By-elections

[Top Cats Hat]

13 minutes ago, apelike said:

The same way as you can have a coalition government, they could simply have a coalition of independents who have a common agenda. However in my opinion they should be made to stand again as independents in their respective area by-elections. 

No real comparison with a coalition government as it doesn't have to produce a manifesto.

 

This question was put to Heidi Allen yesterday and she replied that policies for a possible new party were of secondary importance. She summed up by saying "Values first, policy second" which is so much vacuous nonsense. She also said that they would be canvassing the electorate for ideas on policy which sounds like New Labour 2 where principles are abandoned in favour of policy by focus group! 

[El Cid]

2 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

She summed up by saying "Values first, policy second" which is so much vacuous nonsense. She also said that they would be canvassing the electorate for ideas on policy which sounds like New Labour 2 where principles are abandoned in favour of policy by focus group! 

1

They first need to wait and see how many MPs join their group, the policies will depend on that. If they are all remainers, that will affect the policies.

They may have some members join the Liberal Democrats, if they have members that are very pro the climate, then they may favour a pact with the Greens, as the Liberal Democrats did in some areas.

 

I may agree that a by-election should be called, but a cooling off period will benefit democracy. We do have the Recall of MPs Act 2015, maybe that is sufficient?

[apelike]

27 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

No real comparison with a coalition government as it doesn't have to produce a manifesto.

 

I dont think its compulsory to produce a manifesto and as we have seen in the past decades even when they do what is published is not really worth the paper it is written on as it can be ignored.

[apelike]

18 minutes ago, El Cid said:

I may agree that a by-election should be called, but a cooling off period will benefit democracy. We do have the Recall of MPs Act 2015, maybe that is sufficient?

The recall of MP's Act does not cover this but maybe it should!

[Cyclone]

I looked up the recall act on Wed, it covers jail terms <1 year and expenses fraud.  Rather limited really.

[WiseOwl182]

How come Jezza is insistent they call by elections, yet is happy to let good old Jared remain independent in Hallam without a by election? 

[jaffa1]

On 21/02/2019 at 13:20, apelike said:

The same way as you can have a coalition government, they could simply have a coalition of independents who have a common agenda. However in my opinion they should be made to stand again as independents in their respective area by-elections. 

Yes they should and as one politician  said today  they don't  want a second vote for themselves in their own constituency  but the want a second vote on Brexit.

[Top Cats Hat]

I've now changed my mind on this. 

 

I think they should all stand for re-election (except Ian Austin). Usually there is a very specific, individual reason for an MP to resign from their party  like there was with Jared O'Meara. This however is different. 

 

These resignations were not individuals taking individual action but a coordinated action with a common political aim. Not only that, but they now form a bloc in the commons which is equal in number to the Lib Dems. An individual defector usually wields little power however these individuals form the fourth largest voting bloc in the commons. If 50% of MP's changed party, they would constitutionally have every right to continue as an MP without re-election but it would then cause a sizeable disconnect between what people voted and how they are represented in Parliament.

 

For these reasons I now think that they should all stand for re-election except for Ian Austin who is actually a genuine independant MP.

[tinfoilhat]

5 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

I've now changed my mind on this. 

 

I think they should all stand for re-election (except Ian Austin). Usually there is a very specific, individual reason for an MP to resign from their party  like there was with Jared O'Meara. This however is different. 

 

These resignations were not individuals taking individual action but a coordinated action with a common political aim. Not only that, but they now form a bloc in the commons which is equal in number to the Lib Dems. An individual defector usually wields little power however these individuals form the fourth largest voting bloc in the commons. If 50% of MP's changed party, they would constitutionally have every right to continue as an MP without re-election but it would then cause a sizeable disconnect between what people voted and how they are represented in Parliament.

 

For these reasons I now think that they should all stand for re-election except for Ian Austin who is actually a genuine independant MP.

Why? They could have stayed with labour and just voted how they pleased anyway (you know, like corbyn did when he was on the back benches). They’ve made a statement by leaving their parties - the last bit of that statement is the inevitable unemployment at th next election.

[El Cid]

2 hours ago, Top Cats Hat said:

I think they should all stand for re-election (except Ian Austin). Usually there is a very specific, individual reason for an MP to resign from their party  like there was with Jared O'Meara. This however is different.

3

Perhaps they should stand for re-election, but they have all resigned the whip for different reasons.