tsubaki
Player Valuation: £90m
even by their standards that is something else - deliberately blocking the taxpayer from getting £40 million
Current Affairs The Conservative Party
- Thread starter Ashtonian
- Start date
- Status
even by their standards that is something else - deliberately blocking the taxpayer from getting £40 million
peteblue
Welcome back Wayne
The Tories were the only ones to ask tough questions, Labour and SNP were useless.....
You may well be right but when the tough question is "Are we as a party biased towards millionaires who give us money to the detriment of tax payers" and the answer is "Yes" I am not sure there is much merit to be had, on any level.
4737carlin
Player Valuation: £90m
cooperman
Player Valuation: £10m
The government's app has major issues, just not working at all. The government repeatedly turning down joining a better option from Google/Apple. £250 million to one of Cummings' mates I believe to set it up. What have we got to show for it?
The track and trace operation won't be up and running until the end of June. Weeks after a large amount of people will start mixing again. Tracking and tracing contracts needs to be as comprehensive as possible in order for it to work, yet we could be hitting several thousands of new infections by then. Person in charge of setting up and running this is the wife of a Tory MP.
This is corruption on a grand scale. None of the projects in the pandemic are going out to tender (although I do grasp that this could potentially slow things), they're just being awarded to the mates of a few at the top table. We are getting terrible value for tax payers money.
The people of this country are almost hypnotised by this bunch of incompetent, corrupt tossers. How more obvious does it need to be!?
The track and trace operation won't be up and running until the end of June. Weeks after a large amount of people will start mixing again. Tracking and tracing contracts needs to be as comprehensive as possible in order for it to work, yet we could be hitting several thousands of new infections by then. Person in charge of setting up and running this is the wife of a Tory MP.
This is corruption on a grand scale. None of the projects in the pandemic are going out to tender (although I do grasp that this could potentially slow things), they're just being awarded to the mates of a few at the top table. We are getting terrible value for tax payers money.
The people of this country are almost hypnotised by this bunch of incompetent, corrupt tossers. How more obvious does it need to be!?
'Kin 'ell.
tsubaki
Player Valuation: £90m
orchard
Player Valuation: £60m
28 May 2020
The Speaker has written to MPs to explain why he has accepted the Government's request to recall Parliament. Here is the letter below.
Dear Colleague
The Government has requested that the House be recalled for an earlier sitting on Tuesday 2 June 2020, to sit from 11.30am. The main purpose of the Government’s proposed recall is to bring forward a motion so that the House can take a decision on the form divisions should take - now that the temporary Standing Orders on hybrid proceedings have lapsed.
Apologies for the long letter but I would like to set out why I have decided, after careful consideration and on balance, that the public interest test has been satisfied and therefore I agree to this request.
This is the situation the House finds itself in:
· the temporary orders for remote divisions have lapsed;
· the previous and established method of voting using the division lobbies has been condemned as not meeting social distancing standards by Public Health England;
· although I made a statement on 23 March about a method of carrying out divisions in the lobbies, that was based on the advice provided then by Public Health England. The new advice is very different. There is currently no other method for divisions sanctioned by the House.
Based on the latest professional advice from Public Health England, it is clear to me that the House simply cannot conduct divisions safely via the lobbies. There are pinch points in the lobbies where MPs are recorded by Clerks and counted by Tellers where it would be difficult to maintain social distancing, even though Perspex booths were prepared for two of the division desks. Nor can we follow the strict letter of Standing Order No. 38 which forms part of the House’s normal practice for the conduct of divisions and sets out particular requirements about timings. That is my view and that of the Clerk of the House as Corporate Officer, who has a duty to ensure, so far as possible, the safety of all of those on the Parliamentary Estate. As safety is my paramount consideration for MPs and staff - alongside the need for constituents to be properly represented through voting - we need to consider practical alternative arrangements.
Now that I have agreed to a recall on Tuesday, it is for the Government to decide what proposal for voting it wishes to put forward. I have been clear to the Government and to Opposition parties that I would prefer cross-party agreement to be reached about the way in which the House should conduct its proceedings when the House returns - including on how divisions should take place. I have given the Government until Monday morning to table its motion, to maximise the time available for such an agreement to be reached and to provide an opportunity for it to take account of the views of the Procedure Committee.
If agreement cannot be reached, I will want to ensure that Opposition parties and backbenchers have a chance to table amendments to the motion on Monday. I will also write to you setting out temporary arrangements under my own authority for the sole purpose of enabling the House to come to a decision on future arrangements.
It is not good enough for the House to meet as planned on Tuesday, 2 June and be unable to come to decisions on contested matters of any kind. It is in the public interest that the House should have its say and determine at the earliest convenient moment how it wishes to come to formal decisions for the immediate future. That is why I have agreed to the recall.
It may be that the motion tabled by the Government will also say something about arrangements to ensure appropriate physical distancing within the Chamber, and compliance with public health requirements more generally. However, I wish to restate that I remain willing, under my own authority, to take the steps I think are essential in that regard. In particular, I repeat my view that the limit of around 50 Members present in the Chamber must not be exceeded.
