Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => Politics & Current Affairs => Topic started by: Nearly Sane on March 15, 2017, 08:12:03 PM
-
Following on from the questioning of the South Thanet MP, and Channel 4's ongoing investigation, this could be deeply serious, especially given the connection to Central Office
https://www.channel4.com/news/
-
I've been following this on the channel 4 news over the months. It should mean a good kicking in the teeth of the Tories but it will probably just be a fine. >:(
-
I've been following this on the channel 4 news over the months. It should mean a good kicking in the teeth of the Tories but it will probably just be a fine. >:(
me too. It should certainly mean some by elections. Though not sure whether Farage might stand for UKIP 1.0 or UKIP 2.0
-
I suppose anyone voting Tory on here thinks this is all fine? Like the lie on NI and uturn on it? And the admittance that there is no plan on Brexit if it fails! Anyone voted for them?
-
I suppose anyone voting Tory on here thinks this is all fine? Like the lie on NI and uturn on it? And the admittance that there is no plan on Brexit if it fails! Anyone voted for them?
Lots of people voted for them, but the problem is none of the parties have much going for them tbh.
Labour isn't much better, and lots of people have gone off the liberals.
No it's not fine, but politicians and abusing expenses seem to go together.
🤔
If labour want to get voted for, they could do with bringing back the " other" Milliband.
TBH none of them seem worth voting for ATM.
Disillusioned, is the feeling.
None of them come out squeaky clean.
It's a matter of voting for what people think is the lesser of evils
:o
-
This could have huge constitutional significance were is to be demonstrated that the election of perhaps a dozen Tory MPs were based on unlawful and therefore the results from 2015 declared null and void, with by-elections to be re-run.
The significance, of course, being that those MPs were essential for the Tories winning a majority and therefore to the whole brexit debacle. Without a Tory majority, there wouldn't have been a referendum.
It is plausible that a legal case could be made (and won) that any legislation dependent upon the election of those MPs is similarly null and void.
Interesting times.
-
Hard to know if this is due to incompetence or arrogance, or possibly both. Either way these current problems are well deserved by this loathsome excuse for a political party.
-
So the first finding is a fine. Harumph!
-
Seventy grand fine. What else could happen? Prisons are overflowing as it is and I don't know who would carry the can.
I may sound a bit cavailier about this business. Make no mistake, I dislike the tory party as much as anyone but they didn't declare all their election expenses. The fact that they spent morethan advertised may have meant they had an unfair advantage, idon;t know. Now everyone knows what was spent and they've been fined which seems fair & end of.
Could have been any party.
-
Seventy grand fine. What else could happen? Prisons are overflowing as it is and I don't know who would carry the can.
I may sound a bit cavailier about this business. Make no mistake, I dislike the tory party as much as anyone but they didn't declare all their election expenses. The fact that they spent morethan advertised may have meant they had an unfair advantage, idon;t know. Now everyone knows what was spent and they've been fined which seems fair & end of.
Could have been any party.
rerun of election in seats. Which may still happen
-
I am always wary of accusations of BBC bias but there is certainly a case to answer here.
https://www.thecanary.co/2017/03/16/channel-4s-jon-snow-just-slammed-bbc-coverage-tory-election-fraud/
-
me too. It should certainly mean some by elections.
Agreed.
Though not sure whether Farage might stand for UKIP 1.0 or UKIP 2.0
Wouldn't that put the cat amongst the pigeons.
-
Agreed.
Wouldn't that put the cat amongst the pigeons.
Two UKIP candidates? And then a film of The Life of Nigel?
-
This could have huge constitutional significance were is to be demonstrated that the election of perhaps a dozen Tory MPs were based on unlawful and therefore the results from 2015 declared null and void, with by-elections to be re-run.
The significance, of course, being that those MPs were essential for the Tories winning a majority and therefore to the whole brexit debacle. Without a Tory majority, there wouldn't have been a referendum.
It is plausible that a legal case could be made (and won) that any legislation dependent upon the election of those MPs is similarly null and void.
Interesting times.
Wow. That's a twist and a half.
Though the other parties have been playing the same game so should we add that to the mix and have other by-elections?
-
Two UKIP candidates?
Now there's a thought. I think that would confuse the electorate.
And then a film of The Life of Nigel?
He's not the messiah......
-
This could have huge constitutional significance were is to be demonstrated that the election of perhaps a dozen Tory MPs were based on unlawful and therefore the results from 2015 declared null and void, with by-elections to be re-run.
The significance, of course, being that those MPs were essential for the Tories winning a majority and therefore to the whole brexit debacle. Without a Tory majority, there wouldn't have been a referendum.
It is plausible that a legal case could be made (and won) that any legislation dependent upon the election of those MPs is similarly null and void.
Interesting times.
Plausible seems a bit strong here. Undoubtedly a case could be made that it could be won is plausible in the same sense as a whale turning into s vase of petunias.
-
Wow. That's a twist and a half.
Not really - this has been mentioned by a a number of political commentators since the allegations arose.
Though the other parties have been playing the same game so should we add that to the mix and have other by-elections?
Sure that's true in theory, but the issue would only be significant under two conditions - first that there is the rules on spending were breached in a particular constituency, and secondly that a case can be made that the over-spending had an effect on the outcome. Therefore this will disproportionately affect the Tories as the were unexpectedly successful at holding onto their own marginals and taking marginal seats they previously didn't hold.
The issue is moot if another party overspent but failed to take the seat.
-
Now there's a thought. I think that would confuse the electorate.
He's not the messiah......
Undoubtedly, but that won't stop it happening, the 2 UKIPs that is. With Banks looking to set it up, why would Farage stay in UKIP 1.0?
And while Nigel may not be the Messiah, he may well tell his followers to fuck off.
-
Not really - this has been mentioned by a a number of political commentators since the allegations arose.
Sure that's true in theory, but the issue would only be significant under two conditions - first that there is the rules on spending were breached in a particular constituency, and secondly that a case can be made that the over-spending had an effect on the outcome. Therefore this will disproportionately affect the Tories as the were unexpectedly successful at holding onto their own marginals and taking marginal seats they previously didn't hold.
The issue is moot if another party overspent but failed to take the seat.
But if they won then they too should lose their seat and that may affect the voting in parliament.
Anyway, from what I remember the vote for the referendum bill was high because Labour didn't want to be seen as being anti people/democracy, so it would take many 10's of MPs to affect this.
-
Undoubtedly, but that won't stop it happening, the 2 UKIPs that is. With Banks looking to set it up, why would Farage stay in UKIP 1.0?
And while Nigel may not be the Messiah, he may well tell his followers to fuck off.
That is why it would confuse the electorate because the odds are Farage would favour his pal Aaron. UKIP 1.0 has moved from Farage's position or slipping away from it, whereas Banks is where they are both are.
I think that last comment is more your feelings than his.
-
That is why it would confuse the electorate because the odds are Farage would favour his pal Aaron. UKIP 1.0 has moved from Farage's position or slipping away from it, whereas Banks is where they are both are.
I think that last comment is more your feelings than his.
. It was a joke based on the Life of Brian bit earlier and you agree anyway as you covered that in your first paragtaph