The Politics Thread

[BWFC_Insane]

Why anyone would care about performance over integrity is beyond me.

Have you been looking at our electorate, recently?

Well yes. But Starmer enjoys best PM leads over Johnson that haven’t been seen by a LOTO since Blair in 1997….

So whilst there are a lot of weird people out there….I have to think that based on all the evidence it’s finally sinking in…..

And in any case the point was how on earth in a democracy can a blow be chucked out of Parliament for telling the truth and calling the PM a liar. But the PM can use a known lie dreamt up by extreme right wing groups without sanction?

It’s beyond appalling.

This is a bit like being top of the League in December....still a lot of the season left...

On the last point - Not that I agree with Johnson - but did Kier Starmer prosecute Jimmy Savile? Very difficult to say that's a lie, I mean the fact that he wasn't actually involved one way or the other is important, but it's not a lie...

Are we really going to argue semantic points about what is a far right slur and lie?

Come on. Starmer has a record of working to reform the CPS to make it better able to prosecute people for historic child sexual abuse crimes. Johnson wrote an article once complaining about ‘spaffing money up the wall in a waste of time examining historic allegations relating to child sexual abuse’.

I’m fairly appalled that anyone would even try and justify what Johnson said. And furthermore what he said would be a resignation matter again for any other PM in living memory, though of course they wouldn’t have debased themselves to do so in the first place.

[Worthy4England]

Why anyone would care about performance over integrity is beyond me.

Have you been looking at our electorate, recently?

Well yes. But Starmer enjoys best PM leads over Johnson that haven’t been seen by a LOTO since Blair in 1997….

So whilst there are a lot of weird people out there….I have to think that based on all the evidence it’s finally sinking in…..

And in any case the point was how on earth in a democracy can a blow be chucked out of Parliament for telling the truth and calling the PM a liar. But the PM can use a known lie dreamt up by extreme right wing groups without sanction?

It’s beyond appalling.

This is a bit like being top of the League in December....still a lot of the season left...

On the last point - Not that I agree with Johnson - but did Kier Starmer prosecute Jimmy Savile? Very difficult to say that's a lie, I mean the fact that he wasn't actually involved one way or the other is important, but it's not a lie...

Are we really going to argue semantic points about what is a far right slur and lie?

Come on. Starmer has a record of working to reform the CPS to make it better able to prosecute people for historic child sexual abuse crimes. Johnson wrote an article once complaining about ‘spaffing money up the wall in a waste of time examining historic allegations relating to child sexual abuse’.

I’m fairly appalled that anyone would even try and justify what Johnson said. And furthermore what he said would be a resignation matter again for any other PM in living memory, though of course they wouldn’t have debased themselves to do so in the first place.

Stop being appalled. It's unbecoming. As has been pointed out, one side doesn't have the moral high ground after dodgy dossier. But I'm not justifying what he said, in case you missed it when I said "Not that I agree etc..."

What I said was that the Speaker isn't the right person to judge nor do I think it's their remit, at the time, whether someone is lying...

[Prufrock]

Exactly. It was another low blow from that scrambling charlatan, but the Speaker of the House of Commons isn't FullFact dot org.

[BWFC_Insane]

Why anyone would care about performance over integrity is beyond me.

Have you been looking at our electorate, recently?

Well yes. But Starmer enjoys best PM leads over Johnson that haven’t been seen by a LOTO since Blair in 1997….

So whilst there are a lot of weird people out there….I have to think that based on all the evidence it’s finally sinking in…..

And in any case the point was how on earth in a democracy can a blow be chucked out of Parliament for telling the truth and calling the PM a liar. But the PM can use a known lie dreamt up by extreme right wing groups without sanction?

It’s beyond appalling.

This is a bit like being top of the League in December....still a lot of the season left...

On the last point - Not that I agree with Johnson - but did Kier Starmer prosecute Jimmy Savile? Very difficult to say that's a lie, I mean the fact that he wasn't actually involved one way or the other is important, but it's not a lie...

Are we really going to argue semantic points about what is a far right slur and lie?

Come on. Starmer has a record of working to reform the CPS to make it better able to prosecute people for historic child sexual abuse crimes. Johnson wrote an article once complaining about ‘spaffing money up the wall in a waste of time examining historic allegations relating to child sexual abuse’.

I’m fairly appalled that anyone would even try and justify what Johnson said. And furthermore what he said would be a resignation matter again for any other PM in living memory, though of course they wouldn’t have debased themselves to do so in the first place.

Stop being appalled. It's unbecoming. As has been pointed out, one side doesn't have the moral high ground after dodgy dossier. But I'm not justifying what he said, in case you missed it when I said "Not that I agree etc..."

What I said was that the Speaker isn't the right person to judge nor do I think it's their remit, at the time, whether someone is lying...

I don’t think erskine May allows for false accusations about other members to be made and indeed accusations of that nature full stop. And the speaker is there to uphold those rules.

But let’s agree to disagree.

[Prufrock]

I'm one of the roughly 9 people in the country who have actually read Erskine May. It's not a rule book. It's a text book. There is plenty covered in there, and it's so authoritative that what's it's often treated as if it's a rule book but it isn't.

And the Speaker is not a judge. There are procedures for dealing with MPs lying, but they are for the House. I.e. someone brings a motion on it.

That's Parliament. There's also the ministerial code and the Nolan principles each of which require ministers to act honestly, but they're not law.

And as low a blow as it was it wasn't strictly a lie. We'd get even less done if everything anyone said in Parliament was subjected to constant fact checking.

It's a matter for the Tory party (I'm not holding my breath) and ultimately the voters.

