Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

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



clapham_gull

Legacy Fan
Aug 20, 2003
25,876
maybe so mate, but having a really, really tough time right now dealing with 93 and 94 year old M and D, battling dementia, loss of mobility, forgetting who his family were, didn’t have a clue who I am this morning. Tomorrow I have the pleasure of telling him he has to go into a care home as Mum just can’t cope with him any longer as she’s expecting to have a terminal cancer diagnosed any day now.

Felling really low, guilty and like I’m betray8mg my dear old Dad. When I see what mid 90’s looks like I don’t think I want any part of it for myself.

** Edit, sorry all, most likely completely the wrong thread to have posted this on.
Nothing to apologise for.

Many of us have been there or are there now.

The others will have to face it at some point.

Crack on.
 




Lever

Well-known member
Feb 6, 2019
5,443
maybe so mate, but having a really, really tough time right now dealing with 93 and 94 year old M and D, battling dementia, loss of mobility, forgetting who his family were, didn’t have a clue who I am this morning. Tomorrow I have the pleasure of telling him he has to go into a care home as Mum just can’t cope with him any longer as she’s expecting to have a terminal cancer diagnosed any day now.

Felling really low, guilty and like I’m betray8mg my dear old Dad. When I see what mid 90’s looks like I don’t think I want any part of it for myself.

** Edit, sorry all, most likely completely the wrong thread to have posted this on.
Sorry to hear that. No apology needed; please accept my sympathy for your deeply moving and impossible dilemma.
 




Kinky Gerbil

Im The Scatman
NSC Patron
Jul 16, 2003
58,792
hassocks





Beth Rigby

@BethRigby
Follow

On the matter on pressure on Speaker. Am told that many MPs made a personal pleas to Sir Lindsay about amendments. MPs' have growing concerns for personal safety after incidents of confrontations & protests over the Israel-Hamas war.


Those peaceful protests again, police should have nipped the fringe element of those protests in the bud when it first started.
 






Greenbag50

Well-known member
Jun 1, 2016
502
This is the UK Parliament which today, was asked to change what it was asked to vote on. It was technically the opposition day (SNP, Labour ho are further left than Labour) time.
This left Labour in a tricky situation as their vote would be split between the hard left SNP amendment on Gaza on tbe ceasefire.

The speaker decided ( remember that he is a Labour MP) and against the advice of his chief clerk in the Commons), to allow the Labour amendment to be voted on. Some might say he was pressured into it by Labour whips, but I don’t buy that, at all.
The reasoning to this change was that some Labour MP’s have felt threatened and have received threats on their position on the Ceasefire.
There is currently a protest in Parliament square in support of Palestine.
Democracy cannot be influenced by threats to our elected representatives.
Labour are trying to keep their big tent intact before a big Palestinian hole appears in it.
The result is no votes were taken.
Speaker was forced into an apology due to breaking Parliament protocol to accommodate an amendment he shouldn't have accommodated.
The biggest impact in all of this is our Parliament and elected representatives time is being used and distracted by a conflict 2000 miles away and has no bearing at all on the outcome of what’s happening between the Israel and Hamas.
 


Guinness Boy

Tofu eating wokerati
Helpful Moderator
NSC Patron
Jul 23, 2003
37,341
Up and Coming Sunny Portslade
This is the UK Parliament which today, was asked to change what it was asked to vote on. It was technically the opposition day (SNP, Labour ho are further left than Labour) time.
This left Labour in a tricky situation as their vote would be split between the hard left SNP amendment on Gaza on tbe ceasefire.

The speaker decided ( remember that he is a Labour MP) and against the advice of his chief clerk in the Commons), to allow the Labour amendment to be voted on. Some might say he was pressured into it by Labour whips, but I don’t buy that, at all.
The reasoning to this change was that some Labour MP’s have felt threatened and have received threats on their position on the Ceasefire.
There is currently a protest in Parliament square in support of Palestine.
Democracy cannot be influenced by threats to our elected representatives.
Labour are trying to keep their big tent intact before a big Palestinian hole appears in it.
The result is no votes were taken.
Speaker was forced into an apology due to breaking Parliament protocol to accommodate an amendment he shouldn't have accommodated.
The biggest impact in all of this is our Parliament and elected representatives time is being used and distracted by a conflict 2000 miles away and has no bearing at all on the outcome of what’s happening between the Israel and Hamas.
A total shit show all round.

The SNP keen to show up divisions on Labour put just enough unacceptable language into an amendment, the Tories who would never have agreed to it walk out with them, Hoyle makes an awful decision, the right wing press spin it as pressure from Labour (every MP comes under similar pressure from whips at some point) and Labour veer from “outrage” to celebration.

Meanwhile civilians in Gaza keep dying.
 


A1X

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 1, 2017
20,538
Deepest, darkest Sussex
It’s all a bloody mess.

Let’s be clear the story should be that the UK Parliament today passed a motion calling for a ceasefire and the wording was largely unanimously agreed across all parties, including the Tories. That’s unquestionably, in my opinion, a good thing.

But getting there was a total, total farce. Too much of a focus, on all sides, on petty squabbles and bickering, desperation to create wedges for a coming election and on protocol over action. Claims and counterclaims against each other. The fact that the (let’s be honest, very real and worrying) threat from people outside politics toward elected MPs is starting to influence the political system and the functioning of it. And the Speaker of them house now, in my opinion, being untenable in his position.

The system needs a thorough pipe clean. An election. A new speaker. Just a complete factory reset. Because it can’t keep going on like this.
 




portlock seagull

Well-known member
Jul 28, 2003
17,777
A total shit show all round.

The SNP keen to show up divisions on Labour put just enough unacceptable language into an amendment, the Tories who would never have agreed to it walk out with them, Hoyle makes an awful decision, the right wing press spin it as pressure from Labour (every MP comes under similar pressure from whips at some point) and Labour veer from “outrage” to celebration.

