UK Politics

[steviewevie]

Labour's stance isn't really that different to what it has been saying for a while, it just replaces sustainable ceasefire with immediate humanitarian ceasefire...and using the word immediate made all the difference. It also isn't that different to what Govt and SNP are saying...it is just SNP are saying stop now and we'll worry about hostages and stuff later. Whole thing is crazy, getting all tied up with this wording, as if what we say makes a jot of difference.

[steviewevie]

8 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

I’m not so sure, he had a right to raise an amendment especially if he feels the SNP motion isn’t right. 

maybe he has that right, I have no idea...but he needs to explain clearly why he did it. If he wanted to take heat out of it because it's a hugely inflammatory issue and MPs are getting all sorts of threats these days then I can understand that...but he needs to say. I don't think anyone has come out of this well.

[LJS]

Of course the whole thing is not helped by Westminster's ridiculous and outdated rules.

[steviewevie]

Anyway, Labour's amendment was approved so I look forward to the imminent ceasefire...and soon after Scottish independence.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

maybe he has that right, I have no idea...but he needs to explain clearly why he did it. If he wanted to take heat out of it because it's a hugely inflammatory issue and MPs are getting all sorts of threats these days then I can understand that...but he needs to say. I don't think anyone has come out of this well.

The amended SNP motion has passed so a ceasefire motion has been successful, that’s a good thing isn’t it?

I don’t think Starmer has to do anything, their amendment explains things and I think the Labour Party have explained it before. 

[Paul ™]

What a sh*t state of affairs UK politics and the way the HoC behaves is embarrassing.

Even Goans and Indians here are baffled by it all and that says alot when the have Modi here!

[Ryan1984]

Can someone explain what’s gone on this evening to me like I’m 5 years old?

[steviewevie]

7 minutes ago, Ryan1984 said:

Can someone explain what’s gone on this evening to me like I’m 5 years old?

The yellow people said Stop Fighting! The red people then said Yes Stop Fighting and Make Friends!. The blue people said whatever. It was yellow people's day, but the boss man said everyone can have a go and the yellow people said NO! and then the blue people said NO! and the red people won. But they didn't Stop Fighting. 

Edited February 21, 2024 by steviewevie

[steviewevie]

 

[steviewevie]

Flynn is very f**ked off...says he's been stitched up by Starmer and Hoyle.

[steviewevie]

My groovy MP.

[stuie]

1 hour ago, clarkete said:

I saw something about it several years ago and from what they covered it seemed to have some credibility, hence I'm equally as wary of those like yourself who clearly have their own agenda. 

 

1 hour ago, Neil said:

thats you falling for assange's propaganda

Sorry to be a woke lefty but I still strongly believe in the presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a court of law. 

[steviewevie]

this is why I think we need to put the computers in charge.

[LJS]

32 minutes ago, Neil said:

never before have the grown up parties let the snp play with the big boys

Can't put my finger on it, but I'm sure it's something to do with folk voting for them. 

 

And "the grown up parties?" You watched any of this? I've had more grown up parties for my kids' birthdays.

[steviewevie]

 

[fraybentos1]

As much as I hate the SNP, I think to claim everyone else in the room are children and Labour are the adults is disingenuous. All sides here were playing politics. 

Starmer is a lucky, lucky man.

Hoyle looks very dodgy 

[fraybentos1]

9 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

 

Unless Hoyle allowed the Labour amendment to come to a vote, they said, he would be forcing them to remain loyal to their party or put their own safety at risk. Several told him of the threats they had faced since abstaining on the SNP motion last time.

 

or just vote for the SNP amendment?....

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, fraybentos1 said:

Unless Hoyle allowed the Labour amendment to come to a vote, they said, he would be forcing them to remain loyal to their party or put their own safety at risk. Several told him of the threats they had faced since abstaining on the SNP motion last time.

 

or just vote for the SNP amendment?....

Because of threats?

[steviewevie]

Hoyle will probably need extra security now 

[fraybentos1]

5 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Because of threats?

call me a cynic but I think the 'threats' thing seems a bit of a cop out for Hoyle to do what he really shouldn't do and go against parliamentary convention.

Also even if they got threats for not voting for the SNP amendment last time then why would it be a threat for them to do the opposite this time? Maybe I am misunderstanding things.

[SalviaPlath]

A lot of MPs think any interaction with the public is a threat. 

The political class increasingly believes itself entirely unaccountable. Glad that over this issue we are seeing direct action to remind them who they work for. 

[Neil]

46 minutes ago, LJS said:

Can't put my finger on it, but I'm sure it's something to do with folk voting for them. 

 

And "the grown up parties?" You watched any of this? I've had more grown up parties for my kids' birthdays.

Very childish of the snp to walk out on their own motion.

Folk voted for them on a false basis according to a well known commentaryon Scottish politics ( that you've gone off ever since it started publishing inconvenienttruths

Edited February 21, 2024 by Neil

[Neil]

44 minutes ago, stuie said:

 

Sorry to be a woke lefty but I still strongly believe in the presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a court of law. 

Me too but I also accept that as a decision based on evidence.and that you don't need to be a genius to consider the evidence yourself in this case.

[steviewevie]

The threat thing is real. Two MPs have been killed recently. Sadiq Khan needs round the clock protection for him a d his family. They often receive death threats. Angela Rayner was talking recently about the threats she receives,she just doesn't go out anymore. It is getting worse and should not be played down or belittled. 

[kaosmark2]

52 minutes ago, stuie said:

 

Sorry to be a woke lefty but I still strongly believe in the presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a court of law. 

I think refusing to go to the court of law is suspicious.