FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > MP Dawn Butler asked to leave...
MP Dawn Butler asked to leave...
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
 | |||
| |||
"Well parliamentary rules aside, to be fair it’s true statement. " | |||
| |||
So yes she should have withdrawn or left - 2 options. | |||
"She was asked to withdraw her remarks but refused good on her .She’s passionate and stands up for what she believes in .." I’m glad she refused. To be fair she was just telling the truth and the fact she’s paying for it, it shows how shitty things are at the moment…. | |||
| |||
| |||
"It was the correct code of action I suppose as they are the rules currently. It’s the rules that need changing so you can call them a bunch of liars. It wasn’t as good as Dennis Skinners Dodgy Dave moment but it was up there. " And Dennis Skinner was also correct...dodgy Dave indeed..though I'd have called him cowardly Dave...made a referendum vote decision then walked away from the resulting mess. | |||
| |||
"The rules were followed correctly but sometimes rules need to be broken, especially when they are ridiculous. Under parliamentary rules, MPs are not allowed to accuse each other of lying in the House of Commons. So if an MP is lying, how do you call them out? By taking in circles? No get to the point. If you said you would do X but you did Y and you’ve lied. Simple as that. " Its the use of the word liar I think - loads have been told they have ‘ negligently misstated the actual facts’ or been selfish with the truth or are obviously ignoring of the facts - all are implying the same and they stay in chamber - there’s tons of ways of Implying someone is full of it without saying they’re a liar. | |||
| |||
| |||
"The rules were followed correctly but sometimes rules need to be broken, especially when they are ridiculous. Under parliamentary rules, MPs are not allowed to accuse each other of lying in the House of Commons. So if an MP is lying, how do you call them out? By taking in circles? No get to the point. If you said you would do X but you did Y and you’ve lied. Simple as that. Its the use of the word liar I think - loads have been told they have ‘ negligently misstated the actual facts’ or been selfish with the truth or are obviously ignoring of the facts - all are implying the same and they stay in chamber - there’s tons of ways of Implying someone is full of it without saying they’re a liar. " That’s semantics and a waste of time. Part of the problem of politics is the outdated nature of Parliament with all its pretence and pomp. If you lied at work you’d be called on it, the wording isn’t relevant only the facts are. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"The rules are there to stop structured debated from descending into pointless name calling and also uphold some standards of behaviour. She knew it was wrong and she could easily have implied the same and stayed in the house - there is a code of behaviour and they know it when they take the job.. and the massive wage, expenses and non exec company directorships The behavior is already a disgrace with braying noises and interruptions - can you imagine doing a presentation to the board and them making braying noises and shouting shaaaaame when they dont agree? Wouldn’t be tolerated
So yes she should have withdrawn or left - 2 options. "And an habitual liar gets away with his constant bullshit. | |||
"The rules were followed correctly but sometimes rules need to be broken, especially when they are ridiculous. Under parliamentary rules, MPs are not allowed to accuse each other of lying in the House of Commons. So if an MP is lying, how do you call them out? By taking in circles? No get to the point. If you said you would do X but you did Y and you’ve lied. Simple as that. " It's a charade. Honourable my arse | |||
| |||
"the parliamentary session for calling the PM a liar. Was this the correct action by the deputy speaker to uphold discipline and the code of conduct? Or should an MP be able to speak their mind? " They should follow their code of conduct. | |||
"The rules are there to stop structured debated from descending into pointless name calling and also uphold some standards of behaviour. She knew it was wrong and she could easily have implied the same and stayed in the house - there is a code of behaviour and they know it when they take the job.. and the massive wage, expenses and non exec company directorships The behavior is already a disgrace with braying noises and interruptions - can you imagine doing a presentation to the board and them making braying noises and shouting shaaaaame when they dont agree? Wouldn’t be tolerated
So yes she should have withdrawn or left - 2 options. " | |||
"Deputy speaker was spot on. Whether what she said was accurate is not the point. She broke the rules. The problem with calling anotger member a liar in the house is tgat it boils down to you making an allegation without providing any actual evidence (and I'm referring to proveable evidence). Much like tge discussions we've had in these very forums about accusing others of being fake or timewasters. Yes, lots of people will agree with what she has said, but in the long term, she has brought herself and, if the Deputy speaker hadn't expelled her, the house into disrepute. This is the place where our laws are made. Laws we are expected to abide by. By breaking tge rules of the house, she is demonstrating that she is the sort of individual who does not respect rules - and so how are we expected to respect laws that she might play a part in creating?" If you say something which is demonstrably untrue, I'd say that was evidence. | |||
| |||
"The "code of conduct" means you cannot call someone a liar. However, phrases like "misleading the house" to use but one are time-honoured traditional methods of saying they are lying. I believe they should be allowed to call someone out properly if they are lying. Admittedly, with the current PM, a person with a a long-standing and proven history of written and verbal untruths, debate in the chamber would grind to a halt. I don't think there has ever been a period in British politics where the truth was disrespected so much, by a person so unfit for office. " Spot on | |||
| |||
"The "code of conduct" means you cannot call someone a liar. However, phrases like "misleading the house" to use but one are time-honoured traditional methods of saying they are lying. I believe they should be allowed to call someone out properly if they are lying. Admittedly, with the current PM, a person with a a long-standing and proven history of written and verbal untruths, debate in the chamber would grind to a halt. I don't think there has ever been a period in British politics where the truth was disrespected so much, by a person so unfit for office. " | |||
.The rules need updating. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"If they had have accused of misleading the house,it would have barely have made ripple. Calling him out has made the news. They should do it more often and it may finally sink it that we have an habitual liar running the country." | |||
"Ladybird, thank you for sharing this. I had watched the clip but reading it brings it home even more. I am glad she had the balls to speak out and I believe this has more of an impact than pussyfooting around politically by using euphemisms. "No problem. The content and context is important. Sound bites and bias/controlled narratives put out by mainstream media are what reinforces division. Good news is she was only told to leabe for the days session. Paraphrasing...rules are for the obedient, guidance for the wise. And thank you for creating this thread  | |||
"Deputy speaker was spot on. Whether what she said was accurate is not the point. She broke the rules. The problem with calling anotger member a liar in the house is tgat it boils down to you making an allegation without providing any actual evidence (and I'm referring to proveable evidence). Much like tge discussions we've had in these very forums about accusing others of being fake or timewasters. Yes, lots of people will agree with what she has said, but in the long term, she has brought herself and, if the Deputy speaker hadn't expelled her, the house into disrepute. This is the place where our laws are made. Laws we are expected to abide by. By breaking tge rules of the house, she is demonstrating that she is the sort of individual who does not respect rules - and so how are we expected to respect laws that she might play a part in creating?" I think 40000 dead in residential and care homes is all the evidence anyone needs. He backed up Rat Hancock’s lies about protecting the above when all the time he knew they were being sent back to care homes etc being Covid positive to infect the rest of the residents too. Then to boot he blamed the way the care homes went about the procedure of keeping people safe then denied he said it months later when it’s still there on the internet for anyone to google. That’s just once instance where he lied. So the prove- able evidence you’re looking for is lying six feet under atm | |||
"The only person who was telling the truth was asked to leave .The rules need updating."That just reminded of "weapons of mass destruction"...the only one telling the truth was killed..(a bad man all the same) | |||
"Deputy speaker was spot on. Whether what she said was accurate is not the point. She broke the rules. The problem with calling anotger member a liar in the house is tgat it boils down to you making an allegation without providing any actual evidence (and I'm referring to proveable evidence). Much like tge discussions we've had in these very forums about accusing others of being fake or timewasters. Yes, lots of people will agree with what she has said, but in the long term, she has brought herself and, if the Deputy speaker hadn't expelled her, the house into disrepute. This is the place where our laws are made. Laws we are expected to abide by. By breaking tge rules of the house, she is demonstrating that she is the sort of individual who does not respect rules - and so how are we expected to respect laws that she might play a part in creating? I think 40000 dead in residential and care homes is all the evidence anyone needs. He backed up Rat Hancock’s lies about protecting the above when all the time he knew they were being sent back to care homes etc being Covid positive to infect the rest of the residents too. Then to boot he blamed the way the care homes went about the procedure of keeping people safe then denied he said it months later when it’s still there on the internet for anyone to google. That’s just once instance where he lied. So the prove- able evidence you’re looking for is lying six feet under atm " Check out the video by Peter Stefanovic on Twitter where he details his lies. | |||
"Deputy speaker was spot on. Whether what she said was accurate is not the point. She broke the rules. The problem with calling anotger member a liar in the house is tgat it boils down to you making an allegation without providing any actual evidence (and I'm referring to proveable evidence). Much like tge discussions we've had in these very forums about accusing others of being fake or timewasters. Yes, lots of people will agree with what she has said, but in the long term, she has brought herself and, if the Deputy speaker hadn't expelled her, the house into disrepute. This is the place where our laws are made. Laws we are expected to abide by. By breaking tge rules of the house, she is demonstrating that she is the sort of individual who does not respect rules - and so how are we expected to respect laws that she might play a part in creating? I think 40000 dead in residential and care homes is all the evidence anyone needs. He backed up Rat Hancock’s lies about protecting the above when all the time he knew they were being sent back to care homes etc being Covid positive to infect the rest of the residents too. Then to boot he blamed the way the care homes went about the procedure of keeping people safe then denied he said it months later when it’s still there on the internet for anyone to google. That’s just once instance where he lied. So the prove- able evidence you’re looking for is lying six feet under atm Check out the video by Peter Stefanovic on Twitter where he details his lies." You tube I mean | |||
Judith Cummins played a blinder and in addition to removing one of her own was also able to get in a dig at the Kiwis and Aussies, "I never thought I’d see the day when we see Rugby Union players look tougher than Rugby League players. Yet we have the situation where Rugby Union are sending players here, but Australia and New Zealand have bottled it. Perhaps they are afraid of the competition?”
