MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
Just pipping it today..Chris Chope.
A weapons grade asshat.
IIRC, he blocks any private member's bill, regardless, but this one makes him look even more of an asshat than usual, were it possible.
Reprehensible.
Zippy - the 4-letter word you used to describe the right honourable member shows up as "****" in the forum, but on the titlebar of my browser it shows up as the unredacted form.
Somewhat bizarre choice of adjective given the subject matter, but what do I know?
I don't know if you can change the title now, but if you can, it would be appreciated.
Thanks.
C something certainly. cockwomble rather tame. OP has it right I feel.
My first thought too, but he makes it policy to object to legislation without debate. A policy I generally applaud to prevent bad legislation being shovelled through, but he's missed a big point here. And looking at his other voting record, i think he's a bit of one even without this
Also just noted (I reported your post to draw attention) that although the word has been swearfiltered out, the title of my Chrome tab and also your URL is not.
https://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/****-of-the-day-award/
Sir Christopher is a leading member of a group of backbench Conservatives who make a practice of ensuring that what they see as well-meaning but flabby legislation is not lazily plopped on to the statue book by a few MPs on a poorly attended Friday sitting.
And after all this is a bill to create a new criminal offence, for which people can go to jail.
So, however worthy the cause, he insists on proper, extensive scrutiny, and he has spent most Commons Fridays for the last 20 years doing just that.
His motivation isn't as simple as just being a Tory asshat. But carry on as you were.
WAC,
What a nasty little man.
Well it's done now, since we're old enough to discuss taking pictures of genitals surely we're old enough to deal with their crude naming terms?
As for the MP in question, people like that only get to where they are because like minded people put them there. Sadly, this is democracy in action.
His motivation isn’t as simple as just being a Tory asshat. But carry on as you were.
Yep he has no ability to filter what is important and what is not in terms of making a point. I'd be interested to see what needs debating here
although the word has been swearfiltered out, the title of my Chrome tab and also your URL is not.
Edited.
(That's one nice behind-the-scenes feature of the new forum, we couldn't do that on the old one. First time I've used it, good to know it works.)
On the face on it he’s obviously a nasty Tory, yet this Law was pushed through quickly and to some degree it’s right that it gets pulled up before being passed.
Doesn't take away any handwringing and vitriol for him I have...
But..
This Law, well yes it covers certain “actions” there are Laws coving those actions already.. and whilst I support the new Law it’s definition does need reviewing before it gets passed.
However I am more than happy to call him out for being a nasty spiteful Tory who deserves wanton finger pointing and name calling.
His motivation isn’t as simple as just being a Tory asshat. But carry on as you were.
No, his motivation was based on not bothering to put a 30 second google of effort into what he was scheduled to debate and then sinking a ‘flags for orphans’ type bill on the grounds he didn’t know it was.
£77k a year and all the expenses you can eat for that level of performance.
No, his motivation was based on not bothering to put a 30 second google of effort into what he was scheduled to debate and then sinking a ‘flags for orphans’ type bill on the grounds he didn’t know it was.
How do you know all that ?
Genuine question.
This Law, well yes it covers certain “actions” there are Laws coving those actions already.. and whilst I support the new Law it’s definition does need reviewing before it gets passed.
I do hope he does some research and raises those questions when it is debated....
Perhaps MP's had read the bill (like homework) and were happy to pass it.
Some don’t though, that’s clearly the issue.
Some turn up just to claim expenses then sit drinking GnTs in the Bar then catch the 1530 out of Waterloo back to some home county or other.
Some turn up just to claim expenses then sit drinking GnTs in the Bar then catch the 1530 out of Waterloo back to some home county or other.
This is very true. But it doesn't really fit with Sir Christopher.
So, however worthy the cause, he insists on proper, extensive scrutiny, and he has spent most Commons Fridays for the last 20 years doing just that.
Fridays..
There are five days in a week..
Unfortunately it is a bit difficult for Chope to claim any kind of moral high ground so I naturally tend to be a bit cynical about his motivations (some examples of being a scumbag in my eyes include: expense claim to fix his sofa (!), voting against pardoning Turing and voting against equal pay transparency bill).
I'm sure he will be on the TV at weekend though with his loving wife and family telling everyone how he is really concerned about womens rights and democracy too.
Maybe he just likes specialist upskirt websites?
He really is an absolute delight
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/10103/christopher_chope/christchurch/votes
His voting record is a litany of ignorance & misogyny
anti-abortion, life long brexiter, objected to hillsborough debate, anti sex-ed, climate change denier, pro blasphemy laws, anti-gay marriage, pro-homeopathy, anti-mitochondria donation (to prevent women passing the mitochondrial diseases onto their children), anti-minimum wage, anti free nhs parking for carers.....
his opposition to this law is entirely in line with his political beliefs
FWIW I once confronted an upskirter on the tube on new years eve taking pics of young girls, he laughed at me & just moved down to the next carriage.
