26-Nov 2022 : LAB: 50% / CON: 27% / LDEM: 9% / GRN: 4%

[Rafwan]

Mar 21, 2023 21:48:31 GMT pjw1961 said:

Mar 21, 2023 20:07:04 GMT graham said:

Of course there would have been issues with other parties such as the SNP. At the end of the day,though, the SNP was likely to be more anti-Tory than anti- Labour and keen to keep the Tories out. On the same basis , the DUP - unlike the UUP - was not always a natural Tory ally, and re-economic policy might be closer to Labour.

I am sure that many left of centre LibDem MPs bitterly regret going along with Clegg with the Coalition  deal.I suspect that if 25% had denounced it in public, it would never have happened.I still cannot understand how supine the parliamentary party was at the time - and throughout the Parliament which followed. Pity that Charles Kennedy, Shirley Williams & David Steel remained silent in public. Had they spoken out, doubtless quite a few MPs would have taken the hint.

The passivity of the more social democratic end of the Lib Dems during the coalition was indeed shameful (putting party above country) but the whole party paid a price for it in 2015 so they were duly punished. 

As to the 2010 situation here are a couple of quotes from Labour MPs. "Many in Labour felt that a coalition with the Liberal Democrats was an unrealistic prospect since it would still fall short of the 326 seats needed to form a majority government, with 315 seats to the Conservatives' 306. Labour MP Graham Stringer said, "I don't think it makes sense in the arithmetic – the numbers don't add up."

And re the SNP: "Labour's Douglas Alexander said he could not foresee a situation in which Labour could enter into government with the SNP because the two parties had "fundamental differences", and he made it clear that no senior Labour officials had been approached by anyone from the SNP."

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_Kingdom_government_formation

I find it fanciful to suppose that a Labour government would have been seen as legitimate after an election where it had just lost (notional due to boundary changes) 91 seats and the Conservatives gained 96. It is easy to imagine the viciousness of the Tory press campaign against it in that scenario. 

It is not fanciful if a Labour PM could command a majority in the Commons for key votes. LD could have provided that but chose instead the Tories. As Graham points out, the numbers were there (and as Andrew Adonis also pointed out in his excellent account ‘5 Days in May’). Perhaps Graham Stringer and Douglas Alexander, as members elected on a Labour ticket, might have been a little more steely in the defence of their constituents against the forthcoming onslaught of a Tory government.

[neilj]

It's Dan Hodges, but he has a point

[neilj]

Johnson's defence seems a little frail

[domjg]

Mar 22, 2023 10:07:56 GMT Rafwan said:

Mar 21, 2023 21:48:31 GMT pjw1961 said:

The passivity of the more social democratic end of the Lib Dems during the coalition was indeed shameful (putting party above country) but the whole party paid a price for it in 2015 so they were duly punished. 

As to the 2010 situation here are a couple of quotes from Labour MPs. "Many in Labour felt that a coalition with the Liberal Democrats was an unrealistic prospect since it would still fall short of the 326 seats needed to form a majority government, with 315 seats to the Conservatives' 306. Labour MP Graham Stringer said, "I don't think it makes sense in the arithmetic – the numbers don't add up."

And re the SNP: "Labour's Douglas Alexander said he could not foresee a situation in which Labour could enter into government with the SNP because the two parties had "fundamental differences", and he made it clear that no senior Labour officials had been approached by anyone from the SNP."

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_Kingdom_government_formation

I find it fanciful to suppose that a Labour government would have been seen as legitimate after an election where it had just lost (notional due to boundary changes) 91 seats and the Conservatives gained 96. It is easy to imagine the viciousness of the Tory press campaign against it in that scenario. 

It is not fanciful if a Labour PM could command a majority in the Commons for key votes. LD could have provided that but chose instead the Tories. As Graham points out, the numbers were there (and as Andrew Adonis also pointed out in his excellent account ‘5 Days in May’). Perhaps Graham Stringer and Douglas Alexander, as members elected on a Labour ticket, might have been a little more steely in the defence of their constituents against the forthcoming onslaught of a Tory government.

It just wouldn't have been a runner and the optics would have been terrible. As others have pointed out it would have been labelled a losers coalition in a print media that would have gone bananas. It would have been perceived more widely as undemocratic and almost certainly wouldn't have lasted. Labour and the LDs would have been gravely damaged by trying it and at the subsequent election the tories would probably have won big. Just supposition of course but I don't see how Labour could have stayed in power after the 2010 election. The arithmetic may have theoretically allowed it but politically and culturally it couldn't have worked. A tory minority gvt however should have been left to fail on it's own. 

