WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
True , hard to understand her thinking.
£60 fine , plus 3 points on your licence, or a speed awareness course , if you have not had one before. Was she anywhere near loosing her licence ? Because of previous points.
If I read the evidence correctly - which I may not be - she lied on both occasions she was caught speeding. So technically she kept a clean licence. Which makes her conduct still more baffling.
Now I cannot honestly say I've never broken the speed limit and I'm sure you will tell me that's true of every driver. I've been lucky in that so far I've never been caught. But I hope that if (when) I am caught I will see a slap on the wrist and a small fine that will not stop me driving as preferable to a long prison sentence that would destroy my career.
Indeed. Totally. Utterly. Baffling.
She clearly thought she would never be caught or challenged, because of who she was. But to put it mildly that was foolish. Precisely because she was high profile she would attract more attention.
Put it this way, if this is a sample of her approach I'm glad she wasn't my solicitor. Mine is very meticulous and plays it absolutely by the book - which is what I look for in a solicitor.
We are lucky to live in a country where it works that way. In many - indeed most, probably - a politician probably would be able to get away with such stuff.
It’s like that scene in Mitchell and Webb. When are the Brexiters going to realise that they are the baddies?
Are all 17 million who voted Leave in that referendum baddies, or are you just some sort of generalising fuckwit?
I’m someone watching the country disintegrate while bullies threaten Members of Parliament. What about you?
The country isn't disintegrating. Don't be do melodramatic.
I’m fed up with Brexiters pissing on my leg and telling me it’s raining.
The country is in a state of political and cultural enervation unknown in a generation.
We are openly talking about about the likelihood of independence for Scotland *and* Irish unification, and I note that in the case of a kamikaze (aka No Deal) Brexit all bets on Gibraltar are off.
I’m happy to use the disintegration metaphor.
Yeah agree but that was a(n albeit weak) joke from @Charles.
Hold on a minute the Cabinet, which had Brexiteers in it agreed to the GE as did MPs. I agree the PM is not very good at her job hence 117 MPs from her own party think anybody else would be better than her at the job!
Well indeed. When the election was called I was very excited. By the time of the vote I was annoyed and upset.
So many avoidable mistakes. Cameron, Osborme and Crosby had won the election previously with a strong focus on the economy. Being faced by literal Marxists who want to "smash capitalism." May had nothing worthwhile to say on the economy and silenced her Cabinet.
But then she had nothing worthwhile to say on anything else either and chickened out of the debates. It was an utterly avoidable disaster and frankly the result she deserved. In 2015 I delivered leaflets for a hard working ultra marginal MP who won his seat against the odds. By 2017 I had moved away so did not again but in an avoidable election he lost thanks in no small part to May's shortcomings.
The ground game does make a real difference in a marginal seat.
This is where Labour have a huge advantage now, the Labour membership is huge, young and enthusiastic. In terms of volunteers Labour can hit very optimistic targets with bigger numbers than the Conservatives could get to key marginals.
its very urban focussed and its' not that motivated. The people going out are the same old hands who have always gone out and a few newbies. The membership on paper bears no relationship to the people who come out to help.
That bears little to no relation to what happened. Previously dead constituencies sprung to life. Some constituencies ballooned to massive membership numbers and even most of the biggest critics of Corbyn and momentum after the election came out and praised them and the other new young members work for helping produce the result.
You had individual constituency campaigns getting more volunteers coming in than they knew what to do with.
Where do you actually live? Because round here I'd say it's the reverse. Labour in Staffordshire seem to be literally dying off.
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
Utter madness. And I hope she gets a sentence that reflects how far she has fallen.
A law-maker and legal professional needs to be held to higher standards. An example has to be made that no-one is above the law.
Chris Huhne got 8 months for a guilty plea. She has got to be facing at least a year, possibly a bit more.
Don't be sure. A year and she will almost certainly appeal. The judge will not want that. A lower sentence might come into play for that reason.
There is also the fact that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts.
However I think the fact she is a sitting MP and a legal professional should mean that an example is made.
No matter the sentence, she cannot be allowed to remain in Parliament. And I don't honestly care who wins the by-election - she has to go.
It’s like that scene in Mitchell and Webb. When are the Brexiters going to realise that they are the baddies?
Are all 17 million who voted Leave in that referendum baddies, or are you just some sort of generalising fuckwit?
He’s from New Zealand
Of course he’s a generalising fuckwit
I presume this is only “joke” racism, Charles?
Nothing to do with your race - that’s the only distinguishing feature I know about you. I could have equally said “North Londoner”
It was meant to be an obvious generalisation about obviously generalising.
But I forgot you were a humourless fuckwit. For the avoidance of doubt, that’s just you and has nothing to do with your race, colour, religion or sexual preferences
That’s two fuckwits from you in one night. I thought the noblesse were supposed to be obliging?!
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
Utter madness. And I hope she gets a sentence that reflects how far she has fallen.
A law-maker and legal professional needs to be held to higher standards. An example has to be made that no-one is above the law.
Chris Huhne got 8 months for a guilty plea. She has got to be facing at least a year, possibly a bit more.
Don't be sure. A year and she will almost certainly appeal. The judge will not want that. A lower sentence might come into play for that reason.
There is also the fact that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts.
However I think the fact she is a sitting MP and a legal professional should mean that an example is made.
No matter the sentence, she cannot be allowed to remain in Parliament. And I don't honestly care who wins the by-election - she has to go.
Do you have a link for your assertion that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts?
Cannot imagine why Gove didn't put this on the side of a bus
Perhaps because he wasn't campaigning for a No Deal Brexit? Just a thought.
Or he is a complete moron.
'The day after we vote to leave, we hold all the cards and we can choose the path we want.'
Michael Gove 9th of April 2016.
Exactly my point he had no concept of scenario analysis.
So moron it is.
Hold on a minute the Cabinet, which had Brexiteers in it agreed to the GE as did MPs. I agree the PM is not very good at her job hence 117 MPs from her own party think anybody else would be better than her at the job!
Well indeed. When the election was called I was very excited. By the time of the vote I was annoyed and upset.
So many avoidable mistakes. Cameron, Osborme and Crosby had won the election previously with a strong focus on the economy. Being faced by literal Marxists who want to "smash capitalism." May had nothing worthwhile to say on the economy and silenced her Cabinet.
But then she had nothing worthwhile to say on anything else either and chickened out of the debates. It was an utterly avoidable disaster and frankly the result she deserved. In 2015 I delivered leaflets for a hard working ultra marginal MP who won his seat against the odds. By 2017 I had moved away so did not again but in an avoidable election he lost thanks in no small part to May's shortcomings.
The ground game does make a real difference in a marginal seat.
This is where Labour have a huge advantage now, the Labour membership is huge, young and enthusiastic. In terms of volunteers Labour can hit very optimistic targets with bigger numbers than the Conservatives could get to key marginals.
its very urban focussed and its' not that motivated. The people going out are the same old hands who have always gone out and a few newbies. The membership on paper bears no relationship to the people who come out to help.
Labour are experts at racking up votes where they don’t need them. Whilst there were a few surprise gains in the last election labour racked up votes in safe seats and got 100 less seats for the same number of votes.
Labour have contrived to have a week of car crashes with a botched vnoc, Corbyn squirming on whether he did or did not say stupid woman to the PM, and one of their mps found guilty of perverting the course of justice
I don't doubt Labour are in trouble, however I watched PMQ's live and felt embarrassed by PM May doing the pantomime oration and the craven response behind her.
l watched PMQ's live and I thought at the time Corbyn muttered "stupid people" as the behaviour of the PM and her backbenchers was childish think this bodes well. I say this as someone who does not view Corbyn in a good light, I think he is extreme and presents even more dangers for the country.
PMQs is full of stupid posturing and lame jokes on all sides at all times, and doesn't really reflect the merits or not of either side. So that May might have made a stupid crack is neither here nor there really. I don't think Corbyns alleged words matter much though, especially as he's provided an explanation enough for supporters (And even some non supporters).
#StupidPeople trending on twitter now...
In an amazing turn around making up some rubbish to smear Corbyn with was counterproductive. In fairness to the Conservatives only a strategic genius or someone with the power to see into the future could have predicted that this would go the same way other silly little smears have gone for over 3 years....
Sadly you don't have to make stuff up to smear Corbyn, you just have look into his past. His election as leader and his duplicitous attitude to Brexit has proved a disaster for Labour and I say that as someone who was a member up to a couple of years ago.
