Westminster Politics

Tbf I'm pretty sure hedge funds without said political connections are shorting the pound as well given the multitude of economic assessments about the impact of no deal and the probability of said no deal

Of course they are but i dont think the hedge funds behaviour is an issue as much as Boris and Leave taking money from these people in the first place.

The quicker we come round to just having private low level member funding and government funding only for politics the better.
 
Tbf I'm pretty sure hedge funds without said political connections are shorting the pound as well given the multitude of economic assessments about the impact of no deal and the probability of said no deal
It’s said that the ones backing BoJo are in it for billions. That surely has to have some part in his mentality
 
Are these clowns actually going to work today as they so desperately wanted to come back?

A lot of effort went into cancelling the prorogation and so far in a week they’ve argued about some words hurting their little baby ears. Nothing has been achieved
 
You have misunderstood me. I'm saying Tory policies have contributed to more deaths in society. I just don't believe the figure to be as high as 120,000 and I don't think it's useful for people to use this figure when they're shouting at conservative MPs.

I think these theoretical deaths, based on previous trends are a strange thing to try to calculate full stop. Trends and correlations change by their very nature.

That's before even considering the fact that if the NHS, Department of Transport, Welfare/Pension departments etc had a budget of £500b there would obviously be tens of thousands less deaths per year. Therefore are we going to say "every government ever is responsible for tens of thousands of deaths per year due to not spending double the tax take per annum"?
 
Are these clowns actually going to work today as they so desperately wanted to come back?

A lot of effort went into cancelling the prorogation and so far in a week they’ve argued about some words hurting their little baby ears. Nothing has been achieved

How ignorant, If you want to actually educate yourself of all the different things parliament are doing you only have to look on the website.
 
You have misunderstood me. I'm saying Tory policies have contributed to more deaths in society. I just don't believe the figure to be as high as 120,000 and I don't think it's useful for people to use this figure when they're shouting at conservative MPs.
The exact figure can be debated, yes. But as the article I shared stated, it's easily into the thousands. Would it be more palatable if they rounded down the estimate to 10,000 or 50,000?

Why is it not useful to communicate that thousands of deaths have been caused by Tory policy?
 
Are these clowns actually going to work today as they so desperately wanted to come back?

A lot of effort went into cancelling the prorogation and so far in a week they’ve argued about some words hurting their little baby ears. Nothing has been achieved

Oddly enough most of the first day of recall revolved around the governments illegal attempts to curtail parliamentary scrutiny - worth having a chat about in my book. Then they used this newfound ability to scrutinise and discovered that the government inadvertently overlooked a greater number of arms sales to Saudi Arabia than had previously been realised. The government was also given the opportunity to clarify its position regarding Iran and detail its response to the Thomas Cooke affair. Outside the chamber several committees sat and papers on a variety of topics were laid down, including area specific planning for a European exit.

Given that Parliament was resumed at short notice it also had to create a new order of business. So some of the time last week was also used to set an agenda for the retabling and passage of such things as the Fisheries Bill, Agriculture Bill, Financial Services Bill, Exiting the European Union Bill, etc. Today that means they'll be debating and passing motions relating to the Northern Ireland (Executive Formation) Act.

In fact the parliamentary time given over to arguing about inflamed tensions and its repercussions on politician safety lasted little more than an hour - or 1/24th - of parliament's sitting.
 
I think these theoretical deaths, based on previous trends are a strange thing to try to calculate full stop. Trends and correlations change by their very nature.

That's before even considering the fact that if the NHS, Department of Transport, Welfare/Pension departments etc had a budget of £500b there would obviously be tens of thousands less deaths per year. Therefore are we going to say "every government ever is responsible for tens of thousands of deaths per year due to not spending double the tax take per annum"?

No, we are going to say that Tory austerity is responsible for thousands of incremental deaths per year.

The Tory policies below all have a strong case of contribution to increased deaths.

1. The bedroom tax
2. Denying disability benefit to 165,000 people
3. Scrapping housing benefit for 18-21 year olds
4. Junior doctors contract cuts
5. £30 per week cuts to the sick (disability benefit)
6. Legal aid cuts
7. Scrapping nurses bursaries

Your final paragraph accepts a link between budget size and the number of deaths. How about the fact that Tory policy was to shrink those vital budgets while simultaneously decreasing corporation tax for businesses, finding billions of pounds to bribe the DUP, pay £22.5BN for an (advised against) Hinkley point nuclear power station and HS2 for example.
 
No, we are going to say that Tory austerity is responsible for thousands of incremental deaths per year.

