Change the record Dazh, you’re sounding like an astroturfer.
The caretaker PM doesn’t have to be the leader of the Labour Party.
Why doesn't it? Who decides who that should be then?
(He has to repeat himself because it's not going in!)
He voted remain and campaigned for remain. Why bother if you’re a Brexiter?
I'm far from alone in believing he did neither.
He did, however, come out about 3 seconds after the referendum result was delivered to demand article 50 be triggered immediately. With more enthusiasm than anyone has ever seen him muster for anything, before or since
Any objective analysis would conclude he is absolutely nothing of the sort
Let's see that analysis?
I’m far from alone in believing he did neither
Well who am I likely to believe - Corbyn or Corbyn detractors?
That isn't hard.
How are you unpicking that from racism, out of interest?
Immigration can be abused. For just one example if you let agencies bring large numbers of temporary workers in from other countries to work cheaply you can both abuse them (because they are isolated and at the mercy of the agency) and drive the general labour market downwards too. This is clearly bad for both parties.
Now - you can put a stop to this without restricting immigration generally - you can just ban that kind of practice whilst still leaving the doors open for people to come and find work alongside everyone else.
He did, however, come out about 3 seconds after the referendum result was delivered to demand article 50 be triggered immediately.
That's not the same as voting for Brexit.
Lots of MPs voted A50 - and they go on record as it was with reluctance - but few were comfortable with not respecting democracy etc. They also were also blinkered at the time as to how difficult it was going to be.
There's a lot of hindsight stacked up there.
Maybe you could concern yourself with how to fix this now?
But the critical seats are leave.
Given that labour supporters in leave marginals overwhelmingly back remain or a second referendum, that’s misguided as well.
Don't believe that all all.
I live in a Labour (close at 2017) and 70% in favour of Brexit at the ref.
Mansfield also went from Labour to Tory in 2017.
There is no way 'we' are not moving toward the Brexit party or Tory in our area.
That article in the independent is just research. It doesn't prove anything.
Maybe you could concern yourself with how to fix this now?
Now? Probably too late. As recently as last month at the Labour Conference the “party” voted to decide on policy as regards the EU after the next general election, while chanting the Leader’s name. Is there a path through this without the leader of the second biggest party being central to it? Probably not. So we’re probably screwed now.
few were comfortable with not respecting democracy etc.
But an absolute direct democracy and parliamentary sovereignty are in opposition, you cannot have both. Either "the will of the people" is supreme or parliament is. Which is it to be?
(Spoiler: we already have one of those.)
But an absolute direct democracy and parliamentary sovereignty are in opposition, you cannot have both. Either “the will of the people” is supreme or parliament is. Which is it to be?
Doesn't stop someone feeling uncomfortable about something. New territory and all.
Many MPs have said as such.
Maybe you could concern yourself with how to fix this now?
I've been looking to the Labour party, despairingly, for the last 3 years to help out a bit on that score. But all the labour leadership have done is given the Torys a helping hand when they needed it in parliament to deliver the hardest of Brexits outside the single market and the customs union (as three-line whipped by Jezza himself).
They're still doing the same now
Rome, you believe your own non objective intuition over cold hard data?
Biased much?
But all the labour leadership have done is given the Torys a helping hand when they needed it in parliament to deliver the hardest of Brexits
That's not the case is it really? Facts don't bear that out.
Yes, they do. Labour leadership three line whipped against… oh what’s the point.
is it safe to assume that they’d also be against people having babies?
I would suggest it would depend on how many babies eg Johnson levels or an average person levels.
I think the same would apply to immigration. The new countries joining the EU was very badly handled by Blair.
Of course there is the minor detail that the hotbeds of brexiteers dont tend to overlap that much with the areas of high migration with a few exceptions.
Any objective analysis would conclude he is absolutely nothing of the sort
irony metre has just blown up there.
Rome, you believe your own non objective intuition over cold hard data?
Biased much?
Do I believe what is on my doorstep versus an article in the Independent/You Gov Poll you mean?
Yeah I do. I'm happy to be accountable though.
Have a dig around in here.
He voted remain and campaigned for remain. Why bother if you’re a Brexiteer?
Reluctant remainer.
And a reluctant half arsed campaigner for remain.
That’s not the case is it really? Facts don’t bear that out.
• 3-line whipped his MPs to trigger article 50
• 3-line whipped his MPs to vote against remaining in the single market
• 3-line whipped his MPs to vote against remaining in the customs union
Everything else is just fluff. Those three things right there are all that matter. Mark Francois or Bill Cash couldn't possibly have done more than Corbyn to deliver brexit and land us in the mess we're in
And you wonder why labour voters have deserted them for the Lib Dems?