Yes his bringing the Labour party back to a realistic shot of winning was terrible...
If Corbyn had gone the 2nd referendum route the Tories would have won a majority and done what they wanted with Brexit. It is all well and good to complain about what he's done but without him Labour wouldn't have this power to effect Brexit anyway.
A large part of LAB's surprise result at GE2017 came from anti-Brexit tactical voters like me switching to LAB because we thought it was the best option.
Never again my friend.
But The Labour manifesto promised to implement Brexit in 2017 Mike. Why vote for that if you are anti Brexit?
There was a more Brexit party and a less Brexit party, which was as far as most people got, or needed to go. I would however have expected OGH to have done a bit more research.
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
Utter madness. And I hope she gets a sentence that reflects how far she has fallen.
A law-maker and legal professional needs to be held to higher standards. An example has to be made that no-one is above the law.
Chris Huhne got 8 months for a guilty plea. She has got to be facing at least a year, possibly a bit more.
Don't be sure. A year and she will almost certainly appeal. The judge will not want that. A lower sentence might come into play for that reason.
You normally get 1/3 off for an early plea. Plus as a solicitor she is an officer of the court which is a further aggravation (Huhne, of course was aggravating in a variety of ways but not that).
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
Utter madness. And I hope she gets a sentence that reflects how far she has fallen.
A law-maker and legal professional needs to be held to higher standards. An example has to be made that no-one is above the law.
Chris Huhne got 8 months for a guilty plea. She has got to be facing at least a year, possibly a bit more.
Don't be sure. A year and she will almost certainly appeal. The judge will not want that. A lower sentence might come into play for that reason.
There is also the fact that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts.
However I think the fact she is a sitting MP and a legal professional should mean that an example is made.
No matter the sentence, she cannot be allowed to remain in Parliament. And I don't honestly care who wins the by-election - she has to go.
I would agree with every word in your last three sentences. I'm just not convinced they will happen.
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
Utter madness. And I hope she gets a sentence that reflects how far she has fallen.
A law-maker and legal professional needs to be held to higher standards. An example has to be made that no-one is above the law.
Chris Huhne got 8 months for a guilty plea. She has got to be facing at least a year, possibly a bit more.
Don't be sure. A year and she will almost certainly appeal. The judge will not want that. A lower sentence might come into play for that reason.
There is also the fact that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts.
However I think the fact she is a sitting MP and a legal professional should mean that an example is made.
No matter the sentence, she cannot be allowed to remain in Parliament. And I don't honestly care who wins the by-election - she has to go.
She can only be kicked out of the sentence is more than 12 months in gaol.
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
Utter madness. And I hope she gets a sentence that reflects how far she has fallen.
A law-maker and legal professional needs to be held to higher standards. An example has to be made that no-one is above the law.
Chris Huhne got 8 months for a guilty plea. She has got to be facing at least a year, possibly a bit more.
Don't be sure. A year and she will almost certainly appeal. The judge will not want that. A lower sentence might come into play for that reason.
There is also the fact that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts.
However I think the fact she is a sitting MP and a legal professional should mean that an example is made.
No matter the sentence, she cannot be allowed to remain in Parliament. And I don't honestly care who wins the by-election - she has to go.
She can only be kicked out of the sentence is more than 12 months in gaol.
Peterborough Telegraph said that if the sentence is less than 12 months then it goes to recall. Then the good people of Peterborough get their say.
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
Utter madness. And I hope she gets a sentence that reflects how far she has fallen.
A law-maker and legal professional needs to be held to higher standards. An example has to be made that no-one is above the law.
Chris Huhne got 8 months for a guilty plea. She has got to be facing at least a year, possibly a bit more.
Don't be sure. A year and she will almost certainly appeal. The judge will not want that. A lower sentence might come into play for that reason.
There is also the fact that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts.
However I think the fact she is a sitting MP and a legal professional should mean that an example is made.
No matter the sentence, she cannot be allowed to remain in Parliament. And I don't honestly care who wins the by-election - she has to go.
Do you have a link for your assertion that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts?
Life in Tory Britain, where a homeless man can be found dying metres away from the entrance to Parliament. He had a job, but couldn't afford to live in London on what he was earning. He collapsed near the revolving doors into Parliament, a victim of the cold. Died in hospital.
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
Utter madness. And I hope she gets a sentence that reflects how far she has fallen.
A law-maker and legal professional needs to be held to higher standards. An example has to be made that no-one is above the law.
Chris Huhne got 8 months for a guilty plea. She has got to be facing at least a year, possibly a bit more.
Don't be sure. A year and she will almost certainly appeal. The judge will not want that. A lower sentence might come into play for that reason.
There is also the fact that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts.
However I think the fact she is a sitting MP and a legal professional should mean that an example is made.
No matter the sentence, she cannot be allowed to remain in Parliament. And I don't honestly care who wins the by-election - she has to go.
She can only be kicked out of the sentence is more than 12 months in gaol.
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
True , hard to understand her thinking.
£60 fine , plus 3 points on your licence, or a speed awareness course , if you have not had one before. Was she anywhere near loosing her licence ? Because of previous points.
If I read the evidence correctly - which I may not be - she lied on both occasions she was caught speeding. So technically she kept a clean licence. Which makes her conduct still more baffling.
Now I cannot honestly say I've never broken the speed limit and I'm sure you will tell me that's true of every driver. I've been lucky in that so far I've never been caught. But I hope that if (when) I am caught I will see a slap on the wrist and a small fine that will not stop me driving as preferable to a long prison sentence that would destroy my career.
It's not an unusual trait for people to find it hard to admit to an error. We see a lot of such stubbornness here, for example. Clearly the MP took that to an extreme, but I was married to someone worse for a while.
Everything was always someone else's fault. Why then accept a fine?
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
Perhaps it was more initial panic, then one thing led to another, deeper & deeper.
Good evening, everyone.
Not Status Quo lyrics again?!
PS Good evening to you too!
Who or what is Status Quo? (That's a joke, I do read PB regularly even if I don't listen to music.)
It’s like that scene in Mitchell and Webb. When are the Brexiters going to realise that they are the baddies?
Are all 17 million who voted Leave in that referendum baddies, or are you just some sort of generalising fuckwit?
He’s from New Zealand
Of course he’s a generalising fuckwit
I presume this is only “joke” racism, Charles?
Nothing to do with your race - that’s the only distinguishing feature I know about you. I could have equally said “North Londoner”
It was meant to be an obvious generalisation about obviously generalising.
But I forgot you were a humourless fuckwit. For the avoidance of doubt, that’s just you and has nothing to do with your race, colour, religion or sexual preferences
I think we all know it was a joke... don't slip into full-on Streisand mode.
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
Utter madness. And I hope she gets a sentence that reflects how far she has fallen.
A law-maker and legal professional needs to be held to higher standards. An example has to be made that no-one is above the law.
Chris Huhne got 8 months for a guilty plea. She has got to be facing at least a year, possibly a bit more.
Don't be sure. A year and she will almost certainly appeal. The judge will not want that. A lower sentence might come into play for that reason.
There is also the fact that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts.
However I think the fact she is a sitting MP and a legal professional should mean that an example is made.
No matter the sentence, she cannot be allowed to remain in Parliament. And I don't honestly care who wins the by-election - she has to go.
Do you have a link for your assertion that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts?
I don't but it is certainly consistent with my experience. There are always exceptions of course.
My dear wife's very first plea in mitigation before an irascible Sheriff in Dundee where her client was guilty of shoplifting. She mentioned that the accused had a young child. Explosion on the bench. "I am sick of women coming to this court and trying to hide behind their babies". (addressing the accused directly) "And you can tell your thieving friends that as well!".
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
Utter madness. And I hope she gets a sentence that reflects how far she has fallen.
A law-maker and legal professional needs to be held to higher standards. An example has to be made that no-one is above the law.
Chris Huhne got 8 months for a guilty plea. She has got to be facing at least a year, possibly a bit more.
Don't be sure. A year and she will almost certainly appeal. The judge will not want that. A lower sentence might come into play for that reason.
There is also the fact that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts.
However I think the fact she is a sitting MP and a legal professional should mean that an example is made.
No matter the sentence, she cannot be allowed to remain in Parliament. And I don't honestly care who wins the by-election - she has to go.
Do you have a link for your assertion that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts?
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
True , hard to understand her thinking.
£60 fine , plus 3 points on your licence, or a speed awareness course , if you have not had one before. Was she anywhere near loosing her licence ? Because of previous points.
