Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Have the wheels come off the Boris bus?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by slick_miester View Post

    Back when Cameron was PM, I saw a PMQ session that was almost totally canned: Tory MPs asked "question #3," "question #7," et al, making it embarrassingly obvious that the MPs' questions were arranged with Cameron in advance. I raised that very point with our late friend Allsirgarnet aka Gary Steadman, and he said that it was not at all uncommon for the MPs' questions to be vetted with the PM in advance, or even distributed by the PM to willing MPs in advance, thus rendering PMQs something of a joke in the eyes of many Britons, at least those with a cynical streak -- among whom Mr Steadman decidedly did not number. He was very much a believer in the efficacy of the UK's political traditions, as well as the UK government's capacity to bring about positive change.

    I know that opposition MPs can ask 'most anything they want during PMQs, but doesn't it stand to reason that -- and haven't there been examples in fact when -- members of the PM's party have been castigated for asking unwelcome questions?

    And if committee chairmen are elected by the members -- the same members who elect one of their own to be party leader/PM -- then why would they elect chairmen who might meet with the PM's disapproval?
    Sorry but you are wrong on all counts

    Yes there are planted questions but most are not - however they have been through the Table Office as I said and so have been formally written up and tabulated and notice given to the appropriate minister. However very often a seemingly canned initial question is often a trojan horse for an unexpected supplementary question. Having seen the Table Office in Action and assisted senior Civil Servants in briefing ministers on questions I can assure you that very few questions are really canned. Committee chairs are spread across all parties in the house. The majority party does not have all the chairs. I once had to give evidence to a select committee and the chair was not from the govenment party.
    Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe (H G Wells)
    Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens (Friedrich von Schiller)

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by MarkV View Post

      Sorry but you are wrong on all counts

      Yes there are planted questions but most are not - however they have been through the Table Office as I said and so have been formally written up and tabulated and notice given to the appropriate minister. However very often a seemingly canned initial question is often a trojan horse for an unexpected supplementary question. Having seen the Table Office in Action and assisted senior Civil Servants in briefing ministers on questions I can assure you that very few questions are really canned.
      One does not become a prime minister without knowing how to get around a mere "Table Office." If I'm wrong, then you're naive.

      Originally posted by MarkV View Post
      Committee chairs are spread across all parties in the house. The majority party does not have all the chairs. I once had to give evidence to a select committee and the chair was not from the govenment party.
      Now this I did not know. How badly can a committee chair from the opposing party gum up a PM's program? I'd imagine that if he really wanted to, a chairman can throw a PM's program into a terminal stall.
      I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

      Comment


      • #48
        Never mind all that...

        Any comment on the interpretation now being offered on the decisions of the Scottish court that Prime Minister BoJo did in fact lie to Her Majesty in order to ensure the successful prorogation of parliament?

        Of course, the majesty should have been aware that Johnson habitually lies to everyone, so why should an exception be made for her?

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by slick_miester View Post

          One does not become a prime minister without knowing how to get around a mere "Table Office." If I'm wrong, then you're naive.



          Now this I did not know. How badly can a committee chair from the opposing party gum up a PM's program? I'd imagine that if he really wanted to, a chairman can throw a PM's program into a terminal stall.
          These are not US politicians and have some vague notions of acting for the public good rather than simple party advantage (most of them anyway)
          Last edited by MarkV; 11 Sep 19, 14:42.
          Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe (H G Wells)
          Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens (Friedrich von Schiller)

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Johan Banér View Post
            Never mind all that...

            Any comment on the interpretation now being offered on the decisions of the Scottish court that Prime Minister BoJo did in fact lie to Her Majesty in order to ensure the successful prorogation of parliament?

            Of course, the majesty should have been aware that Johnson habitually lies to everyone, so why should an exception be made for her?
            Irrelevant. HM has to take the advice and the PM doesn't have to explain or justify it. All he (or his Privy Council proxies) have to say is 'we advise you to suspend Parliament Maam' and she has to say 'agreed'. The real question is what was Bojo Bozo's motive for doing so?
            Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe (H G Wells)
            Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens (Friedrich von Schiller)

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by MarkV View Post

              These are not US politicians and have some vague notions of acting for the public good rather than simple party advantage (most of them anyway)
              You wouldn't be operating under the belief that British politicians are of a different species of animal than their American, French, Chinese, or ancient Roman counterparts, are you?









              Or am I hearing the chauvinist's stock line: "our sh*t don't stink"?
              I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by slick_miester View Post

                You wouldn't be operating under the belief that British politicians are of a different species of animal than their American, French, Chinese, or ancient Roman counterparts, are you?









                Or am I hearing the chauvinist's stock line: "our sh*t don't stink"?
                No, but there ARE rules (like many people with no actual morals, MPs DO have some standards).

                A question to the Prime Minister will almost certainly be intended to make him stop and think about his actions, but only if government policy is seen to be extreme will the committees try to gum up the works.

