Cycling UK Forum

So that's another ex Councillor against, who probably was in favour when this was proposed.

Karen Sutton wrote:So that's another ex Councillor against, who probably was in favour when this was proposed.

Yep - and I hear rumblings that more of my current colleagues on Council are wavering now they're beginning to see the light - or even backpedalling furiously.

I'm not sure whether I'm looking forward to Saturday or not

Regulator wrote:

Karen Sutton wrote:So that's another ex Councillor against, who probably was in favour when this was proposed.

Yep - and I hear rumblings that more of my current colleagues on Council are wavering now they're beginning to see the light - or even backpedalling furiously.

Are they begining to see the light or are they just thinking moderating their stance so they can feasibly hang on to their council positions after a 'No' vote?

bikepacker wrote:

Regulator wrote:

Karen Sutton wrote:So that's another ex Councillor against, who probably was in favour when this was proposed.

Yep - and I hear rumblings that more of my current colleagues on Council are wavering now they're beginning to see the light - or even backpedalling furiously.

Are they begining to see the light or are they just thinking moderating their stance so they can feasibly hang on to their council positions after a 'No' vote?

Given the interesting (national) constitutional issues of the past few days, if (hopefully) the vote goes against the proposals what will

a) the Councillors (the MPs) do? . . . . and perhaps more interestingly

b) what will the the Chief Executive (the Prime Minister) do?

To lose the vote would seem to make all of the positions untenable and require a complete new set of people.

Rob

Should the vote be a 'No', if certain people had an ounce of integrity they would resign. But I did state; 'if'.

robgul wrote:
Given the interesting (national) constitutional issues of the past few days, if (hopefully) the vote goes against the proposals what will

a) the Councillors (the MPs) do? . . . . and perhaps more interestingly

b) what will the the Chief Executive (the Prime Minister) do?

To lose the vote would seem to make all of the positions untenable and require a complete new set of people.

Rob

I think the 'Prime Minister' would better equate as the Chair. After all, the staff are the equivalent of the civil service.

Wondered whether a 'misinformation' card might be played if things look tight. We can expect a deus ex machina plotline worthy of Dallas at Loughborough, involving alien abduction, a lost ark of vital statistics, high horses, lapses of memory and a full array of 'that was then, this is now' pleading.

Still, when the pedalo is on the brink of Niagara there's nothing wrong with some full astern.

Regulator wrote:

robgul wrote:
Given the interesting (national) constitutional issues of the past few days, if (hopefully) the vote goes against the proposals what will

a) the Councillors (the MPs) do? . . . . and perhaps more interestingly

b) what will the the Chief Executive (the Prime Minister) do?

To lose the vote would seem to make all of the positions untenable and require a complete new set of people.

Rob

I think the 'Prime Minister' would better equate as the Chair. After all, the staff are the equivalent of the civil service.

That did cross my mind, but in real life does not the Civil Service manipulate the Prime Minister? ... or at least Sir Humphrey seemed to!

Rob

robgul wrote:

Regulator wrote:

robgul wrote:
Given the interesting (national) constitutional issues of the past few days, if (hopefully) the vote goes against the proposals what will

a) the Councillors (the MPs) do? . . . . and perhaps more interestingly

b) what will the the Chief Executive (the Prime Minister) do?

To lose the vote would seem to make all of the positions untenable and require a complete new set of people.

Rob

I think the 'Prime Minister' would better equate as the Chair. After all, the staff are the equivalent of the civil service.

That did cross my mind, but in real life does not the Civil Service manipulate the Prime Minister? ... or at least Sir Humphrey seemed to!

Rob

One could not possibly comment.
Sir Humphrey

If the vote is "no", I look forward to the sight of Kevin Mayne and Greg/John/Simon standing side by side in the CTC back garden saying how they now realise they never disagreed about anything really and how much they have in common.

That did cross my mind, but in real life does not the Civil Service manipulate the Prime Minister? ... or at least Sir Humphrey seemed to!

Rob[/quote]


One could not possibly comment.
Sir Humphrey

[/quote]

... slight mis-quote there ... it was from House of Cards, said by Francis Urqhart (played by Ian Richardson) who was Prime Minister.

Rob

robgul wrote:... slight mis-quote there ... it was from House of Cards, said by Francis Urqhart (played by Ian Richardson) who was Prime Minister.
Rob

I fear you are confused, Minister. Francis Urquhart's catchphrase was "You might think that; I couldn't possibly comment."

swansonj wrote:If the vote is "no", I look forward to the sight of Kevin Mayne and Greg/John/Simon standing side by side in the CTC back garden saying how they now realise they never disagreed about anything really and how much they have in common.

the really, really sad thing is that it would be true. What posessed David Robinson to embark on this ridiculous manoeuvre when there's much more pressing work to be done is beyond me.

And, if you remember, the CTC used to have a back garden, but gave it to the Trust who sold it!