hence today's front page. It is a sad time to see the telegraph descend into brexit ultra
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 23,321
    dixiedean said:

    kle4 said:

    Notch said:

    The biggest story of the next few days is likely to be the Government's alleged contempt against the Commons. The Commons decided unanimously to demand that the Government hand over the full legal advice it received from Attorney General (and cabinet minister) Geoffrey Cox on its draft withdrawal agreement. Theresa May refused on the grounds that the advice any client receives from their lawyers is privileged. "That’s the same for government as it is for any member of the public," she says. Rupert Murdoch's Sunday Times has since published leaked details. What the prime minister omits to take account of is that Parliament has privileges which are not the same as those held by any other institution or person. The Commons has the authority to commit an MP to the clocktower of the Palace of Westminster (cue an easy decision for picture editors around the world - Big Ben plus portcullis), and to suspend them or expel them from membership of Parliament.

    Pass the popcorn.

    And since there is cabinet collective responsibility...

    Labour need to be careful. It cabinet legal advice has to be published imagine all labour's legal advice and their decisions
    Labour didn't say all legal advice needs to be published, it wants this advice published and the Commons agreed. Necessary or not, political or not, if the Commons wants this specific part it doesn't seem to follow that every piece will forevermore need to be released, or that Labour would have to reciprocate. Party advice is presumably not the same thing at all.
    Point of Order. Whilst I agree with this, it was not Labour at all, but EVERY MP who could be arsed voting.
    Don't vote, don't moan about the result.
    It seems to have got tied up with the deeply flawed strategy of just ignoring Opposition motions and to not even vote against them. To my mind that policy is a contempt of Parliament in itself and greatly diminishes the institution as the focal point of our public policy debates. If this incident results in them taking votes in Parliament seriously that will be an even better thing.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 3,159

    Notch said:

    The biggest story of the next few days is likely to be the Government's alleged contempt against the Commons. The Commons decided unanimously to demand that the Government hand over the full legal advice it received from Attorney General (and cabinet minister) Geoffrey Cox on its draft withdrawal agreement. Theresa May refused on the grounds that the advice any client receives from their lawyers is privileged. "That’s the same for government as it is for any member of the public," she says. Rupert Murdoch's Sunday Times has since published leaked details. What the prime minister omits to take account of is that Parliament has privileges which are not the same as those held by any other institution or person. The Commons has the authority to commit an MP to the clocktower of the Palace of Westminster (cue an easy decision for picture editors around the world - Big Ben plus portcullis), and to suspend them or expel them from membership of Parliament.

    Pass the popcorn.

    And since there is cabinet collective responsibility...

    Labour need to be careful. It cabinet legal advice has to be published imagine all labour's legal advice and their decisions
    Surely it only has to be published because the Commons decided unanimously that it should be - in this instance.
    Maybe but it will rebound some day

    Mind you tomorrow with Cox at the despatch box will be very interesting.

    He is a brexiterr and a powerful speaker
    It will. Thus far, he seems to have gained a reputation by making an admittedly very good warm-up speech at Party Conference. Different wicket facing a hostile Commons.
  • dixiedean said:

    Notch said:

    The biggest story of the next few days is likely to be the Government's alleged contempt against the Commons. The Commons decided unanimously to demand that the Government hand over the full legal advice it received from Attorney General (and cabinet minister) Geoffrey Cox on its draft withdrawal agreement. Theresa May refused on the grounds that the advice any client receives from their lawyers is privileged. "That’s the same for government as it is for any member of the public," she says. Rupert Murdoch's Sunday Times has since published leaked details. What the prime minister omits to take account of is that Parliament has privileges which are not the same as those held by any other institution or person. The Commons has the authority to commit an MP to the clocktower of the Palace of Westminster (cue an easy decision for picture editors around the world - Big Ben plus portcullis), and to suspend them or expel them from membership of Parliament.

    Pass the popcorn.

    And since there is cabinet collective responsibility...

    Labour need to be careful. It cabinet legal advice has to be published imagine all labour's legal advice and their decisions
    Surely it only has to be published because the Commons decided unanimously that it should be - in this instance.
    Maybe but it will rebound some day

    Mind you tomorrow with Cox at the despatch box will be very interesting.

