Westminster Politics

It's like if you're a BBC Radio DJ, a Catholic Priest or Conservative MP sexual misconduct is not just tolerated but encouraged
 
Came across this, no idea if this has been posted before so apologies if it has, when I watched it I realised that nothing much has changed, definitely wortn watching

 
Bert_ said:
Just watched this. It's a great interview. Rory is one of the few Tories I'd have any time for.
Click to expand...

Don't let his reasonableness in these interviews/podcasts fool you. A quick look at his voting record in the House of Commons tells you he's the same as the rest of them.
 
That'sHernandez said:
Don't let his reasonableness in these interviews/podcasts fool you. A quick look at his voting record in the House of Commons tells you he's the same as the rest of them.
Click to expand...
Devils Advocate - that’s kinda what he’s talking about in that interview
 
Pexbo said:
Devils Advocate - that’s kinda what he’s talking about in that interview
Click to expand...

I do appreciate that but the way he says it implies, unlike his colleagues, he read the relevant literature and then voted for it anyway, presumably because he either agreed with it or wanted to progress his career. On the face of it I find him a fairly affable and decent person but unless he does something meaningful to back that perception up I don't trust it.
 
That'sHernandez said:
I do appreciate that but the way he says it implies, unlike his colleagues, he read the relevant literature and then voted for it anyway, presumably because he either agreed with it or wanted to progress his career. On the face of it I find him a fairly affable and decent person but unless he does something meaningful to back that perception up I don't trust it.
Click to expand...


I think he's said before that he wouldn't do anything that would cost him the whip (as that would lose him the ability to represent his constituents).

But as you point out that's a bit hypocritical, because he misrepresents his constituents in order to be able to represent them. Also, shows a lack of responsibility, which is a tory politician prequisite these days anyway.
 
Vidyoyo said:
True story, I once chased a cat out of an apartment complex with this guy. He was an affable chap even his voting record speaks for itself.

I have a more libelous story but I can't say it in case Niall gets in trouble.
Click to expand...
Did you see his majority?
 
Just like John Major and his back to basics, conservative family values campaign and one by one they all turned out to be rotters. Including him.
 
Superden said:
Just like John Major and his back to basics, conservative family values campaign and one by one they all turned out to be rotters. Including him.
Click to expand...
you can never trust a man who tucks his shirt in his underpants, you just can't
 
Eplel said:
I think he's said before that he wouldn't do anything that would cost him the whip (as that would lose him the ability to represent his constituents).

But as you point out that's a bit hypocritical, because he misrepresents his constituents in order to be able to represent them. Also, shows a lack of responsibility, which is a tory politician prequisite these days anyway.
Click to expand...

Wasn't one of his points that he believes his constituents vote him in to pursue the party mandate, so if he votes against the party then he is misrepresenting his constituents. He also mentions that most politicians have to pick and choose carefully when they vote against their party. Still is a case that it makes him out as someone who wants to be a politician and therefore is afraid to lose the whip, however his point kind of makes sense in that the system along with the whip etc means its very hard not to follow the party line without losing the whip or being ousted therefore someone who rebelled a lot would probably be kicked out quickly anyway.
 
flameinthesun said:
Wasn't one of his points that he believes his constituents vote him in to pursue the party mandate, so if he votes against the party then he is misrepresenting his constituents. He also mentions that most politicians have to pick and choose carefully when they vote against their party. Still is a case that it makes him out as someone who wants to be a politician and therefore is afraid to lose the whip, however his point kind of makes sense in that the system along with the whip etc means its very hard not to follow the party line without losing the whip or being ousted therefore someone who rebelled a lot would probably be kicked out quickly anyway.
Click to expand...
I mean his argument is that the only thing his voting record tells you is hes conservative mp. Which is enough to consider him a malicious prick and not a very good defence in my view.
I think its weak bullshit in a wider sense, if you cant stand over the policies your implementing then you shouldn't be implementing them. He doesn't even attempt to defend some of the heinous shit hes introduced.
I think he does a plausible impression of a human being but is the same human dogshit that you see elsewhere in the party
 
This will likely get overlooked a bit because of the by-election results, but the HS2 debacle loses even more money as the government does a fire sale of the land, with a bit of spite and likely added cronyism thrown into the mix.

Sale of HS2 land to lose £100m of taxpayers’ money
The government is poised to sell off land within weeks to prevent future administrations from reversing the decision to cancel swathes of the scheme.
Click to expand...

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/hs2-land-sale-birmingham-taxpayer-cost-100m-rs82rxxx6
 
Tories moved right to cannibalise UKIP. Tories to move further to the right to cannibalise Reform.
 
jasT1981 said:
Click to expand...

Voted Labour and really glad they won. Thought the Lib Dems campaign was full of shite and a big reason I didn't vote for them. Have to say the Lib Dems were relentless in my local area, posting leaflets near enough everyday.

Their whole campaign was based on don't waste a vote for Labour as they can't win here. Thought it was weird in all honesty.
 
Jippy said:
This will likely get overlooked a bit because of the by-election results, but the HS2 debacle loses even more money as the government does a fire sale of the land, with a bit of spite and likely added cronyism thrown into the mix.

Sale of HS2 land to lose £100m of taxpayers’ money


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/hs2-land-sale-birmingham-taxpayer-cost-100m-rs82rxxx6
Click to expand...

This needs to be shouted from the rafters immediatley. It's so clearly a direct attempt to sabotage any future goverments ability to invest in infrastructure. Any Labour MP with any vision beyond the next election needs to be hammering this stuff home now.
 
Bert_ said:
This needs to be shouted from the rafters immediatley. It's so clearly a direct attempt to sabotage any future goverments ability to invest in infrastructure. Any Labour MP with any vision beyond the next election needs to be hammering this stuff home now.
Click to expand...
Exactly and you wouldn't put it past the government to flog the land of cheap to their mates and donors.
 
Jippy said:
Exactly and you wouldn't put it past the government to flog the land of cheap to their mates and donors.
Click to expand...

It's a given. They will sell/trade everything they can from this country over the next year. They are going full scorched earth.
 
A Labour majority would be an awful result at the next election. Better than what we've had for the last decade sure, but still really bad.
 
altodevil said:
A Labour majority would be an awful result at the next election. Better than what we've had for the last decade sure, but still really bad.
Click to expand...

As you say, it would still be a lot better than what we've had to this point. My major concern with Labour is the lack of real identity, I get the strategy in not giving the Conservative media to bash but it definitely feels like Starmer will play it safe in the election and not do anything 'radical'
 
altodevil said:
A Labour majority would be an awful result at the next election. Better than what we've had for the last decade sure, but still really bad.
Click to expand...
Better than this country has had throughout its history bar a few elections? I don’t like Starmer and I’d love more progressive policies, but it’s certainly not awful to decimate the tories.
 
LARulz said:
As you say, it would still be a lot better than what we've had to this point. My major concern with Labour is the lack of real identity, I get the strategy in not giving the Conservative media to bash but it definitely feels like Starmer will play it safe in the election and not do anything 'radical'
Click to expand...
Dan_F said:
Better than this country has had throughout its history bar a few elections? I don’t like Starmer and I’d love more progressive policies, but it’s certainly not awful to decimate the tories.
Click to expand...
As I said, it will be better, but it would take electoral reform and EU-relationship reform off the table for another 5+ years, and we've already seen him cosying up to the wrong people. Sure we'll probably get less dodgy contracts to mates, but on the whole I'm not seeing them changing the system under Starmer. Which is what is needed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.