Great stuff on the 'last day of school'
 | |||
| |||
| |||
"There are a whole load of things they cant call each other in parliment,they all know what them things are and are given the chance to withdraw them if they use them,so no it wasnt wrong to ask her to leave,shes not the first and wont be the last,think blaggard is one of the words aswell theres a whole list of them" Maybe like the oxford dictionary it should be revised | |||
"Deputy speaker was spot on. Whether what she said was accurate is not the point. She broke the rules. The problem with calling anotger member a liar in the house is tgat it boils down to you making an allegation without providing any actual evidence (and I'm referring to proveable evidence). Much like tge discussions we've had in these very forums about accusing others of being fake or timewasters. Yes, lots of people will agree with what she has said, but in the long term, she has brought herself and, if the Deputy speaker hadn't expelled her, the house into disrepute. This is the place where our laws are made. Laws we are expected to abide by. By breaking tge rules of the house, she is demonstrating that she is the sort of individual who does not respect rules - and so how are we expected to respect laws that she might play a part in creating? " Of course there are also rules that state an MP should never knowingly lie in Parliament (which is why the rules about calling people liars is in place). It's all based on the expectation that members will behave honourably, which has probably never happened, but the establishment like to pretend this is the case. The whole lot needs to be torn down and rebuilt in a more fit for purpose way. | |||
"Deputy speaker was spot on. Whether what she said was accurate is not the point. She broke the rules. The problem with calling anotger member a liar in the house is tgat it boils down to you making an allegation without providing any actual evidence (and I'm referring to proveable evidence). Much like tge discussions we've had in these very forums about accusing others of being fake or timewasters. Yes, lots of people will agree with what she has said, but in the long term, she has brought herself and, if the Deputy speaker hadn't expelled her, the house into disrepute. This is the place where our laws are made. Laws we are expected to abide by. By breaking tge rules of the house, she is demonstrating that she is the sort of individual who does not respect rules - and so how are we expected to respect laws that she might play a part in creating? Of course there are also rules that state an MP should never knowingly lie in Parliament (which is why the rules about calling people liars is in place). It's all based on the expectation that members will behave honourably, which has probably never happened, but the establishment like to pretend this is the case. The whole lot needs to be torn down and rebuilt in a more fit for purpose way." I concur. | |||
"Deputy speaker was spot on. Whether what she said was accurate is not the point. She broke the rules. The problem with calling anotger member a liar in the house is tgat it boils down to you making an allegation without providing any actual evidence (and I'm referring to proveable evidence). Much like tge discussions we've had in these very forums about accusing others of being fake or timewasters. Yes, lots of people will agree with what she has said, but in the long term, she has brought herself and, if the Deputy speaker hadn't expelled her, the house into disrepute. This is the place where our laws are made. Laws we are expected to abide by. By breaking tge rules of the house, she is demonstrating that she is the sort of individual who does not respect rules - and so how are we expected to respect laws that she might play a part in creating? Of course there are also rules that state an MP should never knowingly lie in Parliament (which is why the rules about calling people liars is in place). It's all based on the expectation that members will behave honourably, which has probably never happened, but the establishment like to pretend this is the case. The whole lot needs to be torn down and rebuilt in a more fit for purpose way." The right honourable boris Johnson. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"It's been said that the last man to enter parliament with honest intentions was Guy Fawkes!" | |||
"There is very little disagreement on this thread which seems to suggest that many people agree that Dawn Butler can walk tall? I think she showed balls. " It was a planned political stunt on the last day of term in order to get some click-bait video for social media. | |||
"There is very little disagreement on this thread which seems to suggest that many people agree that Dawn Butler can walk tall? I think she showed balls. It was a planned political stunt on the last day of term in order to get some click-bait video for social media. " Perhaps, I cannot speak on her behalf.- Assuming for a moment that it was, would it be as bad as the political stunts the PM himself has created, directly or indirectly? Just wondering. | |||
"There is very little disagreement on this thread which seems to suggest that many people agree that Dawn Butler can walk tall? I think she showed balls. It was a planned political stunt on the last day of term in order to get some click-bait video for social media. Perhaps, I cannot speak on her behalf.- Assuming for a moment that it was, would it be as bad as the political stunts the PM himself has created, directly or indirectly? Just wondering. " So are we measuring who can be the biggest stunt now..? | |||
"There is very little disagreement on this thread which seems to suggest that many people agree that Dawn Butler can walk tall? I think she showed balls. It was a planned political stunt on the last day of term in order to get some click-bait video for social media. Perhaps, I cannot speak on her behalf.- Assuming for a moment that it was, would it be as bad as the political stunts the PM himself has created, directly or indirectly? Just wondering. So are we measuring who can be the biggest stunt now..? " You are absolutely right - it is not about that race to the bottom. I just wondered why Dawn's question was considered a stunt when so many people would ask that same question. | |||
"There is very little disagreement on this thread which seems to suggest that many people agree that Dawn Butler can walk tall? I think she showed balls. It was a planned political stunt on the last day of term in order to get some click-bait video for social media. Perhaps, I cannot speak on her behalf.- Assuming for a moment that it was, would it be as bad as the political stunts the PM himself has created, directly or indirectly? Just wondering. So are we measuring who can be the biggest stunt now..? " Since when did stating the truth become a stunt? | |||
"There is very little disagreement on this thread which seems to suggest that many people agree that Dawn Butler can walk tall? I think she showed balls. It was a planned political stunt on the last day of term in order to get some click-bait video for social media. Perhaps, I cannot speak on her behalf.- Assuming for a moment that it was, would it be as bad as the political stunts the PM himself has created, directly or indirectly? Just wondering. So are we measuring who can be the biggest stunt now..? You are absolutely right - it is not about that race to the bottom. I just wondered why Dawn's question was considered a stunt when so many people would ask that same question. " .... she knows the rules. Suffice to say she has the click-bait video, which is doing the rounds and getting a tremendous number of shares and reposts. | |||
| |||
| |||
"There is very little disagreement on this thread which seems to suggest that many people agree that Dawn Butler can walk tall? I think she showed balls. It was a planned political stunt on the last day of term in order to get some click-bait video for social media. Perhaps, I cannot speak on her behalf.- Assuming for a moment that it was, would it be as bad as the political stunts the PM himself has created, directly or indirectly? Just wondering. So are we measuring who can be the biggest stunt now..? Since when did stating the truth become a stunt?" Since her behaviour was in breach of house rules.. Since she was warned and repeated it. Its a stunt for clicks. It worked. | |||
"There is very little disagreement on this thread which seems to suggest that many people agree that Dawn Butler can walk tall? I think she showed balls. It was a planned political stunt on the last day of term in order to get some click-bait video for social media. Perhaps, I cannot speak on her behalf.- Assuming for a moment that it was, would it be as bad as the political stunts the PM himself has created, directly or indirectly? Just wondering. So are we measuring who can be the biggest stunt now..? Since when did stating the truth become a stunt? Since her behaviour was in breach of house rules.. Since she was warned and repeated it. Its a stunt for clicks. It worked. " I'd say if the rules allow a person to get away with consistently lying,the rules are nothing to be desired. | |||
"There is very little disagreement on this thread which seems to suggest that many people agree that Dawn Butler can walk tall? I think she showed balls. It was a planned political stunt on the last day of term in order to get some click-bait video for social media. Perhaps, I cannot speak on her behalf.- Assuming for a moment that it was, would it be as bad as the political stunts the PM himself has created, directly or indirectly? Just wondering. So are we measuring who can be the biggest stunt now..? Since when did stating the truth become a stunt? Since her behaviour was in breach of house rules.. Since she was warned and repeated it. Its a stunt for clicks. It worked. I'd say if the rules allow a person to get away with consistently lying,the rules are nothing to be desired." You've been quite vocal if a Tory has broken the ministerial code. You can't have it both ways 
Are the rules outdated? YES
Do they need updating? YES
Should we just ignore the ones we don't like? ABSOLUTELY NOT | |||
"There is very little disagreement on this thread which seems to suggest that many people agree that Dawn Butler can walk tall? I think she showed balls. It was a planned political stunt on the last day of term in order to get some click-bait video for social media. Perhaps, I cannot speak on her behalf.- Assuming for a moment that it was, would it be as bad as the political stunts the PM himself has created, directly or indirectly? Just wondering. So are we measuring who can be the biggest stunt now..? Since when did stating the truth become a stunt? Since her behaviour was in breach of house rules.. Since she was warned and repeated it. Its a stunt for clicks. It worked. " Why would she want to create a ‘stunt for clicks ‘ ? | |||
| |||
"There is very little disagreement on this thread which seems to suggest that many people agree that Dawn Butler can walk tall? I think she showed balls. It was a planned political stunt on the last day of term in order to get some click-bait video for social media. Perhaps, I cannot speak on her behalf.- Assuming for a moment that it was, would it be as bad as the political stunts the PM himself has created, directly or indirectly? Just wondering. So are we measuring who can be the biggest stunt now..? Since when did stating the truth become a stunt? Since her behaviour was in breach of house rules.. Since she was warned and repeated it. Its a stunt for clicks. It worked. I'd say if the rules allow a person to get away with consistently lying,the rules are nothing to be desired. You've been quite vocal if a Tory has broken the ministerial code. You can't have it both ways