    He is a brexiterr and a powerful speaker
    It will. Thus far, he seems to have gained a reputation by making an admittedly very good warm-up speech at Party Conference. Different wicket facing a hostile Commons.
    I am very relaxed about that. He will be box office
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 3,159

    dixiedean said:

    Notch said:

    The biggest story of the next few days is likely to be the Government's alleged contempt against the Commons. The Commons decided unanimously to demand that the Government hand over the full legal advice it received from Attorney General (and cabinet minister) Geoffrey Cox on its draft withdrawal agreement. Theresa May refused on the grounds that the advice any client receives from their lawyers is privileged. "That’s the same for government as it is for any member of the public," she says. Rupert Murdoch's Sunday Times has since published leaked details. What the prime minister omits to take account of is that Parliament has privileges which are not the same as those held by any other institution or person. The Commons has the authority to commit an MP to the clocktower of the Palace of Westminster (cue an easy decision for picture editors around the world - Big Ben plus portcullis), and to suspend them or expel them from membership of Parliament.

    Pass the popcorn.

    And since there is cabinet collective responsibility...

    Labour need to be careful. It cabinet legal advice has to be published imagine all labour's legal advice and their decisions
    Surely it only has to be published because the Commons decided unanimously that it should be - in this instance.
    Maybe but it will rebound some day

    Mind you tomorrow with Cox at the despatch box will be very interesting.

    He is a brexiterr and a powerful speaker
    It will. Thus far, he seems to have gained a reputation by making an admittedly very good warm-up speech at Party Conference. Different wicket facing a hostile Commons.
    I am very relaxed about that. He will be box office
    Well we won't have long to find out.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 21,255
    Notch said:

    The biggest story of the next few days is likely to be the Government's alleged contempt against the Commons. The Commons decided unanimously to demand that the Government hand over the full legal advice it received from Attorney General (and cabinet minister) Geoffrey Cox on its draft withdrawal agreement. Theresa May refused on the grounds that the advice any client receives from their lawyers is privileged. "That’s the same for government as it is for any member of the public," she says. Rupert Murdoch's Sunday Times has since published leaked details. What the prime minister omits to take account of is that Parliament has privileges which are not the same as those held by any other institution or person. The Commons has the authority to commit an MP to the clocktower of the Palace of Westminster (cue an easy decision for picture editors around the world - Big Ben plus portcullis), and to suspend them or expel them from membership of Parliament.

    Pass the popcorn.

    And since there is cabinet collective responsibility...

    You'd think we might have had a thread on this.....
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 859

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    I'm always being told how wrong he is about everything, so I know for certain that objectors will not take his words at face value, that would be just silly.
    I do not believe anything in the Telegraph. It is UKIP central these days
    That's a rather Trumpian/Corbynite view to take on their entire output.
    Trumpian has become their narrative with Boris as their leader
    + 1. They continue to peddle out their Brexit bollocks even as the whole mess that they help create begins to tear apart the pillars supporting the continuation of the United Kingdom. The DT used to be a good paper until they gradually got sucked into this Brexit madness, they were always Eurosceptic but now I feel instead of realising Brexit is not viable they seem to be going out of their way to inflict harm on the country! This creeping Brexit neurosis has engulfed too many people and perverted their whole belief system.
    Indeed and hence today's front page. It is a sad time to see the telegraph descend into brexit ultra
    Boris Johnson is still peddling his delusions about "better deals "as well! He and his Brexiteer colleagues achieved the current state of affairs. Then they quit - they should have resigned a year ago plus if they thought they could get a better deal.
  • dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    Notch said:

    The biggest story of the next few days is likely to be the Government's alleged contempt against the Commons. The Commons decided unanimously to demand that the Government hand over the full legal advice it received from Attorney General (and cabinet minister) Geoffrey Cox on its draft withdrawal agreement. Theresa May refused on the grounds that the advice any client receives from their lawyers is privileged. "That’s the same for government as it is for any member of the public," she says. Rupert Murdoch's Sunday Times has since published leaked details. What the prime minister omits to take account of is that Parliament has privileges which are not the same as those held by any other institution or person. The Commons has the authority to commit an MP to the clocktower of the Palace of Westminster (cue an easy decision for picture editors around the world - Big Ben plus portcullis), and to suspend them or expel them from membership of Parliament.

    Pass the popcorn.

    And since there is cabinet collective responsibility...

    Labour need to be careful. It cabinet legal advice has to be published imagine all labour's legal advice and their decisions
    Surely it only has to be published because the Commons decided unanimously that it should be - in this instance.
    Maybe but it will rebound some day

    Mind you tomorrow with Cox at the despatch box will be very interesting.