He's not voting remain because he wants to remain he's voting remain to oppose the government in classic "oh no it isn't" politics style.
Where did he say he was voting Remain?
That article you've linked to is written by who? A PFJ/Corbynite student at Lancaster University? Its absolute claptrap!
The Labour party is going to win a majority by capturing Leave-voting, presently Tory constituencies? Seriously?
Jesus H Corbett! I've read some crap in my time, but that's on another level altogether
In amongst the rest of the utter drivel - and it really is utter and complete drivel - my favourite little gem was:
In Scotland, Labour needs to gain 18 seats from the SNP. While some of these Scottish seats are very strongly Remain, others had a stronger Leave result than is generally understood.
So they're going to capture 18 seats in Scotland from the SNP by trying to out-Brexit Boris? Good luck with that!
Actually... is this guy presently in charge of labour policy-making?
irony metre
I've started using my imperial irony yard in preparation for the rejection of the european metric system.
Calling a VONC, winning it, and setting up a new govt could be done in 3 days.
I thought there was a period in which the de-confidenced PM could seek to 'regain the confidence' of the House. 14 days? Maybe that doesn't apply if your Queen's Speech is chucked out.
the LSE article completely ignores the brexit party ltd, Johnson by chasing No Deal has managed to slash BXP ltd's vote
a huge mistake to ignore that, Farage has been very successful in providing labour leavers with a 3rd option for those that would never vote Tory
hard to say how it breaks down by region but 2017 labour voters now just as likely to vote farage as Johnson
theres no way Labour can hope to out brexit farage or Johnson
it also misses that Labour got over twice as many votes form Remainers as Leaversin 2017, I like many others assumed theyd eventually come round to offering a 2nd ref & backing remain (contstructive ambiguity etc)
I thought there was a period in which the de-confidenced PM could seek to ‘regain the confidence’ of the House. 14 days
My understanding is that the 14 day period is simply a window following a succesful VONC during which the opposition parties can seek to form a govt. All they have to do to achieve that is gain the necessary votes to pass a queen's speech. If they do that the PM must resign (or be removed by order of the monarch) and the new PM is invited to form a govt by her Maj. If the opposition parties fail to form a govt in the 14 days, an election is automatically triggered.
must resign
You mean should resign. And this is where it all gets messy, testing out our ‘constitution’ in a time limited fashion, when the incompetent incumbent PM and his hired brain don’t care about norms and responsibilities. I fully expect he can be removed quickly enough, but also fear it will win him votes, as the processes needed will so easily be painted as ‘undemocratic’, not only by his allies, but also by many who wish to see him as far away from the centre of power as possible [oddly].
I half expect the courts to be involved and Johnson to be left sitting in no ten shouting " I am the PM" while a new pm gets on with business and gets an extension
I fully expect he can be removed quickly enough, but also fear it will win him votes, as the processes needed will so easily be painted as ‘undemocratic’
The only person who can remove him is the queen. If the brexiters turn against her then maybe there is some good to be had out of brexit after all? 🙂
Shrewd move by the Scottish courts today.
If they ruled today it could go either way, but if boris doesn't comply with the law, as he asuured the court, the court will basically have no choice but to rule against him and find him in contempt of court.
I assume that's their thinking. Wait out the 19th, then if needed pull the trigger, so to speak.
It's all gone very quiet from the rebel alliance. You have to hope they have the VONC all sewn up and ready to deploy.
I half expect the courts to be involved and Johnson to be left sitting in no ten shouting ” I am the PM” while a new pm gets on with business and gets an extension
👍
Be preferable if he was left in a padded cell wearing a straight jacket shouting "I am the PM".
What is the sanction if Boris doesn't comply and is in contempt of court? Yes, he has to request an extension but I've not heard exactly what his punishment would be - is it contained in the Benn Act?
What is the sanction if Boris doesn’t comply and is in contempt of court?
I think it would be for a court to decide. Maximum 2yrs in prison and or unlimited fine.
Yeh contempt of court caries actual criminal penalties, as opposed to contempt of Parliament which doesn't really.
No one is above the law and all that.
Parliament can make new laws or amend them, but i can't see boris getting a bill trough parliament to get himself off the hook at all, never mind as quickly as he'd need too to avoid charges.
I think it would be for a court to decide. Maximum 2yrs in prison and or unlimited fine.
