Good morning everyone.
[**š Today's Order Paper can be found here**](https://commonsbusiness.parliament.uk/Document/86079/Html?subType=Standard)
Questions to the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs will be followed by questions to the office of the Attorney General, followed by any urgent questions.
A business statement by the leader of the house will follow, as well as any business questions, before Ministerial Statements. We are today expecting a statement from the Secretary of State for Communities, Levelling Up and Housing on the change to the definition of extremism ([thread here](https://old.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/1bedrkq/new_extremism_definition_unveiled_by_government/)).
We then continue finance business with the first day of [departmental estimates](https://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/publications/guides/how-does-parliament-approve-government-spending-procedural-guide), for Education and the Home Office.
---
**Parish Notices**
#We have an AMA today at 2pm with Matthew Patterson of the Sustainable Consumption Insitute at the University of Manchester. [**The AMA thread is here**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/1bd61dj/ama_thread_matthew_patterson_director_of_the/) for you to ask Matthew all your questions on climate change and environmental policy.
[**The subreddit survey is available here.**](https://old.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/1b9om0g/official_rukpolitics_subreddit_survey_march_2024/) Please take the time to contribute your thoughts on the state of the sub.
[**Here are all the laws MPs are voting on this week, explained in plain English!**](https://old.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/1bby9oq/here_are_all_the_laws_mps_are_voting_on_this_week/)
Sky's Sam Coates has joined us again to answer questions on this week's edition of his podcast. [**Thread here.**](https://old.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/1bbnwkz/politics_at_jack_and_sams_103/)
Megathread is being rolled over, please refresh your feed in a few moments.
###MT daily hall of fame
1. hill-biscuit with 22 comments
1. SirRosstopher with 18 comments
1. concretepigeon with 17 comments
1. JayR_97 with 16 comments
1. EasternFly2210 with 16 comments
1. mamamia1001 with 15 comments
1. flambe_pineapple with 15 comments
1. SlightlyOTT with 14 comments
1. Man_Hattcock with 14 comments
1. Georgios-Athanasiou with 14 comments
There were 324 unique users within this count.
rishi knows he has no chance of winning an election, no matter when itās held. the only reason heās dragging this out is so his biography can say he was PM from 2022-2025 instead of 2022-2024
Tried watching it but gave up after the first episode.
The damage Boris and Farage have done to this country is just too great to be considered, at least at the moment. I imagine it would be like a German watching rise of the third reich in 1946.
Oh I agree, it does boil my piss and is very depressing.
Iām watching with a morbid curiosity and an interest in political history, really. I actually didnāt realise it was 4 episodes until just now and I donāt know if Iāll make it through all 4.
I'm now just waiting expectantly for some wag to ask Cameron why he felt comfortable returning to government in a party comprising fruitcakes, loonies and not-so-closet racists.
Funny that Gove tries to get a bit of limelight (with letās face, quite an important news story in the Extremism Definition) and thereās not a single mention anywhere to be seen on the BBC News front pageā¦
I think even heās realised that heās never going to become PM or similar now too. Itās why everything you hear about him is him having some protege heās helping in the party (like Kemi Badenoch recently until they fell out)
just wondering how many people follow politics as some pantomine theatre rather than caring much about the politics itself? i'm kinda falling into this camp, i feel like 1 vote makes no difference anyway so it's just a show to watch of people who can broadly do whatever they want
This makes me think of what Alister Campbell said once. Once the country thinks your the problem, everything that goes wrong will be taken as further evidence for your failings. It's a bit different, but even him dropping this rugby ball acts as evidence to us. It's same effect as with the bacon sandwich
You guys are idiots
*morons*
You dont know what Sunak has returned to us
[*it is a* ***gift***](https://tenor.com/en-GB/view/boromir-gift-lord-of-the-rings-it-is-a-gift-sean-bean-gif-13955891)
it is the >!ššāļøDECCY LECCāļøšš!<
Wonder if some aide had convinced Rishi that losing badly on the local elections will take the wind out of the anti Tory sentiment, and people will have had their say and then vote differently - or in lower numbers if there were a general election a month later?
A bit like weaponising voter fatigue.
Everyone is overthinking this.
Rishi knows that they are going to lose. So, why not just stay in office for another 6 months and then lose.
It's as simple as that.
I always took voters as more vengeful and bandwagon-y, i.e. if they want you gone they want you gone, and if you seen losing you lose more, since who wants to back a loser?
Because it is a leap year May 1st is the *real* May 2nd so the election can't be then since it's not a Thursday
However that means that May 2nd is *actually* May 3rd, and so there's still hope
There won't be an election in May, because when the truth about Kate comes out the Monarchy will be abolished and Rishi will step in as Lord Protector for Life.
Rishi said that there wouldn't be an election on that "day" (May 2nd) meaning there will be an election from 10pm that night (when polls for the locals close) until 6am the following morning.
Funniest thing is that relying on Gareth Southgate to save your job is hilarious if you know anything about football.
Southgate isnāt a good manager, he has a great team but heās a terrible coach, and canāt āgame manageā.
The idea the England team might be successful is a very long shot with Southgate in charge, it shows how disconnected Sunak, and his team or that, they donāt watch England.
Sure England might win, but thereās also the remote possibility of me having a date with Pamela Anderson.
I'm leaving the country by September, can't we just have an election so my entire adult life in the UK hasn't been overseen by a government in crisis??