Are the rules outdated? YES
Do they need updating? YES
Should we just ignore the ones we don't like? ABSOLUTELY NOT
"Maybe, but I think we can agree there is a huge difference between, for example, breaking rules regarding bullying, lying, interfering in the courts, not declaring conflicts of interest, and calling these things out which is the "crime" Butler is guilty of. I think that yes it was partly a stunt. But then many political acts bucking the system and trying to make change have also been. If she had meekly followed the rules, this would not have got the attention it had. She didn't resort to violence, or causing damage. She never actually did anything that we can really say was terrible. She broke some rules (not laws, unlike our government), in an effort to highlight how the government are also breaking the rules... On balance, I think it was the right thing to do, and were the roles reversed (i.e. a Labour government involved in huge amounts of lying, corruption etc.) I would still applaud the act. | |||
"She could've said all of that without calling him a liar and she would've been fine. The point here is that there are rules to follow and she chose not to follow them. Breaking rules has consequences. How can we expect the electorate to follow the laws(rules) if the same people who make then can't even follow their own in house rules? Butler will be back after the break, she probably just wanted the rest of the day off "In equal measure Boris is supposed to be honourable and not lie.. How many times has he done so to Parliament as well as the public and not been forced to retract or apologise. The rule was originally brought in as it was believed MP’s were honourable and would never lie hence the term. He one off breach seems pretty insignificant in comparison. | |||
| |||
"There is very little disagreement on this thread which seems to suggest that many people agree that Dawn Butler can walk tall? I think she showed balls. It was a planned political stunt on the last day of term in order to get some click-bait video for social media. Perhaps, I cannot speak on her behalf.- Assuming for a moment that it was, would it be as bad as the political stunts the PM himself has created, directly or indirectly? Just wondering. So are we measuring who can be the biggest stunt now..? Since when did stating the truth become a stunt? Since her behaviour was in breach of house rules.. Since she was warned and repeated it. Its a stunt for clicks. It worked. I'd say if the rules allow a person to get away with consistently lying,the rules are nothing to be desired. You've been quite vocal if a Tory has broken the ministerial code. You can't have it both ways
Are the rules outdated? YES
Do they need updating? YES
Should we just ignore the ones we don't like? ABSOLUTELY NOT
Maybe, but I think we can agree there is a huge difference between, for example, breaking rules regarding bullying, lying, interfering in the courts, not declaring conflicts of interest, and calling these things out which is the "crime" Butler is guilty of.
I think that yes it was partly a stunt. But then many political acts bucking the system and trying to make change have also been. If she had meekly followed the rules, this would not have got the attention it had.
She didn't resort to violence, or causing damage. She never actually did anything that we can really say was terrible. She broke some rules (not laws, unlike our government), in an effort to highlight how the government are also breaking the rules...
On balance, I think it was the right thing to do, and were the roles reversed (i.e. a Labour government involved in huge amounts of lying, corruption etc.) I would still applaud the act."Well put - I can fully subscribe to this! | |||
"She could've said all of that without calling him a liar and she would've been fine. The point here is that there are rules to follow and she chose not to follow them. Breaking rules has consequences. How can we expect the electorate to follow the laws(rules) if the same people who make then can't even follow their own in house rules? Butler will be back after the break, she probably just wanted the rest of the day off
In equal measure Boris is supposed to be honourable and not lie.. How many times has he done so to Parliament as well as the public and not been forced to retract or apologise. The rule was originally brought in as it was believed MP’s were honourable and would never lie hence the term.
He one off breach seems pretty insignificant in comparison.
"Thats why the rules seem utterly ridiculous. He can stand up and lie on a daily basis with no comeback and the person who points it out gets punished. Farcical. | |||
"Nick & Jackal, I agree with both if you. It is fairly insignificant but she broke the rules and took the punishment. I'm just not sure we should be applauding it." I agree the rules were broken and yes possibly click bait too. I just think as Boris is abusing the house then maybe fighting fire with fire is the next level down to which he has brought our historic house of democracy! I genuinely blame Boris for his repeated appalling behaviour. | |||
"She could've said all of that without calling him a liar and she would've been fine. The point here is that there are rules to follow and she chose not to follow them. Breaking rules has consequences. How can we expect the electorate to follow the laws(rules) if the same people who make then can't even follow their own in house rules? Butler will be back after the break, she probably just wanted the rest of the day off
In equal measure Boris is supposed to be honourable and not lie.. How many times has he done so to Parliament as well as the public and not been forced to retract or apologise. The rule was originally brought in as it was believed MP’s were honourable and would never lie hence the term.
He one off breach seems pretty insignificant in comparison.
Thats why the rules seem utterly ridiculous.
He can stand up and lie on a daily basis with no comeback and the person who points it out gets punished.
Farcical."I often asked myself, after another of his lies... surely this must be the end of his political career. I have come to realise that nothing is going to happen to him - he just continues in the same old way, with the same old smirk whether it is the Queen he lied to or the general public or parliament. Maybe things have to run their course? | |||
"She could've said all of that without calling him a liar and she would've been fine. The point here is that there are rules to follow and she chose not to follow them. Breaking rules has consequences. How can we expect the electorate to follow the laws(rules) if the same people who make then can't even follow their own in house rules? Butler will be back after the break, she probably just wanted the rest of the day off
In equal measure Boris is supposed to be honourable and not lie.. How many times has he done so to Parliament as well as the public and not been forced to retract or apologise. The rule was originally brought in as it was believed MP’s were honourable and would never lie hence the term.
He one off breach seems pretty insignificant in comparison.
Thats why the rules seem utterly ridiculous.
He can stand up and lie on a daily basis with no comeback and the person who points it out gets punished.
Farcical.
I often asked myself, after another of his lies... surely this must be the end of his political career.
I have come to realise that nothing is going to happen to him - he just continues in the same old way, with the same old smirk whether it is the Queen he lied to or the general public or parliament.
Maybe things have to run their course?
"I'm not sure it will make much difference to be honest. The majority of the country seen quite happy having a liar run the country. | |||
"Nick & Jackal, I agree with both if you. It is fairly insignificant but she broke the rules and took the punishment. I'm just not sure we should be applauding it. I agree the rules were broken and yes possibly click bait too. I just think as Boris is abusing the house then maybe fighting fire with fire is the next level down to which he has brought our historic house of democracy! I genuinely blame Boris for his repeated appalling behaviour. " The problem with this is the only way to get rid of him is internally. I just don't see that happening. Do you know if there are laws stopping ministers from saying this outside of the chamber? | |||
"She could've said all of that without calling him a liar and she would've been fine. The point here is that there are rules to follow and she chose not to follow them. Breaking rules has consequences. How can we expect the electorate to follow the laws(rules) if the same people who make then can't even follow their own in house rules? Butler will be back after the break, she probably just wanted the rest of the day off
In equal measure Boris is supposed to be honourable and not lie.. How many times has he done so to Parliament as well as the public and not been forced to retract or apologise. The rule was originally brought in as it was believed MP’s were honourable and would never lie hence the term.
He one off breach seems pretty insignificant in comparison.
Thats why the rules seem utterly ridiculous.
He can stand up and lie on a daily basis with no comeback and the person who points it out gets punished.
Farcical.
I often asked myself, after another of his lies... surely this must be the end of his political career.
I have come to realise that nothing is going to happen to him - he just continues in the same old way, with the same old smirk whether it is the Queen he lied to or the general public or parliament.
Maybe things have to run their course?
I'm not sure it will make much difference to be honest.
The majority of the country seen quite happy having a liar run the country.
"The majority of the country have zero interest in politics. Its got nothing to do with them being happy. They have a look at things come GE time or when something directly affects them. Never at anytime else. | |||
"She could've said all of that without calling him a liar and she would've been fine. The point here is that there are rules to follow and she chose not to follow them. Breaking rules has consequences. How can we expect the electorate to follow the laws(rules) if the same people who make then can't even follow their own in house rules? Butler will be back after the break, she probably just wanted the rest of the day off
In equal measure Boris is supposed to be honourable and not lie.. How many times has he done so to Parliament as well as the public and not been forced to retract or apologise. The rule was originally brought in as it was believed MP’s were honourable and would never lie hence the term.
He one off breach seems pretty insignificant in comparison.
Thats why the rules seem utterly ridiculous.
He can stand up and lie on a daily basis with no comeback and the person who points it out gets punished.
Farcical.
