UK General Election 2017 |OT2| No Government is better than a bad Government

Status
Not open for further replies.
Theonik said:
Doesn't matter. If it passes the government falls.
So Tories will vote it down. At great humiliation. Though one would argue it's a devolved matter.
Click to expand...
What happens if the vote passes?
Would the thing being voted on be implemented? Or does the whole thing get thrown in the trash anyway? Automatic 2nd GE or another stage before that?
 
Fernando Fernandez said:
Breaking- Speaker has selected Stella Creasy's Queen's Speech amendment, on Northern Irish women accessing NHS abortions, for vote today

Interesting!
Click to expand...

Nice one Bercow.

I thought these all basically had to fail so that the speech could go through, and in so doing make anyone that votes against them look like cunts?
 
Dirtyshubb said:
I was listening to LBC on my way to work and they had some expert on talking about the potential purchase and he was right up Murdochs arse.

Making it clear how he thought Fox had done wonderful things saving The Sun and Telegraph (I think it was that one) but not once did he mention the idea of a monopoly or any actual pertinent facts. Funny that.
Click to expand...
Telegraph is the Barclay brothers, I think. Murdoch has The Times, I believe.

But yes, Murdoch has stooges everywhere. Not surprised one of his mouthpieces made it onto the radio.
 
Spaghetti said:
Telegraph is the Barclay brothers, I think. Murdoch has The Times, I believe.

But yes, Murdoch has stooges everywhere. Not surprised one of his mouthpieces made it onto the radio.
Click to expand...
Ah yeah it was The Times, i always get those two confused.

It was really clear he had no intention of detailing any of the reasons for the negativity for the potential sale.
 
DBT85 said:
Nice one Bercow.

I thought these all basically had to fail so that the speech could go through, and in so doing make anyone that votes against them look like cunts?
Click to expand...

The Government can decide to accept an amendment. Cameron did for the TTIP amendement in 2015.
 
*Splinter said:
What happens if the vote passes?
Would the thing being voted on be implemented? Or does the whole thing get thrown in the trash anyway? Automatic 2nd GE or another stage before that?
Click to expand...
There is a couple of points of note here. The queen's speech needs to pass unamended or it's considered a vote of no confidence. However, what constitutes a vote of no confidence is not defined in law and is governed by convention. There is also no consensus on this typically. The FTPA makes this harder still.

Also. The queen's speech is just the government announcing their schedule for the year, what they wish to pass. There is some constitutional conventions there mostly pertaining to the lords, but the commons would still need to pass a bill to implement each of those things.
 
Theonik said:
There is a couple of points of note here. The queen's speech needs to pass unamended or it's considered a vote of no confidence. However, what constitutes a vote of no confidence is not defined in law and is governed by convention. There is also no consensus on this typically. The FTPA makes this harder still.

Also. The queen's speech is just the government announcing their schedule for the year, what they wish to pass. There is some constitutional conventions there mostly pertaining to the lords, but the commons would still need to pass a bill to implement each of those things.
Click to expand...
Ok, so assuming this would be treated as a vote of no confidence (since any Tory MP forced to defend their vote could easily argue that), if an amendment passes and we were sent back to a second GE there would be no opportunity to a pass a bill to implement whatever the amendment was based on? And any GE would be followed by a new queens speech anyway?
 
*Splinter said:
What happens if the vote passes?
Would the thing being voted on be implemented? Or does the whole thing get thrown in the trash anyway? Automatic 2nd GE or another stage before that?
Click to expand...

Nobody knows because the FPTA is terribly unclear. Traditionally an amendment would have been considered a vote of no confidence. The Conservatives might try blagging it, though.

It would add yet more delicious irony after all the digs at Corbyn for sidestepping the Labour Party's equally unclear constitution. I think there must be a deity, since the universe is being cosmically driven to reversing every single Conservative line of attack back on them.
 
What's the point in buying off a political party if they don't let you have a media monopoly?


