Do you want to discuss boring politics? (167 Viewers)

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
26% of the electorate voted for the Tories in 2019 but you were happy for them to do 'pretty much what they want to'

These are the sourest of sour grapes I'm afraid.

And you're getting a taste (maybe more than a taste by the sounds of it!) of how the rest of us have felt for the last 14 years.
26% is significantly more than 20%.

Nowhere have I said I was happy for them to do pretty much what they wanted to. It could be argued that they weren't actually able to do what they wanted to.
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
I agree with her there’s something not good about denigrating our democratic process
Same with trump and his fans in 2020
Great, you agree that there should have been no attempts to interfere with Brexit and Starmer should absolutely respect the result of the referendum - to the letter and in spirit.

The pointless petition is up to 2,116,000 now.
 

Como

Well-Known Member
What has happened and why is something for the Historians, far far too late now to change it.

The future looks nasty, quite how it will go, well who knows. I certainly can see the demise of both the current major parties.
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
Great, you agree that there should have been no attempts to interfere with Brexit and Starmer should absolutely respect the result of the referendum - to the letter and in spirit.
What does 'in spirit' mean because it sounds a bit like a catchall for anything you don't agree with
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
The revoke Brexit petition got like 7m signatures so presumably you lads think we should still be in the EU if petitions hold such weight.
6,103,056 signatories over the 6 months is the one I've just looked up.

The consequent debate was lively! Including some debate about whether an MP had accused another one of being dishonest.
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
What does 'in spirit' mean because it sounds a bit like a catchall for anything you don't agree with
It means, for example, not going back and renegotiating, not paying the EU any fees, not being subservient to the ECHR. The "spirit" was/ is, in my view, about being able to act as a sovereign nation.

And obviously anything I don't agree with:)
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
I don't like this Labour government so far as much as the next man, but I know you like statistics about the popular mandate.

The petition has been signed by 1.66% of voters, it's an irrelevance
It's about 5% now. With best part of 6 months to go. It would be entirely possible to end up with >20% by the time the petition closes.

Im sure it is ultimately an irrelevance. The debate will be interesting - will Keir even be here and will he be dismissive in that really irritating way that he has. As he has said in the past, he doesn't need to take lectures from the likes of us!!
 

PVA

Well-Known Member
26% is significantly more than 20%.

Nowhere have I said I was happy for them to do pretty much what they wanted to. It could be argued that they weren't actually able to do what they wanted to.

Since when have we measured a vote against electorate rather than turnout anyway?

Why should we include the people who couldn't be bothered to vote in the democratic result? They had their chance to have a say, they chose not to.

And if you're going to use that criteria then you have to accept there was no mandate for Brexit (or for anything or anyone ever!).
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
The debate will be interesting - will Keir even be here and will he be dismissive in that really irritating way that he has.
I think you need to downgrade your expectations and look at what's happened to petitions that have reached the threshold in the past. Firstly there's no guarantee of a debate, the threshold merely means the petitions committee will consider it for a debate. They could turn round and say this is a waste of parliament's time as we know what the laws on calling a general election are.

If they do schedule a debate it is unlikely to be in the main chamber. It will be a handful of people in a meeting room, similar to when we used to be told Coventry City were going to be debated in parliament and it would be one of our local MPs saying a few words with about 3 people in attendance.

You can go on the petitions committee site and see how it works and there's links to videos of previous debates, here's one as an example:
 
  • Like
Reactions: PVA

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
I can’t stand Starmer, but if we didn’t get a snap election after Trussonomics and the year of the 3 PMs, we sure aren’t getting one for Starmer being a bit shit.
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
Wonder if this dickhead was just no his way back from Westminster at the time:

I doubt it, I think there were only a very few tractors as the police had advised them not to take them.

Just someone being an arsehole, should get done for driving without due care and attention. Hopefully businesses affected can claim off the tractor driver’s insurance.
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
I think you need to downgrade your expectations and look at what's happened to petitions that have reached the threshold in the past. Firstly there's no guarantee of a debate, the threshold merely means the petitions committee will consider it for a debate. They could turn round and say this is a waste of parliament's time as we know what the laws on calling a general election are.

If they do schedule a debate it is unlikely to be in the main chamber. It will be a handful of people in a meeting room, similar to when we used to be told Coventry City were going to be debated in parliament and it would be one of our local MPs saying a few words with about 3 people in attendance.