[alurqa]

Mar 22, 2023 9:10:42 GMT superted said:

Liz Truss and Priti Patel to join Johnson in voting against the WF this afternoon.

What an arrogant bunch of tossers. But then I read this yesterday and I will change my first sentence to: what an ignorant bunch of tossers. Led by donkeys...

chrisgreybrexitblog.blogspot.com/
Final thoughts

That outcome is hardly surprising. There is a quote, mentioned almost in passing by Russell & James, from a Conservative MP saying that “right up until the indicative votes themselves [in 2019], a very large number of my colleagues had actually no idea at all what the Single Market or the Customs Union was [sic]” (p. 241). That is all too believable and yet also astounding, all the more so given that some of those same MPs were insisting that leave voters had ‘known exactly what they were voting for’ in 2016.

[jib]

Mar 22, 2023 10:25:59 GMT domjg said:

Mar 22, 2023 10:07:56 GMT Rafwan said:

It is not fanciful if a Labour PM could command a majority in the Commons for key votes. LD could have provided that but chose instead the Tories. As Graham points out, the numbers were there (and as Andrew Adonis also pointed out in his excellent account ‘5 Days in May’). Perhaps Graham Stringer and Douglas Alexander, as members elected on a Labour ticket, might have been a little more steely in the defence of their constituents against the forthcoming onslaught of a Tory government.

It just wouldn't have been a runner and the optics would have been terrible. As others have pointed out it would have been labelled a losers coalition in a print media that would have gone bananas. It would have been perceived more widely as undemocratic and almost certainly wouldn't have lasted. Labour and the LDs would have been gravely damaged by trying it and at the subsequent election the tories would probably have won big. Just supposition of course but I don't see how Labour could have stayed in power after the 2010 election. The arithmetic may have theoretically allowed it but politically and culturally it couldn't have worked. A tory minority gvt however should have been left to fail on it's own. 

Dress it up anyway you want, the simple fact remains, no Lib Dem support for Tories in 2010 = no Tory led Government, austerity et al. Yes, tough budget decisions, but none of Osborne's "Star Chamber" bollocks.

Lib Dems = Tory enablers. And you know what, I wouldn't trust the yellow f****rs not to do it all again in 2024.

[steve]

Risperidone is an atypical antipsychotic mostly used to treat schizophrenia, psychosis and mania.
It's available on the nhs.

[steve]

Cabinet secretary Simon Case decides he isn't willing to be Spaffer's fall guy defence and says he never told Johnson all Covid rules and guidance were followed in No 10
The new evidence also shows that Simon Case, the cabinet secretary, says that he never told Boris Johnson that Covid rules and guidance were followed at all time in Downing Street, and that he never assured him no parties were held.

Case also said he was not aware of anyone else giving Johnson these assurances.

Taxi for Spaffer!

[jib]

Mar 22, 2023 10:51:01 GMT steve said:

Risperidone is an atypical antipsychotic mostly used to treat schizophrenia, psychosis and mania.
It's available on the nhs.

I'm so pleased that you've found help at last.

Remember to ask for the Brexitoid cream as well. X.

[oldnat]

Mar 22, 2023 6:23:43 GMT moby said:

Mar 21, 2023 15:25:02 GMT davwel said:

Old Nat helpfully suggested that creating a big person-centred database, could be tried in Wales rather than Scotalnd since its size would be less, though I suspected he also wanted to draw attention to Labour not managing the Welsh NHS well (his view; I simply do not know).

It is a common trope by the Tories and their enablers that Labour is failing to manage the NHS in Wales. It's an easy argument to make, you say there is like for like proportional funding based on numbers through the Barnett formula and then add..... look their waiting lists are longer than ours; watch the Tories use this line at PMQs every time the NHS is the subject. Of course this is simplistic politicking because the reality is Wales has a different population profile to large parts of England. There is a proportionally larger population of over 65s living in Wales with more complex, costly health needs. Due to this fact the need for greater social care funding reduces funding available for elective surgery. This article is old now but it suggests Wales would receive £183 more per patient under a needs based formula:-

www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/nhs-wales-badly-run-by-labour-or-underfunded-by-westminster

"Of course this is simplistic politicking"

Which is why SLab continually use that in Scotland against ScotGov. It's the normal hypocrisy of opposition, implying that their party could do so much better than the government, without mentioning that their party does worse where they are in power.

[pjw1961]

Mar 22, 2023 9:40:16 GMT neilj said:

Tory MPs who have already said they will vote against Sunaks deal, it will only grow, maybe embarrassing for Sunak if he has to rely on opposition votes to get his measure through
Edit plus Mark Francois

My word that really is a coalition of the gruesome.  There's a few more holding government positions who would be in there as well if it wasn't for the fact they would have to resign. 