Haha, Fox news shitty right wing agenda brought up. Eat shit Fox.
 
Spaghetti said:
Source
Click to expand...

The same 40 as this?

DDe4LJjXUAAV3dw.jpg
Click to expand...
 
Things are not looking up for the DUP

BBC said:
The Court of Appeal in Belfast has ruled it is not up the courts to decide on abortion law in Northern Ireland, but up to the Stormont assembly.
In 2015, the High Court ruled the NI law breached the European Convention on Human Rights by not allowing abortion in cases of fatal foetal abnormality or sexual crime.
The ruling was appealed by the justice department and the NI attorney general.
Northern Ireland's abortion law is much stricter than the rest of the UK.
On Thursday, three appeal judges ruled in favour of the Northern Ireland Attorney General and the Department of Justice that Northern Ireland's abortion law is not compatible with the European convention of human rights.
However, in an unusual move the court said the case should now go to the Supreme Court.
It ruled it was not up to the courts to decide on abortion law but local government.
It said the complex moral and religious questions behind the issue should be determined by a legislature.
Click to expand...

Being publicly scolded that you don't meet human right requirements puts you even more to the right of US Republicans.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-40429164
 
Thanks. Well, let's wait and see. I guess since they didn't win a majority and the papers stuck the knives in, I could see see May throwing a spanner in the works.
 
It'll take 6+ months for a new review on the takeover, hopefully the current Government has collapsed by then and Rupe's legacy will be in Jezzas hands.
 
Apparently there is a parliamentary Whatsapp group for women's rights stuff which is normally the sign of a group of MPs being well organised in 2017, I wouldn't be shocked in the government is defeated on Creasy's amendment.
 
tuxfool said:
The same 40 as this?
Click to expand...
Like I said. They are screwed. They can oppose all they like but they know what awaits them if the amendment passes so will swallow it to avoid a no confidence. Which makes this game of 'throw increasingly nasty looking unpopular things for them to support' so humiliating for them.

*Splinter said:
Ok, so assuming this would be treated as a vote of no confidence (since any Tory MP forced to defend their vote could easily argue that), if an amendment passes and we were sent back to a second GE there would be no opportunity to a pass a bill to implement whatever the amendment was based on? And any GE would be followed by a new queens speech anyway?
Click to expand...
On a vote of no confidence, the PM has to ask the Queen to dissolve parliament and a new election will then be proclaimed. When parliament is dissolved there will be no time to legislate on these and the new government will try and pass its own Queen's speech then that isn't bound by this government.

Finally like Crab said FPTA is unclear on what is a vote of no confidence so this can get very bemusing.
 
Theonik said:
Like I said. They are screwed. They can oppose all they like but they know what awaits them if the amendment passes so will swallow it to avoid a no confidence. Which makes this game of 'throw increasingly nasty looking unpopular things for them to support' so humiliating for them.


On a vote of no confidence, the PM has to ask the Queen to dissolve parliament and a new election will then be proclaimed. When parliament is dissolved there will be no time to legislate on these and the new government will try and pass its own Queen's speech then that isn't bound by this government.

Finally like Crab said FPTA is unclear on what is a vote of no confidence so this can get very bemusing.
Click to expand...
Thanks for explaining it.

It all sounds quite farcical to be honest. I'm not convinced there's any downside for voting against even a very popular amendment, since the amendment itself isn't really being voted on.

It's not "payrise for public sector workers? Y/N". It's "payrise for public sector workers sure would be nice eh. Oh well, want to form a government? N/Y"

I can see things get more interesting if an amendment passes, but I'm looking at the assumption that voting against these amendments would be "embarrassing".
 
Tom Watson speaking his bit about Murdoch.

Tom Watson, the Labour deputy leader and shadow culture secretary, is responding.

He says he thinks Bradley will be written up as a “tough operator” on the basis of this. But Rupert Murdoch will then come up with fresh undertakings in lieu, that were in his back pocket. Bradley will then allow the bid, he predicts.

