Are we all Trussed up...

[Jdsk]

This is the first time that I've seen what the Home Secretary was doing when she sent some document to the wrong person or using the wrong email account:

"All in a day’s debacle: 24 hours that undid Liz Truss":
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -liz-truss

"The condensed endgame had begun at 4am on Wednesday when Suella Braverman, still then the home secretary, joined the National Crime Agency on a raid in Oxfordshire connected to illicit Channel crossings.
"As she returned from the raid in the back of a ministerial car, a presumably sleep-deprived Braverman used her personal email to send a government document about immigration to a supportive Tory backbencher, accidentally copying in the aide of another MP, who informed the whips about what was a serious, if not necessarily career-ending, rule breach."

I hope that this cheers up someone else at a time like this.

Jonathan

[Jdsk]

What is a surprise, or maybe it isn't, is that what should be a straightforward nominations, election, calm and collected process has yet again become a psychodrama centred on Johnson (again).

It is interesting. Some possible reasons:

1 Many of us think that if he's in the pair on whom Conservative party members vote then he'll be elected party leader. And then appointed Prime Minister.

And this matters because:

2 Some people find him entertaining. Some people think him corrupt and corrupting.

And:

3 Many people are not finished with his personal rôle in the UK Leaving the EU.

Jonathan

[Psamathe]

I wonder if Johnson's problems go beyond the possibility of being found to have misled Parliament. There is also the Covid Enquiry that will hopefully be reporting (at lest partially) before the next scheduled General Election and I suspect Johnson will come in for major criticism e.g. for delaying lockdowns against scientific advice (of Gov. advisory bodies). But Johnson Fanboys/girls overlook his failings and see him as having got us through Covid.

Ian

[Stevek76]

Can I just point out that suella braverman didn't dream of sending asylum seekers to Rwanda but it was pritti Patel. Braverman is of course worse than Patel! That's some achievement of course even if not s good one.

It's Patel's policy but it was Braverman said it was her dream and obsession to see one of those flights happen at the conservative conference the other week.

It was also Braverman who had the sightly demented and incoherent rant the other day in parliament.

I'm afraid it's the Labour Party, it's the Lib Dems, it's the coalition of chaos, it's the Guardian-reading, tofu-eating wokerati – dare I say, the anti-growth coalition – that we have to thank for the disruption we are seeing on our roads today.

I looked at that and it isn't as bad as it sounds. It isn't for personal income. It is expenses, including paying staff and general office expenses, in relation to continued public service relating to the former role of PM. Receipts are needed for every penny of it. The figure given is the limit she might claim.

Still seems fairly bad to me. What public service is an ex PM doing that isn't already covered by other allowances for that service (eg lords expenses if they're participating there)?

Blair claimed the max last year and already makes millions off the talks circuit.

I don't mind any security needs being covered but ex PMs still wanting to dabble, unelected, in public goings on should fund it themselves.

[Tangled Metal]

Can I just point out that our democratic system is such that we elect individuals into office as an mp with the party having the most MPs having the first chance to form a government with the confidence of a majority of MPs? As such we do not directly elect a PM and have no right to an election to vote for each new PM

I only point this out because those calling for a GE are only doing so because they don't like the current party in power. If they did like them I very much doubt they'd call for a GE. If in doubt I wonder if anyone can find out what Kier Starmer or an mp that served through the Blair to Brown years said about calling a GE when Blair stood down? Simply put hypocrisy in political matters rests on the colour of your's and the party in power's rosette. If they match a minority vote on the next PM is good, if not you'll probably shout about it being unfair, undemocratic and possibly a criminal cartel!

No PM has a mandate, their party might get a mandate to form a government and their leader might get the PM job under that mandate. We do not have a presidential style election for our PM.

[Tangled Metal]

Braverman didn't dream up the Rwanda thing that was under Patel. I think it is very important to put that idea on her so hopefully it ends her further political ambitions. If anyone is worse than SB it's PP!

[Jdsk]

Can I just point out that our democratic system is such that we elect individuals into office as an mp with the party having the most MPs having the first chance to form a government with the confidence of a majority of MPs? As such we do not directly elect a PM and have no right to an election to vote for each new PM

I only point this out because those calling for a GE are only doing so because they don't like the current party in power. If they did like them I very much doubt they'd call for a GE. If in doubt I wonder if anyone can find out what Kier Starmer or an mp that served through the Blair to Brown years said about calling a GE when Blair stood down? Simply put hypocrisy in political matters rests on the colour of your's and the party in power's rosette. If they match a minority vote on the next PM is good, if not you'll probably shout about it being unfair, undemocratic and possibly a criminal cartel!

No PM has a mandate, their party might get a mandate to form a government and their leader might get the PM job under that mandate. We do not have a presidential style election for our PM.

My emboldening.

I don't think that is the only reason. Many of us would like to have a government that is capable of governing. That is not currently the case, and many of us don't think that it will be the case after the latest election of a leader of the Conservative Party.

Jonathan

[Jdsk]

Well, i guess this pretty much wraps it up for the Liz Truss thread!
...

There's a lot of important stuff to be done this week: decisions on elections in Northern Ireland, the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill, the extraordinary powers that might be awarded to Ministers without Parliamentary support...