I will write to colleagues again on Monday when the Government has tabled its motion about the shape of Monday’s proceedings. I understand that the recall will mean that Justice questions will not take place on Tuesday, but the opportunities for urgent questions and statements are unaffected. It is for the Government to set out its proposals for the remaining business of the day. Further guidance will be available as soon as the House reaches its decision on Tuesday.
Warm wishes
Sir Lindsay Hoyle
Speaker of the House of Commons
Photo credit: Jessica Taylor/ UK Parliament
More news on: Parliament, government and politics, Parliament, House of Commons news, Speaker news, Commons news
More Parliament news
The Speaker has written to MPs to explain why he has accepted the Government's request to recall Parliament. Here is the letter below.
Dear Colleague
The Government has requested that the House be recalled for an earlier sitting on Tuesday 2 June 2020, to sit from 11.30am. The main purpose of the Government’s proposed recall is to bring forward a motion so that the House can take a decision on the form divisions should take - now that the temporary Standing Orders on hybrid proceedings have lapsed.
Apologies for the long letter but I would like to set out why I have decided, after careful consideration and on balance, that the public interest test has been satisfied and therefore I agree to this request.
This is the situation the House finds itself in:
· the temporary orders for remote divisions have lapsed;
· the previous and established method of voting using the division lobbies has been condemned as not meeting social distancing standards by Public Health England;
· although I made a statement on 23 March about a method of carrying out divisions in the lobbies, that was based on the advice provided then by Public Health England. The new advice is very different. There is currently no other method for divisions sanctioned by the House.
Based on the latest professional advice from Public Health England, it is clear to me that the House simply cannot conduct divisions safely via the lobbies. There are pinch points in the lobbies where MPs are recorded by Clerks and counted by Tellers where it would be difficult to maintain social distancing, even though Perspex booths were prepared for two of the division desks. Nor can we follow the strict letter of Standing Order No. 38 which forms part of the House’s normal practice for the conduct of divisions and sets out particular requirements about timings. That is my view and that of the Clerk of the House as Corporate Officer, who has a duty to ensure, so far as possible, the safety of all of those on the Parliamentary Estate. As safety is my paramount consideration for MPs and staff - alongside the need for constituents to be properly represented through voting - we need to consider practical alternative arrangements.
Now that I have agreed to a recall on Tuesday, it is for the Government to decide what proposal for voting it wishes to put forward. I have been clear to the Government and to Opposition parties that I would prefer cross-party agreement to be reached about the way in which the House should conduct its proceedings when the House returns - including on how divisions should take place. I have given the Government until Monday morning to table its motion, to maximise the time available for such an agreement to be reached and to provide an opportunity for it to take account of the views of the Procedure Committee.
If agreement cannot be reached, I will want to ensure that Opposition parties and backbenchers have a chance to table amendments to the motion on Monday. I will also write to you setting out temporary arrangements under my own authority for the sole purpose of enabling the House to come to a decision on future arrangements.
It is not good enough for the House to meet as planned on Tuesday, 2 June and be unable to come to decisions on contested matters of any kind. It is in the public interest that the House should have its say and determine at the earliest convenient moment how it wishes to come to formal decisions for the immediate future. That is why I have agreed to the recall.
It may be that the motion tabled by the Government will also say something about arrangements to ensure appropriate physical distancing within the Chamber, and compliance with public health requirements more generally. However, I wish to restate that I remain willing, under my own authority, to take the steps I think are essential in that regard. In particular, I repeat my view that the limit of around 50 Members present in the Chamber must not be exceeded.
I will write to colleagues again on Monday when the Government has tabled its motion about the shape of Monday’s proceedings. I understand that the recall will mean that Justice questions will not take place on Tuesday, but the opportunities for urgent questions and statements are unaffected. It is for the Government to set out its proposals for the remaining business of the day. Further guidance will be available as soon as the House reaches its decision on Tuesday.
Warm wishes
Sir Lindsay Hoyle
Speaker of the House of Commons
Photo credit: Jessica Taylor/ UK Parliament
More news on: Parliament, government and politics, Parliament, House of Commons news, Speaker news, Commons news
More Parliament news
- Chair writes to Prime Minister following Liaison Committee session
- Peers voice fears for COVID-19’s “acute impact” on performing arts
- COVID-19 Rapid Summary: The Virus and its Transmission
- Suspension of all tours and other non-essential visits extended
- Inquiry on facilitating future UK–EU trade in manufactured goods launched
- Speaker responds to MPs
- Letter to the Speaker from Centenary
28 May 2020
The Speaker has written to MPs to explain why he has accepted the Government's request to recall Parliament. Here is the letter below.
Dear Colleague
The Government has requested that the House be recalled for an earlier sitting on Tuesday 2 June 2020, to sit from 11.30am. The main purpose of the Government’s proposed recall is to bring forward a motion so that the House can take a decision on the form divisions should take - now that the temporary Standing Orders on hybrid proceedings have lapsed.
Apologies for the long letter but I would like to set out why I have decided, after careful consideration and on balance, that the public interest test has been satisfied and therefore I agree to this request.
