Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party.

[birchesgreen]

I feel DeSanctimonious is more dangerous than Trump, i get the feeling he really believes all this stuff while Trump half the time doesn't really (as his actions prove) and just finds it useful for his own nefarious purposes (mostly making him richer).

 

[ainsworth74]

I feel DeSanctimonious is more dangerous than Trump,

I have to give Trump some credit, he is good with the nicknames. Ron DeSanctimonious is a strong nick name it really is.

 

[birchesgreen]

I have to give Trump some credit, he is good with the nicknames. Ron DeSanctimonious is a strong nick name it really is.

Yes he has a feel for showbiz, Poor Ron instead picks fights with Disney.

 

[SuspectUsual]

I have to give Trump some credit, he is good with the nicknames. Ron DeSanctimonious is a strong nick name it really is.

Or more likely he has a team around him who are good with stuff like this. I'd be amazed if Trump even knew what sanctimonious actually meant (he said, sanctimoniously )

 

[Typhoon]

I feel DeSanctimonious is more dangerous than Trump, i get the feeling he really believes all this stuff while Trump half the time doesn't really (as his actions prove) and just finds it useful for his own nefarious purposes (mostly making him richer).

Absolutely agree - I suspect Trump is like Johnson, bone idle, just wants to be in post - in his case President; talks a lot, doesn't do much - how much of the 'wall' was actually built during Trump's time? I gather most was just replacement of existing structures. Dangerous on foreign affairs but otherwise wants a quiet life - play golf, give a few speeches, play golf. He may give states more powers to take reactionary steps but DeSantos would want all states to take them

 

[DustyBin]

I was pleased to see the Labour policy, it seems quite workable compared to the current policy and comes across as a fair way of balancing the needs of the trans community and needs for single sex spaces for women.

As a gay man, I have noticed a distinct increase in homophobia in the last year or so. There has been a lot of conflating LGB and T rights by homophobes, who basically use (often baseless IMHO) concerns about Trans to be old school homophobic. My partner and I have been cat called on the tube in the last year for holding hands and I’ve been spat at. And to counter a (hurtful) trope, I’m not particularly flamboyant - we were in bog standard casual clothes. One of my friends had a decorator refuse to decorate their flat because they are gay.

It’s getting worse and I hold both Sunak and Badenoch and the “anti woke” GB news crowd accountable for this. Partly because of this (and partly due to crashing the economy, the NHS, railways etc) I’ve gone from being a Cameroon-esque Conservative supporter (socially and economically liberal) to resolving to never voting for them and supporting whoever will kick them out.

I’m sorry to hear about your recent experiences; unfortunately there will always be a small group of people who need very little encouragement or “justification” to be ****s.

Personally I think both sides are as bad as the other. There are plenty of pro-trans agitators who also deliberately conflate LGB and T rights in order to widen the “fight” (that’s how it appears to me anyway). Again, that absolutely does not justify the abuse you’ve been subjected to, or indeed that suffered by trans people themselves.

And does the US really need any more of these foaming-at-the-mouth, hard-right extremists?

I see he wants to restrict abortion too.

It's the ultimate hypocrisy that these people call themselves "libertarian". They are not. DeSantis is self evidently a meddling busybody who wants to stick his beak into people's private affairs, and to be quite frank, it is none of his business. He is in no way a libertarian, but rather, a dangerous authoritarian.

Maybe the ultimate humiliation for DeSantis would be to be forced to wear drag and, simultaneously, be forced to teach children about LGBT rights.

It’s been discussed on many occasions, but once you go past a certain point in either direction on the political spectrum, authoritarianism inevitably rears it’s head.

 

[nw1]

I feel DeSanctimonious is more dangerous than Trump, i get the feeling he really believes all this stuff while Trump half the time doesn't really (as his actions prove) and just finds it useful for his own nefarious purposes (mostly making him richer).

DeSanctimonious.. I like it!

I think that's true. People like Trump (and Johnson) are basically into their own power and ego. People like DeSantis are more dangerous because they believe their wretched hard-right nonsense.

 

[ainsworth74]

It's beyond time that the Nigel Farage v Coutts fiasco/grave threat to freedom had its own thread. I've moved various posts to a new thread which can be found here.

 

[skyhigh]

Nice to see that roughly 50 days after Nadine Dorries said she'd stand down as an MP with "immediate effect" she still hasn't submitted her resignation. Even the local council are telling her to go now!

