I average approximately £5000 pounds of imports from the UK every year, their are about 350-400 expat farmers in the region who probably do similar. So £2 million added to the UK's bottom line from a very small group, isn't to be sniffed at. Add to that, all the other ex pat business on the go that will do similar across Europe and it's a sizeable chunk of money. But there again I am not just an armchair politician, I actually do something for my country.
It is entirely legal, though not particularly moral - as I have written before, law should not be conflated with justice and, it seems, nor should morality in its political sense.
But, as mentioned in an earlier post, this lot can be forced to have by-elections, via 'moving the Writ', but it would require a majority of MPs to support it.
I don't think it matters a jot who is in this new 'group', or that its size is greater or smaller than the DUP or the Liberals. All that matters at the moment is which way a given MP will vote on the key issues, and this lot 'defecting' won't change how they vote; nor will the rebels in either Labour or Tory ranks change their voting intentions.
Well the voters NEVER voted or gave them a "veto", to leave or form a "freeland" faction group did they?It is entirely legal, though not particularly moral - as I have written before, law should not be conflated with justice and, it seems, nor should morality in its political sense.
But, as mentioned in an earlier post, this lot can be forced to have by-elections, via 'moving the Writ', but it would require a majority of MPs to support it.
I don't think it matters a jot who is in this new 'group', or that its size is greater or smaller than the DUP or the Liberals. All that matters at the moment is which way a given MP will vote on the key issues, and this lot 'defecting' won't change how they vote; nor will the rebels in either Labour or Tory ranks change their voting intentions.
Correct
I am happy to be corrected on this, because Parliamentary Procedure and its minutiae are not a strong point of mine, but... my understanding is that this can also be brought to pass by an MP, usually the Chief Whip of a party, approaching the Speaker (can you spot a potential problem here ), on his approval the matter may be put to the Commons for a vote and, by a simple majority, will pass or fail.Surely @Danllan moving the writ only happens when a seat is vacant due to death imprisonment or resignation ( by applying for some obscure position)
I rather think if it was possible to unseat these MPs it would be highly difficult as TM iswithout a majority now after these resignations even if every one of the conservatives + DUP voted for it. Of course if the Labour and Cons got together they could unseat ths bunch but it takes 6 weeks and I think would cause a constitutional issue iof a very grave order.Incorrect, probably...
I am happy to be corrected on this, because Parliamentary Procedure and its minutiae are not a strong point of mine, but... my understanding is that this can also be brought to pass by an MP, usually the Chief Whip of a party, approaching the Speaker (can you spot a potential problem here ), on his approval the matter may be put to the Commons for a vote and, by a simple majority, will pass or fail.
Now, this is generally taken to be the practice only when an MP is no longer in a seat, through a technical resignation, death etc.. But, and this is the interesting bit, the practice and the lore surrounding it, are such that it does not absolutely preclude a Writ being moved for a sitting MP. The Commons can, I think, command the Speaker to do the necessary.
My understanding is that the door has been left open with an eye to pragmatic ejection of sitting MPs who cannot be removed for any other reason. Imagine a situation in which an MP spends all day, every day, spying strangers and so forth, thereby making work in the Commons impossible. He hasn't broken a law, he can't be stopped from sitting and so preventing his constituents from being represented, so what can be done to get rid of him? The answer is get the voters to bin him - although it would be fascinating if such an individual was returned, with an increased majority...
We live in politically interesting times, in which the Speaker himself has ignored precedent, and it wouldn't surprise me if we see things attempted which, hitherto, we would not have.
Traditionally SF polticians have never taken there seat, but declaring the seat vacant and putting it up for reelection would be pointless as they would just be voted in againI believe a by election writ has been moved by someone else in the case of SF "MPs" who for obvious reasons won't take the traditional route for declaring a by election.
If it is a goer, and I am not entirely certain that it is, I would not be surprised to see cross-party cooperation to get by-elections. I don't know if, tactically, it would make more sense to do this a.s.a.p. to put the current lot on the back foot and scare other potential jumpers, or have it hanging over the heads of potential jumpers. I prefer definite things, so would do it now, but I am not TM or JC. Interesting times.I rather think if it was possible to unseat these MPs it would be highly difficult as TM iswithout a majority now after these resignations even if every one of the conservatives + DUP voted for it. Of course if the Labour and Cons got together they could unseat ths bunch but it takes 6 weeks and I think would cause a constitutional issue iof a very grave order.
As I said before there is a very long history of distinguished politicains crossing the floor and these have not even done this!
And great PR for themTraditionally SF polticians have never taken there seat, but declaring the seat vacant and putting it up for reelection would be pointless as they would just be voted in again
I think they would have to put a 3 line whip on it and then I suspect there would be many who would not support such a motion. I doubt JC or TM would risk it.If it is a goer, and I am not entirely certain that it is, I would not be surprised to see cross-party cooperation to get by-elections. I don't know if, tactically, it would make more sense to do this a.s.a.p. to put the current lot on the back foot and scare other potential jumpers, or have it hanging over the heads of potential jumpers. I prefer definite things, so would do it now, but I am not TM or JC. Interesting times.
True, but it seems to suggest there is a precedent to force a by election.Traditionally SF polticians have never taken there seat, but declaring the seat vacant and putting it up for reelection would be pointless as they would just be voted in again
I doubt that a three line whip would be needed, it just requires a simple majority. If the DUP were to help, maybe a couple of independents (e.g. Mr Field) only 190 Tories and half of Labour could see it done. If JC could get more than half of his MPs to follow him, TM would maybe only need a bit over half of hers...I think they would have to put a 3 line whip on it and then I suspect there would be many who would not support such a motion. I doubt JC or TM would risk it.
They know,we know,but don't stop them from implementing these issues and barriers does it?Hang on chaps there is a slightly more pressing issue.....
Pot calling kettle possiblyGood tweet from a tory mp
Nadine DorriesVerified account @NadineDorries
- 34 replies200 retweets914 likes
4. And, enough of people saying they would be welcome back- this is a lie and everyone knows it. Soubry called the PM a racist. Allen said she wants to destroy the party. They are fundamentalists/democracy deniers with incredibly inflated opinions of their own ability.
Pot calling kettle possibly