The Tory policies below all have a strong case of contribution to increased deaths.

1. The bedroom tax
2. Denying disability benefit to 165,000 people
3. Scrapping housing benefit for 18-21 year olds
4. Junior doctors contract cuts
5. £30 per week cuts to the sick (disability benefit)
6. Legal aid cuts
7. Scrapping nurses bursaries

Your final paragraph accepts a link between budget size and the number of deaths. How about the fact that Tory policy was to shrink those vital budgets while simultaneously decreasing corporation tax for businesses, finding billions of pounds to bribe the DUP, pay £22.5BN for an (advised against) Hinkley point nuclear power station and HS2 for example.

It seems like you agree then that all parties in all countries are responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths across the globe due to not spending more money than they receive?

They're all guilty for example of spending less than 15% of GDP on health, rather than for example 100% per year.
 
It seems like you agree then that all parties in all countries are responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths across the globe due to not spending more money than they receive?

They're all guilty for example of spending less than 15% of GDP on health, rather than for example 100% per year.

Er. It's a judgement call isn't it? If we divert these funds from the health service to build a giant rubber knob it will increase deaths by 500 a year. Is this giant knob worth 500 deaths? If yes then we divert the funds and are responsible for both the 500 deaths and the creation of a giant rubber knob.

So the correct answer is yes, the government is responsible for the increase in deaths, but it is also responsible for the tidal wave of success, or the prevention of further suffering, that it bought with those lives.
 
Er. It's a judgement call isn't it? If we divert these funds from the health service to build a giant rubber knob it will increase deaths by 500 a year. Is this giant knob worth 500 deaths? If yes then we divert the funds and are responsible for both the 500 deaths and the creation of a giant rubber knob.

So the correct answer is yes, the government is responsible for the increase in deaths, but it is also responsible for the tidal wave of success, or the prevention of further suffering, that it bought with those lives.

What if the funds never existed in the first place? Ie we were spending more than the tax take allowed us to spend?

If spending more than we earn is not an issue, then how much is too much? Would spending 25% of GDP on healthcare be positive? 50%? 100%?
 
The BBC's framing of the accusations against Johnson is a bit strange. The editorial which accompanies it seems purely concerned with whether or not Johnson being seen to be a harraser plays badly with female voters whereas, I would argue the story is whether or not the PM harrasses women.
 
What if the funds never existed in the first place? Ie we were spending more than the tax take allowed us to spend?

If spending more than we earn is not an issue, then how much is too much? Would spending 25% of GDP on healthcare be positive? 50%? 100%?

That's precisely the judgement call, which is: These thousands of people were costing us too much to keep alive, an unfortunate and lamentable drag on an already wounded society. We did what we had to to prevent further societal degredation. Realistically their lives were the price we were forced to pay. You may choose to focus on the deaths, but look at all the things their deaths brought us.
 
Oddly enough most of the first day of recall revolved around the governments illegal attempts to curtail parliamentary scrutiny - worth having a chat about in my book. Then they used this newfound ability to scrutinise and discovered that the government inadvertently overlooked a greater number of arms sales to Saudi Arabia than had previously been realised. The government was also given the opportunity to clarify its position regarding Iran and detail its response to the Thomas Cooke affair. Outside the chamber several committees sat and papers on a variety of topics were laid down, including area specific planning for a European exit.

Given that Parliament was resumed at short notice it also had to create a new order of business. So some of the time last week was also used to set an agenda for the retabling and passage of such things as the Fisheries Bill, Agriculture Bill, Financial Services Bill, Exiting the European Union Bill, etc. Today that means they'll be debating and passing motions relating to the Northern Ireland (Executive Formation) Act.

In fact the parliamentary time given over to arguing about inflamed tensions and its repercussions on politician safety lasted little more than an hour - or 1/24th - of parliament's sitting.
@Steven Seagull Ouch - I'd say you've been schooled. :lol:
 
BBC News has just broadcast a clip of Boris Johnson responding to a question about whether he squeezed Charlotte Edwardes’ thigh at a Spectator lunch 20 years ago with a long and rambling reply about his plans to improve bus services.
 
Getting very bizarre! Kuenssberg is just jealous it wasn't her. At what point will Kuenssberg unleash her inner bunny boiler?