If I read the evidence correctly - which I may not be - she lied on both occasions she was caught speeding. So technically she kept a clean licence. Which makes her conduct still more baffling.
Now I cannot honestly say I've never broken the speed limit and I'm sure you will tell me that's true of every driver. I've been lucky in that so far I've never been caught. But I hope that if (when) I am caught I will see a slap on the wrist and a small fine that will not stop me driving as preferable to a long prison sentence that would destroy my career.
I got caught doing 79 mph on the A1 some years ago, by a fixed camera. I believe they give you 10% over to make sure of a conviction. I was returning from London after visiting my daughter. They do send a letter initially requesting the registered keeper,who was driving the vehicle. I was offered the speed awareness course, which I took to avoid the points.
North Yorkshire Police never had fixed speed cameras However the PCC has invested heavily in mobile speed camera vans. Which change locations every day. I am told they are very profitable.
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
Utter madness. And I hope she gets a sentence that reflects how far she has fallen.
A law-maker and legal professional needs to be held to higher standards. An example has to be made that no-one is above the law.
Chris Huhne got 8 months for a guilty plea. She has got to be facing at least a year, possibly a bit more.
Don't be sure. A year and she will almost certainly appeal. The judge will not want that. A lower sentence might come into play for that reason.
There is also the fact that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts.
However I think the fact she is a sitting MP and a legal professional should mean that an example is made.
No matter the sentence, she cannot be allowed to remain in Parliament. And I don't honestly care who wins the by-election - she has to go.
She can only be kicked out of the sentence is more than 12 months in gaol.
I know that is the case. But she should resign no matter how she is sentenced. We cannot have someone convicted of perverting the course of justice sitting in Parliament.
Life in Tory Britain, where a homeless man can be found dying metres away from the entrance to Parliament. He had a job, but couldn't afford to live in London on what he was earning. He collapsed near the revolving doors into Parliament, a victim of the cold. Died in hospital.
I think we should remember this man, when a Tory MP next tells us we have "record numbers of people in employment".
This man was part of those record numbers.
Did things like this not happen between 1997 and 2010?
They happened a lot more, homelessness was much higher then.
Yes it was for much of that period but between 2003 and 2010 it was reduced by 70%. It has sadly risen back up again by over 45% since then (figures for England only)
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
Utter madness. And I hope she gets a sentence that reflects how far she has fallen.
A law-maker and legal professional needs to be held to higher standards. An example has to be made that no-one is above the law.
Chris Huhne got 8 months for a guilty plea. She has got to be facing at least a year, possibly a bit more.
Don't be sure. A year and she will almost certainly appeal. The judge will not want that. A lower sentence might come into play for that reason.
There is also the fact that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts.
However I think the fact she is a sitting MP and a legal professional should mean that an example is made.
No matter the sentence, she cannot be allowed to remain in Parliament. And I don't honestly care who wins the by-election - she has to go.
She can only be kicked out of the sentence is more than 12 months in gaol.
Peterborough Telegraph said that if the sentence is less than 12 months then it goes to recall. Then the good people of Peterborough get their say.
Labour have already asked her to resign according to Order-Order. I am not sure how much pressure they can put on her though.
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
Utter madness. And I hope she gets a sentence that reflects how far she has fallen.
A law-maker and legal professional needs to be held to higher standards. An example has to be made that no-one is above the law.
Chris Huhne got 8 months for a guilty plea. She has got to be facing at least a year, possibly a bit more.
Don't be sure. A year and she will almost certainly appeal. The judge will not want that. A lower sentence might come into play for that reason.
There is also the fact that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts.
However I think the fact she is a sitting MP and a legal professional should mean that an example is made.
No matter the sentence, she cannot be allowed to remain in Parliament. And I don't honestly care who wins the by-election - she has to go.
She can only be kicked out of the sentence is more than 12 months in gaol.
Peterborough Telegraph said that if the sentence is less than 12 months then it goes to recall. Then the good people of Peterborough get their say.
Labour have already asked her to resign according to Order-Order. I am not sure how much pressure they can put on her though.
I suspect she will be encouraged to go and then a cushy job will be arranged working for a Union or pressure group after a couple of months.
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
Utter madness. And I hope she gets a sentence that reflects how far she has fallen.
A law-maker and legal professional needs to be held to higher standards. An example has to be made that no-one is above the law.
Chris Huhne got 8 months for a guilty plea. She has got to be facing at least a year, possibly a bit more.
Don't be sure. A year and she will almost certainly appeal. The judge will not want that. A lower sentence might come into play for that reason.
There is also the fact that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts.
However I think the fact she is a sitting MP and a legal professional should mean that an example is made.
No matter the sentence, she cannot be allowed to remain in Parliament. And I don't honestly care who wins the by-election - she has to go.
She can only be kicked out of the sentence is more than 12 months in gaol.
Peterborough Telegraph said that if the sentence is less than 12 months then it goes to recall. Then the good people of Peterborough get their say.
Labour have already asked her to resign according to Order-Order. I am not sure how much pressure they can put on her though.
Not enough (cf O'Mara and Hopkins, or for that matter Field and Mann).
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
Utter madness. And I hope she gets a sentence that reflects how far she has fallen.
A law-maker and legal professional needs to be held to higher standards. An example has to be made that no-one is above the law.
Chris Huhne got 8 months for a guilty plea. She has got to be facing at least a year, possibly a bit more.
Don't be sure. A year and she will almost certainly appeal. The judge will not want that. A lower sentence might come into play for that reason.
There is also the fact that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts.
However I think the fact she is a sitting MP and a legal professional should mean that an example is made.
No matter the sentence, she cannot be allowed to remain in Parliament. And I don't honestly care who wins the by-election - she has to go.
She can only be kicked out of the sentence is more than 12 months in gaol.
I know that is the case. But she should resign no matter how she is sentenced. We cannot have someone convicted of perverting the course of justice sitting in Parliament.
I doubt you'll find anyone who disagrees (apart from maybe Onasanya herself) but parliament needs to change the law, that was itself introduced on the back of Bobby Sands winning election while on hunger strike in The Maze.
If she tries to hang on I suspect that will provoke a law change - though of course there is no time for anything but Brexit at present.
Hold on a minute the Cabinet, which had Brexiteers in it agreed to the GE as did MPs. I agree the PM is not very good at her job hence 117 MPs from her own party think anybody else would be better than her at the job!
Well indeed. When the election was called I was very excited. By the time of the vote I was annoyed and upset.
So many avoidable mistakes. Cameron, Osborme and Crosby had won the election previously with a strong focus on the economy. Being faced by literal Marxists who want to "smash capitalism." May had nothing worthwhile to say on the economy and silenced her Cabinet.
But then she had nothing worthwhile to say on anything else either and chickened out of the debates. It was an utterly avoidable eat against the odds. By 2017 I had moved away so did not again but in an avoidable election he lost thanks in no small part to May's shortcomings.
The ground game does make a real difference in a marginal seat.
This is where Labour have a huge advantage now, the Labour membership is huge, young and enthusiastic. In terms of volunteers Labour can hit very optimistic targets with bigger numbers than the Conservatives could get to key marginals.
its very urban focussed and its' not that motivated. The people going out are the same old hands who have always gone out and a few newbies. The membership on paper bears no relationship to the people who come out to help.
That bears little to no relation to what happened. Previously dead constituencies sprung to life. Some constituencies ballooned to massive membership numbers and even most of the biggest critics of Corbyn and momentum after the election came out and praised them and the other new young members work for helping produce the result.
You had individual constituency campaigns getting more volunteers coming in than they knew what to do with.
In London for sure, but then London accounts for a remarkably high percentage of the membership (I can't remember the figure). Hornsey and Wood Green has the highest membership and as I recall something like 20% of the adult population in that seat are Labour members (yet the LibDems still manage to do very well there).
Fine upstanding Brexiteers tell Anna Soubry she's "on the side of Adolf Hitler".
I presume this is only “joke” racism, Charles?
On a point of pedantry - it's actually xenophobia.
I was disappointed your guys couldn't get past Mathews in the Test, by the way. Also sad that an honorary Bristol boy like Kane Williamson (who captained Gloucestershire at 20 and was clearly a special talent even then) couldn't quite take the record. But that can't be far off.
I'll admit though that my more intense disappointment was reserved for Australia's win at Perth.
I would have thought ascribing a disagreeable trait to every member of a nation, and on the basis they were from that nation, strayed well into racism.
For example, if I said about some stupidity "ooh that's a bit Irish", I'd surely be guilty of racism.