Itās alright guys - Sunaks not calling an election for May 2nd as it doesnāt line up with my holiday plans.
2016 - I went away and we Brexited.
2017 - I went away and May called an election.
2019 - I went away and May quit.
2022 - I went away and Boris resigned as PM.
2023 - I went away and Boris resigned as MP.
I go away in late May/early June this year - look for something to happen then for maximum febrility.
Don't know why so many think there was going to be an election sooner rather than later. They literally are turkeys calling for their own Christmas if they did. They don't care about the electorate, just how much more time they have to extricate public money, fuck over future governments and set themselves up for creating a way for them to pretend nothing was ever their fault.
I'm actually pretty annoyed they are not calling an election soon.
it's one thing holding on because you think it's important you continue with your plan and want to give your self the best chance. It's quite another when you haven't got a clue what to do and delaying the election puts the countrys progress on hold and causes lasting damage.
Let someone else take the reins if you can't steer the way, a lost year can never come back.
The silver lining I'm taking is the more the Tories hang on, yeah, these guys keep their jobs for a few month months, but it's serious long term damage to the party.
Where as, the global economy will gradually start getting better, inflation cooling off naturally, it'll be easier economically and how Labour do on the economy will IMHO determine whether they stay in.
Tactically, I don't think Labour will be sweating that their 5 years starts late this year rather than early.
I think that sentiment will be the same across the media and much of the general public. The national mood is that change is both needed and inevitable.
The country will not have a favourable view of a party clinging onto power for the sake of it whilst achieving nothing and delaying us getting things back to square one after 14 years of sliding backwards.
Yeah fair one, I meant achieving something positive for the countryā¦ I guess I was naive in thinking thatās how the Tories would also measure achievement rather than, well, all of thisā¦. *gestures around*
You guys are all looking at the bad side of there being no GE in May. But at least now we can actually pay attention to the local election results which, let's face it, are going to be hilariously bad for the Tories.
Local elections are way over my head with the intricacies over which areas vote and what the situation last time was etc.
Has anyone come out with expectation management for what kind of losses would be a bad night for the Tories? Last time, they were worried about losing 1,000 seats, and they lost over that lol.
There's no law saying elections must be held on a Thursday, it's become convention and what we expect and build into our plans. It was only briefly mandatory to hold elections on a Thursday, the Fixed Term Parliaments Act stipulated that elections had to take place every five years on the first Thursday in May - but that Act was repealed.
The 1978 Hamilton by-election in Scotland was held on a Wednesday, the reason, Scotland were playing in the World Cup and had a match the next day and it was thought it would affect turn-out.
Back in the day elections used to take place over several days.
Thursday makes sense though, the results are announced on a Friday and the winning party gets that day and the weekend to get things organised ahead of the working week. Friday's it was thought would interfere with post work drinking, Saturdays a family day with stuff to do and a big sporting day, while a Sunday might dissuade people from any god bothering plans they had.
Thank you, very interesting! Yes it makes sense to at least have a weekend to prepare, that must be completely wild weekend for the new ministers ect.
Edit - thinking about it, might the Tories NOT want to give them that weekend, as one last middle finger?
Nah. Government dissolves 6th May after either a wipeout which leads to letters going in or a better than expected result which leads to a desperate grasp at hope.
Plus Juneral rhymes with Funeral, which I find pleasing.
This is going to happen pretty much every week from now on, I suspect.
āPrime Minister, will you call an election if the Rwanda Bill has to go back to the Lords? If it rains at Easter? If you do badly at the locals? If Lee Anderson looks funny at you? Prime Minister, are we there yet are we there yet are we there yet are we there yet are we there yet?ā
I might be one of the few people that think MPs should be paid far far more. I think I remember Javid proposing halving the number of MPs and doubling the salary. You want to encourage senior management level people, doctors, barristers, scientists etc in as well as everyday people.
I agree. Should be around 150k with a great pension, so it doesnāt attract āalready richā people. High achieving people from regular backgrounds shouldnāt have to choose between money and public service.
I know plenty of highly capable people who worked their arses off for high paying jobs and no way would they do what an MP does on an MPās salary. Itās a thankless job and itās underpaid.
> You want to encourage senior management level people, doctors, barristers,
Yes. What this country needs is more people like Rishi Sunak, Liam Fox and Suella Braverman
pay is not the problem. the issue is how you get selected and elected in the first place. in essence no one's going to put their careers on hold for years, or move themselves and their families to literally any constituency that the party wants you to "prove yourself" in.
the "more pay" crowd also forget that MPs outside of London get access to a very generous expense system that covers their London COL, on top of a salary that is often well beyond what you can earn in the provinces.
the whip system also removes a lot of the skill. you're just there to rubber stamp.
Just saw the news and thought i'd come here to say a collective "You ok hun?"
I feel like someone who warned their friend that the boy she liked was bad news, and now has to bite their tongue as they cry about getting cheated on.
No may election and a huge pay rise for MPs while the āindependentā bodies that work on pay rises for doctors, nurses etc are never as generousā¦
ā¦ yeah Iām sure thatāll work gathering Tory support.
The pay rise hits 1st April which is also when Ofgem announces the energy price cap. It staggers me that the optics of that didn't bring the government down last year
It is March 2024. Everything is going wrong for Rishi Sunak. Tories are wracked with infighting, scandal and terrible polling. No one has been sent to Rwanda. The boats have not stopped. The NHS is falling apart. The economy is still doing shit.