[BWFC_Insane]

I'm one of the roughly 9 people in the country who have actually read Erskine May. It's not a rule book. It's a text book. There is plenty covered in there, and it's so authoritative that what's it's often treated as if it's a rule book but it isn't.

And the Speaker is not a judge. There are procedures for dealing with MPs lying, but they are for the House. I.e. someone brings a motion on it.

That's Parliament. There's also the ministerial code and the Nolan principles each of which require ministers to act honestly, but they're not law.

And as low a blow as it was it wasn't strictly a lie. We'd get even less done if everything anyone said in Parliament was subjected to constant fact checking.

It's a matter for the Tory party (I'm not holding my breath) and ultimately the voters.

A point of order was raised. The point is that you are not meant to make baseless accusations against other members of the house. Johnson did it twice. Yet nothing happens.

Even his own MPs are saying it was out of order.

Yet the speaker is just very very ‘cross’. And if your argument is that there are no absolute rules then the speaker can be judged as a human being. And in failing to deal with Johnson and his appalling tactics he’s failed on that level.

You can’t hide behind the rules, then say the rules aren’t absolutes or law.

If the speaker allows that then every question to Johnson today from the opposition should be ‘why do you spend your time giving tax payers money fraudulently to friends and donors yet campaign to protect paedophiles?’

Cos that’s not a ‘lie’ either. It would be absolutely unacceptable. But it’s less of a lie than Johnson’s remarks.

[Prufrock]

I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying Erskine May isn't the source of the rules, it just sets them out. Like a text book on criminal law will tell you what the criminal law is, but it doesn't make it. And it doesn't set out a big long list of what the speaker can and can't do. That's dictated by all sorts of things such as established practice and the standing orders.

It's well-established that it's not the speaker's role to determine whether things said in the house are true or not. Hoyle himself has made that point previously, and rightly pointed out yesterday that if MPs wanted to change that they could, but it is for them to do so.

Tory MPs are (correctly) saying it was "out of order" by Johnson in the sense that it a disgraceful thing to do, not that it was strictly out of order for the speaker to rule on. It's just not his job.

You're conflating whether Johnson should have done it (he shouldn't) with whether it's Hoyle's role to pull him up on it (it isn't). He's not a judge.

[BWFC_Insane]

I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying Erskine May isn't the source of the rules, it just sets them out. Like a text book on criminal law will tell you what the criminal law is, but it doesn't make it. And it doesn't set out a big long list of what the speaker can and can't do. That's dictated by all sorts of things such as established practice and the standing orders.

It's well-established that it's not the speaker's role to determine whether things said in the house are true or not. Hoyle himself has made that point previously, and rightly pointed out yesterday that if MPs wanted to change that they could, but it is for them to do so.

Tory MPs are (correctly) saying it was "out of order" by Johnson in the sense that it a disgraceful thing to do, not that it was strictly out of order for the speaker to rule on. It's just not his job.

You're conflating whether Johnson should have done it (he shouldn't) with whether it's Hoyle's role to pull him up on it (it isn't). He's not a judge.

No I get what they are saying. I disagree that the speaker couldn’t have at the very least offered a warning based on what’s in erskine May and I suspect other speakers would have done.

But we are where we are.

And will agree to disagree.

[Prufrock]

I mean sure. But I don't think you know what's in Erskine May . Because no-one normal does tbf.

The issue is the ministerial code. But guess who's in charge of enforcing that?!

[BWFC_Insane]

It would be funny if it wasn’t true but it seems chunks of the white paper on levelling up have been copy and pasted from Wikipedia.

Lord help us.

[Bruce Rioja]

It would be funny if it wasn’t true but it seems chunks of the white paper on levelling up have been copy and pasted from Wikipedia.

Lord help us.

Source, please?

[BWFC_Insane]

It would be funny if it wasn’t true but it seems chunks of the white paper on levelling up have been copy and pasted from Wikipedia.

Lord help us.

Source, please?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 06757.html

[Worthy4England]

I'm less bothered around them cutting and pasting when Constantinople was the capital of the Byzantine empire, it has no consequence. The problem with it is, is that it has nothing new in it since Teresa May's government wrote it as the "industrial plan"...and it won't level-up feck all.

[BWFC_Insane]

I'm less bothered around them cutting and pasting when Constantinople was the capital of the Byzantine empire, it has no consequence. The problem with it is, is that it has nothing new in it since Teresa May's government wrote it as the "industrial plan"...and it won't level-up feck all.

I mean there is that too. But I think the first point shows the shambles this is

[Worthy4England]

Not directly linked to government, but you have to laugh at BoE governor on £580k saying people shouldn't be demanding wage rises to combat the ever increasing cost of living...which has taken its biggest dip since records began. Out of touch, much?

[nicholaldo]

I see BoJo's just been for a visit to Jenny's chippy on Tonge Moor Road.

The red wall charm offensive has begun it seems.

[Bruce Rioja]

It would be funny if it wasn’t true but it seems chunks of the white paper on levelling up have been copy and pasted from Wikipedia.

Lord help us.

Source, please?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 06757.html

Must be true then

[Bruce Rioja]

I see BoJo's just been for a visit to Jenny's chippy on Tonge Moor Road.

The red wall charm offensive has begun it seems.

Impeccable taste.

[BWFC_Insane]

It would be funny if it wasn’t true but it seems chunks of the white paper on levelling up have been copy and pasted from Wikipedia.

Lord help us.

Source, please?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 06757.html

Must be true then

I mean it is….as detailed in the article.

[Worthy4England]

5 departures from Downing Street now. Either he's in control, in which case he's thrown them under the bus, or he isn't, in which case they probably believed he was going to. What a shithouse.