He says the Murdoch empire has never honoured the undertakings in lieu it has given.

He says this company has been found guilty of significant corporate failure.

Over the next 12 months Labour will be reviewing media ownership rules, he says.

He says the days when foreign owners can dominate the UK media are over.

The Tories have given Murdoch what he wanted, he says.

But he says Murdoch did not deliver his side of the bargain; he did not produce a landslide for the Tories. The Sun told Britain: “Don’t chuck Britain in the Cor-bin.” But the country binned the Tory manifesto instead, he says.

He says the Tories are “free” from the Murdochs. They should welcome that, and order part two of the Leveson inquiry.

He says James Murdoch is facing a new trial over phone hacking at the Sun in the autumn.

He ends by asking what Theresa May discussed with Rupert Murdoch when they met in New York last autumn.
Click to expand...
 
Theonik said:
Finally like Crab said FPTA is unclear on what is a vote of no confidence so this can get very bemusing.
Click to expand...

Not at all. FTPA is incredibly clear as to what is a vote of no confidence. It's a motion that says “That this House has no confidence in Her Majesty’s Government.”

Nothing else counts.
 
So this has to lead to another election right?

This amendment is going to pass tonight without doubt means there is no way the DUP are going to vote and pass the Queens Speech with it in.... also theres no way other parties will pass the Queens Speech either without the public sector amendment being in
 
TheChamp said:
So this has to lead to another election right?

This amendment is going to pass tonight without doubt means there is no way the DUP are going to vote and pass the Queens Speech with it in.... also theres no way other parties will pass the Queens Speech either without the public sector amendment being in
Click to expand...

Little premature to say that. For the billion the DUP might be willing to hold their nose. And then finding enough Tory rebels willing to throw their own party under the bus like that would be difficult.
 
I guess its forcing the DUP to put their money where their mouth is, in a "you will actually support this government yes?" way.

I guess we will find out if they want to block a corbyn gov so much that they will vote against their morals.
 
WhateverItTakes said:
Little premature to say that. For the billion the DUP might be willing to hold their nose. And then finding enough Tory rebels willing to throw their own party under the bus like that would be difficult.
Click to expand...
Quick, we need to start the narrative that if this passes we will then try for free abortions in Ireland.

That should force them to hold out and cause another election ;)
 
Uzzy said:
Not at all. FTPA is incredibly clear as to what is a vote of no confidence. It's a motion that says "That this House has no confidence in Her Majesty's Government."

Nothing else counts.
Click to expand...
I was reading the parliamentary report and did a skimming of the bill itself but it does not appear to say that. Any bill that can be considered a vote of no confidence should still count as such. One needs to wonder how the bill will work in practice though. Moreover a motion of no confidence would still give the government 14 days to try and pass a motion of confidence before a new GE needs to be called which I forgot to mention so this farce can go even further with the amendment passing and DUP/Tories reconfirming the same government.
 
Uzzy said:
Not at all. FTPA is incredibly clear as to what is a vote of no confidence. It's a motion that says “That this House has no confidence in Her Majesty’s Government.”

Nothing else counts.
Click to expand...

Not true, per se. This was a good discussion of it:

https://stephentweedale.wordpress.c...fidence-convention-in-fixed-term-parliaments/

It's very unclear precisely what happens if an amendment is successful at this stage; there's no precedent and the FTPA simply doesn't have the necessary clarity.
 
sammex said:
It won't be defeated, and they'll all cheer as well like they did yesterday when they defeated the pay cap amendment.
Click to expand...
I still can't get over that, after all the terrorist attacks, that fire etc - they fucking cheered at keeping public sector workers with shitty wages.

And straight after a billion pound bribe to, I want all public sector workers to strike - I don't care if the strike does nothing, it needs to happen.
 
hodgy100 said:
I guess its forcing the DUP to put their money where their mouth is, in a "you will actually support this government yes?" way.