Dear Ms Dorries,
Re: Action Required - No Representation for Mid Bedfordshire
Following a discussion at the recent meeting of Flitwick Town Council on Tuesday 18th July, I have been asked to write to you formally to raise the Council's concerns and frustration at the continuing lack of representation for the people of Mid-Bedfordshire at Westminster.
You had previously announced your intention to stand down as an MP at the next election but then announced that you were standing down as an MP with immediate effect on 9'h June 2023 Since then, you have not resigned.
The last time you spoke in the Commons was 7' June 2022. You have not maintained a constituency office for a considerable time, and it's widely understood that you have not held a surgery in Flitwick since Match 2020.
Rather than representing constituents, the Council is concerned that your focus appears to have been firmly on your television show. upcoming book and political manoeuvres to embarrass the Government for not appointing you to the House of Lords. Councillors noted that your behaviour widely reported in the press is not in line with the Seven Principles of Public Life set out by Lord Nolan in 1995
With an estimated population of 13,800 people, Flitwick represents the largest concentration of voters in the Mid Bedfordshire constituency Flitwick Town Council has a long history of operating on a non-political basis, with a strong ethos that our Council must represent the views and needs of residents regardless of party politics
Our residents desperately need effective representation now and Flitwick Town Council calls on you to immediately vacate your seat to allow a by-election.

Nadine Dorries urged to quit as MP by Flitwick Town Council

Flitwick Town Council says the former government minister is not representing constituents.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[SuspectUsual]

More broadly - regardless of whether an MP has indicated an intention to resign - there needs to be a mechanism to deal with MPs who fundamentally aren’t doing their jobs (non-attendance without good reason, failure to run constituency surgeries etc). It seems at present it’s another example of the “honour” system which has been proven to be outdated and useless in other areas (expenses etc)

 

[ainsworth74]

More broadly - regardless of whether an MP has indicated an intention to resign - there needs to be a mechanism to deal with MPs who fundamentally aren’t doing their jobs (non-attendance without good reason, failure to run constituency surgeries etc). It seems at present it’s another example of the “honour” system which has been proven to be outdated and useless in other areas (expenses etc)

I'd suggest an amendment to the Recall of MPs Act 2015. At the moment there's no way for constituents to initiate a recall. It's currently only triggered if an MP gets a custodial prison sentence (including a suspended sentence), are suspended from the House for at least 10 sitting days following a report by Standards Committee or have a conviction for making false or misleading claims for MP expenses. That then triggers the petition whereby if at least 10% of the electorate of the constituency sign the petition a by-election is triggered.

I wonder if it should therefore be amended in someway to make it possible for constituents to initiate the recall process? I dunno something like if you can get 5% of the electorate to sign a petition to recall an MP then that could trigger the proper petition process that we already have? Perhaps blocked within 18 months of the last time the seat had an election? Must be someway of doing it so that if there is a strong feeling locally the MP can face a recall but without making it too easy so we end up with MPs getting recalled all the time for any odd reason and hosts of by-elections as a result!

 

[Gloster]

The trouble is that there is no clear definition of an MP’s duties, so they can’t be criticised for not doing something that they aren’t required to do. There are party duties and demands, but that can lead no further than losing the whip. A recall petition can only be instigated by constituents if the MP gets a sufficiently long prison sentence, gets suspended by the house for ten sitting or fourteen calendar days, or is convicted of an election expenses fiddle.

We really do need a clear definition of the minimum duties, both inside and outside Parliament, that an MP should fulfill, with due allowance made for ministerial duties or illness. No doubt there would be some who would just keep on the correct side of the line and only go through the motions, but it would be a start.

 

[SuspectUsual]

The trouble is that there is no clear definition of an MP’s duties

Another legacy of the out of date honour system? “A good chap will always do the right thing for his constituents….”

 

[edwin_m]

I wonder if it should therefore be amended in someway to make it possible for constituents to initiate the recall process? I dunno something like if you can get 5% of the electorate to sign a petition to recall an MP then that could trigger the proper petition process that we already have? Perhaps blocked within 18 months of the last time the seat had an election? Must be someway of doing it so that if there is a strong feeling locally the MP can face a recall but without making it too easy so we end up with MPs getting recalled all the time for any odd reason and hosts of by-elections as a result!

I can see the benefit of this in principle, but I guess the problem is that almost every MP will have well over 5% of their constituents voting for someone else, and potentially enough of them would be disgruntled to trigger the process at that threshold. You'd need a much higher threshold to trigger the process, but gathering the signatures then becomes too onerous except for an organisation such as a political party, or someone with a source of independent wealth, and either of those might wish to threaten an MP's position for reasons other than poor conduct. Think of how Republicans in the US threaten to impeach Biden and others on a feeble pretext, essentially to get revenge for what they tried to do to Trump.

The only thing I can think of that might work would be to base it on attendance in the House. An MP could face a recall vote if they didn't attend for say a month, with exemptions for sickness, maternity etc. But the likes of Dorries could avoid that by turning up for five minutes every few weeks. Maybe their pay should be reduced pro-rata if they failed to attend for say 50% of sitting days?