No, because the Irish are the same race. (Yes, I know almost every country is multiracial.) So it's xenophobia - dislike of foreigners.
So the Irish can be considered a race but Kiwis cannot?
Huh? That makes no sense.
Have you misunderstood me? Or are you not the same race as the Irish?
I have clearly misunderstood you.
Am I to take it then that you do not see generalised, unfounded slurs against 'the Irish' as racist?
Generalised slurs against the English on here (racist, xenophobic etc.) seem fine, so I guess it's ok all round?
I can't say I've noticed much of that. Note an English person saying 'little Englanders' is not xenophobic. Also not sure if you were hinting at it but gammon is not racist.
There was a bizarre episode on PB for a while whereby Morris Dancer and others continually referred to French people as Frogs but took great exception to the phrase Little Englander.
Fine upstanding Brexiteers tell Anna Soubry she's "on the side of Adolf Hitler".
I presume this is only “joke” racism, Charles?
On a point of pedantry - it's actually xenophobia.
I was disappointed your guys couldn't get past Mathews in the Test, by the way. Also sad that an honorary Bristol boy like Kane Williamson (who captained Gloucestershire at 20 and was clearly a special talent even then) couldn't quite take the record. But that can't be far off.
I'll admit though that my more intense disappointment was reserved for Australia's win at Perth.
I would have thought ascribing a disagreeable trait to every member of a nation, and on the basis they were from that nation, strayed well into racism.
For example, if I said about some stupidity "ooh that's a bit Irish", I'd surely be guilty of racism.
No, because the Irish are the same race. (Yes, I know almost every country is multiracial.) So it's xenophobia - dislike of foreigners.
So the Irish can be considered a race but Kiwis cannot?
Huh? That makes no sense.
Have you misunderstood me? Or are you not the same race as the Irish?
I have clearly misunderstood you.
Am I to take it then that you do not see generalised, unfounded slurs against 'the Irish' as racist?
Generalised slurs against the English on here (racist, xenophobic etc.) seem fine, so I guess it's ok all round?
I can't say I've noticed much of that. Note an English person saying 'little Englanders' is not xenophobic. Also not sure if you were hinting at it but gammon is not racist.
There was a bizarre episode on PB for a while whereby Morris Dancer and others continually referred to French people as Frogs but took great exception to the phrase Little Englander.
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
Utter madness. And I hope she gets a sentence that reflects how far she has fallen.
A law-maker and legal professional needs to be held to higher standards. An example has to be made that no-one is above the law.
Chris Huhne got 8 months for a guilty plea. She has got to be facing at least a year, possibly a bit more.
Don't be sure. A year and she will almost certainly appeal. The judge will not want that. A lower sentence might come into play for that reason.
There is also the fact that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts.
However I think the fact she is a sitting MP and a legal professional should mean that an example is made.
No matter the sentence, she cannot be allowed to remain in Parliament. And I don't honestly care who wins the by-election - she has to go.
She can only be kicked out of the sentence is more than 12 months in gaol.
Peterborough Telegraph said that if the sentence is less than 12 months then it goes to recall. Then the good people of Peterborough get their say.
Labour have already asked her to resign according to Order-Order. I am not sure how much pressure they can put on her though.
I suspect she will be encouraged to go and then a cushy job will be arranged working for a Union or pressure group after a couple of months.
...or maybe a few more months than that if she is otherwise occupied
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
Utter madness. And I hope she gets a sentence that reflects how far she has fallen.
A law-maker and legal professional needs to be held to higher standards. An example has to be made that no-one is above the law.
Chris Huhne got 8 months for a guilty plea. She has got to be facing at least a year, possibly a bit more.
Don't be sure. A year and she will almost certainly appeal. The judge will not want that. A lower sentence might come into play for that reason.
There is also the fact that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts.
However I think the fact she is a sitting MP and a legal professional should mean that an example is made.
No matter the sentence, she cannot be allowed to remain in Parliament. And I don't honestly care who wins the by-election - she has to go.
She can only be kicked out of the sentence is more than 12 months in gaol.
Peterborough Telegraph said that if the sentence is less than 12 months then it goes to recall. Then the good people of Peterborough get their say.
Labour have already asked her to resign according to Order-Order. I am not sure how much pressure they can put on her though.
Life in Tory Britain, where a homeless man can be found dying metres away from the entrance to Parliament. He had a job, but couldn't afford to live in London on what he was earning. He collapsed near the revolving doors into Parliament, a victim of the cold. Died in hospital.
I think we should remember this man, when a Tory MP next tells us we have "record numbers of people in employment".
This man was part of those record numbers.
Did things like this not happen between 1997 and 2010?
They happened a lot more, homelessness was much higher then.
Yes it was for much of that period but between 2003 and 2010 it was reduced by 70%. It has sadly risen back up again by over 45% since then (figures for England only)
The population has of course increased by more than 10% since 2004, almost exclusively as a result of immigration. Given our housebuilding record over that period and that influx it is frankly surprising that homelessness has not increased by more.
It’s like that scene in Mitchell and Webb. When are the Brexiters going to realise that they are the baddies?
Are all 17 million who voted Leave in that referendum baddies, or are you just some sort of generalising fuckwit?
He’s from New Zealand
Of course he’s a generalising fuckwit
I presume this is only “joke” racism, Charles?
Nothing to do with your race - that’s the only distinguishing feature I know about you. I could have equally said “North Londoner”
It was meant to be an obvious generalisation about obviously generalising.
But I forgot you were a humourless fuckwit. For the avoidance of doubt, that’s just you and has nothing to do with your race, colour, religion or sexual preferences
That’s two fuckwits from you in one night. I thought the noblesse were supposed to be obliging?!
Hold on a minute the Cabinet, which had Brexiteers in it agreed to the GE as did MPs. I agree the PM is not very good at her job hence 117 MPs from her own party think anybody else would be better than her at the job!
Well indeed. When the election was called I was very excited. By the time of the vote I was annoyed and upset.
So many avoidable mistakes. Cameron, Osborme and Crosby had won the election previously with a strong focus on the economy. Being faced by literal Marxists who want to "smash capitalism." May had nothing worthwhile to say on the economy and silenced her Cabinet.
But then she had nothing worthwhile to say on anything else either and chickened out of the debates. It was an utterly avoidable eat against the odds. By 2017 I had moved away so did not again but in an avoidable election he lost thanks in no small part to May's shortcomings.
The ground game does make a real difference in a marginal seat.
This is where Labour have a huge advantage now, the Labour membership is huge, young and enthusiastic. In terms of volunteers Labour can hit very optimistic targets with bigger numbers than the Conservatives could get to key marginals.
its very urban focussed and its' not that motivated. The people going out are the same old hands who have always gone out and a few newbies. The membership on paper bears no relationship to the people who come out to help.
You had individual constituency campaigns getting more volunteers coming in than they knew what to do with.
In London for sure, but then London accounts for a remarkably high percentage of the membership (I can't remember the figure). Hornsey and Wood Green has the highest membership and as I recall something like 20% of the adult population in that seat are Labour members (yet the LibDems still manage to do very well there).
20% of adults in Hornsey are Labour members? Really?!? That’s a truly remarkable stat if true.
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
Utter madness. And I hope she gets a sentence that reflects how far she has fallen.
A law-maker and legal professional needs to be held to higher standards. An example has to be made that no-one is above the law.
Chris Huhne got 8 months for a guilty plea. She has got to be facing at least a year, possibly a bit more.
Don't be sure. A year and she will almost certainly appeal. The judge will not want that. A lower sentence might come into play for that reason.
There is also the fact that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts.
However I think the fact she is a sitting MP and a legal professional should mean that an example is made.
No matter the sentence, she cannot be allowed to remain in Parliament. And I don't honestly care who wins the by-election - she has to go.
She can only be kicked out of the sentence is more than 12 months in gaol.
Peterborough Telegraph said that if the sentence is less than 12 months then it goes to recall. Then the good people of Peterborough get their say.
Labour have already asked her to resign according to Order-Order. I am not sure how much pressure they can put on her though.
I suspect she will be encouraged to go and then a cushy job will be arranged working for a Union or pressure group after a couple of months.
...or maybe a few more months than that if she is otherwise occupied
On a point of pedantry - it's actually xenophobia.
I was disappointed your guys couldn't get past Mathews in the Test, by the way. Also sad that an honorary Bristol boy like Kane Williamson (who captained Gloucestershire at 20 and was clearly a special talent even then) couldn't quite take the record. But that can't be far off.
