Could anything else so succinctly demonstrate the power that Parliament has to hold the government to account – or rather the lack of it?
Commons Speaker Lyndsay Hoyle suspended a sitting of the House of Commons on Thursday (December 8) after discovering that Michael Gove had failed to deliver a full copy of a ministerial statement on the opening of a new coal mine, either to him or to Opposition parties.
This meant the Speaker was unable to select the MPs who would question the minister on the decision, because nobody had the information needed to inform such questions.
This is a breach of the Ministerial Code and by rights, Gove should have resigned.
But, as Maximilien Robespierre observes in the video below, he’s not going to resign.
He won’t be punished by prime minister Rishi Sunak.
And the Commons sitting was suspended for just five minutes.
Pathetic. Toothless. Pointless.
Here’s the clip:
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Time and time again, Tory ministers have been told that their statements to the House of Commons have to be made in a very particular way, which is:
not after announcing what they’re doing to the media first, and
not without giving Opposition parties full access to the contents of their speech.
But Michael Gove – who has been in government on and off since 2010 and therefore should know better – broke those rules yet again, and this time Commons Speaker Lyndsay Hoyle had had enough.
He suspended the sitting of the Commons – firstly for five minutes and then for a longer period, in order to investigate Gove’s reasons for failing to supply more than a brief summary of his long speech before he delivered it and to provide Opposition parties with a chance to absorb what he had said and formulate questions on it.
Was Gove trying to avoid letting his fellow MPs have the chance to ask pertinent questions?
Or is he just incompetent?
As always, it’s hard to separate idiocy from intent with this lot.
The whole saga was captured on video, so you can watch it for yourself:
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Suella Braverman: by her own admission, she is a risk to the security of the United Kingdom. So doesn’t it undermine Rishi Sunak’s claim to be putting “integrity and accountability” back into government for her to be re-appointed as Home Secretary?
One of the most vicious right-wingers in Rishi Sunak’s new Cabinet may find her tenure cut short before she’s had a chance to start – because of her own decisions.
Suella Braverman only quit the role of Home Secretary last week – most probably in order to attack Liz Truss in her resignation letter – but was re-appointed to the job by new prime minister Rishi Sunak yesterday.
The pretext for her resignation was a breach of the ministerial code in which she was said to have sent classified documents from her personal email.
Now this has come back to haunt her, because Labour has joined the Liberal Democrats in demanding an inquiry into whether she is an ongoing security risk and her appointment makes a mockery of Sunak’s claim to be putting “integrity and accountability” back into government.
Shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper criticised the appointment yesterday (October 25), accusing Sunak of putting “party before country” and tweeting, “Security is too important for this irresponsible Tory chaos.”
She expanded on this in a letter to Cabinet Secretary Simon Case, calling for an urgent probe into “this and other possible security breaches”.
She added that “the public has a right to know that there are proper secure information procedures in place to cover the person who has been given charge of our national security”.
In her resignation letter last week, Braverman acknowledged the mistake, calling it a “technical infringement” and adding that much of the content in the document she emailed had already been briefed to MPs.
The claim to be putting “party before country” is justified because Braverman is from the extreme right wing of the Conservative Party. Not a natural Sunak supporter, she only announced she was backing him late on Sunday, when it became clear that Boris Johnson would not be standing as a candidate in the Tory leadership contest.
Her appointment is therefore seen as an attempt by Sunak to win support from all wings of his party. It also trumpets an intention to take a hard line on immigration by reappointing the minister who previously said it was her “dream” to see Rwanda deportation flights take off, and expressed a desire to act tough on small refugee boats crossing the English Channel.
Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesperson Alistair Carmichael said: “Suella Braverman’s appointment makes a mockery of Rishi Sunak’s claims to be bringing integrity to Number 10.
“There must be a full independent inquiry by the Cabinet Office into her appointment, including any promises Sunak made to her behind closed doors.”
He said Braverman should be sacked if it is confirmed that she “repeatedly broke the ministerial code and threatened national security”.
Her reappointment has also sparked outrage among the commentatorati, including the following from Russell Kane, which I recommend you don’t watch if you are offended by extremely strong language:
Alternatively, try this from Professor Tim Wilson who attacks Braverman’s politics, comparing Suella Braverman’s dream of “misery, contempt and insanity” with Martin Luther King’s dream of “optimism”:
Foreign Secretary James Cleverly, speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, insisted Braverman had shown integrity by apologising for breaking the rules. He said Sunak had accepted her apology and chose to re-appoint her because she had “very, very recent” experience of the Home Office.