 

[najaB]

Maybe their pay should be reduced pro-rata if they failed to attend for say 50% of sitting days?

That seems reasonable. If I didn't turn up for work for half the time there's no way I'd still be employed!

 

[takno]

That seems reasonable. If I didn't turn up for work for half the time there's no way I'd still be employed!

If for some reason I found myself employing Nadine Dorries with no option to get rid of her then I suspect I'd welcome her not turning up for work half the time. I'd certainly be looking to make it a work-from-home position

 

[duncanp]

That seems reasonable. If I didn't turn up for work for half the time there's no way I'd still be employed!

A lot of MPs work takes place outside the House of Commons.

There may be meetings in the constituency, or meetings with external organisations about matters that affect their constituents.

Even now, as parliament is in recess, that doesn't mean MPs are doing no work until the first week of September.

Whilst you need to hold MPs to account, you also need to protect MPs for vexatious recall petitions every few months by their political opponents.

 

[nlogax]

A lot of MPs work takes place outside the House of Commons.

There may be meetings in the constituency, or meetings with external organisations about matters that affect their constituents.

Even now, as parliament is in recess, that doesn't mean MPs are doing no work until the first week of September.

Whilst you need to hold MPs to account, you also need to protect MPs for vexatious recall petitions every few months by their political opponents.

All that is true, but Dorries appears to be a terrible MP for her constituency. According to the Flitwick council letter she hasn't conducted a local surgery for approaching three and a half years.

 

[MikeWM]

All that is true, but Dorries appears to be a terrible MP for her constituency. According to the Flitwick council letter she hasn't conducted a local surgery for approaching three and a half years.

While clearly Dorries should get on with it and stop being so irritating, I'd say that hard cases probably would make bad law in this case. Other than Jared O'Mara in the 2017 parliament, I can't immediately think of any other MPs that have behaved in the way Dorries has.

Possibly worth pointing out specifically on the surgery issue that not all MPs do hold surgeries, and there is certainly no requirement to do so. Eric Forth never did, for one, and he kept on getting re-elected nevertheless.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

All that is true, but Dorries appears to be a terrible MP for her constituency. According to the Flitwick council letter she hasn't conducted a local surgery for approaching three and a half years.

I agree, and I think that's the real issue here, far more than attendance in the Commons (which arguably makes very little difference anyway when a Government has an 80+ majority in almost any significant vote). The problem is that the things an MP might need to do are so varied that there's pretty much no sensible way you could ever devise any rules to accurately determine whether an MP is actually doing their job, so it really has to come down to human judgement. I suspect the best you could do is to provide some mechanism for constituents to complain to somewhere if they feel their MP is unreasonably inactive (the Commons Standards and Privileges Committee?) - and if enough complaints about a particular MP come in and appear to be well-founded, then the committee would have the option to investigate and - if it feels appropriate - order a suspension of the MP, triggering the usual possible recall process.

That's not by any means a perfect solution but I suspect it's the least bad option.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Jul 2023 ==

While clearly Dorries should get on with it and stop being so irritating, I'd say that hard cases probably would make bad law in this case. Other than Jared O'Mara in the 2017 parliament, I can't immediately think of any other MPs that have behaved in the way Dorries has.

And every single Sinn Fein MP elected since the 1980s?

 

[Typhoon]

The trouble is that there is no clear definition of an MP’s duties, so they can’t be criticised for not doing something that they aren’t required to do. There are party duties and demands, but that can lead no further than losing the whip. A recall petition can only be instigated by constituents if the MP gets a sufficiently long prison sentence, gets suspended by the house for ten sitting or fourteen calendar days, or is convicted of an election expenses fiddle.

We really do need a clear definition of the minimum duties, both inside and outside Parliament, that an MP should fulfill, with due allowance made for ministerial duties or illness. No doubt there would be some who would just keep on the correct side of the line and only go through the motions, but it would be a start.

If there was a time for at least something to be done , it might be now. It might need a private members bill, though. There must be a considerable number on the government benches, and not just the front bench, who are seriously pi$$ed off by her actions, if only because, through this publicity, it is harming their chances of being re-elected. Even Geoffrey Cox is turning up. asking questions and voting now!

I am surprised that there hasn't been some form of table of MPs published by a media source - those with the worst attendance record, longest date since last record of attending if only to get some attention ('Is your MP a skiver? Full list of attendance records of all MPs on page 5').
One difficulty is near the top of the list will be ministers, in particular the Prime Minister - maybe just include 'unexplained absences', like in schools.

Recorded attendance seems to be fairly common in local government. My district councilor has an over 80% attendance record since elected, according to the council website. I suppose I could try to work it out for Westminster but, not only is it a chore, but there must be days when there is no recorded vote, then there are those like The Speaker (and those 'advised' not to attend).

