"I'm a fighter, not a quitter" x 2
She's just repeating herself now
Looks like someone gingered her up. Must have been a tough volunteer
We're not interested in your Rugby shoot !
My friend is loving this. He's Swedish, so is used to politics being more about politics than shouting, booing and this kind of crap. his current comments are:
Alright, so what just happened
Truss said something along the lines of her being a fighter
There was lots of noise and yelling and stuff
Mr speaker told everyone to shut up
Truss said exactly the same thing again, which yielded additional yelling and stuff
Is this the way it normally is?
I mean even I know that tories give two fscks about working people
It’s a bold move to try the Jedi mind trick on an entire country 😳
Very keen on making the unions into the new "enemy" clearly...
I'm struggling to listen to this, it's just a complete load of bullshit answers.
We're a complete basket case and I worry how much further we can fall before the whole thing collapses (and I'm under no illusion that we CAN fall further).
Yeah, those bastards wanting fair pay and a living wage while their bosses take huge salaries and unlimited bonuses. How dare they...
Who else is worried that she seems to have acquired the One Ring?
Outstanding 🙂
But reading you say it, has made me think… perhaps she already WANTS to resign right now, but they can’t let her, ’till they’ve worked out what happens next?
Maybe there's literally no-one else who'll agree to doing the job.
Maybe there’s literally no-one else who’ll agree to doing the job.
Why would that worry her? Let them fight over that themselves, if they cannot find a leader then they will have no choice but to hand over the reigns to a coalition made up from the opposition. Can we have a GE when one party doesn't have a leader?
Maybe there’s literally no-one else who’ll agree to doing the job.
I think the difficulty is finding someone who is capable of bringing together enough tory mps so they appear united for a bit.
Yeah, those bastards wanting fair pay and a living wage
Well it's absolutely bad for growth and the economy when people have disposable income.
It's very obvious, look at your average billionaire, they spend such a tiny amount of their disposable income, effectively just taking all that money out of the economy and circulation for ever, and that's just one person. Imagine how bad it would be of everyone did that?!
Also a workforce that is working for it's very life is clearly going to be more productive and motivated than one that has been softened by things like central heating and refrigerators. One that might be able to afford a holiday is also much less likely to work 365.25 days a year.
Much better that people aren't given the opportunity to be accidentally antigrowth.
Does any other democratically elected house have such a "spectacle"? That was and is an utter embarrassment. If you are going to ham it up a and play to the cheap seats then at least make it good. Everyone that thinks that behaviour is acceptable in that chamber should be rightly embarrassed.
We are royally in deep doo-doo.
At least the SNP had a bit of gravitas.
I really hope she's just skewered herself again with that triple lock statement, did anyone watching notice if Hunt put his head into his hands when she said it?
Meh, I don't feel like she got quite the kicking she deserved today...
When, in the playground, you have all your mates around you and they have all of theirs around them (and a teacher looking on), you really can't give people the kicking they deserve.
I really hope she’s just skewered herself again with that triple lock statement, did anyone watching notice if Hunt put his head into his hands when she said it?
She made a firm promise... Give it a week or two.
At least the SNP had a bit of gravitas.
Fell into the "triple lock" trap though. Give Starmer his due, he didn't... and any one of us would have (I'm sure I would have). He stuck to things actually said and reversed on, not the rumours briefed out ready to be denied at the dispatch box.
Meh, I don’t feel like she got quite the kicking she deserved today…
It managed to be humiliating but not fatal - in fact it could have been a lot worse. Kind of got the impression that Starmer, with his jokes about the title of her book and so on, just playing for time really.
He knows they're in complete turmoil so he may as well just let them sink, there's not really much point in really sticking the knife in yet.
If you were Starmer, would you want her gone?
Would I want to stop the Tory party in their tracks and hasten a GE? Absolutely.
Would I want the public to witness the spectacle of the Tories going through yet another PM in a couple of months and affecting their public standing? Absolutely.
Would I want to see the Tory infighting? Damn right.
If you were Starmer, would you want her [s] gone [/s] job?
FTFY
There's a reason there isn't a huge queue of potential leaders very publicly forming in the tory Party already, and I don't think SKS is any stupider than anyone else who hasn't stepped forward yet.
if they cannot find a leader then they will have no choice but to hand over the reigns to a coalition made up from the opposition
Pretty sure that's not how it works.
I would hope the leader of the labour party would put ending the damage being done to the country ahead of his own political ambitions. If he wants her to stay on just so he can be the be leader of the rubble and ashes he would inherit, then he would be better suited to be next tory leader.
There’s a reason there isn’t a huge queue of potential leaders very publicly forming in the tory Party already, and I don’t think SKS is any stupider than anyone else who hasn’t stepped forward yet.
Yeah, perish the thought Starmer would be PM and have to actually do anything to fix the UK. Better to let the Tories stick the boot in and stand on the sidelines while folk suffer.
Would I want to see the Tory infighting? Damn right.
Briefing against each other enough to get suspended
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1582695430650896384?t=DrNS08nYMgVbEg-GfruMQg&s=19
Pretty sure that’s not how it works
If they can't find a leader to go to the King and ask to form a government, then someone else gets the chance, a minority coalition being the obvious alternative at this point.
This would precede a GE, not be dependent on one.