Dominic Cummings' wife rejects Boris Johnson 'touching' report
The wife of the prime minister's chief adviser Dominic Cummings has said Boris Johnson did not touch her thigh at a lunch in 1999.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49877508

 
Last edited:
Jo Swinson says opposition leaders have agreed not to carry out a vote of no confidence this week because it would make No Deal more likely and “play into Boris Johnson’s hands”
 
Jo Swinson says opposition leaders have agreed not to carry out a vote of no confidence this week because it would make No Deal more likely and “play into Boris Johnson’s hands”
makes a GNU and an interim PM more likely I guess.
Logically if you dont do it this week your going to wait till 19th when he is supposed to write the letter...
if he does not then 21st vote of no confidence motion is presented
22nd debated (boris probably looses)
that leaves 9 days for somebody to command the confidence of the house, them to ask for (and presumably attain) agreement from the EU to extend... then to bring that back to the commons (does it also have to go through the lords???)
its going to be very tight - I can only assume the opposition parties have a pretty good idea of somebody they can coalesce around for that majority as there really isn't time to spend a week arguing over it
Think im gonna stick a few hundred quid on ken clarke
EDIT - Though Margaret Becket has seen her odds shorten a lot today suggesting somebody has piled a lot of money on her or there are some string rumours around
14/1 two days ago
12/1 one day ago
6/1 today...
 
Last edited:
Commentator Toby Young has defended Boris Johnson over allegations that he groped two women at a lunch when he was editor of the Spectator magazine, claiming that when they worked together "people complained if Boris didn't put his hand on their knee."

Christ who needs enemies when your friends are this stupid.
 

IM guessing shes talking about BIM modeling which has recently been mandated on all government backed schemes ... in fairness last time i was on crossrail the BIM model showed revision 3 and we were working on a 2d paper copy of revision 21 because they BIM modeling was so far behind
basically there is some sense in what shes saying - just unfortunately she really does not understand why the words are on her autocue or what they actually mean ... that said Im sure Mcvey exists as a front bench MP solely to make Boris and Mogg look moderate
 
makes a GNU and an interim PM more likely I guess.
Logically if you dont do it this week your going to wait till 19th when he is supposed to write the letter...
if he does not then 21st vote of no confidence motion is presented
22nd debated (boris probably looses)
that leaves 9 days for somebody to command the confidence of the house, them to ask for (and presumably attain) agreement from the EU to extend... then to bring that back to the commons (does it also have to go through the lords???)
its going to be very tight - I can only assume the opposition parties have a pretty good idea of somebody they can coalesce around for that majority as there really isn't time to spend a week arguing over it
Think im gonna stick a few hundred quid on ken clarke
EDIT - Though Margaret Becket has seen her odds shorten a lot today suggesting somebody has piled a lot of money on her or there are some string rumours around
14/1 two days ago
12/1 one day ago
6/1 today...

I love Beckett but can't see it. I think Clarke will be kingmaker as opposed to king. Bercow is a very interesting option but unlikely unless they plan to run it well past 31st. I've no idea who it'd be honestly.
 
It’s said that the ones backing BoJo are in it for billions. That surely has to have some part in his mentality

Loads will be in it for billions on both sides. Both Jane Street and SIG [and likely most other fintech type firm] for example on the remain/extend side. Most won't be directly connected to politics whatsoever, and the two sides command dark forces powerful enough, that one trying to have politicians act as their agent seems unlikely.
 
It's shocking how little comment this story has generated. Truly depressing.
I believe the story 100%.
But, still I can understand the public being not interested in something like that which happened 20 years ago.
 
I believe the story 100%.
But, still I can understand the public being not interested in something like that which happened 20 years ago.

The timing is almost certainly politically motivated. And when you are using alleged sexual assault against you for political ends, it tends to dull the seriousness of the allegations, as well as potentially dishonour other victims.
 
Loads will be in it for billions on both sides. Both Jane Street and SIG [and likely most other fintech type firm] for example on the remain/extend side. Most won't be directly connected to politics whatsoever, and the two sides command dark forces powerful enough, that one trying to have politicians act as their agent seems unlikely.
There’s an MP with a polish surname (can’t remember) who was/is a big leave advocate. He works for a financial firm as far as I remember and was trying to lobby the Polish government against granting the Uk an extension first time around.
 
makes a GNU and an interim PM more likely I guess.
Logically if you dont do it this week your going to wait till 19th when he is supposed to write the letter...
if he does not then 21st vote of no confidence motion is presented
22nd debated (boris probably looses)
that leaves 9 days for somebody to command the confidence of the house, them to ask for (and presumably attain) agreement from the EU to extend... then to bring that back to the commons (does it also have to go through the lords???)
its going to be very tight - I can only assume the opposition parties have a pretty good idea of somebody they can coalesce around for that majority as there really isn't time to spend a week arguing over it
Think im gonna stick a few hundred quid on ken clarke
EDIT - Though Margaret Becket has seen her odds shorten a lot today suggesting somebody has piled a lot of money on her or there are some string rumours around
14/1 two days ago
12/1 one day ago
6/1 today...

