[Politics] Tory meltdown finally arrived [was: incoming]...

[Thunder Bolt]

As Johnson is in Ukraine

[tweet]1488777522309390339[/tweet]

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Unless any letters have been withdrawn from previous submitters, it feels like we're approaching the magic number. The more interesting question is when the time comes how many will vote to keep him and how many to ditch him.

I think we are about 10/15 letters off still.

 

[willalbion]

As Johnson is in Ukraine

[tweet]1488777522309390339[/tweet]

We truly are a global joke. For a person who bangs on about Britain's place in the world, he seems to care not that he's turned us into a bad punchline.

 

[Igzilla]

We truly are a global joke. For a person who bangs on about Britain's place in the world, he seems to care not that he's turned us into a bad punchline.

But Boris, eh? What a character, everyone thinks he's funny. All they have to do is look at him and they start laughing.

 

[West Hoathly Seagull]

Tobias Ellwood Is the latest to put his letter of no confidence in.

Potentially significant, as he is the first one we know about who may be a serious leadership candidate. Tom Tugendhat may have sent a letter in, but was not saying in his Times Radio interview with Tom Newton-Dunn. Sadly though, I don't think either would get very far with the Conservative Party membership, who are likely to favour someone from the Right Wing i.e. Rishi Sunak or Liz Truss.

 

[Pevenseagull]

Unless any letters have been withdrawn from previous submitters, it feels like we're approaching the magic number. The more interesting question is when the time comes how many will vote to keep him and how many to ditch him.

I think I heard one of two had withdrawn theirs (someone probably made an offer they couldn't resist)

 

[rippleman]

I believe it is universally felt on all sides of the House that Johnson’s ‘Savile’ remark yesterday was ill-judged, tasteless, wholly inaccurate and the desperate words of a floundering man. You won’t find any colleague of Johnson’s willing to stand behind that comment. Not even Nadine Dorris FFS.

Totally agree. But it was an accusation that has been made before and was proved to be untrue at that time. Therefore when Johnson made that statement he was lying to the House.

And yet the Speaker did nothing to sanction the PM for lying.

Then up steps the SNP chap Ian Blackford who accuses the PM of lying - which he clearly did. The Speaker then slings Blackford out of the chamber for telling the truth whilst applying no sanctions against Johnson for lying.

Bring back Betty or Bercrow. This Speaker is not fit for purpose.

 

[Dorset Seagull]

The question for Labour, is the best strategy for Johnson to stay in post as long as possible?

Will is blow over and Johnson recover or is he now just a total liability that will do long term damage to the party?

He may well recover but who would bet on him not continuing to make a complete horlicks of everything from here on in

 

[Baker lite]

Oooft..

 

[Audax]

Bring back Betty or Bercrow. This Speaker is not fit for purpose.

Neither of them would have been able to handle it any better. The problem here is the rules the speaker is asked to enforce and the (lack of) powers granted to the speaker to actually enforce.

It's a shame Blackford didn't come prepared. He could have borrowed the approach an MP in Australia took once:

MP: The Member for Blaxland has the brains of a sheep.

Mr Speaker: Order! The Honourable Member will withdraw that remark.

MP: Very well, Mr Speaker, I withdraw. The Member for Blaxland does not have the brains of a sheep, after all.

 

[Gwylan]

Potentially significant, as he is the first one we know about who may be a serious leadership candidate. Tom Tugendhat may have sent a letter in, but was not saying in his Times Radio interview with Tom Newton-Dunn. Sadly though, I don't think either would get very far with the Conservative Party membership, who are likely to favour someone from the Right Wing i.e. Rishi Sunak or Liz Truss.

Oh, please, please let it be Truss - it will be a total car crash.

You're right, Ellwood or Tugendhat wouldn't win but they're the sort of candidates that the Tories should be looking at. All current cabinet members will be damned by association.