I'll admit though that my more intense disappointment was reserved for Australia's win at Perth.
I would have thought ascribing a disagreeable trait to every member of a nation, and on the basis they were from that nation, strayed well into racism.
For example, if I said about some stupidity "ooh that's a bit Irish", I'd surely be guilty of racism.
No, because the Irish are the same race. (Yes, I know almost every country is multiracial.) So it's xenophobia - dislike of foreigners.
So the Irish can be considered a race but Kiwis cannot?
Huh? That makes no sense.
Have you misunderstood me? Or are you not the same race as the Irish?
I have clearly misunderstood you.
Am I to take it then that you do not see generalised, unfounded slurs against 'the Irish' as racist?
Generalised slurs against the English on here (racist, xenophobic etc.) seem fine, so I guess it's ok all round?
I can't say I've noticed much of that. Note an English person saying 'little Englanders' is not xenophobic. Also not sure if you were hinting at it but gammon is not racist.
There was a bizarre episode on PB for a while whereby Morris Dancer and others continually referred to French people as Frogs but took great exception to the phrase Little Englander.
Funny old world.
Well, it is a bit harsh on frogs.
I think I first heard about the German term for Brits - 'Island Monkeys' - on PB (the things you learn on here!)
I know it's supposed to be a derogatory term but I actually quite like it. Our sense of 'islandness' is deep-rooted in the British psyche (if that's not a sweeping generalisation ), and we are primates after all, so it seems like a resonable epithet!
Life in Tory Britain, where a homeless man can be found dying metres away from the entrance to Parliament. He had a job, but couldn't afford to live in London on what he was earning. He collapsed near the revolving doors into Parliament, a victim of the cold. Died in hospital.
I think we should remember this man, when a Tory MP next tells us we have "record numbers of people in employment".
This man was part of those record numbers.
Did things like this not happen between 1997 and 2010?
They happened a lot more, homelessness was much higher then.
Yes it was for much of that period but between 2003 and 2010 it was reduced by 70%. It has sadly risen back up again by over 45% since then (figures for England only)
The population has of course increased by more than 10% since 2004, almost exclusively as a result of immigration. Given our housebuilding record over that period and that influx it is frankly surprising that homelessness has not increased by more.
Not everything is about immigration David. That increase and those dates correlate quite well with our military escapades abroad and the flow of returning and retiring soldiers who are over represented amongst the homeless.
I genuinely don’t grasp what the issue is here. If they can’t get a deal through parliament, what other option is there? General election I suppose, at a stretch. But Rudd is really only stating the bleeding obvious.
Life in Tory Britain, where a homeless man can be found dying metres away from the entrance to Parliament. He had a job, but couldn't afford to live in London on what he was earning. He collapsed near the revolving doors into Parliament, a victim of the cold. Died in hospital.
I think we should remember this man, when a Tory MP next tells us we have "record numbers of people in employment".
This man was part of those record numbers.
Did things like this not happen between 1997 and 2010?
They happened a lot more, homelessness was much higher then.
Yes it was for much of that period but between 2003 and 2010 it was reduced by 70%. It has sadly risen back up again by over 45% since then (figures for England only)
Laughable that you have produced a chart that clearly shows homelessness is but a fraction of what it was only a 12 years ago. Even a 45% increase on the low point classes as virtually s record low.
Seeing that there is a plausible argument is absolutely not the same as agreeing with that argument or advocating it as the way forward. And it is clear she does not agree with holding a second referendum and thinks it is up the Parliament to resolve this not the people.
So this is not big news. It is stating the obvious and not what TND wants to mean.
In London for sure, but then London accounts for a remarkably high percentage of the membership (I can't remember the figure). Hornsey and Wood Green has the highest membership and as I recall something like 20% of the adult population in that seat are Labour members (yet the LibDems still manage to do very well there).
I don't think it's as high as 20% of the population, that would imply more than 10,000 members. IIRC it's closer to 4,000.
However it's true that Labour membership has increased dramatically since 2016, my own CLP has increased more than threefold and I think that's quite typical.
In London for sure, but then London accounts for a remarkably high percentage of the membership (I can't remember the figure). Hornsey and Wood Green has the highest membership and as I recall something like 20% of the adult population in that seat are Labour members (yet the LibDems still manage to do very well there).
20% of adults in Hornsey are Labour members? Really?!? That’s a truly remarkable stat if true.
Former PBer IOS boasted about Labour having 1,600 activists working in Hornsey in 2015.
He also gave us some reports from a Crouch End coffee shop.
I genuinely don’t grasp what the issue is here. If they can’t get a deal through parliament, what other option is there? General election I suppose, at a stretch. But Rudd is really only stating the bleeding obvious.
Either
a) deal; or b) A50 extension and deal/remain referendum.
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
Utter madness. And I hope she gets a sentence that reflects how far she has fallen.
A law-maker and legal professional needs to be held to higher standards. An example has to be made that no-one is above the law.
Chris Huhne got 8 months for a guilty plea. She has got to be facing at least a year, possibly a bit more.
Don't be sure. A year and she will almost certainly appeal. The judge will not want that. A lower sentence might come into play for that reason.
There is also the fact that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts.
However I think the fact she is a sitting MP and a legal professional should mean that an example is made.
No matter the sentence, she cannot be allowed to remain in Parliament. And I don't honestly care who wins the by-election - she has to go.
She can only be kicked out of the sentence is more than 12 months in gaol.
But she can be kicked out even if that sentence is suspended.
Her brother runs people’s vote... good job there isn’t an elite clique of people taking the piss.
Peoples vote is Blair, Campbell and their mates money behind it. Any Tory MP should avoid the organisation like the plague. I can remember gullible Tory MP's turning up to Open Britain )The umbrella organisation of PV) to learn that a load of die hard labour and lib dems were only goint to Target Tory Leaver MP seats. Gullible is a word that is insufficiently strong for these Tory MP's that are getting involved in this.
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
Utter madness. And I hope she gets a sentence that reflects how far she has fallen.
A law-maker and legal professional needs to be held to higher standards. An example has to be made that no-one is above the law.
Chris Huhne got 8 months for a guilty plea. She has got to be facing at least a year, possibly a bit more.
Don't be sure. A year and she will almost certainly appeal. The judge will not want that. A lower sentence might come into play for that reason.
There is also the fact that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts.
However I think the fact she is a sitting MP and a legal professional should mean that an example is made.
No matter the sentence, she cannot be allowed to remain in Parliament. And I don't honestly care who wins the by-election - she has to go.
She can only be kicked out of the sentence is more than 12 months in gaol.
But she can be kicked out even if that sentence is suspended.
I thought we abolished suspended sentences? Or am I late with the noose?
Is North Hampshire -> Basingstoke -> Aldershot the most consistently Tory (Or seat for any party) constituency in the country, being a gain from the Whigs in 1857 ?
North Shropshire (Oswestry to Market Drayton) = Tory since 1835. Paterson's descendants are probably safe until 2200.
We didn't abolish rotten boroughs, we just reduced the number.
Ah, but Oswestry went Liberal in a 1904 by-election.
Someone from PB had better edit the Wikipedia page
Life in Tory Britain, where a homeless man can be found dying metres away from the entrance to Parliament. He had a job, but couldn't afford to live in London on what he was earning. He collapsed near the revolving doors into Parliament, a victim of the cold. Died in hospital.
I think we should remember this man, when a Tory MP next tells us we have "record numbers of people in employment".
This man was part of those record numbers.
Did things like this not happen between 1997 and 2010?
They happened a lot more, homelessness was much higher then.
Yes it was for much of that period but between 2003 and 2010 it was reduced by 70%. It has sadly risen back up again by over 45% since then (figures for England only)
The population has of course increased by more than 10% since 2004, almost exclusively as a result of immigration. Given our housebuilding record over that period and that influx it is frankly surprising that homelessness has not increased by more.
Not everything is about immigration David. That increase and those dates correlate quite well with our military escapades abroad and the flow of returning and retiring soldiers who are over represented amongst the homeless.
Whilst it is a depressing fact that too many ex service men end up homeless the numbers of our forces are just too small to explain changes like that. Did we not have 8k in Afghanistan for most of that period? Obviously on rotation but out of something like 80k in all. You are talking hundreds (which is far too many of course).
What we also had was approximately 3.5m eastern Europeans, many of them low paid, young, not a little vulnerable and away from family support networks. It is unusual to find a beggar in Edinburgh with English as a first language.
