Current Affairs The Conservative Party

[ArtetaMoney]

I can see why a handsome devil such as yourself would relate to following the advice of the noble Joey Swole lol

Joey Swole, laa. I don't even know him but he sounds like a proper fella.

 

[Walken]

Joey Swole, laa. I don't even know him but he sounds like a proper fella.

I swear, I'm not getting over that for a long time, nearly fell off my chair reading his name in what otherwise a serious and god post.

 

[Moomin]

I swear, I'm not getting over that for a long time, nearly fell off my chair reading his name in what otherwise a serious and god post.

He keeps popping up on my Twitter timeline and the blame lies at the feet of @chicoazul

 

[Baines' left foot]

Agree with it all, but struggled to relate with this bit.

Ahahaha, he's a lad.

 

[orchard]

Is it me, or is that total silly because it's compound ?

Yeah, it's me,...

 

[NilSatisOptimum]

Tories taking protections of MPs a little to far.

 

[tsubaki]

Tories taking protections of MPs a little to far.

TBF banning MPs merely accused of such things from Parliament probably is a bit much. I am also not sure why violence or sexual offences would attract such a ban whilst financial crimes wouldn’t; I mean an MP acting corruptly for personal financial gain would pose more threat to us and Parliament than one who just chinned a mouthy protestor would.

Banning them after they’ve been charged with any criminal offence would be much more justifiable, I think. They would inevitably be more focused on the trial anyway.

 

[mightymoyes]

this should have happened far earlier

 

[tsubaki]

this should have happened far earlier

They’ve even gone after Pob now

 

[Kurt.]

Captain Blagger at your service...

View attachment 247513

Major effin blagger

 

[mightymoyes]

They’ve even gone after Pob now

the subsidised booze in the commons bars will be the biggest blow to him if he gets suspended

 

[NilSatisOptimum]

TBF banning MPs merely accused of such things from Parliament probably is a bit much. I am also not sure why violence or sexual offences would attract such a ban whilst financial crimes wouldn’t; I mean an MP acting corruptly for personal financial gain would pose more threat to us and Parliament than one who just chinned a mouthy protestor would.

Banning them after they’ve been charged with any criminal offence would be much more justifiable, I think. They would inevitably be more focused on the trial anyway.

Its about debasing the power the MP could assert over victims and investigations. Violence or sexual offences is normally about power over the victim. Probably why the likes of Pincher and Bone got away with their actions for so long. Besides i doubt financial crimes and violence or sexual offences are always separate. Still i would put violence and sexual offences as priority to stop over financial corruption every day of the week,

 

[peteblue]

It's amazing how people "still" don't know how the state pension works.

Of course we know how the state pension works, but having paid into it for 50 years, paying more in taxes and NI per month than the state pension pays in a year, I reckon we’ll be quits in about 500 years. Meanwhile those who have moved to this country, legally, are now as British as you or I and deserve to be treated exactly the same, you pay in now and it goes to someone else’s pension until you reach retirement age and then those following do exactly the same. It’s a fair system overall, and I don’t regard anyone legally living here as an immigrant they are just one of us like every other citizen of the U.K. ….

 

[tsubaki]

Its about debasing the power the MP could assert over victims and investigations. Violence or sexual offences is normally about power over the victim. Probably why the likes of Pincher and Bone got away with their actions for so long. Besides i doubt financial crimes and violence or sexual offences are always separate. Still i would put violence and sexual offences as priority to stop over financial corruption every day of the week,

That’s a nonsense though - the power to attack victims or investigators comes from the office they hold, not their presence at work (where let’s not forget there are dozens of cops on duty).

There is also the wider issue of fairness. If an MP is charged with one of these offences, then yes maybe they should be prevented from attending. However where do you draw the line with what “accused” means in this context? When they are arrested? When an accusation is made? Would it be fair if the crime had nothing to do with Parliament to ban them from it?

 

[NilSatisOptimum]

That’s a nonsense though - the power to attack victims or investigators comes from the office they hold, not their presence at work (where let’s not forget there are dozens of cops on duty).

There is also the wider issue of fairness. If an MP is charged with one of these offences, then yes maybe they should be prevented from attending. However where do you draw the line with what “accused” means in this context? When they are arrested? When an accusation is made? Would it be fair if the crime had nothing to do with Parliament to ban them from it?

Don't think you understand the power and influence MPs have that enables them by their role to have power over victims and investigations and debasing alleged abuser is essential. Not much interested in Police here they have there own thread. Much like teachers and my role if allegations are made which are not spurious its "gardening leave" until there is an outcome. Bad thing the Tories are doing and ill leave it at that.