UK Politics

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, Crazyfool01 said:

suprised its taken this long , so if he jumps to reform does it mean another by election ?

not necessarily I don't think.

[kaosmark2]

2 minutes ago, Crazyfool01 said:

suprised its taken this long , so if he jumps to reform does it mean another by election ?

No, MPs can switch party without triggering a by-election.

Which is one of many things that need to be changed within the electoral reform banner.

[Crazyfool01]

Just now, kaosmark2 said:

No, MPs can switch party without triggering a by-election.

Which is one of many things that need to be changed within the electoral reform banner.

so would it not make sense to withdraw whip ? can that not force one ? surely theres ways .... I guess Bridgen is still sat there as an independent 

[Neil]

9 hours ago, fraybentos1 said:

what is TOS?

the other site, they were alternative Glastonbury forums, which didn't last as the idiots ruined them. i didn't tolerate idiots here, which is why here has lasted.

[Neil]

post office fighting like rats in a sack, trying to not let the blame settle on them. looks like the govt is trying to shift the blame from them. as owner, the govt has the blame.

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, Crazyfool01 said:

so would it not make sense to withdraw whip ? can that not force one ? surely theres ways .... I guess Bridgen is still sat there as an independent 

He’s has the whip withdrawn already, he’s technically an independent MP. 

[kaosmark2]

8 minutes ago, Crazyfool01 said:

so would it not make sense to withdraw whip ? can that not force one ? surely theres ways .... I guess Bridgen is still sat there as an independent 

Nope. It has to be triggered by either by the MP, or by a recall petition from constituents.

[Crazyfool01]

Just now, Ozanne said:

He’s has the whip withdrawn already, he’s technically an independent MP. 

surely they can force a by election somehow and remove him but I guess thats really not in the Tory party interests at the moment , having him in reform might be better 

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Crazyfool01 said:

surely they can force a by election somehow and remove him but I guess thats really not in the Tory party interests at the moment , having him in reform might be better 

Sadly not, constituents can only force a by-election via a recall petition in very specific circumstances such as a suspension of more than 10 days. Switching parties isn’t one of those reasons. It’s pretty silly. 

[Neil]

16 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

No, MPs can switch party without triggering a by-election.

Which is one of many things that need to be changed within the electoral reform banner.

i agree it needs sorting, but with the current system, the idea is  that the individual is elected to exercise their personal judgement* and it's not the party that's elected.

(*rather than unthinkingly following the party line like a sheep -it's just the SNP who does that),

[Crazyfool01]

1 minute ago, Neil said:

i agree it needs sorting, but with the current system, the idea is  that the individual is elected to exercise their personal judgement* and it's not the party that's elected.

(*rather than unthinkingly following the party line like a sheep -it's just the SNP who does that),

they all tow the party line anyway , my MP has done that in every vote . but get what you are saying 

[Neil]

1 minute ago, Crazyfool01 said:

they all tow the party line anyway , my MP has done that in every vote . but get what you are saying 

they don't all - corbyn was lauded for voting with the tories.

[Crazyfool01]

3 minutes ago, Neil said:

they don't all - corbyn was lauded for voting with the tories.

but I guess he wasn't consulting constituents on every vote so renders it kind of pointless 

[Neil]

Just now, Crazyfool01 said:

but I guess he wasn't consulting constituents on every vote so renders it kind of pointless 

after they'd voted him in a few times they knew they were getting the vain anti-semite.

[Neil]

Just now, Nobody Interesting said:

The Tories and LAbour when in power both removed the whip form MP's who voted against.

its not normal to remove the whip for voting against the party line, those with govt positions - ministers, etc, are expected to resign that ministerial position

[Crazyfool01]

1 minute ago, Nobody Interesting said:

|Every MP of every party follows the party line and if they might not they get whipped to do it. The Tories and LAbour when in power both removed the whip form MP's who voted against. Far from just one party north of the border that does it

just had a quick k look to see what the portion of free votes is ... couldn't see it 

[steviewevie]

I don't know...if you're in a party then really you're expected to vote with that party, right?

It's why it's a bit unfair to judge MPs by their voting record, they might not actually be voting for things they agree with all the time.

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

I don't know...if you're in a party then really you're expected to vote with that party, right?

It's why it's a bit unfair to judge MPs by their voting record, they might not actually be voting for things they agree with all the time.

Rory Stewart makes that point on his podcast, they vote because they are expected too and if it’s a 3 line whip then they potentially will lose the whip and the Party’s support (financial etc) if they go against the whip. 

[lost]

9 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

I don't know...if you're in a party then really you're expected to vote with that party, right?

Issue could be that parties change their position and some people get elected for national government campaigning on a very specific local issue.

 

[Crazyfool01]

11 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

I don't know...if you're in a party then really you're expected to vote with that party, right?

It's why it's a bit unfair to judge MPs by their voting record, they might not actually be voting for things they agree with all the time.

What’s the point in my MP an environment minister voting against policy’s that protect the environment its bonkers … she’s currently posting videos about the clean water areas having voted for sewage dumping . It beggars belief 

[steviewevie]

8 minutes ago, lost said:

Issue could be that parties change their position and some people get elected for national government campaigning on a very specific local issue.

 

well yeah...and that might happen a lot....and I guess up to the MP what to do...and if people are unhappy about it they can vote them out next time.

[steviewevie]

16 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

Why do we need 650 humans on high salaries to vote when if the PM says vote yes they vote yes?

Get rid of half of them and nobody would notice and maybe we can get rid of the nutters and dangerous ones like Anderson

because as well as voting for an individual human, you are voting for a party. And I expect more people are voting for party rather than their MP...a lot of people probably don't know or care who their MP is.

[steviewevie]

23 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Rory Stewart makes that point on his podcast, they vote because they are expected too and if it’s a 3 line whip then they potentially will lose the whip and the Party’s support (financial etc) if they go against the whip. 

finding out individual MPs voting record is a relatively new thing?

[Neil]

44 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

Probably a lot less than 0.5%. Free votes are very rare.

Governments use whips but 99% of the time they, and opposition, don't need them as the MP's do what they are told and vote the way they are told to.
It's why 'pairing' works so well - one yey and one nay 'pair' and do not turn up for the vote.

The whole thing is a staged farce from centuries ago and really needs modernising.

If someone stands for election on the party programme it's not out of order to expect them to support that party programme.

[steviewevie]