If they then can't secure the confidence of the house we end up at a GE by virtue of no-one being able to form a government.
Pretty sure that’s not how it works.
It is covered under the second point in that link. There is a requirement for a PM and so if the tories cant find one then its time for election.
Or maybe a coalition government instead but its one of those scenarios which are vague because it shouldnt come up.
Thank god we didnt vote for a coalition of chaos and instead just went for the party of chaos.
It’s very obvious, look at your average billionaire, they spend such a tiny amount of their disposable income, effectively just taking all that money out of the economy and circulation for ever, and that’s just one person. Imagine how bad it would be of everyone did that?!
unless they're literally stuffing it under the matress, thats not the case. I would imagine that nearly all of a billionare's unspent income is invested in shares of some kind, and given their ability to absorb losses, I'd imagine the investments are likely to be in a riskier portfolio than the average punter - ie invested in small companies, the exact sort of investment thats needed to grow the economy.
I'm not stating that they should have more money, but suggesting they remove all their money from the economy is fanciful
Yeah, perish the thought Starmer would be PM and have to actually do anything to fix the UK.
And fail, and end up putting labour in a worse position than before hand.
I'd like to see him fix things, I'd like to see anyone fix things, but no British PM is solving Ukraine, OPEC cutting supply, the collapse of Chinese property markets, stagnation in the European and wider global economy. All of which have a bigger bearing on their chances of success than which party they come from.
Labour don't have a magic wand with which to fix things, unfortunately if they're in charge when it doesn't get fixed, they'll take the blame.
Would I want to stop the Tory party in their tracks and hasten a GE? Absolutely.
Would I want the public to witness the spectacle of the Tories going through yet another PM in a couple of months and affecting their public standing? Absolutely.
Would I want to see the Tory infighting? Damn right.
Even if he has morals and not just after power for the sake of it, then it's certainly a toss up. The more the Tories screw up the longer he potentially will be in power for afterwards and able to do some good.
Equally, he can't call a GE, Liz still has to lose this afternoons apparent confidence vote. Is it actually a confidence vote or just a rumor? I thought they had to give an amount of notice that it was a confidence vote and explicitly word it as such?
The Tory whips have said it's a VOC.
Equally, he can’t call a GE, Liz still has to lose this afternoons apparent confidence vote. Is it actually a confidence vote or just a rumor?
The fracking one? In theory it isnt but since the tory whips have called it one and have imposed a three line whip if they do lose it will be rather awkward even by current standards.
Since in theory the punishment is to remove the whip but then that reduces the tory party numbers so if too many revolt then...?
I thought they had to give an amount of notice that it was a confidence vote and explicitly word it as such?
If that up there is what you mean, no, it's not a confidence vote in that sense. It's a vote on an opposition bill, one which needs tory support to pass.
Given the state of the government today, if it isn't voted down to a man by the tories it will be seen as Liz having lost control and therefore the confidence of her party, it will not however have any formal recognition as such.
The Tory whips have said it’s a VOC.
Except that's not the same as it being written on the piece of paper.
And if it does fail, then they still have to vote on a GE by a 2/3 majority. So there's still a no-mans land between 50%+1 voting against fracking and 66.6%+1 voting for a GE.
A three line whip on what is both a breaking of a manifesto promise and a fairly minor issue in the grand scheme of things (Fracking isn't coming back any time soon). They really are desperate to find something to show some common ground on.
Will be interesting to see if there's a major revolt. Can remove the whip from everyone.
but no British PM is solving Ukraine, OPEC cutting supply, the collapse of Chinese property markets, stagnation in the European and wider global economy. All of which have a bigger bearing on their chances of success than which party they come from.
Labour don’t have a magic wand with which to fix things
You are a Tory backbench MP and I claim my £5 plus 10.1%
A three line whip on what is both a breaking of a manifesto promise...
... Will be interesting to see if there’s a major revolt. Can remove the whip from everyone.
Wouldn't that be awkward if you were trying to find a way to circumvent current rules regarding VoNC in the party leader whilst somehow trying to reinforce that you do have a mandate and are doing what was voted for last GE.
You are a Tory backbench MP and I claim my £5 plus 10.1%
Pft, I'll have you know I've held 17 cabinet positions since lunchtime, some of them concurrently.
Missed it live as I was riding my bike in the glorious sunshine on the army land south of Farnborough. Brilliant day and then get home to hear that Lovely Liz* has guaranteed the Triple Lock.
As a pensioner living in Surrey I was delighted. Then I remembered who was guaranteeing it.
I'm shafted aren't I?
Better keep my job going then...
* May be sarcasm.
https://twitter.com/BlewettSam/status/1582716929873448961?s=19
In PMQs, she said she was a fighter, not a quitter.
Turns out that "fighting" can also include "fighting to get out of questions from broadcasters"...
The fact that they’re calling a three line whip over an issue like fracking, that is an absolute irrelevance, shows not only total desperation, but how detached from the day to day reality of most people they are
"I'm a hider, not a heavy hitter."
Oh, fracking isn't "an irrelevance"... it's just not going to help our short term energy problem, yet could result in increasing long term carbon emissions... nothing to gain, everything to lose, except for some niche fossil fuel interests that happen to have their pet loons in government right now, and would like something from them.