I often asked myself, after another of his lies... surely this must be the end of his political career.
I have come to realise that nothing is going to happen to him - he just continues in the same old way, with the same old smirk whether it is the Queen he lied to or the general public or parliament.
Maybe things have to run their course?
I'm not sure it will make much difference to be honest.
The majority of the country seen quite happy having a liar run the country.
The majority of the country have zero interest in politics. Its got nothing to do with them being happy. They have a look at things come GE time or when something directly affects them. Never at anytime else."ain’t that the truth | |||
"The "code of conduct" means you cannot call someone a liar. However, phrases like "misleading the house" to use but one are time-honoured traditional methods of saying they are lying. I believe they should be allowed to call someone out properly if they are lying. Admittedly, with the current PM, a person with a a long-standing and proven history of written and verbal untruths, debate in the chamber would grind to a halt. I don't think there has ever been a period in British politics where the truth was disrespected so much, by a person so unfit for office. Spot on "A spot on from here as well
I will say though that Blair blazed a trail for Johnson............after what he got away with means that PM's can lie to the Commons and us and walk away scott free. | |||
| |||
"It's good to get the truth in parliament sometimes. Full credit to her " | |||
"She could've said all of that without calling him a liar and she would've been fine. The point here is that there are rules to follow and she chose not to follow them. Breaking rules has consequences. How can we expect the electorate to follow the laws(rules) if the same people who make then can't even follow their own in house rules? Butler will be back after the break, she probably just wanted the rest of the day off
In equal measure Boris is supposed to be honourable and not lie.. How many times has he done so to Parliament as well as the public and not been forced to retract or apologise. The rule was originally brought in as it was believed MP’s were honourable and would never lie hence the term.
He one off breach seems pretty insignificant in comparison.
Thats why the rules seem utterly ridiculous.
He can stand up and lie on a daily basis with no comeback and the person who points it out gets punished.
Farcical.
I often asked myself, after another of his lies... surely this must be the end of his political career.
I have come to realise that nothing is going to happen to him - he just continues in the same old way, with the same old smirk whether it is the Queen he lied to or the general public or parliament.
Maybe things have to run their course?
I'm not sure it will make much difference to be honest.
The majority of the country seen quite happy having a liar run the country.
The majority of the country have zero interest in politics. Its got nothing to do with them being happy. They have a look at things come GE time or when something directly affects them. Never at anytime else.
"I think this is another good reason for "stunts" like this. It makes people more aware of what's going on. It's why political activists have always gone for big gestures. It's the only way to reach some people. | |||
"She could've said all of that without calling him a liar and she would've been fine. The point here is that there are rules to follow and she chose not to follow them. Breaking rules has consequences. How can we expect the electorate to follow the laws(rules) if the same people who make then can't even follow their own in house rules? Butler will be back after the break, she probably just wanted the rest of the day off
In equal measure Boris is supposed to be honourable and not lie.. How many times has he done so to Parliament as well as the public and not been forced to retract or apologise. The rule was originally brought in as it was believed MP’s were honourable and would never lie hence the term.
He one off breach seems pretty insignificant in comparison.
Thats why the rules seem utterly ridiculous.
He can stand up and lie on a daily basis with no comeback and the person who points it out gets punished.
Farcical.
I often asked myself, after another of his lies... surely this must be the end of his political career.
I have come to realise that nothing is going to happen to him - he just continues in the same old way, with the same old smirk whether it is the Queen he lied to or the general public or parliament.
Maybe things have to run their course?
I'm not sure it will make much difference to be honest.
The majority of the country seen quite happy having a liar run the country.
The majority of the country have zero interest in politics. Its got nothing to do with them being happy. They have a look at things come GE time or when something directly affects them. Never at anytime else.
I think this is another good reason for "stunts" like this. It makes people more aware of what's going on.
It's why political activists have always gone for big gestures. It's the only way to reach some people. "Maybe so but it hasn't made one front page, nor have I seen it on any social media amongst what I'd call the everyday population | |||
"She could've said all of that without calling him a liar and she would've been fine. The point here is that there are rules to follow and she chose not to follow them. Breaking rules has consequences. How can we expect the electorate to follow the laws(rules) if the same people who make then can't even follow their own in house rules? Butler will be back after the break, she probably just wanted the rest of the day off
In equal measure Boris is supposed to be honourable and not lie.. How many times has he done so to Parliament as well as the public and not been forced to retract or apologise. The rule was originally brought in as it was believed MP’s were honourable and would never lie hence the term.
He one off breach seems pretty insignificant in comparison.
Thats why the rules seem utterly ridiculous.
He can stand up and lie on a daily basis with no comeback and the person who points it out gets punished.
Farcical.
I often asked myself, after another of his lies... surely this must be the end of his political career.
I have come to realise that nothing is going to happen to him - he just continues in the same old way, with the same old smirk whether it is the Queen he lied to or the general public or parliament.
Maybe things have to run their course?
I'm not sure it will make much difference to be honest.
The majority of the country seen quite happy having a liar run the country.
The majority of the country have zero interest in politics. Its got nothing to do with them being happy. They have a look at things come GE time or when something directly affects them. Never at anytime else.
I think this is another good reason for "stunts" like this. It makes people more aware of what's going on.
It's why political activists have always gone for big gestures. It's the only way to reach some people.
Maybe so but it hasn't made one front page, nor have I seen it on any social media amongst what I'd call the everyday population "Oh it is very much on social media - I have seen it multiple times alongside people calling for more support for her. | |||
"There is very little disagreement on this thread which seems to suggest that many people agree that Dawn Butler can walk tall? I think she showed balls. " Like i say... our balls are so big we have to carry them on our chest! | |||
"There is very little disagreement on this thread which seems to suggest that many people agree that Dawn Butler can walk tall? I think she showed balls. It was a planned political stunt on the last day of term in order to get some click-bait video for social media. Perhaps, I cannot speak on her behalf.- Assuming for a moment that it was, would it be as bad as the political stunts the PM himself has created, directly or indirectly? Just wondering. So are we measuring who can be the biggest stunt now..? Since when did stating the truth become a stunt? Since her behaviour was in breach of house rules.. Since she was warned and repeated it. Its a stunt for clicks. It worked. " Shouldn't we challenge the 'rules'? Rosa Parks did. | |||
"The rules are there to stop structured debated from descending into pointless name calling and also uphold some standards of behaviour. She knew it was wrong and she could easily have implied the same and stayed in the house - there is a code of behaviour and they know it when they take the job.. and the massive wage, expenses and non exec company directorships The behavior is already a disgrace with braying noises and interruptions - can you imagine doing a presentation to the board and them making braying noises and shouting shaaaaame when they dont agree? Wouldn’t be tolerated
So yes she should have withdrawn or left - 2 options.
And an habitual liar gets away with his constant bullshit."So when she accused the police of racism when she was stopped and lied about the whole matter, that is okay. She never apologised, wasted police time ( they had to spend time showing their side where the policeman apologises to say sorry number was read wrong by the system etc etc ), the lie she spread to the public. So is not the common concussion that all MP's lie ? She twists the truth as she wants | |||
"She could've said all of that without calling him a liar and she would've been fine. The point here is that there are rules to follow and she chose not to follow them. Breaking rules has consequences. How can we expect the electorate to follow the laws(rules) if the same people who make then can't even follow their own in house rules? Butler will be back after the break, she probably just wanted the rest of the day off
In equal measure Boris is supposed to be honourable and not lie.. How many times has he done so to Parliament as well as the public and not been forced to retract or apologise. The rule was originally brought in as it was believed MP’s were honourable and would never lie hence the term.
He one off breach seems pretty insignificant in comparison.
Thats why the rules seem utterly ridiculous.
He can stand up and lie on a daily basis with no comeback and the person who points it out gets punished.
Farcical.
I often asked myself, after another of his lies... surely this must be the end of his political career.
I have come to realise that nothing is going to happen to him - he just continues in the same old way, with the same old smirk whether it is the Queen he lied to or the general public or parliament.
Maybe things have to run their course?
I'm not sure it will make much difference to be honest.
The majority of the country seen quite happy having a liar run the country.
The majority of the country have zero interest in politics. Its got nothing to do with them being happy. They have a look at things come GE time or when something directly affects them. Never at anytime else.
I think this is another good reason for "stunts" like this. It makes people more aware of what's going on.
It's why political activists have always gone for big gestures. It's the only way to reach some people.
Maybe so but it hasn't made one front page, nor have I seen it on any social media amongst what I'd call the everyday population "I wonder why... | |||
"She could've said all of that without calling him a liar and she would've been fine. The point here is that there are rules to follow and she chose not to follow them. Breaking rules has consequences. How can we expect the electorate to follow the laws(rules) if the same people who make then can't even follow their own in house rules? Butler will be back after the break, she probably just wanted the rest of the day off
In equal measure Boris is supposed to be honourable and not lie.. How many times has he done so to Parliament as well as the public and not been forced to retract or apologise. The rule was originally brought in as it was believed MP’s were honourable and would never lie hence the term.
He one off breach seems pretty insignificant in comparison.
Thats why the rules seem utterly ridiculous.
He can stand up and lie on a daily basis with no comeback and the person who points it out gets punished.