Ha! Out on good behaviour 1 day on probation due to political motivation.
Unlimited fine pay by the party.
Popularity sky rocket.
Job done.
3 term as PM.
😂
Ha! Out on good behaviour 1 day on probation due to political motivation.
Unlimited fine pay by the party.
Popularity sky rocket.
Job done.
3 term as PM.
Hah.
You can't serve as an MP, never mind PM if you've done jail time.
Doesn't matter if it's a one day sentence or 5 years.
Just look at that labour MP who got found guilty of avoiding a speeding ticket by trying to say someone else was driving.
You can’t serve as an MP, never mind PM if you’ve done jail time.
Yes, I know that but the rules can be changed, hah!
Remember Parliament sovereignty?
You will have a "criminal" PM 😂
Yes, I know that but the rules can be changed, hah!
Lol, yes they can. As I said about 2 comments previously ...
Parliament can make new laws or amend them, but i can’t see boris getting a bill through parliament to get himself off the hook at all, never mind as quickly as he’d need too to avoid charges.
Boris is up shit creek right now. And he's outsourced his paddle manufacturing business.
Just look at that labour MP who got found guilty of avoiding a speeding ticket by trying to say someone else was driving.
That was Chris Huhne and he was a Lib.
That aside, you can stand for election with criminal convictions:
Imprisonment and court decisions
1.10 You are disqualified under the Representation of the
People Act 1981 if you have been convicted of an offence and
have been sentenced to be imprisoned or detained for more
than a year and are detained anywhere in the UK, the Republic
of Ireland, the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man, or are
unlawfully at large.
1.11 The nomination of a person disqualified on this basis is
void, and the (Acting) Returning Officer will reject their
nomination paper.
1.12 You are also disqualified under the Representation of the
People Act 1983 (as amended), if you have been convicted or
have been reported guilty of a corrupt or illegal electoral
UK legislation is
published by the
National Archives and
is available on
www.legislation.gov.uk
However, at the time
of writing, there were
outstanding changes
not yet made by the
legislation.gov.uk
editorial team to the
House of Commons
Disqualification Act
1975. If in doubt, you
should seek your own
independent legal
advice.
UK Parliamentary by-elections > Great Britain >
Candidates and agents > Part 1 of 6
5
practice or of an offence relating to donations. The
disqualification for an illegal practice begins from the date a
person has been reported guilty by an election court or
convicted and lasts for three years. The disqualification for a
corrupt practice begins from the date a person has been
reported guilty by an election court or convicted and lasts for
five years.
Criminal records (2017)
Request
How many current members of the House of Commons have criminal records? I would like figures please.
How many former members of the House of Commons had criminal records when they were MPs? Once again, I would like this information in figures.
If there are MPs that hold criminal records, what crimes are they for?Response
How many current members of the House of Commons have criminal records? I would like figures please.
Information on how many MPs currently have criminal convictions is not held by the House of Commons. Members are not obliged to provide this information to the House of Commons. The information you require may be held by the Police and you may therefore wish to consider submitting your request to them. The contact details of the various Police Forces are available online or from any public library. Alternatively, you may wish to consider contacting the individual Members concerned to ask for the information you seek; contact details are available on our Parliamentary pages. However, Members of Parliament are not public authorities for the purposes of the Freedom of Information Act. This means that they are not obliged to respond to requests made under the Act.
How many former members of the House of Commons had criminal records when they were MPs? Once again, I would like this information in figures.
Some information is held by the House of Commons. Information on former members of the House of Commons is already publicly available from the parliamentary web pages.
As the information you request is reasonably accessible to you otherwise than under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) your request is refused. In refusing your request the House is applying the exemption set out in section 21 (1) and (2) (a) of the FOIA. This is an absolute exemption and the public interest test does not apply.
If there are MPs that hold criminal records, what crimes are they for?
As explained above, the House of Commons holds limited information about the criminal records of Members, because they are not required to report this to the House of Commons. This is already detailed in our response above. We suggest that you redirect your request to either the Police, or individual Members themselves.
Remember Parliament sovereignty?
You mean the parliamentary sovereignty that the courts upheld? What's your point caller?
You mean the parliamentary sovereignty that the courts upheld? What’s your point caller?
Slowman the law can be changed if there are enough MPs vote for it to be changed in the Parliament. The court just have to obey. Then it can be changed again ... again ... again ...
That was Chris Huhne and he was a Lib.
Also Fiona Onasanya, Peterborough MP and she was Labour