You can go on the petitions committee site and see how it works and there's links to videos of previous debates, here's one as an example:
That was very interesting actually.

My NHS employers breached my contract of employment in 2006 at the behest of Gordon Brown. My union were useless.
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
I think you need to downgrade your expectations and look at what's happened to petitions that have reached the threshold in the past. Firstly there's no guarantee of a debate, the threshold merely means the petitions committee will consider it for a debate. They could turn round and say this is a waste of parliament's time as we know what the laws on calling a general election are.

If they do schedule a debate it is unlikely to be in the main chamber. It will be a handful of people in a meeting room, similar to when we used to be told Coventry City were going to be debated in parliament and it would be one of our local MPs saying a few words with about 3 people in attendance.

You can go on the petitions committee site and see how it works and there's links to videos of previous debates, here's one as an example:
It wasn’t always thus though, was it? Fixed Term Parliaments Act only came in in 2011 and presumably could be repealed.

Unlikely admittedly. There is a requirement for a government response to this petition. I would imagine it will be along the lines of, fuck off plebs.

If it is, I look forward to Starmer, his chums and their clothes and spectacles being fucked off in 2029 🥳
 

Mucca Mad Boys

Well-Known Member
It wasn’t always thus though, was it? Fixed Term Parliaments Act only came in in 2011 and presumably could be repealed.

Unlikely admittedly. There is a requirement for a government response to this petition. I would imagine it will be along the lines of, fuck off plebs.

If it is, I look forward to Starmer, his chums and their clothes and spectacles being fucked off in 2029 🥳
It was repealed on 2022 which is why we had a guessing game of when Sunak would call an election.

Apart from the Government being unpopular, there isn’t really a case for an election. I could definitely see Labour calling an early election for a renewed mandate after 2-3 years because we’ve never seen a party get off to such a poor start with this large a majority.

It was a pointless act to begin with because in 2017 and 2019 Parliament voted to have an election
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
Not really though as it’s likely to mean Reforms vote increasing. People’s genuine concerns about uncontrolled immigration have been ignored for years (looking at various governments actions, not words). Countries across Europe have shifted to the right because of it. If Labour aren’t seen to get a grip of it, I’d unfortunately expect similar to happen here.
The ultimate irony being that reform was a driving force in leaving the Dublin agreement which by no coincidence coincides with the massive hike in the numbers of crossings. It’s almost as if the smuggling gangs understood what we were voting for.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
I am sure Labour will do the 5 years and then as with the Callaghan administration be cast into the wilderness as they are acting like a poor man’s Tory tribute act

Starmer and Reeves already seem confused that the electorate is openly laughing and mocking them. Starmer is high on vanity and low on resilience

It’s going badly and will get worse
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
26% is significantly more than 20%.

Nowhere have I said I was happy for them to do pretty much what they wanted to. It could be argued that they weren't actually able to do what they wanted to.

National vote means nothing. You play the game to the rules at the time. Everyone’s election strategy would be wildly different in a popular vote contest over a constituency system. Under the system we have Labour won a stinking majority. You can be sad about that, heavens knows the left were for 14 odd years, but recognise you being sad isn’t a valid reason to overturn a democratic election.

Come on, you know this tune, you were playing it 2016-2024
 

Mucca Mad Boys

Well-Known Member
I am sure Labour will do the 5 years and then as with the Callaghan administration be cast into the wilderness as they are acting like a poor man’s Tory tribute act

Starmer and Reeves already seem confused that the electorate is openly laughing and mocking them. Starmer is high on vanity and low on resilience

It’s going badly and will get worse
There isn’t really anything redeemable about this government. Only the public sector workers will be happy so far. Even so, those pay rises won’t go far if inflation creeps back up and farmer’s strikes cause increases in food prices and/or shortages.

They were elected without any real guiding vision or detailed policies. At least Tony Blair had guiding principles for his Government when elected in 1997, for better or worst.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
There isn’t really anything redeemable about this government. Only the public sector workers will be happy so far. Even so, those pay rises won’t go far if inflation creeps back up and farmer’s strikes cause increases in food prices and/or shortages.

They were elected without any real guiding vision or detailed policies. At least Tony Blair had guiding principles for his Government when elected in 1997, for better or worst.

The Tory complaints today are virtually identical to the ones in 1997.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top