Farcical.
I often asked myself, after another of his lies... surely this must be the end of his political career.
I have come to realise that nothing is going to happen to him - he just continues in the same old way, with the same old smirk whether it is the Queen he lied to or the general public or parliament.
Maybe things have to run their course?
I'm not sure it will make much difference to be honest.
The majority of the country seen quite happy having a liar run the country.
The majority of the country have zero interest in politics. Its got nothing to do with them being happy. They have a look at things come GE time or when something directly affects them. Never at anytime else.
I think this is another good reason for "stunts" like this. It makes people more aware of what's going on.
It's why political activists have always gone for big gestures. It's the only way to reach some people.
Maybe so but it hasn't made one front page, nor have I seen it on any social media amongst what I'd call the everyday population
I wonder why..."Because no one is really that interested as I said above | |||
"She could've said all of that without calling him a liar and she would've been fine. The point here is that there are rules to follow and she chose not to follow them. Breaking rules has consequences. How can we expect the electorate to follow the laws(rules) if the same people who make then can't even follow their own in house rules? Butler will be back after the break, she probably just wanted the rest of the day off
In equal measure Boris is supposed to be honourable and not lie.. How many times has he done so to Parliament as well as the public and not been forced to retract or apologise. The rule was originally brought in as it was believed MP’s were honourable and would never lie hence the term.
He one off breach seems pretty insignificant in comparison.
Thats why the rules seem utterly ridiculous.
He can stand up and lie on a daily basis with no comeback and the person who points it out gets punished.
Farcical.
I often asked myself, after another of his lies... surely this must be the end of his political career.
I have come to realise that nothing is going to happen to him - he just continues in the same old way, with the same old smirk whether it is the Queen he lied to or the general public or parliament.
Maybe things have to run their course?
I'm not sure it will make much difference to be honest.
The majority of the country seen quite happy having a liar run the country.
The majority of the country have zero interest in politics. Its got nothing to do with them being happy. They have a look at things come GE time or when something directly affects them. Never at anytime else.
I think this is another good reason for "stunts" like this. It makes people more aware of what's going on.
It's why political activists have always gone for big gestures. It's the only way to reach some people.
Maybe so but it hasn't made one front page, nor have I seen it on any social media amongst what I'd call the everyday population
Oh it is very much on social media - I have seen it multiple times alongside people calling for more support for her."Well I haven't seen it on any of them and it isn't trending on twitter, I guess if you follow the right people then of course you would see it | |||
"She could've said all of that without calling him a liar and she would've been fine. The point here is that there are rules to follow and she chose not to follow them. Breaking rules has consequences. How can we expect the electorate to follow the laws(rules) if the same people who make then can't even follow their own in house rules? Butler will be back after the break, she probably just wanted the rest of the day off
In equal measure Boris is supposed to be honourable and not lie.. How many times has he done so to Parliament as well as the public and not been forced to retract or apologise. The rule was originally brought in as it was believed MP’s were honourable and would never lie hence the term.
He one off breach seems pretty insignificant in comparison.
Thats why the rules seem utterly ridiculous.
He can stand up and lie on a daily basis with no comeback and the person who points it out gets punished.
Farcical.
I often asked myself, after another of his lies... surely this must be the end of his political career.
I have come to realise that nothing is going to happen to him - he just continues in the same old way, with the same old smirk whether it is the Queen he lied to or the general public or parliament.
Maybe things have to run their course?
I'm not sure it will make much difference to be honest.
The majority of the country seen quite happy having a liar run the country.
The majority of the country have zero interest in politics. Its got nothing to do with them being happy. They have a look at things come GE time or when something directly affects them. Never at anytime else.
I think this is another good reason for "stunts" like this. It makes people more aware of what's going on.
It's why political activists have always gone for big gestures. It's the only way to reach some people.
Maybe so but it hasn't made one front page, nor have I seen it on any social media amongst what I'd call the everyday population
I wonder why...
Because no one is really that interested as I said above"Or could it be that to draw attention to her actual statment...see above transcript...would garner further support? | |||
"She could've said all of that without calling him a liar and she would've been fine. The point here is that there are rules to follow and she chose not to follow them. Breaking rules has consequences. How can we expect the electorate to follow the laws(rules) if the same people who make then can't even follow their own in house rules? Butler will be back after the break, she probably just wanted the rest of the day off
In equal measure Boris is supposed to be honourable and not lie.. How many times has he done so to Parliament as well as the public and not been forced to retract or apologise. The rule was originally brought in as it was believed MP’s were honourable and would never lie hence the term.
He one off breach seems pretty insignificant in comparison.
Thats why the rules seem utterly ridiculous.
He can stand up and lie on a daily basis with no comeback and the person who points it out gets punished.
Farcical.
I often asked myself, after another of his lies... surely this must be the end of his political career.
I have come to realise that nothing is going to happen to him - he just continues in the same old way, with the same old smirk whether it is the Queen he lied to or the general public or parliament.
Maybe things have to run their course?
I'm not sure it will make much difference to be honest.
The majority of the country seen quite happy having a liar run the country.
The majority of the country have zero interest in politics. Its got nothing to do with them being happy. They have a look at things come GE time or when something directly affects them. Never at anytime else.
I think this is another good reason for "stunts" like this. It makes people more aware of what's going on.
It's why political activists have always gone for big gestures. It's the only way to reach some people.
Maybe so but it hasn't made one front page, nor have I seen it on any social media amongst what I'd call the everyday population
Oh it is very much on social media - I have seen it multiple times alongside people calling for more support for her.
Well I haven't seen it on any of them and it isn't trending on twitter, I guess if you follow the right people then of course you would see it"You do know what you see on social ,edia is based on your analytics and algorithm? That if you and I 'googled' (not that i use google) the same thing we would get different resaults... that's what them there cookies and tracking pop ups are. Social media platforms are tailored to you. | |||
"The rules are there to stop structured debated from descending into pointless name calling and also uphold some standards of behaviour. She knew it was wrong and she could easily have implied the same and stayed in the house - there is a code of behaviour and they know it when they take the job.. and the massive wage, expenses and non exec company directorships The behavior is already a disgrace with braying noises and interruptions - can you imagine doing a presentation to the board and them making braying noises and shouting shaaaaame when they dont agree? Wouldn’t be tolerated
So yes she should have withdrawn or left - 2 options.
And an habitual liar gets away with his constant bullshit.
So when she accused the police of racism when she was stopped and lied about the whole matter, that is okay.
She never apologised, wasted police time ( they had to spend time showing their side where the policeman apologises to say sorry number was read wrong by the system etc etc ), the lie she spread to the public.
So is not the common concussion that all MP's lie ? She twists the truth as she wants"Well that didnt take long did it? | |||
"There is very little disagreement on this thread which seems to suggest that many people agree that Dawn Butler can walk tall? I think she showed balls. It was a planned political stunt on the last day of term in order to get some click-bait video for social media. Perhaps, I cannot speak on her behalf.- Assuming for a moment that it was, would it be as bad as the political stunts the PM himself has created, directly or indirectly? Just wondering. So are we measuring who can be the biggest stunt now..? Since when did stating the truth become a stunt? Since her behaviour was in breach of house rules.. Since she was warned and repeated it. Its a stunt for clicks. It worked. Shouldn't we challenge the 'rules'? Rosa Parks did." Yes...always.or we'd still be following the churches middle ages rules | |||
"She could've said all of that without calling him a liar and she would've been fine. The point here is that there are rules to follow and she chose not to follow them. Breaking rules has consequences. How can we expect the electorate to follow the laws(rules) if the same people who make then can't even follow their own in house rules? Butler will be back after the break, she probably just wanted the rest of the day off
In equal measure Boris is supposed to be honourable and not lie.. How many times has he done so to Parliament as well as the public and not been forced to retract or apologise. The rule was originally brought in as it was believed MP’s were honourable and would never lie hence the term.
He one off breach seems pretty insignificant in comparison.
Thats why the rules seem utterly ridiculous.
He can stand up and lie on a daily basis with no comeback and the person who points it out gets punished.
Farcical.
I often asked myself, after another of his lies... surely this must be the end of his political career.
I have come to realise that nothing is going to happen to him - he just continues in the same old way, with the same old smirk whether it is the Queen he lied to or the general public or parliament.
Maybe things have to run their course?
I'm not sure it will make much difference to be honest.
The majority of the country seen quite happy having a liar run the country.
The majority of the country have zero interest in politics. Its got nothing to do with them being happy. They have a look at things come GE time or when something directly affects them. Never at anytime else.
I think this is another good reason for "stunts" like this. It makes people more aware of what's going on.
It's why political activists have always gone for big gestures. It's the only way to reach some people.
Maybe so but it hasn't made one front page, nor have I seen it on any social media amongst what I'd call the everyday population
I wonder why...
Because no one is really that interested as I said above
Or could it be that to draw attention to her actual statment...see above transcript...would garner further support? "Tbf they are quite good at telling what is important and what ismt . It normally depends if it's on sky or not. | |||
| |||
"The rules are there to stop structured debated from descending into pointless name calling and also uphold some standards of behaviour. She knew it was wrong and she could easily have implied the same and stayed in the house - there is a code of behaviour and they know it when they take the job.. and the massive wage, expenses and non exec company directorships The behavior is already a disgrace with braying noises and interruptions - can you imagine doing a presentation to the board and them making braying noises and shouting shaaaaame when they dont agree? Wouldn’t be tolerated
So yes she should have withdrawn or left - 2 options.
