Jump to content


The Conservative Party - Part Two.

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, whiteowl said:

I see that during voting on the new post-brexit trade bill, the tories have voted against a new clause that was:

 

"...intended to protect the NHS and publicly funded health and care services in other parts of the UK from any form of control from outside the UK."

Colour me surprised!

 

Just watching the Russia Report panel speaking, absolutely damning!

 

Terms like gross incompetance and misconduct in public office seem tame in comparison to what's gone on here.

Edited by Magilla

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 This mob are ruthlessly incompetent. As usual the Tories tried their old trick of sweeping something under the carpet. Sadly the carpet has had that much swept under it, it is now threadbare and the report sees the light of day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Mister Gee said:

 This mob are ruthlessly incompetent. As usual the Tories tried their old trick of sweeping something under the carpet. Sadly the carpet has had that much swept under it, it is now threadbare and the report sees the light of day.

It's just  like Trump implying that if you don't test for corvid-19 then it doesn't exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, whiteowl said:

I see that during voting on the new post-brexit trade bill, the tories have voted against a new clause that was:

 

"...intended to protect the NHS and publicly funded health and care services in other parts of the UK from any form of control from outside the UK."

 

Shouldn't really be surprised I guess.

 

Full bill here : https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8854/

It's not surprising it was voted down as parliament have no say in trade deals anyway. If you read the amendment then it really does not amount to much anyway.

Edited by apelike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 21/07/2020 at 10:42, whiteowl said:

I see that during voting on the new post-brexit trade bill, the tories have voted against a new clause that was:

 

"...intended to protect the NHS and publicly funded health and care services in other parts of the UK from any form of control from outside the UK."

 

 

Shouldn't really be surprised I guess.

 

Full bill here : https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8854/

But didnt Doris promis us that the NHS was protected? i'm sure he said that when Corbyn waved the leaked documents about, i wonder if he could have been lying to us?

where are the forums tory faithful to tell us it must have been a mistake?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, banjodeano said:

But didnt Doris promis us that the NHS was protected? i'm sure he said that when Corbyn waved the leaked documents about, i wonder if he could have been lying to us?

where are the forums tory faithful to tell us it must have been a mistake?

Maybe the internet is down in their area of Russia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 21/07/2020 at 10:42, whiteowl said:

I see that during voting on the new post-brexit trade bill, the tories have voted against a new clause that was:

 

"...intended to protect the NHS and publicly funded health and care services in other parts of the UK from any form of control from outside the UK."

 

 

Shouldn't really be surprised I guess.

 

Full bill here : https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8854/

That's the summary of the Clause that Caroline Green proposed and was voted down though. There are numerous parts to it. You can't pick and choose bits of a clause to have, it's all or nothing.

 

FYI here is the full thing they voted against:

 

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2020-07-20c.1948.0

 

Surprise, clauses added to bills by the opposition are voted against by the party in power.

 

Part B was interesting: 

 

`to protect the employment rights or terms and conditions of employment for public sector employees and those working in publicly funded health or care sectors`

 

It means we could never agree to a trade deal where another country could offer us services that might be beneficial to the public sector in case it changes the T&C's of those in the public sector. No wonder it was voted against.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, the_bloke said:

Part B was interesting: 

 

`to protect the employment rights or terms and conditions of employment for public sector employees and those working in publicly funded health or care sectors`

 

It means we could never agree to a trade deal where another country could offer us services that might be beneficial to the public sector in case it changes the T&C's of those in the public sector. No wonder it was voted against.

How is that different from the protections that already exist in UK law provided by TUPE? That looks like it's just a clause to not use new trade deals as an excuse to remove existing protections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, the_bloke said:

That's the summary of the Clause that Caroline Green proposed and was voted down though. There are numerous parts to it. You can't pick and choose bits of a clause to have, it's all or nothing.

 

FYI here is the full thing they voted against:

 

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2020-07-20c.1948.0

 

Surprise, clauses added to bills by the opposition are voted against by the party in power.

 

Part B was interesting: 

 

`to protect the employment rights or terms and conditions of employment for public sector employees and those working in publicly funded health or care sectors`

 

It means we could never agree to a trade deal where another country could offer us services that might be beneficial to the public sector in case it changes the T&C's of those in the public sector. No wonder it was voted against.

I think it was only worth reporting by the media because it contained this sentence which was a good sound bite....

 

"...intended to protect the NHS and publicly funded health and care services in other parts of the UK from any form of control from outside the UK."

 

When in reality it was nothing of the sort and just wishful thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Charlie Elphicke is the latest Tory sex offender.

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-england-kent-53515005

 

Or, perhaps he’s just a bit naughty...  in his own mind.

 

In my mind, I find the Tory party disgusting. How exactly, do you defend a cynical move like this:

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/12/tory-mps-suspended-over-sex-allegations-reinstated-for-confidence-vote

Edited by Pettytom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see Boris is looking after his friends and family, he put his own brother, his former boss, a billionaire Tory donor, a former top aide and a Brexiteer cricketer in the House of Lords for life. The new peers will be able to claim £305 for each day they attend the Lords until they die or retire without ever having to face an election.

It just shows the Lords is a waste of time and money filled with cronies of whichever Government of the day is in power.

 

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnson-puts-brother-billionaire-22450311

 

Edited by iansheff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, iansheff said:

I see Boris is looking after his friends and family, he put his own brother, his former boss, a billionaire Tory donor, a former top aide and a Brexiteer cricketer in the House of Lords for life. The new peers will be able to claim £305 for each day they attend the Lords until they die or retire without ever having to face an election.

It just shows the Lords is a waste of time and money filled with cronies of whichever Government of the day is in power.

 

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnson-puts-brother-billionaire-22450311

 

The Lords should only be composed of ex MPs IMO.

 

At least hereditary peerages don't exist anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.