UK General Discussion

[Filuwaúrdjan]

hah

[Filuwaúrdjan]

His fault for being a cock, I think.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The cherry of the top of the glorious cake that is this story: Vicky Pryce is apparently now in a relationship with Denis MacShane. Yes, that one.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

218 Labour MPs are pledged to vote in favour, 14 will be voting against (mostly very committed Catholics, though not entirely), 3 will be abstaining (this includes both Timms and Shuker; the widely suspected reasons for the lack of a whip) and no one knows about a further 20 (also quite an RC heavy list, actually).

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It generally doesn't take long for the real figures to emerge.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

All 8 DUP MPs reportedly against (how shocking). Around 20 Labour MPs and about 4 LibDems, one of which is Teather.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The Attorney General seems to have abstained.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Sources suggest 140 Tories against, 132 for. If confirmed I'll resign my membership.

139-132 is the current (final?) figure

[Filuwaúrdjan]

There have been 'rebellions' (much, much smaller) on some technical, procedural follow up votes. This is... unusual.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

institutionalized

I think that's only true of a small number; Lord Gilbert, say.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Well, it's a marker of minority status here, isn't it? Not so in Quebec.

Though more than just a few Catholic MPs voted in favour, it should be noted.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Teather is a piece of sh!t. Anyone who's ever had a relative who's died of cancer ought to think so.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Havering MPs: Rosindell against (not a surprise), Watkinson and Cruddas in favour.

With regards to issues mentioned above, Cruddas is very, very, very much RC.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

A technical term, it should be noted.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It is quite the magnet for cretins of all political hues; the dominant tone depends on the subject matter a lot of the time.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/feb/14/harold-wilson-roy-hattersley-wrong-about

Thoughts?

There's nothing too surprising there, but it's interesting all the same. Wilson had an (unfair) reputation as a factionalist hack before he became leader, and an (unfair) reputation as an unusually dodgy career politician after 1966 or so and then as that plus 'paranoid old man' after 1974. The main reason for the first two was that he couldn't lie convincingly, which is an awful disability for a politician. Generally he tried to get around that by half-truths, which was dangerous because it's easier to prove those than actual lies. As for the third, well, we now know that he was quite right to be paranoid.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Eastleigh is one of the few places left where they still totally dominate local politics; they've built up a very strong brand there, one that can survive the trainwreck that The-LibDems-In-Government have basically been and (probably) one that can survive the criminal conviction (and outing as a total louse) of their sitting Member on top of that. And even if they do lose the by-election, they'll probably take the seat back at the General Election. Of course (and like most LibDem seats) in terms of government formation Eastleigh is only relevant in terms of a Tory minority or Tory majority; it has no bearing on whether or not Labour can win. The minority LibDem seats where Labour are competitive are mostly going to fall, incumbency be damned.

I also wonder how strong some of the second generation incumbents in their safer seats (facing Tory opposition) are.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

See the career of John Bercow as a case in point...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I suspect that we might see a surprising amount of fluidity between the two Government parties in the county council elections later this year.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

LibDems took a hell of a beating in Aber last year, for whatever that's worth.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

That is the technical term, I understand.

Though actually what's been alleged is worse than that; full on power abuse creeper creep.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Related story being that of Lord Rennard, of course. A story that has the added... er... 'bonus'... of Baron Groper of Wavertree looking very much the type, so to speak.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Seems as though the Vatican essentially sacked him.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

This apple is larger than that egg.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The Labour Party ran 78 candidates in January 1910 and 56 in December 1910. Most (almost all in December) of these candidates won, almost all of them faced no opposition from the Liberal Party (there was, of course, an electoral pact). Had Labour adopted a more aggressive approach to relations with the Liberals, the Party would have polled many more votes but won significantly less seats.

And, of course, there were no opinion polls in the 1910s.

What electoral reform will be undertaken in the UK, which will allow the UKIP to gain voters (or the other parties to lose voters), in the way that universal suffrage allowed Labour to gain voters in the years following 1910?

Oddly enough (and somewhat counterintuitively), it was proven a while ago that universal suffrage wasn't (as in: literally can't have logically been) the reason for Labour's great breakthrough after 1918, although it certainly helped as the '20s progressed.