And an habitual liar gets away with his constant bullshit.
So when she accused the police of racism when she was stopped and lied about the whole matter, that is okay.
She never apologised, wasted police time ( they had to spend time showing their side where the policeman apologises to say sorry number was read wrong by the system etc etc ), the lie she spread to the public.
So is not the common concussion that all MP's lie ? She twists the truth as she wants""Wasted police time." Did she stop them or did they stop her? P
Plus, if she did lie, the evidence would be there as the officer had a chest cam as well as Ms Butler filming. She would've had to make a formal complaint and statement, which if found untrue would possibly mean a criminal offence. As far as I'm aware, the MET hasn't pulled her up so...
My question to you is do you truly believe all politicians lie or are your comments simply trying to distract from the PM being called out on his governance by attacking the integrity of his accuser?
| |||
"The rules were followed correctly but sometimes rules need to be broken, especially when they are ridiculous. Under parliamentary rules, MPs are not allowed to accuse each other of lying in the House of Commons. So if an MP is lying, how do you call them out? By taking in circles? No get to the point. If you said you would do X but you did Y and you’ve lied. Simple as that. " Winston Churchill used the phrase "being economical with the truth" | |||
"The rules are there to stop structured debated from descending into pointless name calling and also uphold some standards of behaviour. She knew it was wrong and she could easily have implied the same and stayed in the house - there is a code of behaviour and they know it when they take the job.. and the massive wage, expenses and non exec company directorships The behavior is already a disgrace with braying noises and interruptions - can you imagine doing a presentation to the board and them making braying noises and shouting shaaaaame when they dont agree? Wouldn’t be tolerated
So yes she should have withdrawn or left - 2 options.
And an habitual liar gets away with his constant bullshit.
So when she accused the police of racism when she was stopped and lied about the whole matter, that is okay.
She never apologised, wasted police time ( they had to spend time showing their side where the policeman apologises to say sorry number was read wrong by the system etc etc ), the lie she spread to the public.
So is not the common concussion that all MP's lie ? She twists the truth as she wants
"Wasted police time." Did she stop them or did they stop her? P
Plus, if she did lie, the evidence would be there as the officer had a chest cam as well as Ms Butler filming. She would've had to make a formal complaint and statement, which if found untrue would possibly mean a criminal offence. As far as I'm aware, the MET hasn't pulled her up so...
My question to you is do you truly believe all politicians lie or are your comments simply trying to distract from the PM being called out on his governance by attacking the integrity of his accuser?
"Its symptomatic of what a nasty little country we have become. Not for the 1st time questions have been asked about the PMS relationship with the truth. Instead of looking at the issue,dirt has been thrown ar the accuser (and it doesmt take a genius to work out where this comes from) Anyone who is seen as threat to them will be vilified in the rags,the smear campaign on corbyn being the prime example. Its truly gutter level but hardly a surprise,considering wgo is in charge. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Now the government refuse to search Hancock’s private emails for evidence on how Hancock dealt with the Covid crisis and his own PPE deals. Apparently it’s ok to use your private email as long as you follow guidance and keep anything you think relevant. The good law project have been refused by Boris and co to release the emails for scrutiny. So what will a public enquiry find .. fuck all apparently as all the deals were done on private emails and we’re not allowed to see that as .. well it’s private.. People died and government ministers are allowed private emails accounts while in office to do business? WTF !!! " I agree... It's a coverup | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"I believe that the rules are (a) an MP is not allowed to call another a liar in the house, (b) an MP is not allowed to lie in the house. When the speaker fails to do anything about a PM who continually makes statements that are demonstrably disconnected from the truth, but instead only acts against those who point out the lies, then the system is totally broken, and the speaker himself has brought the house into disrepute. On the first day of the next session (separate gripe, country still in the grip of a pandemic, why the fuck are the MPs going on holiday?) I would love to see every single non-government MP stand up one by one and call out the PM and the cabinet as liars. When the system is broken like this, and the people of the country are in deadly danger, the time for politely obeying old fashioned rules is over." This! | |||
| |||
"I believe that the rules are (a) an MP is not allowed to call another a liar in the house, (b) an MP is not allowed to lie in the house. When the speaker fails to do anything about a PM who continually makes statements that are demonstrably disconnected from the truth, but instead only acts against those who point out the lies, then the system is totally broken, and the speaker himself has brought the house into disrepute. On the first day of the next session (separate gripe, country still in the grip of a pandemic, why the fuck are the MPs going on holiday?) I would love to see every single non-government MP stand up one by one and call out the PM and the cabinet as liars. When the system is broken like this, and the people of the country are in deadly danger, the time for politely obeying old fashioned rules is over." When you say "the time for politely obeying old fashioned rules is over", which rules do you mean? Who will decide which rules are ignored? | |||
"Let's put it another way.. everyone knew what Tony Blair said he stood for and he got elected.. People knew what Corby stood for and he got trounced.. Nobody knows what Starmer stands for and he could be elected.. " Do you honestly believe it was Corbyn's policies that were the issue? | |||
"I believe that the rules are (a) an MP is not allowed to call another a liar in the house, (b) an MP is not allowed to lie in the house. When the speaker fails to do anything about a PM who continually makes statements that are demonstrably disconnected from the truth, but instead only acts against those who point out the lies, then the system is totally broken, and the speaker himself has brought the house into disrepute. On the first day of the next session (separate gripe, country still in the grip of a pandemic, why the fuck are the MPs going on holiday?) I would love to see every single non-government MP stand up one by one and call out the PM and the cabinet as liars. When the system is broken like this, and the people of the country are in deadly danger, the time for politely obeying old fashioned rules is over. When you say "the time for politely obeying old fashioned rules is over", which rules do you mean? Who will decide which rules are ignored? " Generally not the people who benefit from the old rules. Female emancipation as an example. Nothing much was happening, until women started ignoring the rules. I am afraid that change does not, on the whole, come easy. It has to be forced. | |||
"I believe that the rules are (a) an MP is not allowed to call another a liar in the house, (b) an MP is not allowed to lie in the house. When the speaker fails to do anything about a PM who continually makes statements that are demonstrably disconnected from the truth, but instead only acts against those who point out the lies, then the system is totally broken, and the speaker himself has brought the house into disrepute. On the first day of the next session (separate gripe, country still in the grip of a pandemic, why the fuck are the MPs going on holiday?) I would love to see every single non-government MP stand up one by one and call out the PM and the cabinet as liars. When the system is broken like this, and the people of the country are in deadly danger, the time for politely obeying old fashioned rules is over. When you say "the time for politely obeying old fashioned rules is over", which rules do you mean? Who will decide which rules are ignored? Generally not the people who benefit from the old rules. Female emancipation as an example. Nothing much was happening, until women started ignoring the rules. I am afraid that change does not, on the whole, come easy. It has to be forced. " Forced? With physical violence? | |||
"Think she was bang out of order.. In a Pandemic we need all parties coming together..." In the midst of a pandemic, surely honesty and transparency is needed in such uncertain times where lives are at stake. Why is it every time a government official is caught with their pants down or their hand the cookie jar, we start calling for unity when these people are clearly out for their own interests? | |||
"I believe that the rules are (a) an MP is not allowed to call another a liar in the house, (b) an MP is not allowed to lie in the house. When the speaker fails to do anything about a PM who continually makes statements that are demonstrably disconnected from the truth, but instead only acts against those who point out the lies, then the system is totally broken, and the speaker himself has brought the house into disrepute. On the first day of the next session (separate gripe, country still in the grip of a pandemic, why the fuck are the MPs going on holiday?) I would love to see every single non-government MP stand up one by one and call out the PM and the cabinet as liars. When the system is broken like this, and the people of the country are in deadly danger, the time for politely obeying old fashioned rules is over. When you say "the time for politely obeying old fashioned rules is over", which rules do you mean? Who will decide which rules are ignored? Generally not the people who benefit from the old rules. Female emancipation as an example. Nothing much was happening, until women started ignoring the rules. I am afraid that change does not, on the whole, come easy. It has to be forced. Forced? With physical violence? " Almost inevitably, power does not give up it's grip easily. I don't advocate violence, but when every avenue has been explored, sometimes there is no other option. I will point again to the emancipation of women. Decades of campaigning had resulted in no shift in the law. It was only when the suffragettes took things to the next level that things changed. Throughout history it has been the same, power only listens to power. Sadly that power seems to have to be manifested as violence. Be it about workers rights, racial equality, votes for women, unfair taxes. They have all needed to threaten the establishment with more than peaceful protests to get results. | |||
| |||
"Think she was bang out of order.. In a Pandemic we need all parties coming together..." Yup how dare she call our serial liar of a leader a liar? She was totally out of order! Way more out of order than a leader who routinely tells damaging lies with impunity. | |||
| |||
"I think nearly everyone here can agree with what the MP said. The problem is we have a PM who can lie alot and the system within the house prevents other members from calling him out directly. Its the perfect situation for a person like him, no one call him out directly, and he will just waffle, ducking and diving with the odd u turn thrown in for good measure when he hits the dispatch box." I think the usual suspects have just decided to remain quiet. | |||
"Let's put it another way.. everyone knew what Tony Blair said he stood for and he got elected.. People knew what Corby stood for and he got trounced.. Nobody knows what Starmer stands for and he could be elected.. " Nobody knows what johnson stands for as he lies and changes his mind every 30 seconds. | |||
"She could've said all of that without calling him a liar and she would've been fine. The point here is that there are rules to follow and she chose not to follow them. Breaking rules has consequences. How can we expect the electorate to follow the laws(rules) if the same people who make then can't even follow their own in house rules? Butler will be back after the break, she probably just wanted the rest of the day off
In equal measure Boris is supposed to be honourable and not lie.. How many times has he done so to Parliament as well as the public and not been forced to retract or apologise. The rule was originally brought in as it was believed MP’s were honourable and would never lie hence the term.