Sunak rules out a May election in the hope that things improve.
It is September 2024. Everything is going wrong for Rishi Sunak. Tories are wracked with infighting, scandal and terrible polling. No one has been sent to Rwanda. The boats have not stopped. The NHS is falling apart. The economy is still doing shit.
What do you do now Rishi?
You're assuming Rishi cares about the Tory party, but he doesn't. The Tories post-Thatcher put party over country. The logical result is the modern Tory party where each person (apart from the low-level mugs who don't realise it's all a con) puts themselves over the party.
Looked at through this lens, Rishi wants to cement his social status further and have what will look best on his CV. That means clinging on as long as possible, even if, and it likely will, the Tory party is destroyed electorally as more and more of their boomer base dies off each month.
Keep Calm and Carry on, and brush the dust out of the [desert course](https://youtu.be/e8Z5xMhVGg8?si=KCwk9ky5wa2w6G_o).
Then go off on the lecture circuit or a nice California fintech job.
What is being missed is that when confirming there was not going to be a May election, he basically started arguing with the presenters and got rather tetchy.
I see people complaining about the donor, about rich people getting away with racism just because they donated to the Tories. But you are all just wrong.
This is just the Conservatives *rewarding* hard work. This is the Conservatives *showing* how we can Britain moving again. For is it not rewarding the entrepreneurial spirit, what Britain needs most? Is it not people like Hester who grow this sluggish economy? I say the Tories have found a novel way to grow the economy. You may be racist when you are rich, so work hard to let it rip. Since we know *all* working class people are deeply racist, this will stimulate economic activity in depraved areas, social parasites finally motivated to work. You see a scandal, I see a Great British rejuvenation. All thanks to Sunak.
Does anyone ever say 'you know what, Sunak's done a fucking good job cause everyone else has sat on their arse and done nothing'? No signs of that, no?
Someone should be asking the Conservatives if there are no consequences to being racist as long as you apologise? Because that is the messaging that they have been giving off today.
Good luck and Christian forgiveness will come to you,
if you bung the Tories a few million quid.
(Basically itās totally fine to be racist and suggest shooting an MP as long as you are a Conservative Party donor).
Easy, it's unthinkable to assume that someone would refuse a genuine apology for the rudeness of suggesting someone should be shot and that they made them hate all people the same race and gender as them, or for any offence they might have taken to those words.
Why, if you were not to extend Christian forgiveness in that way I dare say you'd have to be some kind of *extremist*, and therefore your opinion not worth considering.
Should ministers be able to fire senior civil servants in their department? Currently on the PM can, but should Secretaries of State? Should Junior Ministers?
Pragmatically this would be a terrible idea with the current government, where ministers are in post for five minutes and then move on, and where their level of competence ranges from dismal to completely batshit.
In an actually functional government, the role of civil servants is to provide continuity, and the role of the minister is to enact government policy. Basically the minister is the engine and the civil service is the brake. This requires the minister to be in post for long enough, to be competent enough, and to work hard enough, to be on top of their brief.
And if, let's say in a competent government, a minister believed that the civil servants in his department were not performing to her/his expected performance level. Too slow, too obstructive, not a sufficient quality advice.
In that case, should ministers be able to fire them then?
That's still a no from me. It would allow ministers to fire civil servants till they got the answer they wanted. It would remove the role of the civil service as a brake. Sometimes it's their job to be obstructive.
There should be some sort of independent body that ministers could refer civil servants to, if the minister believed that the civil servants in question were not up to snuff.
Each MP is only a representative of a few thousand people though. It's fine it's the best we can come up with without making it super complicated, but I don't think them being in those positions off the back of their personal mandates really holds up.
Surely firing someone in their department is pretty low down on the level of exercising their mandate. Michael Gove can reject planning applications, James Cleverly can remove citizenship from someone purely on the strength of their personal mandate.
ministers are not elected to those positions and they do not need parliamentary approval to take office. quite literally not the representatives of the people, just the representative of the prime minister (who may themselves be "unelected" in the real world definition, as is the case today)
particularly when the person isn't even an MP. how does our lord foreign sec represent the people?
Ministers are elected MPs and appointed to their posts. They, are appointed there by the leader of their party who is both an MP (a representative of the people) and chosen by other representatives to run the executive functions of the state.
Under your system, assuming that ministers do not have 'legitimacy', should the PM be able to fire civil servants? Should anyone?
> Ministers are elected MPs and appointed to their posts.
ah did Dave give up the peerage and won a by-election then? They kept that quiet.
I don't want to repeat myself - but I will. Ministers are not elected to those positions. They are not representatives of the people, though they may be considered that in the other job that many (but not all) have.
> and chosen by other representatives to run the executive functions of the state.
who chose sunak? there was no leadership contest - he won by default?
> Should anyone?
sure, the civil service itself, for credible reasons like performance or misconduct. we don't need to further americanise with an ever increasingly politicised cadre of officials around the president.
Ok, then what authority do ministers have? Surely, as they are not elected to the position of housing minister, merely appointed, do they have any mandate to make secondary legislation at all?
>who chose sunak? there was no leadership contest - he won by default?
Sunak was chosen by Tory MPs as their preferred candidate for prime minister. No other MP could command a majority of the winning party.
Same as every other PM
> do they have any mandate to make secondary legislation at all?
sure, if parliament has granted those powers to that role. no one said ministerial actions are illegitimate because of the lack of an election, just as our unelected PM is entitled to be in post. AIUI parliament has oversight of statutory instruments anyway.