This doesn't come to a halt because Truss has resigned as party leader.

Jonathan

[Jdsk]

I note with annoyance that Truss' short tenure entitles her to a hand out of over £100k a year, from now on...

And a list of people who will be appointed to Parliament for life without ever facing election or review.

Confirmed:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... 4-days-pm/
(paywalled)

Jonathan

[Psamathe]

Can I just point out that our democratic system is such that we elect individuals into office as an mp with the party having the most MPs having the first chance to form a government with the confidence of a majority of MPs? As such we do not directly elect a PM and have no right to an election to vote for each new PM

I only point this out because those calling for a GE are only doing so because they don't like the current party in power. If they did like them I very much doubt they'd call for a GE. If in doubt I wonder if anyone can find out what Kier Starmer or an mp that served through the Blair to Brown years said about calling a GE when Blair stood down? Simply put hypocrisy in political matters rests on the colour of your's and the party in power's rosette. If they match a minority vote on the next PM is good, if not you'll probably shout about it being unfair, undemocratic and possibly a criminal cartel!

No PM has a mandate, their party might get a mandate to form a government and their leader might get the PM job under that mandate. We do not have a presidential style election for our PM.

I agree and I think it highlights the failings of our "democratic system". These days the Government and PM seem to be getting ever increasing powers available without consulting Parliament and thus without our elected representatives having any say.

Personally I find the calls for a General Election reasonable given how the Conservatives seem to have adopted different policies from those of the manifesto on which they came to power. In some respects those arguing Johnson should be restored to PM because he is the one who has the mandate of the electorate, whilst technically wrong, it raises a point that Johnson was the leader who took a prominent role in the last General Election. Who knows what new direction the person selected by the Conservative MPs and/or the Conservative Party members will pursue.

I was particularly disappointed when Truss was declaring she had a mandate to implement her extreme policies when that "mandate" was from just 0.17% of the national electorate.

Ian

[Dingdong]

Johnson was a good "politician" only in terms of political expediency, he also sold the country a lie. As a human being, he was (and presumably still is) an odious, self serving, selfish, arrogant, egregious and toxic megalomaniac. He is also a persistent, pathological liar.

Which is why eventually no one wanted him on their team. A good prime minister has to have experience and grit and integrity to lead and be part of a huge team of talented individuals. They also need to be clever enough to know when their time is up. But most of all they have to engender a basic level of trust, not only from their own party, but from the country. Which is why we'll never see Johnson in front line politics ever again. Thank God.

There's a difference between being a good politician and a good PM.
What makes you so sure Johnson won't make a comeback?

Four things really:

1. Nobody goes back to an ex who is a pathological liar

2. He's a proven political idiot. Sacked from every job in the last 30 years, including PM.

3. He's as illegitimate as the next PM as his dozen or so illegitimate children. Poor sods, having that article for a "father".

4. It's rumoured that over two dozen Tory MPs will immediately defect to the Libdems if he's chosen, leaving a very large hole in the Tory majority. It's this, inevitably which rules out Boris entirely.

I've got £50 on Sunak at 5/2 odds. My money is safe.

[mjr]

I note with annoyance that Truss' short tenure entitles her to a hand out of over £100k a year, from now on...

And a list of people who will be appointed to Parliament for life without ever facing election or review.

Confirmed:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... 4-days-pm/
(paywalled)

It's a plot to stuff the Lords with Tories by having as many prime ministers as possible in the time left before the next election!

[Dingdong]

Well, i guess this pretty much wraps it up for the Liz Truss thread!
...

There's a lot of important stuff to be done this week: decisions on elections in Northern Ireland, the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill, the extraordinary powers that might be awarded to Ministers without Parliamentary support...

This doesn't come to a halt because Truss has resigned as party leader.

Jonathan

Truss has said she will do absolutely nothing until the next leader is elected. So I'm afraid it does come to a crashing halt, as policy and bills are concerned.

[Dingdong]

I've been on this earth 64 years come December. I've seen governments and PMs come and go, but I've never witnessed such a litany of poor representation at the top of government as the past 3 years. Theresa May was boring and uninspiring, but at least she kept a steady hand on the tiller and appeared to have integrity. Iain Duncan Smith was similar but again, there was a trust in the man.

The only candidate I can see even getting close to the standards required for high office is Sunak. He kept the books balanced all through the hell of Covid, and though his silver spoon credentials are not appealing, he seems to have the character and experience to lead the country, as no one else does.
My German friend phoned me from Berlin last night, everyone in the country is laughing at Britain and what a shambles we are. Thanks Boris/Truss et al. Egits the both of them.

Run Sunak, Run!

PS: (I feel I must register a vested interest, as I've got fifty quid on him at Ladbrokes for next PM!)

[Psamathe]

Do we need yet another thread discussing the same subject already being discussed on multiple other threads?

Quite a few forum members dislike the non-cycling threads and more threads swamps the "New Threads" pages and angers them and we get a restart of "Should political threads be banned ..." and they do have a point. This is a cycling forum but some enjoy discussing other subjects but the onus is on such subjects not to dominate the forum with loads and loads of such threads.

Ian