In London for sure, but then London accounts for a remarkably high percentage of the membership (I can't remember the figure). Hornsey and Wood Green has the highest membership and as I recall something like 20% of the adult population in that seat are Labour members (yet the LibDems still manage to do very well there).
20% of adults in Hornsey are Labour members? Really?!? That’s a truly remarkable stat if true.
Former PBer IOS boasted about Labour having 1,600 activists working in Hornsey in 2015.
He also gave us some reports from a Crouch End coffee shop.
There was an area branch set up in a little market town, always solidly Tory. They had a lot of retired public sector, Corbynites seemingly most of them. The always seemed to be doing coffee mornings and petitions etc. But Rory still ended up with a 16,000 majority.
Is North Hampshire -> Basingstoke -> Aldershot the most consistently Tory (Or seat for any party) constituency in the country, being a gain from the Whigs in 1857 ?
North Shropshire (Oswestry to Market Drayton) = Tory since 1835. Paterson's descendants are probably safe until 2200.
We didn't abolish rotten boroughs, we just reduced the number.
Ah, but Oswestry went Liberal in a 1904 by-election.
Someone from PB had better edit the Wikipedia page
Even if it's been 'only' 110, not 180 years, it's ridiculous for Tory or Labour seats to be represented by the same party for centuries on end.
Why is it ridiculous?
Indeed. It's only represented that way if that's what the voters want. Their choice.
What is ridiculous is people still thinking after Scotland 2015 and 2017 that there is such a thing as an inherently safe seat.
Most places have not gone the way Scotland has recently.
Which is as well. Any democracy that sees 95% of seats go to one party would be a democracy in its way to an unpleasant death. Fortunately it didn't matter hugely in Scotland because it was only 9% of the total seats in the country, but I wouldn't want to see either or indeed party have such a stranglehold on national politics.
In London for sure, but then London accounts for a remarkably high percentage of the membership (I can't remember the figure). Hornsey and Wood Green has the highest membership and as I recall something like 20% of the adult population in that seat are Labour members (yet the LibDems still manage to do very well there).
20% of adults in Hornsey are Labour members? Really?!? That’s a truly remarkable stat if true.
Former PBer IOS boasted about Labour having 1,600 activists working in Hornsey in 2015.
He also gave us some reports from a Crouch End coffee shop.
I don’t doubt it’s a heartland, I live close to there and can confirm that north London is very red. But 20% of the adult population strikes me as fake news.
Life in Tory Britain, where a homeless man can be found dying metres away from the entrance to Parliament. He had a job, but couldn't afford to live in London on what he was earning. He collapsed near the revolving doors into Parliament, a victim of the cold. Died in hospital.
I think we should remember this man, when a Tory MP next tells us we have "record numbers of people in employment".
This man was part of those record numbers.
Did things like this not happen between 1997 and 2010?
They happened a lot more, homelessness was much higher then.
Yes it was for much of that period but between 2003 and 2010 it was reduced by 70%. It has sadly risen back up again by over 45% since then (figures for England only)
The population has of course increased by more than 10% since 2004, almost exclusively as a result of immigration. Given our housebuilding record over that period and that influx it is frankly surprising that homelessness has not increased by more.
Not everything isescapades abroad and the flow of returning and retiring soldiers who are over represented amongst the homeless.
Whilst it is a depressing fact that too many ex service men end up homeless the numbers of our forces are just too small to explain changes like that. Did we not have 8k in Afghanistan for most of that period? Obviously on rotation but out of something like 80k in all. You are talking hundreds (which is far too many of course).
What we also had was approximately 3.5m eastern Europeans, many of them low paid, young, not a little vulnerable and away from family support networks. It is unusual to find a beggar in Edinburgh with English as a first language.
Street beggars are rarely homeless (except in some of the large urban areas), no forces people should be sleeping rough, they are entitled to priority status.
There’s been lots of sensible changes over the last couple of years in how local authorities handle homelessness. The automatic response used to be when someone turns up and says the landlord is evicting them, stay put and if you leave before the courts order you out you’ll be classed as intentionally homeless and not entitled to support.
Such a situation. Is bad for the landlord, fudges up the credit and background checks for the tenant. This is no longer the case.
Life in Tory Britain, where a homeless man can be found dying metres away from the entrance to Parliament. He had a job, but couldn't afford to live in London on what he was earning. He collapsed near the revolving doors into Parliament, a victim of the cold. Died in hospital.
I think we should remember this man, when a Tory MP next tells us we have "record numbers of people in employment".
This man was part of those record numbers.
Did things like this not happen between 1997 and 2010?
They happened a lot more, homelessness was much higher then.
Yes it was for much of that period but between 2003 and 2010 it was reduced by 70%. It has sadly risen back up again by over 45% since then (figures for England only)
The population has of course increased by more than 10% since 2004, almost exclusively as a result of immigration. Given our housebuilding record over that period and that influx it is frankly surprising that homelessness has not increased by more.
Not everything is about immigration David. That increase and those dates correlate quite well with our military escapades abroad and the flow of returning and retiring soldiers who are over represented amongst the homeless.
Whilst it is a depressing fact that too many ex service men end up homeless the numbers of our forces are just too small to explain changes like that. Did we not have 8k in Afghanistan for most of that period? Obviously on rotation but out of something like 80k in all. You are talking hundreds (which is far too many of course).
What we also had was approximately 3.5m eastern Europeans, many of them low paid, young, not a little vulnerable and away from family support networks. It is unusual to find a beggar in Edinburgh with English as a first language.
Estimates are around 6,000 - 13,000.
So potentially a large slug of the 20,000 increase since 2009.
Afghan kicked off again in 2006 and that (a 3-5 year engagement) would correlate with the 2009 increase.
I have no firm stats on that. Are there stats on immigrant homelessness?
Yes it was for much of that period but between 2003 and 2010 it was reduced by 70%. It has sadly risen back up again by over 45% since then (figures for England only)
The population has of course increased by more than 10% since 2004, almost exclusively as a result of immigration. Given our housebuilding record over that period and that influx it is frankly surprising that homelessness has not increased by more.
Not everything isescapades abroad and the flow of returning and retiring soldiers who are over represented amongst the homeless.
Whilst it is a depressing fact that too many ex service men end up homeless the numbers of our forces are just too small to explain changes like that. Did we not have 8k in Afghanistan for most of that period? Obviously on rotation but out of something like 80k in all. You are talking hundreds (which is far too many of course).
What we also had was approximately 3.5m eastern Europeans, many of them low paid, young, not a little vulnerable and away from family support networks. It is unusual to find a beggar in Edinburgh with English as a first language.
Street beggars are rarely homeless (except in some of the large urban areas), no forces people should be sleeping rough, they are entitled to priority status.
There’s been lots of sensible changes over the last couple of years in how local authorities handle homelessness. The automatic response used to be when someone turns up and says the landlord is evicting them, stay put and if you leave before the courts order you out you’ll be classed as intentionally homeless and not entitled to support.
Such a situation. Is bad for the landlord, fudges up the credit and background checks for the tenant. This is no longer the case.
I agree that there has been some progress. But in a civilised society we really should be trying harder.
Life in Tory Britain, where a homeless man can be found dying metres away from the entrance to Parliament. He had a job, but couldn't afford to live in London on what he was earning. He collapsed near the revolving doors into Parliament, a victim of the cold. Died in hospital.
I think we should remember this man, when a Tory MP next tells us we have "record numbers of people in employment".
This man was part of those record numbers.
Did things like this not happen between 1997 and 2010?
They happened a lot more, homelessness was much higher then.
Yes it was for much of that period but between 2003 and 2010 it was reduced by 70%. It has sadly risen back up again by over 45% since then (figures for England only)
The population has of course increased by more than 10% since 2004, almost exclusively as a result of immigration. Given our housebuilding record over that period and that influx it is frankly surprising that homelessness has not increased by more.
Not everything isescapades abroad and the flow of returning and retiring soldiers who are over represented amongst the homeless.
Whilst it is a depressing).
What we also had was approximately 3.5m eastern Europeans, many of them low paid, young, not a little vulnerable and away from family support networks. It is unusual to find a beggar in Edinburgh with English as a first language.
Street beggars are rarely homeless (except in some of the large urban areas), no forces people should be sleeping rough, they are entitled to priority status.
There’s been lots of sensible changes over the last couple of years in how local authorities handle homelessness. The automatic response used to be when someone turns up and says the landlord is evicting them, stay put and if you leave before the courts order you out you’ll be classed as intentionally homeless and not entitled to support.