                It's called, "The Mother of Parliaments," for a reason - MPs are so hedged about with tradition and ceremony, they rarely take individual action that will rock the boat. Outside Parliament, of course, you get the usual bribery, extortion, blackmail, and people who can't keep their trousers fastened, but a certain decorum is expected (and generally followed) within the house.

                On a side note, the findings of the Court of Session raise an interesting dilemma;

                If Scotland is indeed the, "Valued and equal partner within this union," then the government will be compelled to act on this verdict.

                If the verdict is ignored, then it can be seen by all and sundry that this, "Precious Union," is a sham, and Scotland is no more than a troublesome region.

                Either way, the independence movement wins.
                Last edited by the ace; 11 Sep 19, 15:44.
                Indyref2 - still, "Yes."

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by the ace View Post

                  No, but there ARE rules (like many people with no actual morals, MPs DO have some standards).

                  A question to the Prime Minister will almost certainly be intended to make him stop and think about his actions, but only if government policy is seen to be extreme will the committees try to gum up the works.

                  It's called, "The Mother of Parliaments," for a reason
                  Aren't you in favor of leaving the swamp that is Westminster behind?

                  Originally posted by the ace View Post
                  MPs are so hedged about with tradition and ceremony, they rarely take individual action that will rock the boat. Outside Parliament, of course, you get the usual bribery, extortion, blackmail, and people who can't keep their trousers fastened, but a certain decorum is expected (and generally followed) within the house.
                  Like all the good Roman Catholic clergy and laymen who kept attending mass robotically while the whole world was learning about their little kiddie sex racket . . . . . in plain English, that's called hypocrisy. Maybe it's high time an MP acts like he has a pair. That might be the only way to keep a clown like Boris from playing this flim-flam game with Britons' heretofore universally acknowledged rights.
                  I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by slick_miester View Post

                    Aren't you in favor of leaving the swamp that is Westminster behind?



                    Like all the good Roman Catholic clergy and laymen who kept attending mass robotically while the whole world was learning about their little kiddie sex racket . . . . . in plain English, that's called hypocrisy. Maybe it's high time an MP acts like he has a pair. That might be the only way to keep a clown like Boris from playing this flim-flam game with Britons' heretofore universally acknowledged rights.
                    (My bold) And now you know why. I've long been of the opinion that Mum needs to move into a home.
                    Indyref2 - still, "Yes."

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by the ace View Post

                      (My bold) And now you know why. I've long been of the opinion that Mum needs to move into a home.
                      What makes you think that Scots politicians are any better than British, or American, et al? "Boss" Tweed was, after all, descended from Scotsmen, too.
                      I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by slick_miester View Post

                        What makes you think that Scots politicians are any better than British, or American, et al? "Boss" Tweed was, after all, descended from Scotsmen, too.
                        It was after all a combination of incompetence and corruption by Scots politicians that got them into such a mess that they had to plead with England for a union.
                        Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe (H G Wells)
                        Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens (Friedrich von Schiller)

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by slick_miester View Post

                          What makes you think that Scots politicians are any better than British, or American, et al? "Boss" Tweed was, after all, descended from Scotsmen, too.
                          Our current crop of politicians aren't doing too badly (one of them is the QC who brought the matter to the court of Session in the first place), and Holyrood is currently the only functioning government in the UK.

                          I think we'll do just fine.
                          Indyref2 - still, "Yes."

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by the ace View Post



                            It's called, "The Mother of Parliaments," for a reason -
                            Indeed it is-just not the reason people think. The actual phrase is 'England is the mother of parliaments ' It was not meant as a claim Westminster is the the creator ('Mother') for all Parliaments world-wide but simply that 'England' (England here meaning the voters in England) create a Parliament (give birth to like a mother) when they vote. The voters are the mother of Parliaments.

                            What has the Murdoch Press phone-tapping scandal and the affairs of an England Football team Manager got to do with politicians?

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by MarkV View Post
                              It was after all a combination of incompetence and corruption by Scots politicians that got them into such a mess that they had to plead with England for a union.
                              And active Spanish military resistance, as well as an English blockade, and general attempts to make things fail for the Scots of course... And it was after all by now over three hundred years ago.
                              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darien_scheme

                              Sure, they shouldn't have tried that. And if they still would, they should have done better. But then again hasn't the a certain kind of English line for a couple of centuries been that these minors it finds itself in a union with should know their places?
                              https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-46528952

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Johan Banér View Post
                                And active Spanish military resistance, as well as an English blockade, and general attempts to make things fail for the Scots of course... And it was after all by now over three hundred years ago.
                                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darien_scheme

                                Sure, they shouldn't have tried that. And if they still would, they should have done better. But then again hasn't the a certain kind of English line for a couple of centuries been that these minors it finds itself in a union with should know their places?
                                https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-46528952
                                To be fair, Darien was pretty close to the Eastern terminus of the Panama Canal. It's just a pity their bright idea was to sell woollens to people who ran around naked in a rain-forest.
                                Indyref2 - still, "Yes."

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X