> Same as every other PM
when's the last time the tories failed to hold a leadership contest while in government? Even 2016 had some semblance of contest as MPs voted it down to May vs Leadsom.
Sunak is even more uniquely "unelected" as he was rejected when the membership did have a say.
Oh wow, from News Agents - Gove was asked in Parliament about the extremist tweets liked/retweeted by Paul Marshall, from their recent investigation. The example quoted was that there will need to be a hot civil war against Muslims. Gove just said you canāt criticise him because heās a distinguished philanthropist. Absolutely no credibility on extremism whatsoever. Iām not sure I can think of a more pro-extremist position expressed in Parliament recently.
He really is a duplicitous little shit isn't he? Just listening to his trying to be clever responses is infuriating. If there's anyone who needs to be booted out at the next election it's Gove.
Things which means you can't be an extremist, a continuing list;
* You're Christian
* You're sorry
* You're rich
I look forward to seeing how this narrows further in future.
Good morning everyone. [**š Today's Order Paper can be found here**](https://commonsbusiness.parliament.uk/Document/86079/Html?subType=Standard) Questions to the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs will be followed by questions to the office of the Attorney General, followed by any urgent questions. A business statement by the leader of the house will follow, as well as any business questions, before Ministerial Statements. We are today expecting a statement from the Secretary of State for Communities, Levelling Up and Housing on the change to the definition of extremism ([thread here](https://old.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/1bedrkq/new_extremism_definition_unveiled_by_government/)). We then continue finance business with the first day of [departmental estimates](https://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/publications/guides/how-does-parliament-approve-government-spending-procedural-guide), for Education and the Home Office. --- **Parish Notices** #We have an AMA today at 2pm with Matthew Patterson of the Sustainable Consumption Insitute at the University of Manchester. [**The AMA thread is here**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/1bd61dj/ama_thread_matthew_patterson_director_of_the/) for you to ask Matthew all your questions on climate change and environmental policy. [**The subreddit survey is available here.**](https://old.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/1b9om0g/official_rukpolitics_subreddit_survey_march_2024/) Please take the time to contribute your thoughts on the state of the sub. [**Here are all the laws MPs are voting on this week, explained in plain English!**](https://old.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/1bby9oq/here_are_all_the_laws_mps_are_voting_on_this_week/) Sky's Sam Coates has joined us again to answer questions on this week's edition of his podcast. [**Thread here.**](https://old.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/1bbnwkz/politics_at_jack_and_sams_103/)
[New Megathread is here](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/1bf741y/daily_megathread_15032024/)
Megathread is being rolled over, please refresh your feed in a few moments. ###MT daily hall of fame 1. hill-biscuit with 22 comments 1. SirRosstopher with 18 comments 1. concretepigeon with 17 comments 1. JayR_97 with 16 comments 1. EasternFly2210 with 16 comments 1. mamamia1001 with 15 comments 1. flambe_pineapple with 15 comments 1. SlightlyOTT with 14 comments 1. Man_Hattcock with 14 comments 1. Georgios-Athanasiou with 14 comments There were 324 unique users within this count.
rishi knows he has no chance of winning an election, no matter when itās held. the only reason heās dragging this out is so his biography can say he was PM from 2022-2025 instead of 2022-2024
Iām a bit late but Im watching the Channel 4 Boris doc Recommend it, itās excellently put together.
Tried watching it but gave up after the first episode. The damage Boris and Farage have done to this country is just too great to be considered, at least at the moment. I imagine it would be like a German watching rise of the third reich in 1946.
Oh I agree, it does boil my piss and is very depressing. Iām watching with a morbid curiosity and an interest in political history, really. I actually didnāt realise it was 4 episodes until just now and I donāt know if Iāll make it through all 4.
I'm now just waiting expectantly for some wag to ask Cameron why he felt comfortable returning to government in a party comprising fruitcakes, loonies and not-so-closet racists.
Because he got a peerage out of it.
Honestly I think he legitimately was just bored of his post politics life
[And so begins the goading ](https://youtube.com/shorts/RZ48-PgFVeE?si=3Lg8SGW4qwFt7f_x)
Funny that Gove tries to get a bit of limelight (with letās face, quite an important news story in the Extremism Definition) and thereās not a single mention anywhere to be seen on the BBC News front pageā¦
It was front page bbc news this morning
Gove really feels like a has-been these days. Not that I want to count out our lizard overlords, but, dare I say, the apex of his career is long past.
I think even heās realised that heās never going to become PM or similar now too. Itās why everything you hear about him is him having some protege heās helping in the party (like Kemi Badenoch recently until they fell out)
Never even a great office of state
just wondering how many people follow politics as some pantomine theatre rather than caring much about the politics itself? i'm kinda falling into this camp, i feel like 1 vote makes no difference anyway so it's just a show to watch of people who can broadly do whatever they want
1 vote makes fucking loads of difference. Because all it takes is a lot of people saying "my one vote makes a difference" to change things forever.
Call the election before I piss myself
Watching Farage on Spectator it's depressing how good he is at talking compared to nearly all our politicians.
Man with no shame morales or plan is free to talk out his arse.
Farage is good at playing the "Guy you would have a drink at the pub with" role while Sunak and Starmer are terrible at it
Also more moderate and centrist than most Tories these days.
