Jump to content
Total Rugby League Fans Forum
Sign in to follow this  
ckn

Independent Group

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, CanaBull said:

Instead of just being ineffectual, UK political leadership now looks weak and broken as well as ineffectual.

You mean even more weak and broken . Probably most of us haven’t known a more pathetic political situation or ineffective political class 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, CanaBull said:

Whilst I’m usually one of those who tends not to ascribe to malice that which could be just as easily explained by outright incompetence, would it not have been a bit more sensible considering the eyes of the world are on the UK at the moment to, I don’t know, have waited another month or so until after something a bit more important was dealt with before all this ship jumping?

Instead of just being ineffectual, UK political leadership now looks weak and broken as well as ineffectual.

Not looks but is, there isn't one of them worth a single vote?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The three who have left the Tories - thank goodness the number included that loud mouth LibDem Soubry! - will not make any difference at all to the Brexit votes in future as they would all vote against whatever the government presents to Parliament because as a very balanced Tory remainer MP said on Sky tonight (unfortunately I cannot remember her name), they all want to remain, which makes them different from most of the remainer Tory MPs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few more Conservative defectors, and how badly would the party's ability to achieve anything at all be sapped in the Commons? However much May bribes the DUP, she can't increase their numbers.


Millions long for immortality who don't know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon. (Susan Ertz)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Futtocks said:

A few more Conservative defectors, and how badly would the party's ability to achieve anything at all be sapped in the Commons? However much May bribes the DUP, she can't increase their numbers.

With regard to Brexit, they could probably cope with about ten as that has been around the number who have consistently voted against anything pro-Brexit.  This is bearing in mind that a few Brexit supporting Labour MPs will likely step in to fill any gaps.

Edited by Saintslass

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Futtocks said:

A few more Conservative defectors, and how badly would the party's ability to achieve anything at all be sapped in the Commons? However much May bribes the DUP, she can't increase their numbers.

Don’t forget May has Hoey and Field to keep her numbers up. Strange that they’re not getting abuse...

  • Like 1

“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime" - Mark Twain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The anti No Deal amendment will attract a lot of MP's voting for the amendment who haven't voted against the Govt yet. The extent of the majority for the amendment will be interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Futtocks said:

A few more Conservative defectors, and how badly would the party's ability to achieve anything at all be sapped in the Commons? However much May bribes the DUP, she can't increase their numbers.

If they lose two more they technically wouldn't have a majority even with the DUP. Although the likelihood is that the defecting Tory MPs would continue to vote in line with the government despite now sitting across from them, making the entire thing a waste of time. Which it is anyway. You'd probably get the likes of Umunna now voting with the Tories on a lot of issues too so it probably won't make too much difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Evil Homer said:

If they lose two more they technically wouldn't have a majority even with the DUP. Although the likelihood is that the defecting Tory MPs would continue to vote in line with the government despite now sitting across from them, making the entire thing a waste of time. Which it is anyway. You'd probably get the likes of Umunna now voting with the Tories on a lot of issues too so it probably won't make too much difference.

How can you be so sure? Yes I could see the ex Tories voting with the government on some things, but I doubt that the ex Labour lot would support very much. 

Like I've already said, I'm very much of the "let's wait and see" before I will pass any real judgment on the whole thing.


"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Griff9of13 said:

How can you be so sure? Yes I could see the ex Tories voting with the government on some things, but I doubt that the ex Labour lot would support very much. 

Like I've already said, I'm very much of the "let's wait and see" before I will pass any real judgment on the whole thing.

Why would they suddenly start voting against things they believe in and have voted for for years? They're still Tories, they haven't renounced their conservative views. The same goes for the ex-Labour members. Save for issues surrounding Brexit and quite petty personality clashes, none of them appear to actually disagree with their former parties on very much at all.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Saintslass said:

The three who have left the Tories - thank goodness the number included that loud mouth LibDem Soubry! - will not make any difference at all to the Brexit votes in future as they would all vote against whatever the government presents to Parliament because as a very balanced Tory remainer MP said on Sky tonight (unfortunately I cannot remember her name), they all want to remain, which makes them different from most of the remainer Tory MPs.

This " very balanced Tory remainer MP ",  did they have a chip on both shoulders ?

The old jokes are always the best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Griff9of13 said:

How can you be so sure? Yes I could see the ex Tories voting with the government on some things, but I doubt that the ex Labour lot would support very much. 

Like I've already said, I'm very much of the "let's wait and see" before I will pass any real judgment on the whole thing.

Surely if the Parliamentary arithmetic alters further, and the government no longer have a majority, then the composition of various committees will be affected, which could hinder getting any legislation through the Commons.


“Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.”

Clement Attlee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Trojan said:

Surely if the Parliamentary arithmetic alters further, and the government no longer have a majority, then the composition of various committees will be affected, which could hinder getting any legislation through the Commons.