“Clearly the PM wants to make sure that the department can deliver from day one.”
But he didn’t sound very convincing.
It is hard to defend a minister whose brief is to focus on crime when she only admitted committing one herself – last week. Let’s look forward to watching Sunak make a stab at it in Prime Minister’s Questions.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
The bank holiday weekend may be over, but this article is being produced in the period before everybody goes back to work – so I’m still putting up material that has interested me – and I hope it interests you. Make of it what you will:
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Sunak and Truss: they’ll be attacking the Scottish government at a hustings event in Perth.
It’s all a bit predictable, isn’t it? Still, if it works, there’s no reason they wouldn’t carry on with it.
I refer, of course, to the Tory tactic of “divide and rule” – currently on full display in that party’s leadership election campaign.
Both Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss have ventured into Scotland, where they said the ruling SNP should be challenged on its record, and affirmed their opposition to another independence referendum.
The SNP has retaliated by pointing out (correctly) that neither candidate is offering a solution to the current cost-of-living crisis – and suggesting that both will boost support for Scottish independence.
Sunak has announced a plan to roll back devolution to ensure “every single” government department operated UK-wide, despite key policy areas such as education and health having been in the control of Holyrood since 1999.
That’s unconstitutional, of course.
He also called for regular reports from Scotland on the delivery of key services, so these can be compared across the UK. That seems to be another attempt to establish lines of criticism that could be used to accuse the Scottish administration of failure (probably on false bases).
Truss just went straight for the jugular, saying she would make changes to the Scotland Act to give MSPs the same full parliamentary privilege as MPs at Westminster, so they would have legal immunity from prosecution over statements made in Holyrood, instead of the narrower set of protections against defamation claims and some court actions they have now.
If that seems like a bonus for MSPs, think again: Truss wants it in order to “allow for more robust questioning for ministers” and “increase the powers of the Scottish parliament to hold the Scottish government to account”. It’s all about attacking the SNP administration.
“I’ll make sure that my government does everything to ensure elected representatives hold the devolved administration to account for its failure to deliver the quality public services, particularly health and education, that Scottish people deserve.”
The SNP’s Westminster leader, Ian Blackford, reminded voters that throughout the cost of living crisis, while other nations’ governments have acted to support the most vulnerable people, the UK’s Tory government has “sat on its hands”. He said:
“Whoever wins this leadership contest, Scotland loses.”
That’s true – but it’s not the argument for independence that he insists it is, because it applies across the United Kingdom. We all lose as long as any Tories remain in office at all. That’s something we should all remember as this leader election draws to its close.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Unfair and unnatural: the rule change was rammed through as part of a “take it or leave it” proscription rule package with the collusion of right-wing trade union leaderships (surely a contradiction in terms?) at last year’s farcical Labour conference.
This should sound the death knell for Keir Starmer’s Labour Party.
It is quite clearly nowhere anybody who believes in the founding Labour values of fairness and equality can stay any more – because Starmer has deliberately removed those values from the way his club treats the people who fund it:
The Labour party’s new 2022 rule book has abolished fairness and natural justice from its expulsion processes.
No, that’s not a joke – though perhaps it is a sick one.
The party’s rules now explicitly rule out those concepts from the entitlement of anyone it decides to expel.
Chapter 2, Clause ii.8 tells members they have a right to dignity, respect and fairness… Clearly that ‘right’ now only applies – and is therefore not regarded as an actual right by the regime – as long as the party feels like keeping you in as a member. If it decides to kick you out, your right to that ‘right’ doesn’t exist.
The regime slipped through this anti-justice horror as part of the ‘take it or leave it’ proscription rule package rammed through at last year’s party conference with the collusion of right-wing union managements.
There are plenty of genuine socialist parties springing up in the UK now, so there is no reason to stick with this hollowed-out hulk that Starmer is milking to destruction before jumping ship – probably to the Tories.
My advice to all members of good character and conscience: GET OUT NOW.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Laughing at us: Boris Johnson grinned inanely and bobbed about on his bench while MPs attacked his contempt for the rules and denials of guilt, before Parliament went into recess. What is he planning that we don’t know?
I was going to use video of this interview but instead I decided to spare you the agony.