Such a situation. Is bad for the landlord, fudges up the credit and background checks for the tenant. This is no longer the case.
There are enough beds for everyone "homeless". But it is more than the availability of beds that causes people to sleep rough.
It’s like that scene in Mitchell and Webb. When are the Brexiters going to realise that they are the baddies?
Are all 17 million who voted Leave in that referendum baddies, or are you just some sort of generalising fuckwit?
He’s from New Zealand
Of course he’s a generalising fuckwit
I presume this is only “joke” racism, Charles?
Nothing to do with your race - that’s the only distinguishing feature I know about you. I could have equally said “North Londoner”
It was meant to be an obvious generalisation about obviously generalising.
But I forgot you were a humourless fuckwit. For the avoidance of doubt, that’s just you and has nothing to do with your race, colour, religion or sexual preferences
I think we all know it was a joke... don't slip into full-on Streisand mode.
Ok, fair point. I've made a bit of a tit of myself. Most anti English sentiment in here does come from the English. Still, it's a jolly poor show to call all Leavers bad. You remainers have got Tony Blair and Al Campbell on your side, so how bad does that make you?
Life in Tory Britain, where a homeless man can be found dying metres away from the entrance to Parliament. He had a job, but couldn't afford to live in London on what he was earning. He collapsed near the revolving doors into Parliament, a victim of the cold. Died in hospital.
I think we should remember this man, when a Tory MP next tells us we have "record numbers of people in employment".
This man was part of those record numbers.
Did things like this not happen between 1997 and 2010?
They happened a lot more, homelessness was much higher then.
Yes it was for much of that period but between 2003 and 2010 it was reduced by 70%. It has sadly risen back up again by over 45% since then (figures for England only)
The population has of course increased by more than 10% since 2004, almost exclusively as a result of immigration. Given our housebuilding record over that period and that influx it isncreased by more.
Not everything isescapades abroad and the flow of returning and retiring soldiers who are over represented amongst the homeless.
Whilst it is a depressing).
What we also had was approximately 3.5m eastern Europeans, many of them low paid, young, not a little vulnerable and away from family support networks. It is unusual to find a beggar in Edinburgh with English as a first language.
Street beggars are rarely homeless (except in some of the large urban areas), no forces people should be sleeping rough, they are entitled to priority status.
There’s been lots of sensible changes over the last couple of years in how local authorities handle homelessness. The automatic response used to be when someone turns up and says the landlord is evicting them, stay put and if you leave before the courts order you out you’ll be classed as intentionally homeless and not entitled to support.
Such a situation. Is bad for the landlord, fudges up the credit and background checks for the tenant. This is no longer the case.
There are enough beds for everyone "homeless". But it is more than the availability of beds that causes people to sleep rough.
Most certainly. But when help is offered and refused they stop being a victim and become a nuisance that need moved on.
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
Utter madness. And I hope she gets a sentence that reflects how far she has fallen.
A law-maker and legal professional needs to be held to higher standards. An example has to be made that no-one is above the law.
Chris Huhne got 8 months for a guilty plea. She has got to be facing at least a year, possibly a bit more.
Don't be sure. A year and she will almost certainly appeal. The judge will not want that. A lower sentence might come into play for that reason.
There is also the fact that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts.
However I think the fact she is a sitting MP and a legal professional should mean that an example is made.
No matter the sentence, she cannot be allowed to remain in Parliament. And I don't honestly care who wins the by-election - she has to go.
She can only be kicked out of the sentence is more than 12 months in gaol.
But she can be kicked out even if that sentence is suspended.
I thought we abolished suspended sentences? Or am I late with the noose?
Ok, fair point. I've made a bit of a tit of myself. Most anti English sentiment in here does come from the English. Still, it's a jolly poor show to call all Leavers bad. You remainers have got Tony Blair and Al Campbell on your side, so how bad does that make you?
Seeing that there is a plausible argument is absolutely not the same as agreeing with that argument or advocating it as the way forward. And it is clear she does not agree with holding a second referendum and thinks it is up the Parliament to resolve this not the people.
So this is not big news. It is stating the obvious and not what TND wants to mean.
It's treated as news because most politicians refuse to engage with hypotheticals even where it's obvious they are about to become a reality.
Ok, fair point. I've made a bit of a tit of myself. Most anti English sentiment in here does come from the English. Still, it's a jolly poor show to call all Leavers bad. You remainers have got Tony Blair and Al Campbell on your side, so how bad does that make you?
You're missing a trick there Twisted, you forgot we've also got Adonis on our side!
WRT sentencing, there are three aggravating factors (abuse of a position of trust, absence of contrition, failure to co-operate with the authorities) and no mitigating factors that I can think of.
Plus being a solicitor. She abused that position of trust as well as that of being an MP.
What a nitwit.
And she has lost literally everything trying to avoid a £60 fine.
Madness.
Utter madness. And I hope she gets a sentence that reflects how far she has fallen.
A law-maker and legal professional needs to be held to higher standards. An example has to be made that no-one is above the law.
Chris Huhne got 8 months for a guilty plea. She has got to be facing at least a year, possibly a bit more.
Don't be sure. A year and she will almost certainly appeal. The judge will not want that. A lower sentence might come into play for that reason.
There is also the fact that women, on the whole, get lower sentences for the same level of offence as their male counterparts.
However I think the fact she is a sitting MP and a legal professional should mean that an example is made.
No matter the sentence, she cannot be allowed to remain in Parliament. And I don't honestly care who wins the by-election - she has to go.
She can only be kicked out of the sentence is more than 12 months in gaol.
I know that is the case. But she should resign no matter how she is sentenced. We cannot have someone convicted of perverting the course of justice sitting in Parliament.
I doubt you'll find anyone who disagrees (apart from maybe Onasanya herself) but parliament needs to change the law, that was itself introduced on the back of Bobby Sands winning election while on hunger strike in The Maze.
If she tries to hang on I suspect that will provoke a law change - though of course there is no time for anything but Brexit at present.
I am curious why the law that was introduced made allowances for people to remain an MP despite being convicted in the first place? It surely cannot have envisaged people staying on after being found guilty of perverting the course of justice, so what crimes did they think had short enough custodial sentences that it was permissible that they remain in office?
Life in Tory Britain, where a homeless man can be found dying metres away from the entrance to Parliament. He had a job, but couldn't afford to live in London on what he was earning. He collapsed near the revolving doors into Parliament, a victim of the cold. Died in hospital.
I think we should remember this man, when a Tory MP next tells us we have "record numbers of people in employment".
This man was part of those record numbers.
Did things like this not happen between 1997 and 2010?
They happened a lot more, homelessness was much higher then.
Yes it was for much of that period but between 2003 and 2010 it was reduced by 70%. It has sadly risen back up again by over 45% since then (figures for England only)
The population has of course increased by more than 10% since 2004, almost exclusively as a result of immigration. Given our housebuilding record over that period and that influx it is frankly surprising that homelessness has not increased by more.
Not everything is about immigration David. That increase and those dates correlate quite well with our military escapades abroad and the flow of returning and retiring soldiers who are over represented amongst the homeless.
Whilst it is a depressing fact that too many ex service men end up homeless the numbers of our forces are just too small to explain changes like that. Did we not have 8k in Afghanistan for most of that period? Obviously on rotation but out of something like 80k in all. You are talking hundreds (which is far too many of course).
What we also had was approximately 3.5m eastern Europeans, many of them low paid, young, not a little vulnerable and away from family support networks. It is unusual to find a beggar in Edinburgh with English as a first language.
Estimates are around 6,000 - 13,000.
So potentially a large slug of the 20,000 increase since 2009.
Afghan kicked off again in 2006 and that (a 3-5 year engagement) would correlate with the 2009 increase.
I have no firm stats on that. Are there stats on immigrant homelessness?
Life in Tory Britain, where a homeless man can be found dying metres away from the entrance to Parliament. He had a job, but couldn't afford to live in London on what he was earning. He collapsed near the revolving doors into Parliament, a victim of the cold. Died in hospital.
I think we should remember this man, when a Tory MP next tells us we have "record numbers of people in employment".
This man was part of those record numbers.
Did things like this not happen between 1997 and 2010?
They happened a lot more, homelessness was much higher then.
Yes it was for much of that period but between 2003 and 2010 it was reduced by 70%. It has sadly risen back up again by over 45% since then (figures for England only)
The population has of course increased by more than 10% since 2004, almost exclusively as a result of immigration. Given our housebuilding record over that period and that influx it is frankly surprising that homelessness has not increased by more.