Scotland already has an upskirting law, the argument for needing it in the rUK is because guys have been caught & let off despite the police having their phones with the pictures on
is he on here Kimbers? 😉
and second goes to
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44496427
May was "Disappointed" which really means can't bollock anyone in her party
Edited.
(That’s one nice behind-the-scenes feature of the new forum, we couldn’t do that on the old one. First time I’ve used it, good to know it works.)
You will be happy to know the link still works if you put the original URL in.
Chope obviously doesn't have a wife, daughters, sisters or any female friends in his life.
Perhaps someone should upskirt his wife or daughter(s) and see how long it takes him to get the bill back into the chambers......
Can’t we just trebuchet him into the English Channel under a “will of the people” thing 🙂
As for the MP in question, people like that only get to where they are because like minded people put them there. Sadly, this is democracy in action.
I would guess that the majority of tory voters who vote for him wouldn't even know his history and vote just because he is tory.
I agree in princple with his actions. Laws should be properly debated before being enacted no matter what the offence is. Look how many MPs were sitting to vote that through without any sort of debate.
Laws should be properly debated before being enacted no matter what the offence is.
And where did he stand on the devolved parliament/assembly debate this week? Did he want it fully discussed or did he vote anyway?
He's a tory MP that the only thing you need to know. This bill was not benefiting his wallet in anyway so he didn't want to know.
That seems to sum the man up to a tee!
He’s a tory MP that the only thing you need to know. This bill was not benefiting his wallet in anyway so he didn’t want to know.
Spot on. The annoying thing is that a lot of middle England will exclaim “but only a complete arsehole would do that to this bill”...... then vote for him or an equivalent cynical piece of shit at the next election because they’re afraid Jeremy will take a few of their basically unearned quid and give it to someone brown.
Maybe he'd like a mass debate over the subject matter.
I’ve emailed my MP to suggest that Mr Chope and Philip Davies should be deselected.
My MP was himself fired from a cabinet post as a result of his obsession with one handed websites, so I daresay that the disgusting Tory pig will escape sanction.
Labour voters can be just the same. My local MP is labour and a complete moron with no social skills, things he is more important than everyone else and has no idea about his local community. He only gets in because the area I live in is a Labour heartland. However the conservative candidate I have also met and he is diplomatic, knows his community and really sorts things out well. Everyone who has met him wishes he was our MP, even long term labour voters!
He certainly is a mass debater
I’m surprised ninfan isn’t here to defend him.
The chap has certainly put himself in the firing line. He has a broader point; these dog whistle specific laws are usually a bad idea.
Why is this revolting practice not dealable with using existing privacy legislation? Surely people have a ‘reasonable expectation of privacy’ for their underwear?
Why is this revolting practice not dealable with using existing privacy legislation? Surely people have a ‘reasonable expectation of privacy’ for their underwear?
Perhaps this is why a private members bill works here, it shuts down a loophole and makes something easy to prosecute and raises awareness all at the same time.
Which of these laws are a bad idea though?
Just because it's a PMB doesn't automatically make it a good piece or a bad piece of legislation, and not all PMB's are presented as Friday bills, many are permitted to be debated because of their importance.
So the answer to your question is I suspect none of them, but how many bad laws would have been passed if they were able to just be whistled through on a quiet friday. That is why he is objecting IN PRINCIPLE to the process, not specifically to the actual bill / proposal.
So while I am not a tory supporter, I can't condemn him specifically for the action, although I'd have hoped he might be able to see past the principle in this case.
I can however consider him a scumbag on his past voting record, and I'll also add in for the act of not having done seemingly any research on this PMB when if he had done so, or if one of his scumbaggy mates or aides had had a word with him about it, he might have seen past 'the principle' in this case.
TLDR, did a bad thing but for a good reason.
So while I am not a tory supporter, I can’t condemn him specifically for the action, although I’d have hoped he might be able to see past the principle in this case.
TBH for me it just shows he is stuck in his own world thinking he is fighting the good fight, just nobody asked him to and he is causing more harm than good in these situations. i wonder if he even read the bill or spoke to any other MP's about it.
TBH for me it just shows he is stuck in his own world thinking he is fighting the good fight, just nobody asked him to and he is causing more harm than good in these situations. i wonder if he even read the bill or spoke to any other MP’s about it.
That would make him blasé, and dismissive and showing such poor judgement that a reasonable person might think he is unfit to be an MP.
That and being a twunt.
anti-abortion, life long brexiter, objected to hillsborough debate, anti sex-ed, climate change denier, pro blasphemy laws, anti-gay marriage, pro-homeopathy, anti-mitochondria donation (to prevent women passing the mitochondrial diseases onto their children), anti-minimum wage, anti free nhs parking for carers…..
Ahhh your standard Tory and Brexit voting moron then.
Y’see, you learn something new everyday on here 👍🤫
Brilliant - guess who recommended his knighthood... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44518706
Theresa is just awesome - I particularly liked the way she didn't answer the question of his knighthood.