[oldnat]

[steamdrivenandy]

Mar 22, 2023 11:29:25 GMT pjw1961 said:

Mar 22, 2023 9:40:16 GMT neilj said:

Tory MPs who have already said they will vote against Sunaks deal, it will only grow, maybe embarrassing for Sunak if he has to rely on opposition votes to get his measure through
Edit plus Mark Francois

My word that really is a coalition of the gruesome.  There's a few more holding government positions who would be in there as well if it wasn't for the fact they would have to resign. 

Please could one of them be Braverman and could she resign yesterday.

[oldnat]

As always, the King's lawyers seem to have "suggested" to ScotGov that HM might be disinclined to get round to assenting to the Bill, if his privileges are infringed. Looks like Royal lands may be required to comply, but be exempt from prosecution if they don't.

Since the Bill would apply to Alister Jack's extensive shooting estates, it will be interesting to see if UKGov decides that the Bill must be blocked to ensure compliance with the UK Internal Market Act.

[jayblanc]

Mar 22, 2023 11:35:23 GMT steamdrivenandy said:

Mar 22, 2023 11:29:25 GMT pjw1961 said:

My word that really is a coalition of the gruesome.  There's a few more holding government positions who would be in there as well if it wasn't for the fact they would have to resign. 

Please could one of them be Braverman and could she resign yesterday.

She'd just explain that she was very sorry for doing it, and have her job back next week.

[neilj]

ERG have officially come out against Sunaks deal

[steve]

Apparently some of the inflation last month was caused by a lack of vegetables.

Plenty available today in Westminster.


Real events obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is a subtype of OCD characterized by ongoing intrusive thoughts and compulsive behaviors around someone's past actions.

[steve]

Interesting that those who have screwed up and lied such as brexitanians and Spaffer Johnson are incredibly keen that the public " move on" and forget about their culpability.
Combined of course with deflection on to those who weren't stupid and didn't lie.

[graham]

If 35 Tory MPs do vote against the WF , it implies that Opposition votes were required to pass it. That weakens Sunak's position as Tory leader - and undermines his authority.

[bardin1]

Presumably if Labour could have defeated the government on the 'Windsor agreement' they should have voted against it or they will be accused in 10 years time of propping up the Sunak regime and should never be trusted again?

Or am I doing this wrong?

[Deleted]

Mar 22, 2023 13:03:56 GMT graham said:

If 35 Tory MPs do vote against the WF , it implies that Opposition votes were required to pass it. That weakens Sunak's position as Tory leader - and undermines his authority.

What authority? He's sloppy seconds - he lost to Truss.

[alurqa]

Mar 22, 2023 13:03:56 GMT graham said:

If 35 Tory MPs do vote against the WF , it implies that Opposition votes were required to pass it. That weakens Sunak's position as Tory leader - and undermines his authority.

And makes public the membership list for the ERG. Damn.

[alurqa]

Mar 22, 2023 13:43:20 GMT @sotonsaint said:

Mar 22, 2023 13:03:56 GMT graham said:

If 35 Tory MPs do vote against the WF , it implies that Opposition votes were required to pass it. That weakens Sunak's position as Tory leader - and undermines his authority.

What authority? He's sloppy seconds - he lost to Truss.

And was forced to give Braverman her job back after she fucked up the first time by abusing email. His authority was reinforced when Braverman fucked up with email a second time, then claimed she hadn't seen it. Aw bless. Ain't she lovely?

[oldnat]

[Mark]

Johnson is employing the same tactic as Father Ted in the epsode "Kicking Bishop Brennan Up The Arse" (in which he does so as a forfeit for a lost bet.

He told Bishop Brennan "Id never kick you up the arse as if I ever did, you'd kill me, so I couldn't have done so".

Now, Johnson is basically using the same attemmpted get out.

Jesus wept!

(It didn't work for Father Ted)

[pjw1961]

Mar 22, 2023 13:52:25 GMT oldnat said:

Speaker Hoyle then made the same mistake as May, saying it was two. Duncan Smith - the forgotten man.

[oldnat]

[steve]

Anyone know what the penalty is for lying under oath to a parliamentary committee.

[graham]

Mar 22, 2023 14:51:15 GMT steve said:

Anyone know what the penalty is for lying under oath to a parliamentary committee.

I believe it is the same as all penalties for perjury!

[oldnat]

Mar 22, 2023 14:51:15 GMT steve said:

Anyone know what the penalty is for lying under oath to a parliamentary committee.

I'm sure that the book he took an oath on will have some interesting penalties that could be applied.