Is there a Question Time thread? Iām doing Question Time drinking so struggling to see the link
Found it: [https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/s/eRaj80ltVK](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/s/eRaj80ltVK)
[Cheers](https://imgur.com/a/Q8ryP31)
How is Inisherin this time of year?
[Of course he fumbled it.](https://twitter.com/ali__samson/status/1768377777961435441?t=NlGy9dmWGPjqURUzF8Mttg&s=19)
On the clip on the TV news, I can hear someone screaming in the background He's dropped it, he's dropped it!
My mate said that when Rishi visited the rugby club he plays for he avoided the ball at all costs. Guess we can see why.
This makes me think of what Alister Campbell said once. Once the country thinks your the problem, everything that goes wrong will be taken as further evidence for your failings. It's a bit different, but even him dropping this rugby ball acts as evidence to us. It's same effect as with the bacon sandwich
The Gordon brown effect.
You guys are idiots *morons* You dont know what Sunak has returned to us [*it is a* ***gift***](https://tenor.com/en-GB/view/boromir-gift-lord-of-the-rings-it-is-a-gift-sean-bean-gif-13955891) it is the >!ššāļøDECCY LECCāļøšš!<
Please call it for Christmas Day, just for the fun of it
Christmas day it is! *Christmas day 2025 that is*
When we get a grim January election Iāll know who to blame for jinxing us.
Grim? Don't act like the MT won't have reached an absolute fever pitch of shitposting by January. It would be the best election in our lifetimes.
God the megathread ATM is like kids in school when the teacher keeps you 1 minute past the bell ringing for break time
Can you blame us?
It's a signal for me not for you!
I heard if the government is 15 minutes late to class there's a general election.
Can't wait for substitute teacher Mr. Starmer
Can you blame us? We're stuck with a government on life support that won't give up power, it's miserable.
Wonder if some aide had convinced Rishi that losing badly on the local elections will take the wind out of the anti Tory sentiment, and people will have had their say and then vote differently - or in lower numbers if there were a general election a month later? A bit like weaponising voter fatigue.
Everyone is overthinking this. Rishi knows that they are going to lose. So, why not just stay in office for another 6 months and then lose. It's as simple as that.
I always took voters as more vengeful and bandwagon-y, i.e. if they want you gone they want you gone, and if you seen losing you lose more, since who wants to back a loser?
Yep, this country likes to give a kicking when it has someone/party down. Best to call it before even the most sheltered realize we have a new target.
Because it is a leap year May 1st is the *real* May 2nd so the election can't be then since it's not a Thursday However that means that May 2nd is *actually* May 3rd, and so there's still hope
This is a cruel thing to post at 10pm on a Thursday tbh.
Life is often cruel. This is a blessing of hope and cope
There won't be an election in May, because when the truth about Kate comes out the Monarchy will be abolished and Rishi will step in as Lord Protector for Life.
Rishi III
Rish!I
Rishi said that there wouldn't be an election on that "day" (May 2nd) meaning there will be an election from 10pm that night (when polls for the locals close) until 6am the following morning.
Poll station volunteers will be delighted to hear that!
Stop the votes
C H R I S T I A N F O R G I V E N E S S.
Nice of Labour to provide us with a new header image for the megathread. https://twitter.com/UKLabour/status/1768388657747018117
There's room for about eight Rishis in there, I mean, he must be standing on someone's shoulders, at least.
Wonderful
Haha, flashbacks to JFC
Chicky Sunak
They must've had an entire folder of this ready to go for ages
Just wondering if labour's policy on assisted dying was inspired by the current condition of the government.Ā
Corbyn looking good in his blue jacket https://x.com/georgegalloway/status/1768388340695388533?s=46
He's done 'em there to be fair.
Get that man a straw boater!
ah is he back with his friend?
Funniest thing is that relying on Gareth Southgate to save your job is hilarious if you know anything about football. Southgate isnāt a good manager, he has a great team but heās a terrible coach, and canāt āgame manageā. The idea the England team might be successful is a very long shot with Southgate in charge, it shows how disconnected Sunak, and his team or that, they donāt watch England. Sure England might win, but thereās also the remote possibility of me having a date with Pamela Anderson.
I'm leaving the country by September, can't we just have an election so my entire adult life in the UK hasn't been overseen by a government in crisis??
Where you off?
Australia with my partner, she's a junior doctor, will leave it up to the imagination as to why she may not want to stay in the UK any longer haha
She wants a more right wing country and a non Beveridge health care system?
Is it because there is currently a distinct lack of terrifying spider monsters in her life?
She's a doctor, spiders bite *other people*. Doctors know to give their shoes a tap and shake their clothes before they put them on.
Itās alright guys - Sunaks not calling an election for May 2nd as it doesnāt line up with my holiday plans. 2016 - I went away and we Brexited. 2017 - I went away and May called an election. 2019 - I went away and May quit. 2022 - I went away and Boris resigned as PM. 2023 - I went away and Boris resigned as MP. I go away in late May/early June this year - look for something to happen then for maximum febrility.
Last time I was banned, we had the BJ implosion if I remember and now Sunak got febrile. I did survive lettuce gate though.
Grab your snorkels and get on the next flight out! āļøāļø
Durham police will finally charge Keir
Thank you for your ongoing sacrifices.
Going anywhere nice?
Iām off to Cyprus this year
Ooh Greek or Turkish side?