He one off breach seems pretty insignificant in comparison.
Thats why the rules seem utterly ridiculous.
He can stand up and lie on a daily basis with no comeback and the person who points it out gets punished.
Farcical.
I often asked myself, after another of his lies... surely this must be the end of his political career.
I have come to realise that nothing is going to happen to him - he just continues in the same old way, with the same old smirk whether it is the Queen he lied to or the general public or parliament.
Maybe things have to run their course?
I'm not sure it will make much difference to be honest.
The majority of the country seen quite happy having a liar run the country.
The majority of the country have zero interest in politics. Its got nothing to do with them being happy. They have a look at things come GE time or when something directly affects them. Never at anytime else.
I think this is another good reason for "stunts" like this. It makes people more aware of what's going on.
It's why political activists have always gone for big gestures. It's the only way to reach some people.
Maybe so but it hasn't made one front page, nor have I seen it on any social media amongst what I'd call the everyday population
Oh it is very much on social media - I have seen it multiple times alongside people calling for more support for her.
Well I haven't seen it on any of them and it isn't trending on twitter, I guess if you follow the right people then of course you would see it
You do know what you see on social ,edia is based on your analytics and algorithm?
That if you and I 'googled' (not that i use google) the same thing we would get different resaults... that's what them there cookies and tracking pop ups are. Social media platforms are tailored to you."I'm aware of how the Internet works with regards to tracking cookies. Cookies have nothing to do with trending topics or newspapers front pages though. You said social media platforms are tailored to each individual user, I know, hence I said if you follow the right accounts you would've seen it. What I said remains true, most people couldn't care less about politics, hence, its not big news in the real world. | |||
"Think she was bang out of order.. In a Pandemic we need all parties coming together..." Gnab.......that's bang out of order  | |||
"I believe that the rules are (a) an MP is not allowed to call another a liar in the house, (b) an MP is not allowed to lie in the house. When the speaker fails to do anything about a PM who continually makes statements that are demonstrably disconnected from the truth, but instead only acts against those who point out the lies, then the system is totally broken, and the speaker himself has brought the house into disrepute. On the first day of the next session (separate gripe, country still in the grip of a pandemic, why the fuck are the MPs going on holiday?) I would love to see every single non-government MP stand up one by one and call out the PM and the cabinet as liars. When the system is broken like this, and the people of the country are in deadly danger, the time for politely obeying old fashioned rules is over." | |||
"I believe that the rules are (a) an MP is not allowed to call another a liar in the house, (b) an MP is not allowed to lie in the house. When the speaker fails to do anything about a PM who continually makes statements that are demonstrably disconnected from the truth, but instead only acts against those who point out the lies, then the system is totally broken, and the speaker himself has brought the house into disrepute. On the first day of the next session (separate gripe, country still in the grip of a pandemic, why the fuck are the MPs going on holiday?) I would love to see every single non-government MP stand up one by one and call out the PM and the cabinet as liars. When the system is broken like this, and the people of the country are in deadly danger, the time for politely obeying old fashioned rules is over. " | |||
| |||
"I believe that the rules are (a) an MP is not allowed to call another a liar in the house, (b) an MP is not allowed to lie in the house. When the speaker fails to do anything about a PM who continually makes statements that are demonstrably disconnected from the truth, but instead only acts against those who point out the lies, then the system is totally broken, and the speaker himself has brought the house into disrepute. On the first day of the next session (separate gripe, country still in the grip of a pandemic, why the fuck are the MPs going on holiday?) I would love to see every single non-government MP stand up one by one and call out the PM and the cabinet as liars. When the system is broken like this, and the people of the country are in deadly danger, the time for politely obeying old fashioned rules is over." I agree And this would for sure hit the news outside the uk, too. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Democracy - that thing you get when you vote for something you want from a list of 2 and don't get what they promised to deliver. Ever! Maybe we need a new thing like . . . " | |||
"It seems that she had every I twntion of breaking the rules to draw attention to the fact that the Prime Minister is lying. He does so regularly, without consequence. She was penaliased as per the rules. What's the issue?" The rules. | |||
"It seems that she had every I twntion of breaking the rules to draw attention to the fact that the Prime Minister is lying. He does so regularly, without consequence. She was penaliased as per the rules. What's the issue? The rules. " Which of course you follow, to the letter. Not even a mile over the speed limit. | |||
"It seems that she had every I twntion of breaking the rules to draw attention to the fact that the Prime Minister is lying. He does so regularly, without consequence. She was penaliased as per the rules. What's the issue? The rules." She was penalised as per the rules for speaking the truth. Again, what's the issue? The rules exist under an assumption of some level of integrity. Essentially, the lack of such was called out and the necessary penalty for doing so was accepted. Right and proper. Yoir disagreement about this is what? | |||
"I believe that the rules are (a) an MP is not allowed to call another a liar in the house, (b) an MP is not allowed to lie in the house. When the speaker fails to do anything about a PM who continually makes statements that are demonstrably disconnected from the truth, but instead only acts against those who point out the lies, then the system is totally broken, and the speaker himself has brought the house into disrepute. On the first day of the next session (separate gripe, country still in the grip of a pandemic, why the fuck are the MPs going on holiday?) I would love to see every single non-government MP stand up one by one and call out the PM and the cabinet as liars. When the system is broken like this, and the people of the country are in deadly danger, the time for politely obeying old fashioned rules is over." That would require the opposition to be organised and execute a plan at the same time... Oh and to actually attend the house. Fat chance of that happening then. | |||
| |||
"MP thrown out of Commons for telling the truth. That should be the headline. Says it all, really." In a nutshell - yes. | |||
"MP thrown out of Commons for telling the truth. That should be the headline. Says it all, really." But she wasn't. She was asked to leave for repeatedly breaching their agreed protocols. | |||
"MP thrown out of Commons for telling the truth. That should be the headline. Says it all, really. But she wasn't. She was asked to leave for repeatedly breaching their agreed protocols. " She did. But we have to consider the proportionality of her one-time offence against the sustained lying over a long period of time, the withholding of facts, the deceiving everybody around him including the Queen and the people of this country. While two wrongs do not make a right, I would argue there are quantum leaps between them. I really do think she did us all a favour, whether it also happened to be a publicity stunt, few care. | |||
"MP thrown out of Commons for telling the truth. That should be the headline. Says it all, really. But she wasn't. She was asked to leave for repeatedly breaching their agreed protocols. She did. But we have to consider the proportionality of her one-time offence against the sustained lying over a long period of time, the withholding of facts, the deceiving everybody around him including the Queen and the people of this country. While two wrongs do not make a right, I would argue there are quantum leaps between them. I really do think she did us all a favour, whether it also happened to be a publicity stunt, few care." Sounds very much like "Westminster bubble" stuff... George and Jean at No.42 tend not to bother with all of that chatter... | |||
| |||
"It's quite an odd set up. The speaker was correct to ask her to leave as she had clearly broke the rules. This is in the speakers powers. As for telling lies in parliament the speaker has little power other than hinting the person clarifies their statement. It is a breach of the ministerial code to lie but guess who is the person who gets to decide if it is or not and what should be the punishment... yep the PM " and that leads to the question... how can this still be a democracy? The person who stops inquiries into his behaviour regarding the furbishing of his flat being just another example. The proroguing of parliament at the crucial time when looking at Brexit documentation another... the list of incompetent acts as well as lack of integrity seems endless. And while Jack and Jill (whatever their names) may not care.... many do. There will hopefully be a tipping point when the thinking Tory voters will start scratching their heads asking if this is really what they want? | |||
"It's quite an odd set up. The speaker was correct to ask her to leave as she had clearly broke the rules. This is in the speakers powers. As for telling lies in parliament the speaker has little power other than hinting the person clarifies their statement. It is a breach of the ministerial code to lie but guess who is the person who gets to decide if it is or not and what should be the punishment... yep the PM and that leads to the question... how can this still be a democracy? The person who stops inquiries into his behaviour regarding the furbishing of his flat being just another example. The proroguing of parliament at the crucial time when looking at Brexit documentation another... the list of incompetent acts as well as lack of integrity seems endless. And while Jack and Jill (whatever their names) may not care.... many do. There will hopefully be a tipping point when the thinking Tory voters will start scratching their heads asking if this is really what they want? " They're either quiet or intellectualising current events to avoid what is clearly wrong in our politics. This is beyond Left and Right now. | |||