Not everything is about immigration David. That increase and those dates correlate quite well with our military escapades abroad and the flow of returning and retiring soldiers who are over represented amongst the homeless.
Whilst it is a depressing fact that too many ex service men end up homeless the numbers of our forces are just too small to explain changes like that. Did we not have 8k in Afghanistan for most of that period? Obviously on rotation but out of something like 80k in all. You are talking hundreds (which is far too many of course).
What we also had was approximately 3.5m eastern Europeans, many of them low paid, young, not a little vulnerable and away from family support networks. It is unusual to find a beggar in Edinburgh with English as a first language.
Estimates are around 6,000 - 13,000.
So potentially a large slug of the 20,000 increase since 2009.
Afghan kicked off again in 2006 and that (a 3-5 year engagement) would correlate with the 2009 increase.
I have no firm stats on that. Are there stats on immigrant homelessness?
"How would you vote if the choice was between the government EU deal and staying in the EU?" Remain: 53% (+5) Leave: 47% (-5) +/- with 2016 Brexit vote Fieldwork: 24/10/18-06/11/18 Sample: 8,154
How many MPs have been sent to prison since the war?
I can think of two Aitken and Huhne.
Bobby Sands of course was in prison when elected.
I thought Aitken had left Parliament before his court case?
If we're including ex-MPs Stonehouse needs to be included, surreal though that case was.
Yes, sorry, you're right. If we include ex-MPs we'd need to add Archer too.
So is Huhne the only serving MP at this moment to be jailed since the war?
Eric Illsley and Terry Fields too.
Weren’t four MPs jailed over expenses ?
After leaving parliament.
Edit - OK, I was misunderstanding about Illsley. So we have Fields (tough one, but there, he deliberately broke the law and paid the penalty) Illsley, Huhne and now Onasanya.
I think she holds the distinction of being the first female MP or ex-MP to face porridge though (Moran having somehow dodged it).
I think we should remember this man, when a Tory MP next tells us we have "record numbers of people in employment".
This man was part of those record numbers.
Did things like this not happen between 1997 and 2010?
They happened a lot more, homelessness was much higher then.
Yes it was for much of that period but between 2003 and 2010 it was reduced by 70%. It has sadly risen back up again by over 45% since then (figures for England only)
The population has of course increased by more than 10% since 2004, almost exclusively as a result of immigration. Given our housebuilding record over that period and that influx it isncreased by more.
Not everything isescapades abroad and the flow of returning and retiring soldiers who are over represented amongst the homeless.
Whilst it is a depressing).
What we also had was approximately 3.5m eastern Europeans, many of them low paid, young, not a little vulnerable and away from family support networks. It is unusual to find a beggar in Edinburgh with English as a first language.
Street beggars are rarely homeless (except in some of the large urban areas), no forces people should be sleeping rough, they are entitled to priority status.
There’s been lots of sensible changes over the last couple of years in how local authorities handle homelessness. The automatic response used to be when someone turns up and says the landlord is evicting them, stay put and if you leave before the courts order you out you’ll be classed as intentionally homeless and not entitled to support.
Such a situation. Is bad for the landlord, fudges up the credit and background checks for the tenant. This is no longer the case.
There are enough beds for everyone "homeless". But it is more than the availability of beds that causes people to sleep rough.
Most certainly. But when help is offered and refused they stop being a victim and become a nuisance that need moved on.
"How would you vote if the choice was between the government EU deal and staying in the EU?" Remain: 53% (+5) Leave: 47% (-5) +/- with 2016 Brexit vote Fieldwork: 24/10/18-06/11/18 Sample: 8,154
"How would you vote if the choice was between the government EU deal and staying in the EU?" Remain: 53% (+5) Leave: 47% (-5) +/- with 2016 Brexit vote Fieldwork: 24/10/18-06/11/18 Sample: 8,154
Around 75% of rough sleepers have serious psychosis and subtsance abuse issues, and therefore probably aren't really capable of just "snapping out of it".
And the rest will tend to develop them very quickly. Sleeping rough is not healthy for one's mental wellbeing.
Comments
However I think the fact she is a sitting MP and a legal professional should mean that an example is made.
No matter the sentence, she cannot be allowed to remain in Parliament. And I don't honestly care who wins the by-election - she has to go.
I thought the noblesse were supposed to be obliging?!
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/380090/women-cjs-2013.pdf
Although it isn't conclusive.
' The man, believed to be a 45-year-old Hungarian national called Gyula Remef '
Everything was always someone else's fault. Why then accept a fine?
My dear wife's very first plea in mitigation before an irascible Sheriff in Dundee where her client was guilty of shoplifting. She mentioned that the accused had a young child. Explosion on the bench. "I am sick of women coming to this court and trying to hide behind their babies". (addressing the accused directly) "And you can tell your thieving friends that as well!".
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/380090/women-cjs-2013.pdf
There is plenty more to show significant disparity between sentencing trends between male and female offenders.
I believe they give you 10% over to make sure of a conviction.
I was returning from London after visiting my daughter.
They do send a letter initially requesting the registered keeper,who was driving the vehicle.
I was offered the speed awareness course, which I took to avoid the points.
North Yorkshire Police never had fixed speed cameras
However the PCC has invested heavily in mobile speed camera vans.
Which change locations every day.
I am told they are very profitable.
I
https://fullfact.org/economy/homelessness-england/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn1VxaMEjRU
If she tries to hang on I suspect that will provoke a law change - though of course there is no time for anything but Brexit at present.
Funny old world.
I know it's supposed to be a derogatory term but I actually quite like it. Our sense of 'islandness' is deep-rooted in the British psyche (if that's not a sweeping generalisation
So this is not big news. It is stating the obvious and not what TND wants to mean.
However it's true that Labour membership has increased dramatically since 2016, my own CLP has increased more than threefold and I think that's quite typical.
He also gave us some reports from a Crouch End coffee shop.
a) deal; or
b) A50 extension and deal/remain referendum.
No other options.
Gullible is a word that is insufficiently strong for these Tory MP's that are getting involved in this.
I can think of two Aitken and Huhne.
Bobby Sands of course was in prison when elected.
What we also had was approximately 3.5m eastern Europeans, many of them low paid, young, not a little vulnerable and away from family support networks. It is unusual to find a beggar in Edinburgh with English as a first language.
If we're including ex-MPs Stonehouse needs to be included, surreal though that case was.
There’s been lots of sensible changes over the last couple of years in how local authorities handle homelessness. The automatic response used to be when someone turns up and says the landlord is evicting them, stay put and if you leave before the courts order you out you’ll be classed as intentionally homeless and not entitled to support.
Such a situation. Is bad for the landlord, fudges up the credit and background checks for the tenant. This is no longer the case.
Simon Thomas is another former MP to be convicted after leaving the house - recently receiving a suspended sentence for some very unpleasant images
And we mustn't forget Denis MacShane - who, of course, ended up in a relationship with Huhne's ex...
Jeffrey Archer and those two peers caught fiddling their expenses are also technically members of Parliament, just not of the House of Commons.
So potentially a large slug of the 20,000 increase since 2009.
Afghan kicked off again in 2006 and that (a 3-5 year engagement) would correlate with the 2009 increase.
I have no firm stats on that. Are there stats on immigrant homelessness?
Thorpe came close, but not guilty is not guilty :-)
Close run thing but still.
We have hit rock Brexit bottom: Brendan O'Neill delivering the *worst possible* take on Brexit that can ever be and will ever be.
"Really? For what crime?"
"What do you mean, for what crime?"
And anyway, fiddling expenses can be criminal even if you aren’t an MP.
"How would you vote if the choice was between the government EU deal and staying in the EU?" Remain: 53% (+5) Leave: 47% (-5) +/- with 2016 Brexit vote Fieldwork: 24/10/18-06/11/18 Sample: 8,154
https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1075500449376153608
Not quite the C U R S E D N U M B E R S but close.
Edit - OK, I was misunderstanding about Illsley. So we have Fields (tough one, but there, he deliberately broke the law and paid the penalty) Illsley, Huhne and now Onasanya.
I think she holds the distinction of being the first female MP or ex-MP to face porridge though (Moran having somehow dodged it).
You sound like a Tory.
😉
https://medium.com/@JRogan3000/brendan-oneill-brexit-and-irish-republicanism-6687c83a8760
And the rest will tend to develop them very quickly. Sleeping rough is not healthy for one's mental wellbeing.