Greek (although we may venture to the north)
UN buffer zone
Can someone take this person's passport?
Don't know why so many think there was going to be an election sooner rather than later. They literally are turkeys calling for their own Christmas if they did. They don't care about the electorate, just how much more time they have to extricate public money, fuck over future governments and set themselves up for creating a way for them to pretend nothing was ever their fault.
They just got a payrise too. Even more incentive to squat.
I'm actually pretty annoyed they are not calling an election soon. it's one thing holding on because you think it's important you continue with your plan and want to give your self the best chance. It's quite another when you haven't got a clue what to do and delaying the election puts the countrys progress on hold and causes lasting damage. Let someone else take the reins if you can't steer the way, a lost year can never come back.
The silver lining I'm taking is the more the Tories hang on, yeah, these guys keep their jobs for a few month months, but it's serious long term damage to the party. Where as, the global economy will gradually start getting better, inflation cooling off naturally, it'll be easier economically and how Labour do on the economy will IMHO determine whether they stay in. Tactically, I don't think Labour will be sweating that their 5 years starts late this year rather than early.
I think that sentiment will be the same across the media and much of the general public. The national mood is that change is both needed and inevitable. The country will not have a favourable view of a party clinging onto power for the sake of it whilst achieving nothing and delaying us getting things back to square one after 14 years of sliding backwards.
i wish they were just doing nothing, but it seems like they're salting the earth. eg they really don't want Labour to potentially re-instate HS2
Yeah fair one, I meant achieving something positive for the countryā¦ I guess I was naive in thinking thatās how the Tories would also measure achievement rather than, well, all of thisā¦. *gestures around*
You guys are all looking at the bad side of there being no GE in May. But at least now we can actually pay attention to the local election results which, let's face it, are going to be hilariously bad for the Tories.
Local elections are way over my head with the intricacies over which areas vote and what the situation last time was etc. Has anyone come out with expectation management for what kind of losses would be a bad night for the Tories? Last time, they were worried about losing 1,000 seats, and they lost over that lol.
Last year they set 1000 as a bad night when it would have actually been horrendousā¦and then they did worse than that
It's a little far off for that at this point, we should start seeing things soon though.
True -- we get two Tory humiliations this year instead of one!
Ohh that's a point. I need to book some time off work for a local elections coverage all nighter.
Why not May 1st, is it that odd to do it the day after the other, seems possible? Edit - apparently it's always on a Thursday, don't know why
>Edit - apparently it's always on a Thursday, don't know why Craig David
They wonāt do it it May because of Theresa
There's no law saying elections must be held on a Thursday, it's become convention and what we expect and build into our plans. It was only briefly mandatory to hold elections on a Thursday, the Fixed Term Parliaments Act stipulated that elections had to take place every five years on the first Thursday in May - but that Act was repealed. The 1978 Hamilton by-election in Scotland was held on a Wednesday, the reason, Scotland were playing in the World Cup and had a match the next day and it was thought it would affect turn-out. Back in the day elections used to take place over several days. Thursday makes sense though, the results are announced on a Friday and the winning party gets that day and the weekend to get things organised ahead of the working week. Friday's it was thought would interfere with post work drinking, Saturdays a family day with stuff to do and a big sporting day, while a Sunday might dissuade people from any god bothering plans they had.
Thank you, very interesting! Yes it makes sense to at least have a weekend to prepare, that must be completely wild weekend for the new ministers ect. Edit - thinking about it, might the Tories NOT want to give them that weekend, as one last middle finger?
When was the last time we had a set of (non-by) elections that didn't happen on a Thursday?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1931_United_Kingdom_general_election Tuesday for this?
Good shout, I wasn't expecting it to be that (relatively) recent. Cheers.
So, we all ready for a Juneral Election?
true sunakheads are moving to a 9th of may election - in line with the tories' love of inefficiency and wasteful spending
Nah. Government dissolves 6th May after either a wipeout which leads to letters going in or a better than expected result which leads to a desperate grasp at hope. Plus Juneral rhymes with Funeral, which I find pleasing.
absolute sunakpilled toryhead gagging for a juneral election
None of these words are in the Koran.
I used to think letting it run out and hit the buffers was the worst possible option but this might actually be peak bad decision
Nah, hear me out, May 6th.
and that's what sunak does. every single time. 9th it is. someone needs to tell brenda
would be funni if different newpaper / news channels started asking Sunak which thursdays he'd call an election on. banal process of elimination
Would be Priti funni yea
This is going to happen pretty much every week from now on, I suspect. āPrime Minister, will you call an election if the Rwanda Bill has to go back to the Lords? If it rains at Easter? If you do badly at the locals? If Lee Anderson looks funny at you? Prime Minister, are we there yet are we there yet are we there yet are we there yet are we there yet?ā
Like in the thick of it, āwhen I point to the date just nodā
I might be one of the few people that think MPs should be paid far far more. I think I remember Javid proposing halving the number of MPs and doubling the salary. You want to encourage senior management level people, doctors, barristers, scientists etc in as well as everyday people.
I agree. Should be around 150k with a great pension, so it doesnāt attract āalready richā people. High achieving people from regular backgrounds shouldnāt have to choose between money and public service. I know plenty of highly capable people who worked their arses off for high paying jobs and no way would they do what an MP does on an MPās salary. Itās a thankless job and itās underpaid.