"MP thrown out of Commons for telling the truth. That should be the headline. Says it all, really. But she wasn't. She was asked to leave for repeatedly breaching their agreed protocols. She did. But we have to consider the proportionality of her one-time offence against the sustained lying over a long period of time, the withholding of facts, the deceiving everybody around him including the Queen and the people of this country. While two wrongs do not make a right, I would argue there are quantum leaps between them. I really do think she did us all a favour, whether it also happened to be a publicity stunt, few care." I care. Its the seat of our democracy not the bloody love island house where txt and clicks are meaningful. If we want democracy taken seriously treat it with respect. If she wants to reform the house then campaign to reform the house and she may well get support to do so. But no.. That's too hard... Much easier doing a bit of clickbait social media pandering to the hard of thinking. | |||
"It's quite an odd set up. The speaker was correct to ask her to leave as she had clearly broke the rules. This is in the speakers powers. As for telling lies in parliament the speaker has little power other than hinting the person clarifies their statement. It is a breach of the ministerial code to lie but guess who is the person who gets to decide if it is or not and what should be the punishment... yep the PM and that leads to the question... how can this still be a democracy? The person who stops inquiries into his behaviour regarding the furbishing of his flat being just another example. The proroguing of parliament at the crucial time when looking at Brexit documentation another... the list of incompetent acts as well as lack of integrity seems endless. And while Jack and Jill (whatever their names) may not care.... many do. There will hopefully be a tipping point when the thinking Tory voters will start scratching their heads asking if this is really what they want? " That's democracy at work. Have an opposition party that attracts more voters and the colours change. Though still with the same protocols as you've highlighted. | |||
"MP thrown out of Commons for telling the truth. That should be the headline. Says it all, really. But she wasn't. She was asked to leave for repeatedly breaching their agreed protocols. She did. But we have to consider the proportionality of her one-time offence against the sustained lying over a long period of time, the withholding of facts, the deceiving everybody around him including the Queen and the people of this country. While two wrongs do not make a right, I would argue there are quantum leaps between them. I really do think she did us all a favour, whether it also happened to be a publicity stunt, few care. I care. Its the seat of our democracy not the bloody love island house where txt and clicks are meaningful. If we want democracy taken seriously treat it with respect. If she wants to reform the house then campaign to reform the house and she may well get support to do so. But no.. That's too hard... Much easier doing a bit of clickbait social media pandering to the hard of thinking. " I have no issue with what she did. She highlighted a hypocrisy. That brings pressure to bear in most circumstances, but as we have such a brazenly corrupt and self-serving government and a public that doesn't seem to mind, I doubt that it will register... | |||
| |||
"I'm not sure who is coming out of this worse. The man who Is trampling all over centuries of democracy or the people cheering him on." Both as bad as each other .. | |||
"It's quite an odd set up. The speaker was correct to ask her to leave as she had clearly broke the rules. This is in the speakers powers. As for telling lies in parliament the speaker has little power other than hinting the person clarifies their statement. It is a breach of the ministerial code to lie but guess who is the person who gets to decide if it is or not and what should be the punishment... yep the PM and that leads to the question... how can this still be a democracy? The person who stops inquiries into his behaviour regarding the furbishing of his flat being just another example. The proroguing of parliament at the crucial time when looking at Brexit documentation another... the list of incompetent acts as well as lack of integrity seems endless. And while Jack and Jill (whatever their names) may not care.... many do. There will hopefully be a tipping point when the thinking Tory voters will start scratching their heads asking if this is really what they want? That's democracy at work. Have an opposition party that attracts more voters and the colours change. Though still with the same protocols as you've highlighted. " It's out there in the public domain for all to see. I would expect Labour to highlight this closer to the next GE and hopefully a promise to change these odd rules. If not those odd rules transfer to the next PM regardless if its labour or conservative. I'm guessing this is how Blair sold the WMD story though suspect there was more to it than that | |||
"It's quite an odd set up. The speaker was correct to ask her to leave as she had clearly broke the rules. This is in the speakers powers. As for telling lies in parliament the speaker has little power other than hinting the person clarifies their statement. It is a breach of the ministerial code to lie but guess who is the person who gets to decide if it is or not and what should be the punishment... yep the PM and that leads to the question... how can this still be a democracy? The person who stops inquiries into his behaviour regarding the furbishing of his flat being just another example. The proroguing of parliament at the crucial time when looking at Brexit documentation another... the list of incompetent acts as well as lack of integrity seems endless. And while Jack and Jill (whatever their names) may not care.... many do. There will hopefully be a tipping point when the thinking Tory voters will start scratching their heads asking if this is really what they want? That's democracy at work. Have an opposition party that attracts more voters and the colours change. Though still with the same protocols as you've highlighted. It's out there in the public domain for all to see. I would expect Labour to highlight this closer to the next GE and hopefully a promise to change these odd rules. If not those odd rules transfer to the next PM regardless if its labour or conservative. I'm guessing this is how Blair sold the WMD story though suspect there was more to it than that" Turkeys voting for Christmas perhaps. What is frustrating is thta even after wmd dodgy dossier and invading Iraq... Even after Christine and Neil Hamilton and even after the mps expenses scandal... There apparently is still a lack of oversight and accountability beyond changing one lot for another. | |||
| |||
"MP thrown out of Commons for telling the truth. That should be the headline. Says it all, really. But she wasn't. She was asked to leave for repeatedly breaching their agreed protocols. She did. But we have to consider the proportionality of her one-time offence against the sustained lying over a long period of time, the withholding of facts, the deceiving everybody around him including the Queen and the people of this country. While two wrongs do not make a right, I would argue there are quantum leaps between them. I really do think she did us all a favour, whether it also happened to be a publicity stunt, few care. I care. Its the seat of our democracy not the bloody love island house where txt and clicks are meaningful. If we want democracy taken seriously treat it with respect. If she wants to reform the house then campaign to reform the house and she may well get support to do so. But no.. That's too hard... Much easier doing a bit of clickbait social media pandering to the hard of thinking. " Sorry I mis-spelt - I meant to say " quite a few do care" (meaning the opposite) - did not realise until just. | |||
"Nnobody cares if Boris tells the odd Porkie.. It makes him more human and likeable... A PM of the people.. In years to come there will a Boris Statue .. " If it were as easy ... and just about little porkies - but these lies are so blatant, substantial, existential... | |||
"It's quite an odd set up. The speaker was correct to ask her to leave as she had clearly broke the rules. This is in the speakers powers. As for telling lies in parliament the speaker has little power other than hinting the person clarifies their statement. It is a breach of the ministerial code to lie but guess who is the person who gets to decide if it is or not and what should be the punishment... yep the PM and that leads to the question... how can this still be a democracy? The person who stops inquiries into his behaviour regarding the furbishing of his flat being just another example. The proroguing of parliament at the crucial time when looking at Brexit documentation another... the list of incompetent acts as well as lack of integrity seems endless. And while Jack and Jill (whatever their names) may not care.... many do. There will hopefully be a tipping point when the thinking Tory voters will start scratching their heads asking if this is really what they want? That's democracy at work. Have an opposition party that attracts more voters and the colours change. Though still with the same protocols as you've highlighted. It's out there in the public domain for all to see. I would expect Labour to highlight this closer to the next GE and hopefully a promise to change these odd rules. If not those odd rules transfer to the next PM regardless if its labour or conservative. I'm guessing this is how Blair sold the WMD story though suspect there was more to it than that Turkeys voting for Christmas perhaps. What is frustrating is thta even after wmd dodgy dossier and invading Iraq... Even after Christine and Neil Hamilton and even after the mps expenses scandal... There apparently is still a lack of oversight and accountability beyond changing one lot for another. " That does seem the sum of it sadly. About time a party stood on a manifesto that includes changing that otherwise whoever wins the GE we are back in the same situation | |||
"Nnobody cares if Boris tells the odd Porkie.. It makes him more human and likeable... A PM of the people.. In years to come there will a Boris Statue .. " Can I suggest a splendid statue of him in the centre of a public urinal? | |||
"Nnobody cares if Boris tells the odd Porkie.. It makes him more human and likeable... A PM of the people.. In years to come there will a Boris Statue .. " Wow...just wow... | |||
"Nnobody cares if Boris tells the odd Porkie.. It makes him more human and likeable... A PM of the people.. In years to come there will a Boris Statue .. Wow...just wow... "It's sometimes hard to tell if he's joking or if he's reached a sort of event horizon of tabloid bullshit. He may now have been sucked in so far by the guff they spout, there's no longer any chance of breaking free. | |||
"Nnobody cares if Boris tells the odd Porkie.. It makes him more human and likeable... A PM of the people.. In years to come there will a Boris Statue .. " 
| |||
"Nnobody cares if Boris tells the odd Porkie.. It makes him more human and likeable... A PM of the people.. In years to come there will a Boris Statue ..
"It will give people a nice focal point to gather and protest around in protest season. I imagine garlands of flowers and caring messages being left on it. | |||
| |||
