Westminster Politics

Silva said:
Not that I know of. But it does coincide with the voter turnout rising, specifically in demographics less likely to have to forms of identification.
Click to expand...
I could imagine alot of young people have ID as many bars and clubs ID everyone who looks under 25. If passport is the only form of ID allowed then that sucks.
 
Silva said:
Honestly, requiring identification to vote is utter bullshit. It hits younger and poorer people disproportionately. I can't believe how little is being made of this.
Click to expand...

It's largely because people with id don't care and those who don't, well they don't have much of a voice. Its also a difficult one to argue against for Labour, ideally you want independent body to champion the fight against.

If they gave out free IDs to everyone then fair enough. Doubt that'll happen though
 
Smores said:
It's largely because people with id don't care and those who don't, well they don't have much of a voice. Its also a difficult one to argue against for Labour, ideally you want independent body to champion the fight against.

If they gave out free IDs to everyone then fair enough. Doubt that'll happen though
Click to expand...
It's the easiest thing in the world to argue against from Labour POV. The conservative party is pushing this for purely political gains, to suppress younger and poorer voters, to stop people from voting. It's an antidemocratic proposal and needs to feck off.
 
Silva said:
The conservative party intends to bring in ID requirements to vote, a classic voter suppression tactic. Can't have all these young people thinking it's okay to vote.
Click to expand...

Yup. Their demographic is dying so time to surpress the vote
 
Silva said:
It's the easiest thing in the world to argue against from Labour POV. The conservative party is pushing this for purely political gains, to suppress younger and poorer voters, to stop people from voting. It's an antidemocratic proposal and needs to feck off.
Click to expand...
Completely agree with this. This would have far greater impact than changes to constituencies. Think of all the struggles that contributed to voting equality in this country.
I hope it doesn't happen. If it does, there will need to be some kind of charitable fund set up to fight it.
 
It's been a really busy day today so i'm playing catch up. What is the general consensus of the QS and subsequent debate?
 
Silva said:
It's the easiest thing in the world to argue against from Labour POV. The conservative party is pushing this for purely political gains, to suppress younger and poorer voters, to stop people from voting. It's an antidemocratic proposal and needs to feck off.
Click to expand...

Disagree to the layman its a sensible proposal, heck in the GE thread you had people confused they didn't need ID.

Its only when you dig deeper that it becomes apparent what their interests are but on the reverse Labour would be seen to be arguing against out of partisan interest.
 
Laura Kuenssberg on BBC News five minutes ago. Plays May's address to parliament which sounds very open and cross-party (unlikely to extend to anyone who dissents in reality), then says something to the effect of "Labour are doing well and will now do everything they can to cause political trouble", before playing Corbyn's address.

She's not even trying to pretend that she's not biased anymore, is she?
 
ClutchHunter said:
Laura Kuenssberg on BBC News five minutes ago. Plays May's address to parliament which sounds very open and cross-party (unlikely to extend to anyone who dissents in reality), then says something to the effect of "Labour are doing well and will now do everything they can to cause political trouble", before playing Corbyn's address.

She's not even trying to pretend that she's not biased anymore, is she?
Click to expand...

To the Tories?
 
Labour's lead in the polls, IMO, is because the govt is so disastrous, Corbyn far more personable and ran a much better campaign and they're offering something rather than a slogan (Brexit means Brexit)

I fear that many hardcore Corbyn supporters will revert back to "...but the crowds!", forgetting that he was getting enormous crowds when he was in the low 20s in the polls.
 
There was speculation this week that the Conservatives could open talks with the Liberal Democrats’ 12 MPs about supporting the Government if the DUP talks fail.

But Sir Vince, the former Business secretary, told The Daily Telegraph: “Having mated with a preying mantis once we are not going to do it again.

“They will have to accept they are a minority government which will stay in power with the consent of the other parties in parliament and run a different style of government.”
Click to expand...
 




I will continue to say this until he leaves Government.

It's complete madness that Abbott is touted being either the only incompetent individual in Westminster or the most incompetent individual.
To not see the bias against her you must simply be ignorant, and in contrast, see the comparatively easy ride Boris gets.
 
QuackQuack said:
How come it is taking so long to form a deal with the DUP? Do the government have a time limit?
Click to expand...

Because the DUP are trying to get every penny they can, its not too their advantage to do a quick deal. Good omen for Brexit huh
 
QuackQuack said:
How come it is taking so long to form a deal with the DUP? Do the government have a time limit?
Click to expand...
The deadline is Edit - Thursday 29th.. to form a government.

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/could-todays-queens-speech-bring-down-theresa-may

if delays continue past next Thursday’s deadline, Mrs May will need to find 10 MPs outside her own party to support her legislative agenda. They’ll probably come from the DUP – even without an official agreement – but it’ll be tight
Click to expand...
Full Text said:
The Queen opened parliament this morning and set out the government’s plans for new legislation in her (nearly) annual address. Next Thursday, the Commons will vote on whether they agree to the government’s proposed agenda.

