|
This is weird. 185 - Known as the "weird" number.
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 14:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 00:56 |
|
|
I got an email from my MP Ian Murray yesterday, confirming that he will be voting against article 50. Hopefully lots of other Labour MPs will follow. I'll never forgive Corbyn if article 50 passes thanks to Labour votes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 14:30
|
|
|
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications?publication_filter_option=consultations Government is looking to close 30+ job centres. Look forward to getting sanctioned for being three minutes late to an appointment that's going to be two hours late because of understaffing
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 14:32
|
|
|
I want to say if that happens i'd never vote Labour. But I doubt I can hold that conviction once the general election comes around.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 14:33
|
|
|
marktheando posted:I got an email from my MP Ian Murray yesterday, confirming that he will be voting against article 50. Hopefully lots of other Labour MPs will follow. As it stands it's likely that when the votes are counted it would have passed even if labours Ayes were put in the Noes column. But that ignores the difference it could have made if Labour did their job properly and actually opposed the bill - public opinion and effective argument could have brought Remainer Tories to their side. In summary: the excuse that 'labour couldn't have done anything anyway' will be trotted out to suppose Corbyn's behaviour. It's horseshit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 14:33
|
|
|
So is Corbyn's plan that Brexit is so much of a disaster it ruins the Tories? Is there plan?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 14:37
|
|
|
Aren't "squatters" just trespassers and isn't it unlawful to break into houses? Why can't you just report them to the police and have them arrested for trespassing and breaking and entering?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 14:43
|
|
|
Skinty McEdger posted:The counter petition has gone up: I was a bit alarmed by Trump until I realised if he's not allowed a state visit then he can't say anything mean in public. Thank god the president of the USA is so dependent on the goodwill of our government to get his views out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 14:48
|
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:So is Corbyn's plan that Brexit is so much of a disaster it ruins the Tories? Is there plan? The plan is to respect the result of the referendum but make the best of the result of the referendum. Step one of that is the amendments: quote:i) Allow a meaningful vote in Parliament on the final Brexit deal. Labour’s amendment would ensure that the House of Commons has the first say on any proposed deal and that the consent of Parliament would be required before the deal is referred to the European Council and Parliament.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 14:49
|
|
|
marktheando posted:I got an email from my MP Ian Murray yesterday, confirming that he will be voting against article 50. Hopefully lots of other Labour MPs will follow. The Tory rebels have confirmed they are going to toe the line so there is no chance of the vote failing Whether they would have been more emboldened if Labour had been given a free vote  but I suspect not since if Theresa May has any strengths its enforcing party discipline.I'm a bit confused by the Labour tactics of vote for Article 50 regardless, that seems...counterproductive. I would have thought the point would be to vote against A50 if they don't get their amendments. I pretty much have no idea what is going on anymore
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 14:52
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Aren't "squatters" just trespassers and isn't it unlawful to break into houses? I've always wondered why a property owner wouldn't simply gain entry through an open window, dispose of the unsolicited gifts that have been delivered to their home, then repair their broken door locks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 14:54
|
|
|
Gort posted:The plan is to respect the result of the referendum but make the best of the result of the referendum. Step one of that is the amendments: But now they're saying they'll vote for it if they get amendments or not, so there is no reason for the government to give ground. Also while corbyn has been sucking the government have got the remainer Tories to support them with their mythical "white paper"
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 14:56
|
|
|
a pipe smoking dog posted:Also while corbyn has been sucking the government have got the remainer Tories to support them with their mythical "white paper" lol if you don't think the tories were all going to vote leave in lockstep regardless
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 14:58
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Aren't "squatters" just trespassers and isn't it unlawful to break into houses? Also trespass is not a matter for criminal law, neither is squatting except in certain residential properties as of a couple years ago, so there's nothing for the police to enforce unless they're causing nuisance or alarm, which they wouldn't if the property is long disused.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:01
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Aren't "squatters" just trespassers and isn't it unlawful to break into houses? Violence for securing entry (kicking in doors) has been an offence since the 70s but trespass is traditionally (or rather was) a civil issue. Squatters would make a claim of legal right to residence and the property holder would have to contest in court - its was a civil matter up until residential squatting was criminalised in 2012
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:02
|
|
|
Gort posted:The plan is to respect the result of the referendum but make the best of the result of the referendum. Step one of that is the amendments: But they said they would vote for it even if they get none of their amendments. That's the bit I don't understand.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:04
|
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:But they said they would vote for it even if they get none of their amendments. That's the bit I don't understand. Did labour ever say they would do anything else? It was only people trying to rationalise Corbyn's position on this bill that suggested the amendments were required for labour's support.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:06
|
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:But they said they would vote for it even if they get none of their amendments. That's the bit I don't understand. That bit falls under "respect the referendum".