I still think Hunt ... I'm not much of a gambler but I had a quiet fiver on him a few weeks ago

 

[nicko31]

Oooft..

Does anyone recall this story with Tobias Ellwood at the time?

 

[Audax]

Oh, please, please let it be Truss - it will be a total car crash.

You're right, Ellwood or Tugendhat wouldn't win but they're the sort of candidates that the Tories should be looking at. All current cabinet members will be damned by association.

I still think Hunt ... I'm not much of a gambler but I had a quiet fiver on him a few weeks ago

Hunt was toxic last time around thanks to his time as Health Secretary and all the argy-bargy with the doctors. I suspect he may have redeemed himself a little since then in his role as chair of the Health committee, in particular because of how he's repeatedly challenged the government on their handling of the pandemic.

You may be right, if he throws his hat in he may well be the one who gets the ball rolling.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Oh, please, please let it be Truss - it will be a total car crash.

You're right, Ellwood or Tugendhat wouldn't win but they're the sort of candidates that the Tories should be looking at. All current cabinet members will be damned by association.

I still think Hunt ... I'm not much of a gambler but I had a quiet fiver on him a few weeks ago

Ellwood, Tugendhat or Hunt on a 'Get Brexit Undone' platform ?

 

[Bodian]

Neither of them would have been able to handle it any better. The problem here is the rules the speaker is asked to enforce and the (lack of) powers granted to the speaker to actually enforce.

It's a shame Blackford didn't come prepared. He could have borrowed the approach an MP in Australia took once:

There was a Parliamentary Exchange many years ago where an MP referred to another as a 'Scotch *******'. The recipient objected on the grounds that he was 'Scottish' not 'Scotch'!

 

[rippleman]

Depends on if other potential candidates for the PM job put their heads above the parapet.

Amongst the cabinet, only Sunak or Gove would have enough credibility to run for this role as Truss has got too close to Johnson recently. The next leader will sack almost all the current cabinet as their only skill set is loyalty to the PM.

If Hunt throws his hat in the ring prior to the vote, Boris the Liar is going down.

After "spaffing", to use our dear leader's vernacular, at least £10bn of taxpayers money i'm not sure that Sunak has any more credibility to lead our country than my cat.

 

[WATFORD zero]

After "spaffing", to use our dear leader's vernacular, at least £10bn of taxpayers money i'm not sure that Sunak has any more credibility to lead our country than my cat.

If your cat has 'funny' hair and makes no sense, I'm in

 

[happypig]

Neither of them would have been able to handle it any better. The problem here is the rules the speaker is asked to enforce and the (lack of) powers granted to the speaker to actually enforce.

It's a shame Blackford didn't come prepared. He could have borrowed the approach an MP in Australia took once:

MP: The Member for Blaxland has the brains of a sheep.

Mr Speaker: Order! The Honourable Member will withdraw that remark.

MP: Very well, Mr Speaker, I withdraw. The Member for Blaxland does not have the brains of a sheep, after all.

Reminds me of Dennis Skinner:

DS: "Half of that lot opposite are crooks"
Speaker: "Withdraw that remark"
DS: "I withdraw it. Half of that lot aren't crooks"

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

PMQ's. Literally pointless.

For those more educated than me, is there any incentive for a PM to actually provide an answer to the question instead of the standard "I think what the people of this country care about more is....."

I appreciate you could say "the public would see he is not answering questions"....but he did the same in all the pre-election debates and that didn't seem to matter.

 

[KZNSeagull]

PMQ's. Literally pointless.

For those more educated than me, is there any incentive for a PM to actually provide an answer to the question instead of the standard "I think what the people of this country care about more is....."

I appreciate you could say "the public would see he is not answering questions"....but he did the same in all the pre-election debates and that didn't seem to matter.

It has always been pointless, not just under this PM, and used to be introduced not that long ago as the weekly knockabout session which really didn't achieve anything. I am not sure why anyone expects it to achieve anything now.