    He is a brexiterr and a powerful speaker
    It will. Thus far, he seems to have gained a reputation by making an admittedly very good warm-up speech at Party Conference. Different wicket facing a hostile Commons.
    I am very relaxed about that. He will be box office
    Well we won't have long to find out.
    Indeed. It is Cox who will announce the governments position on the advice tomorrow so maybe best to hold fire until he has clarified the position
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 28,058
    edited December 2

    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    Damn. I appreciate some people want the reduction, but having the same seats for 2010, 2015 and 2017 have made them very useful from a statistical point of view, so I was hoping the next elec would have the same seats. :(
    I really don't think they will change. Who is going to make it a priority now? It is mere speculation on my part.

    The reduction seems almost incidental to just the need to review because of the updated figures.

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    FPT @ydoethur

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    I see they are at it again today in France.

    The stereotypical Frenchman is always at it.

    And they riot a lot as well...
    Unlike the supine UK the French are still able to walk upright and do not act like sheeple when their politicians stiff them. If only they could sell the UK some backbones.
    Everyone gets my puns on doors, but not my awesome puns about the French being always at it! Very annoying.

    They missed my puns about the bangs on Nelson's Column as well.
    Did you know the story about the lions at Nelson’s Column? It would appeal to your sense of humour...
    No. Did they suck?
    If you’ve ever looked

    Did this dog his later career? Or did it just tail off?
    I’ll ig-gnaw that barking remark.
    I'd be lion if I said I didn't admire the puns, but I still think you're being a big catty.
    Why of course. Cats voted Leave
    Well that's another reason to annul the referendum result - how many of those 17.4m were cats?!

    :wink:
    Outrageous suggestion - there were barely any cheetahs.
    The numbers ocelot wildly.....
    Any lynx to support that assertion?
    You gotta be kitten me!
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 5,750
    dixiedean said:

    Notch said:

    The biggest story of the next few days is likely to be the Government's alleged contempt against the Commons. The Commons decided unanimously to demand that the Government hand over the full legal advice it received from Attorney General (and cabinet minister) Geoffrey Cox on its draft withdrawal agreement. Theresa May refused on the grounds that the advice any client receives from their lawyers is privileged. "That’s the same for government as it is for any member of the public," she says. Rupert Murdoch's Sunday Times has since published leaked details. What the prime minister omits to take account of is that Parliament has privileges which are not the same as those held by any other institution or person. The Commons has the authority to commit an MP to the clocktower of the Palace of Westminster (cue an easy decision for picture editors around the world - Big Ben plus portcullis), and to suspend them or expel them from membership of Parliament.

    Pass the popcorn.

    And since there is cabinet collective responsibility...

    Labour need to be careful. It cabinet legal advice has to be published imagine all labour's legal advice and their decisions
    Surely it only has to be published because the Commons decided unanimously that it should be - in this instance.
    Maybe but it will rebound some day

    Mind you tomorrow with Cox at the despatch box will be very interesting.

    He is a brexiterr and a powerful speaker
    It will. Thus far, he seems to have gained a reputation by making an admittedly very good warm-up speech at Party Conference. Different wicket facing a hostile Commons.
    Cod-Churchillia rhetoric works better at a Tory party rally than a Commons stuffed with lawyers.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,855

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    I'm always being told how wrong he is about everything, so I know for certain that objectors will not take his words at face value, that would be just silly.
    I do not believe anything in the Telegraph. It is UKIP central these days
    That's a rather Trumpian/Corbynite view to take on their entire output.
    Trumpian has become their narrative with Boris as their leader
    + 1. They continue to peddle out their Brexit bollocks even as the whole mess that they help create begins to tear apart the pillars supporting the continuation of the United Kingdom. The DT used to be a good paper until they gradually got sucked into this Brexit madness, they were always Eurosceptic but now I feel instead of realising Brexit is not viable they seem to be going out of their way to inflict harm on the country! This creeping Brexit neurosis has engulfed too many people and perverted their whole belief system.
    Indeed and hence today's front page. It is a sad time to see the telegraph descend into brexit ultra
    Boris Johnson is still peddling his delusions about "better deals "as well! He and his Brexiteer colleagues achieved the current state of affairs. Then they quit - they should have resigned a year ago plus if they thought they could get a better deal.
    In their slight defence May did delay even the Cabinet taking a view until the middle of this year, but given the fundamental nature of the complaints of many of them, especially those most recent ones, yes they very much should have quit a long time ago. If May was keeping them in the dark then that is yet another reason.