The issue here is that Dorries has taken it to the extreme and is openly going on the media - not only presenting her TV programme and writing a weekly Mail opinion piece but being interviewed 'demanding' this that and the other - being seen just about everywhere but Parliament - and her constituency. Have the contestants for Strictly or Celebrity Bake Off been announced yet? More opportunities rub her constituents faces in the mud. I don't suppose there will be a big queue to replace her as Conservative candidate for Mid-Beds, having to at least partially defend her actions.

 

[duncanp]

Possibly worth pointing out specifically on the surgery issue that not all MPs do hold surgeries, and there is certainly no requirement to do so. Eric Forth never did, for one, and he kept on getting re-elected nevertheless.

Especially these days, there are other ways for constituents to get in touch with their MP, via e-mail and social media.

MPs can keep their constituents up to date with what they are doing via social media, and some also have a dedicated website.

If you made MPs attend a minimum number of debates each month, what would happen is that they pick a particularly obscure debate in which they have no interest, just to tick the relevant box, and they would sit there scrolling through their phones or falling asleep.

What matters is an MPs overall performance, and the next election is time for the voters to decide whether they wish to retain the sitting MP.

 

[MikeWM]

And every single Sinn Fein MP elected since the 1980s?

Well, their electors knew what they were voting for. Although if one was uncharitable, I suppose you could say the same about people voting for Dorries

 

[yorksrob]

And every single Sinn Fein MP elected since the 1980s?

It pains me to speak positively with regard to Sinn Fein, however presumably their MP's continue their constituency work (albeit outwith Westminster), however according to the Councillors of Flitwick, Ms Dorries is AWOL both in terms of Westminster and constituency work.

 

[skyhigh]

I am surprised that there hasn't been some form of table of MPs published by a media source - those with the worst attendance record, longest date since last record of attending if only to get some attention ('Is your MP a skiver? Full list of attendance records of all MPs on page 5').
One difficulty is near the top of the list will be ministers, in particular the Prime Minister - maybe just include 'unexplained absences', like in schools.

Recorded attendance seems to be fairly common in local government. My district councilor has an over 80% attendance record since elected, according to the council website. I suppose I could try to work it out for Westminster but, not only is it a chore, but there must be days when there is no recorded vote, then there are those like The Speaker (and those 'advised' not to attend).

There are records of voting history and attendance available online. My local MP (who I'm not massively keen on) has roughly a 91% attendance to votes over the current parliamentary term. In comparison Dorries has an attendance of 48%. The last time she voted was in April.

The Public Whip — Voting Record - Nadine Dorries MP, Mid Bedfordshire (11397)

 

[nlogax]

There are records of voting history and attendance available online. My local MP (who I'm not massively keen on) has roughly a 91% attendance to votes over the current parliamentary term. In comparison Dorries has an attendance of 48%. The last time she voted was in April.

The Public Whip — Voting Record - Nadine Dorries MP, Mid Bedfordshire (11397)

With the Conservative majority shrinking bit by bit it's clear why this lack of engagement is a risk to her party. Outside of her weird social media posts and tv appearances in which she continues to fawn over Boris Johnson she is fast becoming a liability to the Tories in terms of pure parliamentary numbers. Every vote will now count for them and Dorries barely shows up.

 

[najaB]

A lot of MPs work takes place outside the House of Commons.

There may be meetings in the constituency, or meetings with external organisations about matters that affect their constituents.

Which is why the attendance threshold wouldn't be 100%.

Even now, as parliament is in recess, that doesn't mean MPs are doing no work until the first week of September.

And since parliament isn't sitting, the attendance requirement wouldn't enter into it.

 

[edwin_m]

A lot of MPs work takes place outside the House of Commons.

There may be meetings in the constituency, or meetings with external organisations about matters that affect their constituents.

That's why I suggested a threshold of 50% attendance, below which MPs might be liable to financial sanction. A lower figure could be considered instead, and perhaps ministers would have a different threshold to allow for their extra duties. Backbenchers also do important work on committees, perhaps attending them could count towards the threshold as well as attending the House.

 

[duncanp]

Which is why the attendance threshold wouldn't be 100%.

And since parliament isn't sitting, the attendance requirement wouldn't enter into it.

It depends what you set the threshold at.

You want to ensure a reasonable level of attendance, but you don't want MPs sitting in a debate just for the sake of a box ticking exercise.

 

[yorksrob]

It depends what you set the threshold at.

You want to ensure a reasonable level of attendance, but you don't want MPs sitting in a debate just for the sake of a box ticking exercise.

Arguably, if a debate is going on in parliament, its important enough for at least some constituents that the mp should be present.