This is Theresa May’s first Queen’s Speech as Prime Minister. Reports say that senior Tories expect it to be her last.

But could the Speech itself bring Mrs May down? FactCheck investigates.

Does she have the votes?
Contrary to a premature announcement from the Number 10 press office last week, the Tory-DUP deal is still up in the air – ten days after negotiations began.

The earliest a formal deal could be reached is tomorrow. But if delays continue past next Thursday’s deadline, Mrs May will need to find 10 MPs outside her own party to support her legislative agenda. They’ll probably come from the DUP – even without an official agreement – but it’ll be tight.

What would happen if she loses the vote?
It used to be the case that the government would collapse if it couldn’t get its Queen’s Speech through parliament.

But, as Professor Colin Talbot explained in our FactCheck last week on Jeremy Corbyn’s chances of being Prime Minister, the Fixed Term Parliament Act makes things more complicated.

In Professor Talbot’s view, legally speaking, losing the Queen’s Speech vote is no longer a fatal blow to the government. The only thing that forcibly removes a government from office is if MPs vote through a “motion of no confidence”.

But politically, if Mrs May can’t get through her legislative programme today, it would extremely difficult for her to continue as Prime Minister.

Her personal credibility has fallen since she failed to secure a parliamentary majority in this month’s snap election. According to YouGov, the Prime Minister is now “almost as unpopular as pre-campaign Corbyn”. Failing to get the Queen’s Speech through could only damage her reputation further.

FactCheck verdict

If Theresa May fails to get the votes to pass the Queen’s Speech, it will be politically difficult for her to remain Prime Minister, although legally possible.

However, it’s unlikely that the DUP would turn their backs on her so close to a deal. So our best guess is that the Queen’s Speech will pass through the Commons and Mrs May will live to fight another day.
Click to expand...
As far as I know, if Theresa May did fail to form a government, the baton would pass to Corbyn. But he too would need a majority, so the chances of him getting a Queens Speech passed are virtually zero.

Most likely is that Theresa May's Queen Speech will pass with some ease. Her government will continue on as normal for a while. Until:

- Labour can arrange a coalition to ambush a tired Conservative part with a vote of no confidence. A simple majority is required. The Tories would then have 14 days to pass a motion of confidence (again, a simple majority is required) otherwise another General Election is called.

- The Tories start losing motions. This could especially happen on any controversial subjects, like Brexit. In which case they will be under pressure to call a General Election as it becomes clear that they no longer have power in commons.

But we could be in for a long wait.
 
Last edited:
rcoobc said:
The deadline is Edit - Thursday 29th.. to form a government.

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/could-todays-queens-speech-bring-down-theresa-may



As far as I know, if Theresa May did fail to form a government, the baton would pass to Corbyn. But he too would need a majority, so the chances of him getting a Queens Speech passed are virtually zero.

Most likely is that Theresa May's Queen Speech will pass with some ease. Her government will continue on as normal for a while. Until:

- Labour can arrange a coalition to ambush a tired Conservative part with a vote of no confidence. A simple majority is required. The Tories would then have 14 days to pass a motion of confidence (again, a simple majority is required) otherwise another General Election is called.

- The Tories start losing motions. This could especially happen on any controversial subjects, like Brexit. In which case they will be under pressure to call a General Election as it becomes clear that they no longer have power in commons.

But we could be in for a long wait.
Click to expand...
Ah that makes sense. I remember con-lib coalition was made and it didn't take this long. Something is going on.
 
QuackQuack said:
Ah that makes sense. I remember con-lib coalition was made and it didn't take this long. Something is going on.
Click to expand...
Yeah, this is taking a lot longer (I think). And we actually had the Prime Minister resigning and a coalition deal to be made to make that happen.

I think what this means is the government will very weak in legislative powers.

Unfortunately, they could conceivably survive for quite some time
 
Peston said the other day that the deal with the DUP is done. It's just the DUP wanting time to work out how they're going to present it.
 
vi1lain said:




I will continue to say this until he leaves Government.

It's complete madness that Abbott is touted being either the only incompetent individual in Westminster or the most incompetent individual.
To not see the bias against her you must simply be ignorant, and in contrast, see the comparatively easy ride Boris gets.
Click to expand...


I've always been wary of some of the defence of Abbott considering some of the stuff she's come out with, but I do think there's a point here insofar as the fact that Boris is every bit as atrocious as her. He's spent years trying to portray himself as a comical joker but when he's actually forced to discuss politics, which is kind of the thing he's employed in, he's got feck all.

Know someone who has some connections with media down south etc and according to him most people say Boris is basically a bit of a sociopath; lacking in empathy and entirely concerned with gaining power. All his little stumbles and speech mannerisms are rehearsed in advance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.