This is the situation the House finds itself in:
· the temporary orders for remote divisions have lapsed;
· the previous and established method of voting using the division lobbies has been condemned as not meeting social distancing standards by Public Health England;
· although I made a statement on 23 March about a method of carrying out divisions in the lobbies, that was based on the advice provided then by Public Health England. The new advice is very different. There is currently no other method for divisions sanctioned by the House.
Based on the latest professional advice from Public Health England, it is clear to me that the House simply cannot conduct divisions safely via the lobbies. There are pinch points in the lobbies where MPs are recorded by Clerks and counted by Tellers where it would be difficult to maintain social distancing, even though Perspex booths were prepared for two of the division desks. Nor can we follow the strict letter of Standing Order No. 38 which forms part of the House’s normal practice for the conduct of divisions and sets out particular requirements about timings. That is my view and that of the Clerk of the House as Corporate Officer, who has a duty to ensure, so far as possible, the safety of all of those on the Parliamentary Estate. As safety is my paramount consideration for MPs and staff - alongside the need for constituents to be properly represented through voting - we need to consider practical alternative arrangements.
Now that I have agreed to a recall on Tuesday, it is for the Government to decide what proposal for voting it wishes to put forward. I have been clear to the Government and to Opposition parties that I would prefer cross-party agreement to be reached about the way in which the House should conduct its proceedings when the House returns - including on how divisions should take place. I have given the Government until Monday morning to table its motion, to maximise the time available for such an agreement to be reached and to provide an opportunity for it to take account of the views of the Procedure Committee.
If agreement cannot be reached, I will want to ensure that Opposition parties and backbenchers have a chance to table amendments to the motion on Monday. I will also write to you setting out temporary arrangements under my own authority for the sole purpose of enabling the House to come to a decision on future arrangements.
It is not good enough for the House to meet as planned on Tuesday, 2 June and be unable to come to decisions on contested matters of any kind. It is in the public interest that the House should have its say and determine at the earliest convenient moment how it wishes to come to formal decisions for the immediate future. That is why I have agreed to the recall.
It may be that the motion tabled by the Government will also say something about arrangements to ensure appropriate physical distancing within the Chamber, and compliance with public health requirements more generally. However, I wish to restate that I remain willing, under my own authority, to take the steps I think are essential in that regard. In particular, I repeat my view that the limit of around 50 Members present in the Chamber must not be exceeded.
I will write to colleagues again on Monday when the Government has tabled its motion about the shape of Monday’s proceedings. I understand that the recall will mean that Justice questions will not take place on Tuesday, but the opportunities for urgent questions and statements are unaffected. It is for the Government to set out its proposals for the remaining business of the day. Further guidance will be available as soon as the House reaches its decision on Tuesday.
Warm wishes
Sir Lindsay Hoyle
Speaker of the House of Commons
orchard
Player Valuation: £60m
- The Speaker confirms that only 50 MPs will be allowed in the Chamber - the same as under the current hybrid model. So this is not about "MPs returning to work", as Rees-Mogg claimed. It simply shuts out those who could previously participate online.
- Public Health England has advised "that the House cannot conduct divisions safely via the lobbies". Yet no alternative system of voting has been agreed. So a decision was taken to switch off the online system before any consideration of how Parliament would vote in person.
3.The Speaker writes that "it is for the Govt to decide what proposal for voting it wishes to put forward". That, in a nutshell, is the problem. The Executive has far too much power over the institution that is supposed to hold it to account - even on how it meets & how it votes.
[3:31 PM]
- This should matter to us all. At UK level, the House of Commons is the only democratically-elected institution we have. The only people we get to vote in or out of power are MPs. For as long as nearly 600 of them are shut out of Parliament, our democracy is partially suspended
- The govt did not choose to have a pandemic that made it so hard for Parlt to function. But it can choose how to respond. The goal should be to expand participation, not shrink it; to use every possible tool to allow MPs to participate. Instead, it has barred the digital gates.#
- Ministers could do this, in the teeth of cross-party opposition, merely by refusing to table the necessary Standing Orders. If we are to maintain proper democratic scrutiny of govt, we have to loosen the grip of the Executive over the institution that holds it to account.END
Easing the lockdown, sending kids back to school etc. without a proper working widespread test, trace and isolate will see a spike in cases. Reckless but will give a boost to the herd immunity brigade, Johnson/Cummings/Vallance ideology..
cooperman
Player Valuation: £10m
A cynical view would be the Tories seeing this is a win-win. Kill of the vulnerable, pay loads of cash to mates.
However the demographic by far most likely to become seriously ill by this disease is most likely a Tory voter. Just utter incompetence right to the top.
Johnson has surrounded himself with a bunch of yes men, who despite being devoid of talent, have ridden on his coat tails to the top. Now we have a famine of talent during the most challenging national emergency in generations.
peteblue
Welcome back Wayne
Name the people you think should be in charge.....
peteblue
Welcome back Wayne
Gove is a back stabbing barsteward. But on occasions he can be quite good. Just not this time....
- Status