    And, again in their slight defence, it is not only they are who are peddling delusions about better deals, that is shared across left and right, leave and remain. At leas those openly wanting remain or no deal are a bit more realistic.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 28,058
    Meanwhile, in the sunlit uplands of the EU:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46417991
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,855
    Foxy said:

    dixiedean said:

    Notch said:

    The biggest story of the next few days is likely to be the Government's alleged contempt against the Commons. The Commons decided unanimously to demand that the Government hand over the full legal advice it received from Attorney General (and cabinet minister) Geoffrey Cox on its draft withdrawal agreement. Theresa May refused on the grounds that the advice any client receives from their lawyers is privileged. "That’s the same for government as it is for any member of the public," she says. Rupert Murdoch's Sunday Times has since published leaked details. What the prime minister omits to take account of is that Parliament has privileges which are not the same as those held by any other institution or person. The Commons has the authority to commit an MP to the clocktower of the Palace of Westminster (cue an easy decision for picture editors around the world - Big Ben plus portcullis), and to suspend them or expel them from membership of Parliament.

    Pass the popcorn.

    And since there is cabinet collective responsibility...

    Labour need to be careful. It cabinet legal advice has to be published imagine all labour's legal advice and their decisions
    Surely it only has to be published because the Commons decided unanimously that it should be - in this instance.
    Maybe but it will rebound some day

    Mind you tomorrow with Cox at the despatch box will be very interesting.

    He is a brexiterr and a powerful speaker
    It will. Thus far, he seems to have gained a reputation by making an admittedly very good warm-up speech at Party Conference. Different wicket facing a hostile Commons.
    Cod-Churchillia rhetoric works better at a Tory party rally than a Commons stuffed with lawyers.
    Well he is meant to be a good lawyer himself, so he will have to earn his keep defending a weak case.
  • JayWJayW Posts: 33
    edited December 2
    If local elections were ever a reliable indicator for general elections, I think the demographic changes in Tory and Labour voters over the years have made them steadily less so.

    The most significant being the stark and yawning age divide between those who vote Tory (overwhelmingly old) and Labour (overwhelmingly young). The latter are much more likely to come and out and vote in a General election than a local, and this differential turn-out is magnified further in local by-elections.

    The continuing emasculation of local government, which has little power anywhere these days beyond deciding which vital service to cut deeper, has only increased this apathy.

    So local elections have become pretty meaningless, both as predictors of the wider political landscape, or directly in terms of political power.

    Basically the Tory gammon horde pouring out dutifully to cast their vote rain or shine in more or less meaningless local contests doesn't tell us much.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,855
    JayW said:



    The continuing emasculation of local government, which have little power these days beyond deciding which vital service to cut deeper, has only increased this apathy.

    I agree with a lot of what you say, but has apathy actually increased? For instance, at my council's last elections turnout was up on last time, and by-elections had comparable turnout. Perhaps that is an outlier compared to other places, but do we have hard evidence the general apathetic nature of local elections has actually gotten worse?

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 21,255
    edited December 2
    JayW said:

    If local elections were ever a reliable indicator for general elections, I think the demographic changes in Tory and Labour voters over the years have made them steadily less so.

    The most significant being the stark and yawning age divide between those who vote Tory (overwhelmingly old) and Labour (overwhelmingly young). The latter are much more likely to come and out and vote in a General election than a local, and this differential turn-out is magnified further in local by-elections.

    The continuing emasculation of local government, which has little power anywhere these days beyond deciding which vital service to cut deeper, has only increased this apathy.

    So local elections have become pretty meaningless, both as predictors of the wider political landscape, or directly in terms of political power.

    Basically the Tory gammon horde pouring out dutifully to cast their vote rain or shine in more or less meaningless local contests doesn't tell us much.

    No, but your posts tell us you are a [email protected]
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 5,973

    JayW said:

    If local elections were ever a reliable indicator for general elections, I think the demographic changes in Tory and Labour voters over the years have made them steadily less so.

    The most significant being the stark and yawning age divide between those who vote Tory (overwhelmingly old) and Labour (overwhelmingly young). The latter are much more likely to come and out and vote in a General election than a local, and this differential turn-out is magnified further in local by-elections.

    The continuing emasculation of local government, which has little power anywhere these days beyond deciding which vital service to cut deeper, has only increased this apathy.

    So local elections have become pretty meaningless, both as predictors of the wider political landscape, or directly in terms of political power.