They already don’t have a majority and therefore aren’t entitled to majorities on Select committees yet they deliberately broke this rule by getting the DUP to vote it through. 

  • Like 1

“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime" - Mark Twain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime" - Mark Twain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Phil said:

Strange that they’re registered as a limited company and not a political party. This of course means they don’t have to divulge their backers. 

Imagine being so “independent” that your backers insist on you keeping them anonymous, strange indeed, almost Machiavellian you could say. 

For clarity, it is only Shuker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, ckn said:

They already don’t have a majority and therefore aren’t entitled to majorities on Select committees yet they deliberately broke this rule by getting the DUP to vote it through. 

Tories have a long history of not allowing rules to get in the way of ambition. "If you don't like the rules then rewrite the rules".

Edited by Griff9of13

"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, getdownmonkeyman said:

My hopelessly naive/romantic view has me thinking, these guys are looking to generate a centre ground option. At the moment we are left with extreme options.

They're going to generate an 'all of them being voted out at the next election' option, and rightly so.

FWIW I fail to see what's so extreme about Labour policies at the moment. Certainly Corbyn's manifesto at the last election generated almost universal praise, and his political stance would be considered moderate in Scandinavia (ironically the countries with traditionally the highest HDI in the world).

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because Corbyn's MP's know what he'll do if he ever gets in power. They know none of it has been spoken about even less published in print.

For most of us Corbyn was always part of the Communist wing of the Labour Party using Labour as a front. Unlike most Labour voters who were, say, from the Ernie Bevan wing of the Party. Bevan being one of the founding fathers of NATO. The quote Bevan is remembered for correct or not was that NATO was to "Keep the Americans in, Soviets out etc. The exact opposite of what Corbyn believes.

Corbyn was always a Soviet sympathiser and his attitude after Salisbury was "Lets discuss this with the Russians" when he knew they had sent agents to kill the Scirpals (sp) proved beyond doubt he is totally unfit to be PM and look after the security of the Country.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Father Ted said:

Because Corbyn's MP's know what he'll do if he ever gets in power. They know none of it has been spoken about even less published in print.

For most of us Corbyn was always part of the Communist wing of the Labour Party using Labour as a front. Unlike most Labour voters who were, say, from the Ernie Bevan wing of the Party. Bevan being one of the founding fathers of NATO. The quote Bevan is remembered for correct or not was that NATO was to "Keep the Americans in, Soviets out etc. The exact opposite of what Corbyn believes.

Corbyn was always a Soviet sympathiser and his attitude after Salisbury was "Lets discuss this with the Russians" when he knew they had sent agents to kill the Scirpals (sp) proved beyond doubt he is totally unfit to be PM and look after the security of the Country.   

Yes unfortunately becoming PM does not mean you become dictator of the country nor does it mean you are solely responsible (or even partially responsible?) for national security. If these breakaway MPs had concerns about a Corbyn-led government veering further to the left than advertised then their best bet would've been to stay put, work together with the rest of the party and use their influence to ensure Labour retained the centre ground while moving forwards in a direction which was determined by the membership. Instead they threw a hissy fit, actively tried to subvert the party for two years and when that didn't work they took their ball home completely, and now will likely be replaced in parliament at the earliest opportunity by people who are far more sympathetic to Corbyn than they were. As I've said, self-defeating idiots.

Edited by Evil Homer
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Evil Homer said:

They're going to generate an 'all of them being voted out at the next election' option, and rightly so.

FWIW I fail to see what's so extreme about Labour policies at the moment. Certainly Corbyn's manifesto at the last election generated almost universal praise, and his political stance would be considered moderate in Scandinavia (ironically the countries with traditionally the highest HDI in the world).

The only one I would exempt from having to hold a by election is Luciana Berger as I think her reasons for leaving are understandable. The abuse she received was personal and must have been unbearable. 

I have sympathy for Joan Clarke but as she was Labour friends of Israel chairperson I think she would have been more correct in staying and fighting her cause from within.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Niels said:

The only one I would exempt from having to hold a by election is Luciana Berger as I think her reasons for leaving are understandable. The abuse she received was personal and must have been unbearable. 

I have sympathy for Joan Clarke but as she was Labour friends of Israel chairperson I think she would have been more correct in staying and fighting her cause from within.

Berger should be the first to hold a by-election as she was only saved from deselection last week by a spectacularly misplaced intervention by Tom Watson. Her constituents want her gone, and rightly so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Niels said:

The only one I would exempt from having to hold a by election is Luciana Berger as I think her reasons for leaving are understandable. The abuse she received was personal and must have been unbearable. 

I have sympathy for Joan Clarke but as she was Labour friends of Israel chairperson I think she would have been more correct in staying and fighting her cause from within.

 

 

 

Do you think Berger gets more personal abuse than Corbyn ? 

Joan Ryan knew she was finished as far as her Constituency Party was concerned. She just jumped before she got the black spot.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...