How does it make it more likely considering the very limited time-frame after the 19th as you mentioned?

Surely if they triggered the VONC this week (with 2 weeks to agree for a compromise) that would make it more likely get a GNU? If they can't agree in 2 weeks what makes you think they'll agree in a day or two after the 19th?
 
I love Beckett but can't see it. I think Clarke will be kingmaker as opposed to king. Bercow is a very interesting option but unlikely unless they plan to run it well past 31st. I've no idea who it'd be honestly.
yeah - though it would have to be before 31st if Boris refuses to send the letter i think - also I assume he would have to stand down as speaker to make that an option?
 
How does it make it more likely considering the very limited time-frame after the 19th as you mentioned?

Surely if they triggered the VONC this week (with 2 weeks to agree for a compromise) that would make it more likely get a GNU? If they can't agree in 2 weeks what makes you think they'll agree in a day or two after the 19th?

I could see them bickering and not agreeing a candidate to coalesce around... the fact that they seem prepared to run the clock down makes me think in the background there is at least an informal agreement as to who they might back
 
How does it make it more likely considering the very limited time-frame after the 19th as you mentioned?

Surely if they triggered the VONC this week (with 2 weeks to agree for a compromise) that would make it more likely get a GNU? If they can't agree in 2 weeks what makes you think they'll agree in a day or two after the 19th?

They really should be sounding it all out prior to the VONC to be fair. I don't think it would be a bad idea to do indicative votes early on.

In fact what might be embarrassing for the PM is if they do that prior to kicking him out, they're probably not that dickish though.
 
They really should be sounding it all out prior to the VONC to be fair. I don't think it would be a bad idea to do indicative votes early on.

In fact what might be embarrassing for the PM is if they do that prior to kicking him out, they're probably not that dickish though.
dont think labour would sanction it if there was a realistic chance that corbyn could be humiliated ... (I think there is a very realistic possibility he would and might well get less votes than johnson would command)
 
I could see them bickering and not agreeing a candidate to coalesce around... the fact that they seem prepared to run the clock down makes me think in the background there is at least an informal agreement as to who they might back

But if there was an informal agreement on who to back, why not trigger the VONC now? What's the benefit of leaving it last minute?

Also, whatever the opposition agree to privately, they mathematically need independents & Tory rebels to back them too. There are 34 independents currently, the 4th largest group in parliament more than Libs, CUKs, Plaids and Greens put together. They are not in these talks. So even if the parties of the opposition are united behind someone, that doesn't mean that that person will command the majority of the House or that there won't have to be last-minute negotiations anyway. And the less time there is for those, the less feasible it becomes.

I'm not convinced. I feel they're just kicking the can down the road to avoid having to take difficult decisions now. Which is very politician-like.
 
I love Beckett but can't see it. I think Clarke will be kingmaker as opposed to king. Bercow is a very interesting option but unlikely unless they plan to run it well past 31st. I've no idea who it'd be honestly.

Can’t be Bercow, they’d claim his actions as speaker were just a big power grab. No need to give them unnecessary ammunition.
 
Can’t be Bercow, they’d claim his actions as speaker were just a big power grab. No need to give them unnecessary ammunition.

Exactly the reason it could well be him. A figure on his way out soon anyway, that will absolutely incense the brexiteers, and would have no real partisan interest past the whole brexit thing.

I could see them bickering and not agreeing a candidate to coalesce around... the fact that they seem prepared to run the clock down makes me think in the background there is at least an informal agreement as to who they might back

Absolutely agree with this. They'll have mathed it carefully, including approaching tory rebels etc.
 
But if there was an informal agreement on who to back, why not trigger the VONC now? What's the benefit of leaving it last minute?

The longer this goes on, the more it looks like an absolute madhouse with a tory government spinning dangerously out of control. It also lets them say 'we gave him a chance to get a deal before stepping in.'

Boris is in an impossible situation; half the polls say he's comfortable (ipsos yougov) and has the brexiteers in the bag, the other half say he's a bit screwed. Usually in these cases you plan for the worst case - if he's screwed he would go for more 'moderate' votes to bring it home, however he actually can't do that in this instance as anything he does to allay fears on that side, push the other away. Electorally these weeks of chaos play perfectly for the opposition. It's why the tories are trying to goad them so badly.