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:07
|
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:But they said they would vote for it even if they get none of their amendments. That's the bit I don't understand. Yeah, I don't see how you can go "We're demanding these changes but if you don't want to make them that's fine you have our unconditional support anyway".
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:07
|
|
|
I feel like this comes up 3 times a day with the same people asking the same questions and then getting the same answer.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:08
|
|
|
TheRat posted:That bit falls under "respect the referendum". The referendum was that the UK should terminate it's membership with the EU. Absolutely nothing was voted for on the implementation of that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:08
|
|
|
I agree with Kenneth Clarke and Hillary Benn
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:09
|
|
|
TheRat posted:I feel like this comes up 3 times a day with the same people asking the same questions and then getting the same answer. Things that don't make sense probably don't get remembered. Respecting the referendum without the protections in the amendments is bullshit. It's not an excuse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:11
|
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:Things that don't make sense probably don't get remembered. And yet you're perfectly happy to keep asking the same nonsensical questions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:12
|
|
|
TheRat posted:And yet you're perfectly happy to keep asking the same nonsensical questions. Sorry.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:13
|
|
|
I think Labour's plan is scream loudly about voting for it for several reasons.
In short, everything is hosed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:15
|
|
|
my brother a supposed liberal democrat just tried to convince me that the immigration ban isn't a bad thing, nor is it a muslim ban when confronting him that i thought the lib dems were the immigration party, he told me that he didn't believe in that
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:21
|
|
|
What's the point of even having an opposition party if 'but the Tories will just ram it through' is an excuse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:24
|
|
|
Fangz posted:What's the point of even having an opposition party if 'but the Tories will just ram it through' is an excuse. Dude I just got told off by one of the thread adults for asking this. Tread carefully.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:29
|
|
|
Rakosi posted:I agree with Kenneth Clarke and Hillary Benn Unsurprising.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:32
|
|
|
At this point it doesn't really matter what labour does. They might as well go on holiday.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:35
|
|
|
Gonzo McFee posted:Unsurprising. Ken Clarke's been more of a leader to the 48% that voted remain than Corbyn ever was.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:39
|
|
|
Fangz posted:What's the point of even having an opposition party if 'but the Tories will just ram it through' is an excuse. A lot of the pro-Corbyn posturing – especially the arguments that "you can't amend the bill if you vote against it" and "voting against it would be electoral suicide and it'll pass anyway" – were literally the same arguments the Blairites were bringing out to justify abstaining on the Welfare Reform Bill eighteen months ago. TinTower fucked around with this message at 15:51 on Jan 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:43
|
|
|
Don't recall having a referendum on the Welfare Reform Bill.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:47
|
|
|
We did have a general election which was won by a party who promised to make those cuts, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:48
|
|
|
TinTower posted:A lot of the pro-Corbyn posturing – especially the arguments that "you can't amend the bill if you vote against it" and "voting against it would be electoral suicide and it'll pass anyway" – where literally the same arguments the Blairites were bringing out to justify abstaining on the Welfare Reform Bill eighteen months ago.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:48
|
|
|
TinTower posted:A lot of the pro-Corbyn posturing – especially the arguments that "you can't amend the bill if you vote against it" and "voting against it would be electoral suicide and it'll pass anyway" – where literally the same arguments the Blairites were bringing out to justify abstaining on the Welfare Reform Bill eighteen months ago. I don't recall the Blairites using the first argument at the time. It's certainly not true (unless, as someone said, you actually get enough MPs to vote against a Bill to throw it out completely before it can be amended). But yes, the idea that "the papers will attack us if we vote against it" and "it doesn't matter what we do because the Tories have a majority" were things you heard, and I was under the impression Corbyn was meant to be a refreshing alternative to that sort of thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:54
|
|
|
We should leave the EU & create our own, with blackjack and hookers and nationalised industries. And we won't invite the Germans or Luxembourgish? Luxembourgers? Cunts from Luxembourg won't be welcome
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:54
|
|
|
TinTower posted:A lot of the pro-Corbyn posturing – especially the arguments that "you can't amend the bill if you vote against it" and "voting against it would be electoral suicide and it'll pass anyway" – were literally the same arguments the Blairites were bringing out to justify abstaining on the Welfare Reform Bill eighteen months ago. Welfare cuts were bad and if Labour won't defend the welfare state then there's little reason for them to exist. Leaving the EU is also bad but not a fundamental reason for the Labour Party existing. Won't defend Corbyn/Labour for his/their handling of this which has been miserable, confused and then just poo poo and wrong, but your comparison only works on a superficial level
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 00:56 |
|
|
forkboy84 posted:We should leave the EU & create our own, with blackjack and hookers and nationalised industries. And we won't invite the Germans or Luxembourgish? Luxembourgers? Cunts from Luxembourg won't be welcome I believe they're called the 'deLuxe'.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:59
|
|