I guess we will find out if they want to block a corbyn gov so much that they will vote against their morals.
Click to expand...

Either way this is a genious move by Labour
 
Theonik said:
There is also this scenario, amendment passes, Queen's Speech fails, Government passes motion of confidence within 14 days. Trucks along.
Click to expand...

I mean, this could happen, but they'd have to reintroduce a new Queen's Speech, since the old one would have failed, and so this really just resets the problem. I suppose they could just put the abortion section into the new version of the Queen's Speech, but would the DUP then still support it?

There's no earthly way of knowing which direction we are going!

EDIT: Realistically, though, the Conservatives are just going to vote down abortion rights for Northern Irish women and our sordid government will stagger on.
 
Why must the Queen's speech pass unamended? Tradition/precedent or is there a good reason for it?

Crab said:
I mean, this could happen, but they'd have to reintroduce a new Queen's Speech, since the old one would have failed, and so this really just resets the problem. I suppose they could just put the abortion section into the new version of the Queen's Speech, but would the DUP then still support it?
Click to expand...
This sounds a lot more sensible than what is apparently the norm.
 
Crab said:
EDIT: Realistically, though, the Conservatives are just going to vote down abortion rights for Northern Irish women and our sordid government will stagger on.
Click to expand...

This is the most likely scenario.

However, I quite like the idea that it goes the way you explained a post prior...

Crab said:
It's very unclear precisely what happens if an amendment is successful at this stage; there's no precedent and the FTPA simply doesn't have the necessary clarity.
Click to expand...

happens and we go full crisis on what happens, because that'd be wonderful. I mean 'what's the worst possible outcome' seems to still be in play, let's really go down this road.
 
*Splinter said:
Why must the Queen's speech pass unamended? Tradition/precedent or is there a good reason for it?
Click to expand...

The Queen's Speech sets out everything the executive intends to introduce. If amended, the executive would have to introduce something it doesn't support, which makes it unfit to be the executive. It evolved from tradition (see also: our entire constitution) but it holds such an important role that it has been formally adopted by many other constitutions in the form of the investiture vote.
 
*Splinter said:
Why must the Queen's speech pass unamended? Tradition/precedent or is there a good reason for it?


This sounds a lot more sensible than what is apparently the norm.
Click to expand...
Same with bills that are commonly associated with no-confidence motions they are needed for the government to function. A defeat on the budget or an amendment is the house telling the government that they disagree with their governing because they are linked to their function. A government that can't spend cannot operate. But on the flipside, a lot of this is convention. To see a true level of constitutional fuckery this can be twisted to one simply needs to look at the US and their borrowing cap. There congress sets the level of spending/funds and level of borrowing allowed by the president that he then spends/borrows. In the UK if Parliament asks the president to spend more than they raise that's implicitly borrowing. In the US congress can simply shut down government if they don't fix that!

Crab said:
I mean, this could happen, but they'd have to reintroduce a new Queen's Speech, since the old one would have failed, and so this really just resets the problem. I suppose they could just put the abortion section into the new version of the Queen's Speech, but would the DUP then still support it?

There's no earthly way of knowing which direction we are going!

EDIT: Realistically, though, the Conservatives are just going to vote down abortion rights for Northern Irish women and our sordid government will stagger on.
Click to expand...
I don't think they would actually in the first place this would be convention I don't think the FPTA requires a new Queen's speech when a motion of confidence is passed. May is not planning to have another Queen's Speech in the house until Brexit is done iirc to avoid any confidence vote in the interim.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

[UK] Apple pulls data protection tool after UK government security row
2
76
4K
Paasei replied
Grok is so much better than ChatGPT now
45
399
sono replied
Was there a better stage diver than Eddie Vedder?
25
1K
UltimaKilo replied
Are the people ready to be governed by AI
Science 
31
208
ReasonBeing replied
Is there a better flavor combo than Grilled cheese and tomato soup?
2
93
3K
CokeDiet replied
Top Bottom