Meanwhile civilians in Gaza keep dying.
As do IDF soldiers, Hamas terrorists (good thing) and Israeli hostages.
 


Greenbag50

Well-known member
Jun 1, 2016
502
The key point for me is the reason Labour MP’s wanted the amendment is due to threats from the public on abstaining from an SNP vote in November in the ceasefire.
Democracy in any country cannot be bullied by intimidating MP’s into voting one way or another by threats of violence.
This can’t be tolerated, otherwise it’s not democracy.
 


beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
36,015
The key point for me is the reason Labour MP’s wanted the amendment is due to threats from the public on abstaining from an SNP vote in November in the ceasefire.
Democracy in any country cannot be bullied by intimidating MP’s into voting one way or another by threats of violence.
This can’t be tolerated, otherwise it’s not democracy.
trying to understand this: Labour MPs have been threaten, so Hoyle on his own decides to break protocol to put the Labour amendment first, so they can vote in favour. presumably to register their vote in favour of a non-SNP specified ceasfire declaration. and this is considered a good response to threats. hmmm.
 




Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
56,106
Faversham
maybe so mate, but having a really, really tough time right now dealing with 93 and 94 year old M and D, battling dementia, loss of mobility, forgetting who his family were, didn’t have a clue who I am this morning. Tomorrow I have the pleasure of telling him he has to go into a care home as Mum just can’t cope with him any longer as she’s expecting to have a terminal cancer diagnosed any day now.

Felling really low, guilty and like I’m betray8mg my dear old Dad. When I see what mid 90’s looks like I don’t think I want any part of it for myself.

** Edit, sorry all, most likely completely the wrong thread to have posted this on.
No criticism for emoting, mate. So sorry that you have to deal with this. I have my own challenge at the moment, which it too complicated and unpleasant to go into. Staying alive is (whatever it is Dyche says about) maximum effort and minimum requirement for me for the next year. Keep you nose above the waterline :thumbsup:
 


aolstudios

Well-known member
Nov 30, 2011
5,278
brighton





Beth Rigby

@BethRigby
Follow

On the matter on pressure on Speaker. Am told that many MPs made a personal pleas to Sir Lindsay about amendments. MPs' have growing concerns for personal safety after incidents of confrontations & protests over the Israel-Hamas war.


Those peaceful protests again, police should have nipped the fringe element of those protests in the bud when it first started.
"Fringe"?..
 


Greenbag50

Well-known member
Jun 1, 2016
502
Last one tonight
SNP ceasefire amendment has no caveats. Ceasefire now with no addendums.
Some labour MP’s need conditions attached , such as release of all Israeli hostages held by Hamas, peace talks etc.
These Labour MP’s are getting threats to vote for no caveat immediate ceasefire by Israel when they won’t vote for that.
Parliament is changing behaviour as a direct result of threats to MP’s.
 




Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
56,106
Faversham
'Ignored member' alert (above) :lolol:

I love he ignore function. But maybe I could live without the alerts.

Whoever you are, you're a twat :thumbsup:
 




A1X

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 1, 2017
20,538
Deepest, darkest Sussex
trying to understand this: Labour MPs have been threaten, so Hoyle on his own decides to break protocol to put the Labour amendment first, so they can vote in favour. presumably to register their vote in favour of a non-SNP specified ceasfire declaration. and this is considered a good response to threats. hmmm.
It’s not a good response but it’s a response from an “I wouldn’t start from here” perspective. We know MPs are regularly threatened. In the last 10 years, two of them have been murdered in broad daylight. You can understand why Hoyle didn’t want a contentious debate such as this to lead to increased risks for sitting MPs.

As I’ve said, he’s now compromised and should be replaced, but I can at least understand his thought process as to why he allowed it (even if his failure to properly articulate this (twice) has just made things worse).
 


Greenbag50

Well-known member
Jun 1, 2016
502
It’s not a good response but it’s a response from an “I wouldn’t start from here” perspective. We know MPs are regularly threatened. In the last 10 years, two of them have been murdered in broad daylight. You can understand why Hoyle didn’t want a contentious debate such as this to lead to increased risks for sitting MPs.

As I’ve said, he’s now compromised and should be replaced, but I can at least understand his thought process as to why he allowed it (even if his failure to properly articulate this (twice) has just made things worse).
The whole point is MP’s getting threatened should not interrupt the democratic process of an elected official.
If we go down this path, those threatening will be emboldened and know they can influence what is being discussed and ultimately what laws are being passed in the House of Commons.
The UK will therefore will be no more than an activist haven where MP’s will act on threats to themselves and their families and not on the platform they were elected upon.
The vocal minority will rule.
I don’t want that
 




Baldseagull

Well-known member
Jan 26, 2012
11,839
Crawley
The key point for me is the reason Labour MP’s wanted the amendment is due to threats from the public on abstaining from an SNP vote in November in the ceasefire.
Democracy in any country cannot be bullied by intimidating MP’s into voting one way or another by threats of violence.
This can’t be tolerated, otherwise it’s not democracy.
I find it less worrying for democracy if MPs are intimidated by a mob than bought by some individuals, but yes, neither situation results in proper democracy.
 


clapham_gull

Legacy Fan
Aug 20, 2003
25,876
Probably the worst indictment of the current administration from Johnson and after is everything is viewed through the lens of right wing versus left.

It has crippled debate on a number of issues and has infected all parties and a large chunk of their supporters.

We all accepted a few years ago (with a bit of grumbling) that it would be fair better if we took out own bags to the supermarket.

Imagine that debate now ?

Anyone with bags in the back of their car would be labelled a woke communist by the Tories with the backing of the Daily Mail.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here