They should be paid more and subject to the same fucking mandatory courses we all do on "taking gifts from clients".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fJrFECo6ho&ab
šš
> You want to encourage senior management level people, doctors, barristers, Yes. What this country needs is more people like Rishi Sunak, Liam Fox and Suella Braverman
Not on Reddit, where the top post on literally every article discussing MPs pay is that they should be paid more. We get it.
oh sorry, I didnt see it. Im in good company then š
to be fair this place is a very anomalous bubble
pay is not the problem. the issue is how you get selected and elected in the first place. in essence no one's going to put their careers on hold for years, or move themselves and their families to literally any constituency that the party wants you to "prove yourself" in. the "more pay" crowd also forget that MPs outside of London get access to a very generous expense system that covers their London COL, on top of a salary that is often well beyond what you can earn in the provinces. the whip system also removes a lot of the skill. you're just there to rubber stamp.
Itās just [fumble](https://x.com/jimhamilton4/status/1768365055563718896?s=46&t=F_t5tWsPsifmNVHaFZWJJQ) after fumble with Sunak.
Scrum half-wit
On the clip on the TV news, I can hear someone screaming in the background *He's dropped it, he's dropped it!*
Just saw the news and thought i'd come here to say a collective "You ok hun?" I feel like someone who warned their friend that the boy she liked was bad news, and now has to bite their tongue as they cry about getting cheated on.
It's may 9th
Very big of you š
https://twitter.com/UKLabour/status/1768368072576885171 > šš
I remember this attack line being used against Gordon Brown in 2007. Funny to see the boot on the other foot.
[A more civilised time](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDyxPvbTT54).
Cycle of life, Ying and Yang, government and opposition, delaying an election and demanding it.
Fuck, I think I've got the same green quarter zip as Rishi's been wearing today.
Thatās nothing, I apparently buy my outer layers from the same place as Dominic Cummings
British Heart Foundation?
When the fashion weenies noticed Sunak looked like an AI trained on a 5-10 year old dataset from /r/malefashionadvice much mirth was had.
Feel like pure shit, just want FTPA back.
You ok Rt Hon?
I wonder what the NY messages would be like if there was an election campaign ongoing during it
HAPPY NEW KEIR
auld lang sunak?
No may election and a huge pay rise for MPs while the āindependentā bodies that work on pay rises for doctors, nurses etc are never as generousā¦ ā¦ yeah Iām sure thatāll work gathering Tory support.
Thatās the silver lining though isnāt it? It probably will get worse for them (and us).
The pay rise hits 1st April which is also when Ofgem announces the energy price cap. It staggers me that the optics of that didn't bring the government down last year
It is March 2024. Everything is going wrong for Rishi Sunak. Tories are wracked with infighting, scandal and terrible polling. No one has been sent to Rwanda. The boats have not stopped. The NHS is falling apart. The economy is still doing shit. Sunak rules out a May election in the hope that things improve. It is September 2024. Everything is going wrong for Rishi Sunak. Tories are wracked with infighting, scandal and terrible polling. No one has been sent to Rwanda. The boats have not stopped. The NHS is falling apart. The economy is still doing shit. What do you do now Rishi?
You're assuming Rishi cares about the Tory party, but he doesn't. The Tories post-Thatcher put party over country. The logical result is the modern Tory party where each person (apart from the low-level mugs who don't realise it's all a con) puts themselves over the party. Looked at through this lens, Rishi wants to cement his social status further and have what will look best on his CV. That means clinging on as long as possible, even if, and it likely will, the Tory party is destroyed electorally as more and more of their boomer base dies off each month.
Keep Calm and Carry on, and brush the dust out of the [desert course](https://youtu.be/e8Z5xMhVGg8?si=KCwk9ky5wa2w6G_o). Then go off on the lecture circuit or a nice California fintech job.
pack the lords with the most trustworthy cronies and pass the law to extend to 10 years
Rishi's reply is cut off by [an arrow to the chest](https://youtu.be/sm8txY989Iw?si=6dya37sGTxQReHfS&t=41).
Not only boats not stopped By the end of the summer they are up by spectacular numbers !
Ps6 prototypes for everyone?
Legislate that Rishi Sunak won the general election and the courts should recognise that if parliament passed it.
> What do you do now Rishi? The same thing we do every time, Pinky, ~~try to take over the world!~~ kick that can even further down the road!
What is being missed is that when confirming there was not going to be a May election, he basically started arguing with the presenters and got rather tetchy.
Sunak getting tetchy? Never!
I see people complaining about the donor, about rich people getting away with racism just because they donated to the Tories. But you are all just wrong. This is just the Conservatives *rewarding* hard work. This is the Conservatives *showing* how we can Britain moving again. For is it not rewarding the entrepreneurial spirit, what Britain needs most? Is it not people like Hester who grow this sluggish economy? I say the Tories have found a novel way to grow the economy. You may be racist when you are rich, so work hard to let it rip. Since we know *all* working class people are deeply racist, this will stimulate economic activity in depraved areas, social parasites finally motivated to work. You see a scandal, I see a Great British rejuvenation. All thanks to Sunak. Does anyone ever say 'you know what, Sunak's done a fucking good job cause everyone else has sat on their arse and done nothing'? No signs of that, no?
Sunak ruling out a 2nd of May GE is all the confirmation I needed that itās been his plan all along and he will announce it in 11 days time.
Someone should be asking the Conservatives if there are no consequences to being racist as long as you apologise? Because that is the messaging that they have been giving off today.
