The banker loving, baby-eating Tory party thread (regenerated)

[sharkyvilla]

4 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

Ah the 'if we stop mentioning it it will go away' tactic

Sadly, it'll probably work

Again surely Brexit is complete by the end of January? Then it's time to move on to nergotiating the future relationship. 

[StefanAVFC]

Just now, sharkyvilla said:

Again surely Brexit is complete by the end of January? Then it's time to move on to nergotiating the future relationship. 

No, no, no and no.

You are literally parroting their lines for them. (see Snowy's post in Brexit thread)

[snowychap]

3 minutes ago, sharkyvilla said:

Again surely Brexit is complete by the end of January?

No.

[HanoiVillan]

2 hours ago, peterms said:

They haven't referenced it, but I assume it's based on reports a few days ago that he messaged his followers saying that he'd joined.  The BF chief of staff displayed a photo of his (the BF person)'s membership card, but I'm not aware of any similar proof regarding Y-L.

I assume anyone sensible in the tory party wouldn't want him, and if he has managed to join, you'd expect him to be removed simply because of his profile.

They allow online applications, but they are subject to later approval, so it's possible that he might have joined (ie applied) online and that this was the basis for his claim - I don't know.

Further update on this:

I agree with all the points in your comment, just want to be careful I don't accuse the Tories of something more stupid than they have actually done. No doubt lots of Y-L's brethren are joining up, many of them will get through, and clearly Johnson's government is going to lean in to 'English nationalism' more than any previous government in history. But I don't want to raise Y-L's profile any more than necessary by claiming he's 'joined' if he hasn't. The Tories have a moral responsibility to create a right-side edge of political acceptability, and not admitting Y-L is them doing the bare minimum.

[Ingram85]

Kids in poverty, kids on hospital floors, disabled people offing themselves, food **** banks. People struggling to heat their homes and to feed themselves and their families.

Then you see the absolute piss taking state of that Opening address of Parliament. Game playing, name calling, laughing, bullying etc... its absolutely embarrassing.

Wealthy and privileged toffs slapping each other on the back with their beetroot red faces twisted into maniacal sneers because their side won. It's not even a respected chamber anymore, it's a **** playground. 'Almost' like they are all only in it for themselves. The two MP's doing the opening speeches should be ashamed of themselves. The absolute mockery of it all.

[Awol]

50 minutes ago, Ingram85 said:

 

Then you see the absolute piss taking state of that Opening address of Parliament...

That's the point, it's supposed to be, by tradition.

[Mic09]

3 hours ago, snowychap said:

No.

It depends what you mean by "Brexit" doesn't it.

If you are looking for a specific date when the UK has left the EU, yeah, that's next month. That's what the kids will learn in school and that's what will be written in history books.

If you are looking at the end of negotiations, deals, trade agreements, then Brexit will never, by definition, be over with.

[snowychap]

16 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

It depends what you mean by "Brexit" doesn't it.

Brexit means Brexit.

[snowychap]

I see that Johnson may soon be trying to sell us yet another bridge.

Edit: And Zak Goldsmith peerage confirmed. That's the Old Etonian close friend of the PM's partner who lost his seat in last week's election being ennobled very shortly afterwards. Trebles all round.

Edited December 19, 2019 by snowychap

[Ingram85]

1 hour ago, Awol said:

That's the point, it's supposed to be, by tradition.

Contrast the shambolic and pathetic 'traditions' acted out by these privileged tosspots that are absolutely **** embarrassing to the types of lives of people mentioned in the first sentence that have to be governed by these Word Removeds.

[HanoiVillan]

26 minutes ago, snowychap said:

I see that Johnson may soon be trying to sell us yet another bridge.

Edit: And Zak Goldsmith peerage confirmed. That's the Old Etonian close friend of the PM's partner who lost his seat in last week's election being ennobled very shortly afterwards. Trebles all round.

I still live in hope that one day people will see the virtue of abolishing this institution, which is a symbol of the endemic corruption that lies at the heart of British society (and which, in this case, nobody has even attempted to conceal).

[snowychap]

5 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

I still live in hope that one day people will see the virtue of abolishing this institution, which is a symbol of the endemic corruption that lies at the heart of British society (and which, in this case, nobody has even attempted to conceal).

The problem for me is: how is it done and what do you replace it with (if anything)?

And at the heart of the above is: who gets to do the abolishing?

[HanoiVillan]

2 minutes ago, snowychap said:

The problem for me is: how is it done and what do you replace it with (if anything)?

And at the heart of the above is: who gets to do the abolishing?

The answer I would like to the above is that the institution is replaced by nothing, and that the scrutiny role is replaced by beefed-up Select Committees. I don't really mind which party does the abolishing, as long as that's where we end up.

Obviously there is a non-trivial risk that a replacement institution could be even worse (for example, if the party that proposes replacing it is also a party that appears determined to suppress voters and make it harder to voters or the courts to challenge them - who could I possibly mean?) Still, I live in hope that I'll see that ermine thrown out one day.

[snowychap]

9 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

The answer I would like to the above is that the institution is replaced by nothing, and that the scrutiny role is replaced by beefed-up Select Committees. I don't really mind which party does the abolishing, as long as that's where we end up.

Obviously there is a non-trivial risk that a replacement institution could be even worse (for example, if the party that proposes replacing it is also a party that appears determined to suppress voters and make it harder to voters or the courts to challenge them - who could I possibly mean?) Still, I live in hope that I'll see that ermine thrown out one day.

I think that misses the part that the second chamber plays consitutionally (it has acted as a check on the power of the executive - possibly more effectively than supine Houses of Commons).

The issue is how do you get from an arrangement that we have now to a better one, surely?

I've on more than a number of occasions put forward some defences of the House of Lords - not because I'm in favour of the particular institution or that I'm in favour of a second chamber (if it''s elected then you're in to mandate clashes) or that I'm not very much against entrenched privilege and demonstrable examples of that (see also Monarchy, obvs) but because unwinding it from the constitutional arrangement, if it were to be done properly, would require much more than simply transferring some of their scrutiny to Commons' Select Committees, it would require the kind of thoughtful planning that we just do not make.

The point about who does the abolishing is not which party but rather that if it's the governing party (Tories now but potentially Labour in future) that is making such a huge constitutional change then they're going to be doing it in their own favour or making a hash of it or, more probably, doing both. It's a reason the Constitutional body that this lot are to set up to 'review' things should cause disquiet.

 

[snowychap]

 

 

[peterms]

2 hours ago, snowychap said:

I see that Johnson may soon be trying to sell us yet another bridge.

Edit: And Zak Goldsmith peerage confirmed. That's the Old Etonian close friend of the PM's partner who lost his seat in last week's election being ennobled very shortly afterwards. Trebles all round.

And who ran a racist campaign against Khan, let's not forget.

[chrisp65]

I’m just glad we got back control and stopped ourselves being ruled by these unelected officials.

Enjoy the ride.

 

[Chindie]

But, you know, people just wanted Brexit kinda, done, you know? Like they were bored of it yeah? I mean being bored is so much worse than, you know, giving a bunch of words removed, kinda, you know an elected dictatorship kinda thing.

[peterms]

I've seen several reports over the last few days, individuals reporting their personal experience of racist abuse in public places.

Many more than I normally see.

Like after the referendum, there may be an emboldening of far right sentiments taking place.

[Seat68]

Honky