Tories close gap on Labour to 1 point

BlindBoyGrunt said:
No, I just think he's a totally uninspiring leader and a liar. Anyone who thinks that Labour's recent poll lead has anything to do with him are deluding themselves.
Click to expand...
Ooh triggered. Strange how you can expend so much pent up frustration on replying to me yet you can't summon up any response to @Chris_Boro and his detailed and logical explanation as to why Labour were whipped to abstain against that Bill in the Lords.
 
GazC_MFC said:
Might want to get the mirror out about lying claiming Labour stopped free dinners
Click to expand...
Stop lying.
BoroFur said:
Ooh triggered. Strange how you can expend so much pent up frustration on replying to me yet you can't summon up any response to @Chris_Boro and his detailed and logical explanation as to why Labour were whipped to abstain against that Bill in the Lords.
Click to expand...
Now there's a man after a bite.
 
BoroFur said:
Not at all. You got your facts wrong and were put in your place not for the first time I might add.
Click to expand...
Starmer's Labour have abstained on quite a few occasions including the SpyCops bill. I can't remember them getting any big amendments through later though.
 
BlindBoyGrunt said:
Starmer's Labour have abstained on quite a few occasions including the SpyCops bill. I can't remember them getting any big amendments through later though.
Click to expand...
You haven't addressed what was said to you. You've just ignored it and gone off at a tangent to suit your own agenda.
 
BoroFur said:
You haven't addressed what was said to you. You've just ignored it and gone off at a tangent to suit your own agenda.
Click to expand...
I addressed what was said to me in the very post you've quoted. Chris said that the reason for Starmer's abstentions was to later insert their own amendments. Can you tell me if he inserted any amendments into the SpyCops bill? Can you tell me of any other amendments he's successfully inserted?

I see that you've liked GazC's post where he accuses me of being a liar whilst getting his facts wrong.
 
BlindBoyGrunt said:
I addressed what was said to me in the very post you've quoted. Chris said that the reason for Starmer's abstentions was to later insert their own amendments. Can you tell me if he inserted any amendments into the SpyCops bill? Can you tell me of any other amendments he's successfully inserted?

I see that you've liked GazC's post where he accuses me of being a liar whilst getting his facts wrong.
Click to expand...
You should get some help for that bitterness.
 
BlindBoyGrunt said:
I addressed what was said to me in the very post you've quoted. Chris said that the reason for Starmer's abstentions was to later insert their own amendments. Can you tell me if he inserted any amendments into the SpyCops bill? Can you tell me of any other amendments he's successfully inserted?

I see that you've liked GazC's post where he accuses me of being a liar whilst getting his facts wrong.
Click to expand...

If you so wish you can view every debated amendment to every single bill and their recorded votes and who voted for what, it's all public record.

Unfortunately, it would take a long time as there's many debates for every day they sit and it's not very user friendly, but here's the "SpyCops" bill in its entirety.

The Lords is just one big very expensive talking shop that goes through every bill with a fine tooth comb with amendments fired back and forth until either the government pulls it or forces it through. This process can take over a year.

There are 769 members, the Conservatives have the most with 258, then crossbenchers with 186, then Labour 167. Every single member can add an ammendment with most being voted on by a fraction of the total members, for example around 180 voted on the free school meals ammendment, if Labour did whip for it, the Tories would respond in kind, same result but less options for Labour. The best that can be hoped for is that popular opinion forces a "rethink".

But ultimately, they have no powers over what the sitting government want to do, especially one with a large majority. Abstaining is very common as it allows for more ammendments and debates but again this can be ultimately futile if the government will just push it through Royal Assent anyway, which is why opposition parties often opt to abstain as to not be drawn into potential pointless mud slinging by taking a definitive line.

I totally disagree with the HOL, I think it should be abolished, but it does play an important role in our legislative process, but peoples understanding of that process is very limited and is often misinterpreted.
 
GazC_MFC said:
You have to ask yourself would you rather enable a Tory government or a Labour under stramer government/hung Parliament

When they choice are laid out as such, the choice should be an easy one
Click to expand...
This is a different argument Gaz.. Or as someone once said, you've gone off on a tangent. Now please address where you misrepresented what I said and then accused me of lying.
 
American_Mary said:
Corbyn, a man who had forever condoned violence on all sides
Click to expand...

I think you mean to say condemned AM!

Otherwise I broadly agree with the rest of your post. Always think its worth considering that if the paarty had united behind Corbyn, and the polling numbers had therefore been slightly better, the 2017 election likely wouldn't have happened at all. May already had a slight majority and 3 years left. She only went to the public because everyone at the time was talking about a 200 seat tory majority.
 
BlindBoyGrunt said:
This is a different argument Gaz.. Or as someone once said, you've gone off on a tangent. Now please address where you misrepresented what I said and then accused me of lying.
Click to expand...
I wasn’t replying to anyone, I was taking the discussion somewhere else rather than dwell and go round in circles

You did lie or at best you deliberately misinterpreted the lords vote or as others have said you were being disingenuous , Chris explained how you did.
 
Chris_Boro said:
Labour abstaining on this clause about free school meals (a Lib Dem ammendment) allows them to insert their own ammendments.
Click to expand...

Sorry Chris, this is b***ks. Voting for or against or abstaining on an amendment does not change what other amendments are allowed later on.

The schools bill started in the Lords. It would be much easier for Labour to get amendments they want (or ones they can support) inserted in to the bill at this stage than it will when this bill comes through the commons.

Chris_Boro said:
This is part of a much larger bill, one which would give the government control over such things like what children are taught in schools,
Click to expand...

So wouldn't it be better to gain something from it? Aren't the Starmer supporters on here constantly twisting at the likes of me and BBG that it's all about compromise and getting 10% of what you want and art of the possible and all that sh*te? Abstaining on a free school meals amendment doesn't make the other stuff in the bill go away somehow. Aren't you lot always purring about electoral pacts and potential coalitions with the Lib Dems?

Chris_Boro said:
ultimately the government will decide what it wants to do as it has a large majority.
Click to expand...

Of course. But wouldn't it be a good trap to force the tories to vote the amendment down? Either in the Lords or when it comes to the Commons? Labour have made the story (not that its been picked up much by media) all about them abstaining again.

Chris_Boro said:
To suggest they are against free school meals is very misleading.
Click to expand...

Sure. I think it's fair to say Starmer isn't strongly for or against anything really from what we've seen of him. I would guess that the tactic behind this abstention is just to keep the bill entirely negative so that Labour can vote against it without any "Labour vote against free school meals" style headlines.
 
SuperStu said:
Negative style headlines.
Click to expand...
When the long term plan is government, you don’t want to give this MSM the ammunition. No one hears about the lords votes, but like you say if the put the amendment in, and then vote against/abstain in the HOC it creates headlines and damage
 
GazC_MFC said:
When the long term plan is government, you don’t want to give this MSM the ammunition. No one hears about the lords votes, but like you say if the put the amendment in, and then vote against/abstain in the HOC it creates headlines and damage
Click to expand...

Gaz oway, if you're going to use the quote function, I've no objection to you focusing on one specific part of my post to respond to but you could at least not paraphrase me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top