Labour leadership

[taffboy gwyrdd]

Fucking generals coup, get a grip.

You know full well it was aired.

Anyway, do let me know if you find something about intel agencies not bothering any more to target prominent politicians who clearly going against "interests" of states/NATO etc. I'd be fascinated to read it.

 

[butchersapron]

"A decision of the Shadow Cabinet" that would be um, very much like something the shadow cabinet decides

A decision coming from the shadow cabinet just means that the SC decides what the whip is to be. Not that the SC gets to decide for itself. Do you think the police just enforce lawss they make up?

 

[gosub]

Do you think they decide by majority vote in there or something? If Corbyn had chosen to enforce the whip, that would have been the decision of cabinet (albeit a cabinet rapidly vacated by a number of members).

Maybe Mr Corbyn, just fought a valiant action over the weekend to prevent the shadow cabinet bouncing him into whipping the party into voting for military action

 

[butchersapron]

You know full well it was aired.

Anyway, do let me know if you find something about intel agencies not bothering any more to target prominent politicians who clearly going against "interests" of states/NATO etc. I'd be fascinated to read it.

Aired my arse. I bet the plans are fully advanced.

 

[killer b]

Maybe Mr Corbyn, just fought a valiant action over the weekend to prevent the shadow cabinet bouncing him into whipping the party into voting for military action

What?

 

[butchersapron]

Maybe Mr Corbyn, just fought a valiant action over the weekend to prevent the shadow cabinet bouncing him into whipping the party into voting for military action

Do you really think the SC works on collegaite and majority voting rules rather than executive decision? Oh you poor little thing.

 

[killer b]

Laughable. Too much time spent reading smug tories on twitter.

 

[gimesumtruf]

Debate in the house of commons right now on UK role in the Middle East and the Labour benches are almost empty, I despair with the leadership effort.

 

[butchersapron]

Debate in the house of commons right now on UK role in the Middle East and the Labour benches are almost empty, I despair with the leadership effort.

No one cares what you think or is even watching - but why would a full set of benches make the slightest difference?

 

[gosub]

Debate in the house of commons right now on UK role in the Middle East and the Labour benches are almost empty, I despair with the leadership effort.

Parliamentlive.tv - Commons

Looks like a phantom debate to me

 

[butchersapron]

Parliamentlive.tv - Commons

Looks like a phantom debate to me

They all are.

 

[gimesumtruf]

No one cares what you think or is even watching - but why would a full set of benches make the slightest difference?

Straw men and insults don't cut it. The house of commons may be unimportant to you because you know everything and lecture what we should read and believe.

 

[butchersapron]

Straw men and insults don't cut it. The house of commons may be unimportant to you because you know everything and lecture what we should read and believe.

Votes aren't won or lost on the quality of debate, nor the attendance at the arena. Put away childish things.

 

[TheHoodedClaw]

Debate in the house of commons right now on UK role in the Middle East and the Labour benches are almost empty, I despair with the leadership effort.

The PLP meeting to discuss the Shadow Cabinet's decision is taking place right now.

 

[TheHoodedClaw]

dp

 

[Azrael]

Votes aren't won or lost on the quality of debate, nor the attendance at the arena. Put away childish things.

No hard-and-fast rule. Depends on the subject, how much or whether it's whipped, the personalities involved, and the quality of the arguments. Unless you're arguing that every single Commons debate was predetermined -- including the Norway debate -- you don't even disagree.

 

[butchersapron]

No hard-and-fast rule. Depends on the subject, how much or whether it's whipped, the personalities involved, and the quality of the arguments. Unless you're arguing that every single Commons debate was predetermined -- including the Norway debate -- you don't even disagree.

No, it's over. No votes are won on the quality of debate today. Live in the modern world.

 

[Azrael]

And your evidence for this claim is ...?

 

[butchersapron]

And your evidence for this claim is ...?

It not happening.

 

[butchersapron]

A set of tight procedure being put in place to stop it happening. A change of organisation of MPs into tightly whipped groups from individuals with their own interests.

 

[butchersapron]

It not being the age of parliamentary decency you seem to always imagine.

 

[Azrael]

Who said anything about "parliamentary decency"? I'll allow unintentional, but regardless, honking great straw man. This is about your claim that debate is has no bearing on the outcome of Commons' votes.

You surely don't think the ultra-cynical Commons of the appeasement years was marked by decency, so once again, we don't even disagree that debate can have a decisive effect on a heavily flawed chamber.

 

[toblerone3]

One senior Labour source, who is not in Corbyn’s camp, said Labour MPs seemed to have become more wary of backing military action over the weekend for fear of “marking their card”.

 

[butchersapron]

Who said anything about "parliamentary decency"? I'll allow unintentional, but regardless, honking great straw man. This is about your claim that debate is has no bearing on the outcome of Commons' votes.

You surely don't think the ultra-cynical Commons of the appeasement years was marked by decency, so once again, we don't even disagree that debate can have a decisive effect on a heavily flawed chamber.

No votes are won on the quality of debate today. You can think that you agree with that or not. That was what i said though.

 

[Pickman's model]

anyway the quality of debate in the commons is pisspoor

 

[Azrael]

No votes are won on the quality of debate today. You can think that you agree with that or not. That was what i said though.

Very well, taking "today" to mean, oh, say the last five years, what's your evidence for the claim? "It not happening" is circular as it gets.

I'll assume you've not run extensive research into MPs' reason for voting in every single division: or, even if we presuppose that every whipped vote is immune to debate, every free vote.

So, what's backing up you extreme confidence in your opinion?

 

[butchersapron]

Very well, taking "today" to mean, oh, say the last five years, what's your evidence for the claim? "It not happening" is circular as it gets.

I'll assume you've not run extensive research into MPs' reason for voting in every single division: or, even if we presuppose that every whipped vote is immune to debate, every free vote.

So, what's backing up you extreme confidence in your opinion?

It not happening.

 

[butchersapron]

Are you really this naive?

I'm not going to bother asking you what's backing up your own extreme confidence given that you can't get straight if you're agreeing with me or not.

 

[Azrael]

anyway the quality of debate in the commons is pisspoor

Often is, yes, but not always. Some debates, especially into uncontroversial, specialist bills, in which the few MPs attending are interested and well-informed, it can be high.

 

[Pickman's model]

Very well, taking "today" to mean, oh, say the last five years, what's your evidence for the claim? "It not happening" is circular as it gets.

I'll assume you've not run extensive research into MPs' reason for voting in every single division: or, even if we presuppose that every whipped vote is immune to debate, every free vote.

So, what's backing up you extreme confidence in your opinion?

when was the last time you heard of a parliamentary speech swaying a debate?