    Basically the Tory gammon horde pouring out dutifully to cast their vote rain or shine in more or less meaningless local contests doesn't tell us much.

    No, but your posts tell is you are a [email protected]
    Just ignore him @JayW; everyone else does!
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 6,012

    JayW said:

    If local elections were ever a reliable indicator for general elections, I think the demographic changes in Tory and Labour voters over the years have made them steadily less so.

    The most significant being the stark and yawning age divide between those who vote Tory (overwhelmingly old) and Labour (overwhelmingly young). The latter are much more likely to come and out and vote in a General election than a local, and this differential turn-out is magnified further in local by-elections.

    The continuing emasculation of local government, which has little power anywhere these days beyond deciding which vital service to cut deeper, has only increased this apathy.

    So local elections have become pretty meaningless, both as predictors of the wider political landscape, or directly in terms of political power.

    Basically the Tory gammon horde pouring out dutifully to cast their vote rain or shine in more or less meaningless local contests doesn't tell us much.

    No, but your posts tell is you are a [email protected]
    Hmm. The colour of your postings has changed over time,.. Brexit has altered your posting style.. You need to tone it down a bit.
  • Geoffrey Cox, Attorney General at the despatch box tomorrow.

    Labour's shadow Attorney General is Shami Chakrabarti

    So who replies for the opposition
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 19,777
    edited December 2
    Geoffrey Cox, Attorney General at the dispatch box tomorrow.

    Labour's shadow Attorney General is Shami Chakrabarti

    So who replies for the opposition
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 20,414
    IanB2 said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    FPT @ydoethur

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    I see they are at it again today in France.

    The stereotypical Frenchman is always at it.

    And they riot a lot as well...
    Unlike the supine UK the French are still able to walk upright and do not act like sheeple when their politicians stiff them. If only they could sell the UK some backbones.
    Everyone gets my puns on doors, but not my awesome puns about the French being always at it! Very annoying.

    They missed my puns about the bangs on Nelson's Column as well.
    Did you know the story about the lions at Nelson’s Column? It would appeal to your sense of humour...
    No. Did they suck?
    If you’ve ever looked closely at them there’s something a little ... odd ... about them

    Landseer was commissioned to design them. Problem was he had never been to Africa or seen a lion so he had no idea what they looked like. Fortunately (albeit not for the lion) one at London Zoo had recently died so he had them send over the remains.

    Now this was obviously a very important commission so he was keen to get it just right. However he took so long about the sketches that the lion began to decompose and the hind quarters fell off before he’d drawn them. In a panic he did the only thing he could think of and used his pet Labrador as a model for the lion’s legs and back....

    I guess that shows you have to be careful when working with a deadline.

    Did this dog his later career? Or did it just tail off?
    I’ll ig-gnaw that barking remark.
    I'd be lion if I said I didn't admire the puns, but I still think you're being a big catty.
    Why of course. Cats voted Leave
    Well that's another reason to annul the referendum result - how many of those 17.4m were cats?!

    :wink:
    You need to paws for thought!
    I did once canvass someone who had put his dog on the electoral register. In the days before IER, of course.
    Did you get the dog's vote?
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 859
    JayW said:

    If local elections were ever a reliable indicator for general elections, I think the demographic changes in Tory and Labour voters over the years have made them steadily less so.

    The most significant being the stark and yawning age divide between those who vote Tory (overwhelmingly old) and Labour (overwhelmingly young). The latter are much more likely to come and out and vote in a General election than a local, and this differential turn-out is magnified further in local by-elections.

    The continuing emasculation of local government, which have little power these days beyond deciding which vital service to cut deeper, has only increased this apathy.

    So local elections have become pretty meaningless, both as predictors of the wider political landscape, or directly in terms of political power.

    Basically the Tory gammon horde pouring out dutifully to cast their vote rain or shine in more or less meaningless local contests doesn't tell us much.

    I agree with you that Local Government has on the whole been forced into an ineffectual cul-de-sac. I think the inability of councils to increase Taxes or Spending above limits imposed by Central Government is wrong. Local Councillors can of course be surcharged for inappropriate decisions but I am not sure if profligate spending or increased taxation to a point of diminishing returns qualifies for penalties to be implemented.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 5,973

    Geoffrey Cox, Attorney General at the despatch box tomorrow.

    Labour's shadow Attorney General is Shami Chakrabarti

    So who replies for the opposition

    I should imagine Keir might be up for it. :smile:
This discussion has been closed.