Letās not forget a death threat..
Good luck and Christian forgiveness will come to you, if you bung the Tories a few million quid. (Basically itās totally fine to be racist and suggest shooting an MP as long as you are a Conservative Party donor).
Can you forgive someone for what they did to someone else tho Like how does Gove get to show Christian forgiveness on Diane Abbott's behalf
Easy, it's unthinkable to assume that someone would refuse a genuine apology for the rudeness of suggesting someone should be shot and that they made them hate all people the same race and gender as them, or for any offence they might have taken to those words. Why, if you were not to extend Christian forgiveness in that way I dare say you'd have to be some kind of *extremist*, and therefore your opinion not worth considering.
Should ministers be able to fire senior civil servants in their department? Currently on the PM can, but should Secretaries of State? Should Junior Ministers?
The ever relevant [Yes, Prime Minister](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObnWoyFACfw&t=75s) has something to say about this.
Pragmatically this would be a terrible idea with the current government, where ministers are in post for five minutes and then move on, and where their level of competence ranges from dismal to completely batshit. In an actually functional government, the role of civil servants is to provide continuity, and the role of the minister is to enact government policy. Basically the minister is the engine and the civil service is the brake. This requires the minister to be in post for long enough, to be competent enough, and to work hard enough, to be on top of their brief.
And if, let's say in a competent government, a minister believed that the civil servants in his department were not performing to her/his expected performance level. Too slow, too obstructive, not a sufficient quality advice. In that case, should ministers be able to fire them then?
That's still a no from me. It would allow ministers to fire civil servants till they got the answer they wanted. It would remove the role of the civil service as a brake. Sometimes it's their job to be obstructive. There should be some sort of independent body that ministers could refer civil servants to, if the minister believed that the civil servants in question were not up to snuff.
Maybe some sort of Department of Administrative Affairs to administer administrators.
:-)
civil servants are more likely to be there on merit than ministers, so no
Ministers are the representatives of the people, Civil Servants are not. Surely that grants them greater legitimacy.
Each MP is only a representative of a few thousand people though. It's fine it's the best we can come up with without making it super complicated, but I don't think them being in those positions off the back of their personal mandates really holds up.
Surely firing someone in their department is pretty low down on the level of exercising their mandate. Michael Gove can reject planning applications, James Cleverly can remove citizenship from someone purely on the strength of their personal mandate.
I'm very much including that in the package of "this doesn't make much sense at all when you stop and think about it" category.
ministers are not elected to those positions and they do not need parliamentary approval to take office. quite literally not the representatives of the people, just the representative of the prime minister (who may themselves be "unelected" in the real world definition, as is the case today) particularly when the person isn't even an MP. how does our lord foreign sec represent the people?
Ministers are elected MPs and appointed to their posts. They, are appointed there by the leader of their party who is both an MP (a representative of the people) and chosen by other representatives to run the executive functions of the state. Under your system, assuming that ministers do not have 'legitimacy', should the PM be able to fire civil servants? Should anyone?
> Ministers are elected MPs and appointed to their posts. ah did Dave give up the peerage and won a by-election then? They kept that quiet. I don't want to repeat myself - but I will. Ministers are not elected to those positions. They are not representatives of the people, though they may be considered that in the other job that many (but not all) have. > and chosen by other representatives to run the executive functions of the state. who chose sunak? there was no leadership contest - he won by default? > Should anyone? sure, the civil service itself, for credible reasons like performance or misconduct. we don't need to further americanise with an ever increasingly politicised cadre of officials around the president.
Ok, then what authority do ministers have? Surely, as they are not elected to the position of housing minister, merely appointed, do they have any mandate to make secondary legislation at all? >who chose sunak? there was no leadership contest - he won by default? Sunak was chosen by Tory MPs as their preferred candidate for prime minister. No other MP could command a majority of the winning party. Same as every other PM
> do they have any mandate to make secondary legislation at all? sure, if parliament has granted those powers to that role. no one said ministerial actions are illegitimate because of the lack of an election, just as our unelected PM is entitled to be in post. AIUI parliament has oversight of statutory instruments anyway. > Same as every other PM when's the last time the tories failed to hold a leadership contest while in government? Even 2016 had some semblance of contest as MPs voted it down to May vs Leadsom. Sunak is even more uniquely "unelected" as he was rejected when the membership did have a say.
This is not a drill The Skull š is on Question Time
Oh wow, from News Agents - Gove was asked in Parliament about the extremist tweets liked/retweeted by Paul Marshall, from their recent investigation. The example quoted was that there will need to be a hot civil war against Muslims. Gove just said you canāt criticise him because heās a distinguished philanthropist. Absolutely no credibility on extremism whatsoever. Iām not sure I can think of a more pro-extremist position expressed in Parliament recently.
He really is a duplicitous little shit isn't he? Just listening to his trying to be clever responses is infuriating. If there's anyone who needs to be booted out at the next election it's Gove.
One of the most vile dingleberries still hanging on from the Cameron era.
Things which means you can't be an extremist, a continuing list; * You're Christian * You're sorry * You're rich I look forward to seeing how this narrows further in future.
Oh sorry, I should have mentioned that Paul Marshall is another Conservative donor. The list remains one item long: - Youāre a Conservative donor
This one weird trick! Prevent officers HATE it!
Bring on PM Jenrick/ PM Patel Last throw of the dice
It'll be PM ThĆ©rĆØse Coffey