Here’s the gist:
Boris Johnson refuses four times to answer whether or not he will resign if he is found to have broken his own Covid laws.
“I can’t say anything more about this until the process is completed” he tells Sophie Raworth.
Mr Johnson was pressed several times on the subject by Sophie Raworth in an interview for BBC One’s Sunday Morning Programme. She asked whether he understood why so many people found his on-the-record explanations – including that he believed he was only attending work events – “implausible”.
Mr Johnson said: “There is literally not a bean I can tell you about that.”
He was asked if he was “burying” his “head in the sand” as he was being investigated by the police, had MPs calling on him to resign and might face a no-confidence vote.
Mr Johnson replied: “I am fortunate to live in a democracy. I am fortunate to be the PM of a free independent democratic country where people can take that sort of decision, and where I do face that sort of pressure, that’s a wonderful thing.”
If Johnson does live in a democracy, many would say he’s the only one in the UK to have that privilege. Millions of us would love to have a vote on whether he gets to remain as prime minister – but he knows how it would go and is probably counting his lucky stars that there’s no mechanism to allow us that choice.
It seems, though, that he has no intention of following the rules. If he is found to have attended even one lockdown-busting party, then he will have intentionally lied to Parliament and the law will demand his resignation.
So the question is, how will he pervert our customs in order to continue inflicting himself on us?
Boris Johnson: “Drunk? At a party? Me? How would anybody know the difference?”
Should we be grateful to former Tory attorney-general Jeremy Wright for reminding us that, if Boris Johnson is found to have attended or known about rule-breaking No 10 parties, he’ll have to resign?
This Writer reckons so; it’s important to keep the facts in mind because otherwise, one of Johnson’s cronies will slither in and pretend they’re different – which is what they’re trying to do.
Mr Wright’s reminder is that Johnson will have no escape route, because he will have misled Parliament when he said no rules were broken.
Meanwhile, here comes Johnson’s personal lawyer to claim – desperately – that – even if he attended gatherings found to be illegal parties – he broke no rules if he went back to work immediately afterwards and did not drink excessively.
The biggest problem with this argument is that it is clearly nonsense. If he drank anything at all, or came into contact with anyone at all in a social setting, then he broke the rules.
Mr Wright’s test of culpability is much simpler – and therefore, far more believable. In a letter to his own constituents, he states:
“If the prime minister has attended events he knew broke the rules, or was aware of events he knew broke the rules, he should not have advised the House of Commons, on several occasions, that as far as he was aware, no rules were broken there.
“Doing so in those circumstances would be misleading the House and must in my view lead to his resignation or removal from office.”
That’s good to know, at a time when Johnson is expected to receive a fixed-penalty notice from the Metropolitan Police – for attending rule-breaking parties at 10 Downing Street.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Do it online if you can: but will employees really be penalised by the new Welsh Government rule?
I can think of at least one employer of people in Wales that will hate this:
From Monday (December 27), workers will receive a £60 fixed penalty notice and companies will be fined £1,000 every time they are found not to be working from home, with no good reason for being at their normal place of work.
For employers, this could rise to a maximum fine of £10,000.
The new measure to limit the spread of Covid-19 (in the light of the rise of the Omicron variant) is being imposed by the Welsh government.
Employers will be expected to take all reasonable steps to facilitate home working and provide employees with the support they need.
Unions have raised concerns that employers will be able to protect themselves from fines by placing liability on workers, but I don’t see how this can work.
It should be fairly obvious if an employee is able to work from home, and if an employer if restricting them from doing so.
For example, as a journalist, I’m entirely capable of working from home. I’ve been doing it successfully for 10 days short of 10 years, at the time of writing.
But a previous employer, that wanted to move its branch office to 41 miles away from my home for no very good reason, demanded that I travel that distance every day, even though it was possible that I would have to travel back again (to my patch) during the day, and then return to the office to write up my stories.
I was capable of working from home. My employer was restricting me from doing so.
I honestly think my then-bosses were mystified when I resigned. I went on to better things and the local edition of the newspaper folded. I think other changes had to be made in the firm to cover its losses, although that may just be gossip.
All because an employer refused to allow an employee to work from home.
I’m not suggesting that anyone should quit their job if their employer orders them to attend a workplace that may infect them with Covid-19.
Obviously, being compelled by their boss should be a good enough reason for them to do so. Then the burden of responsibility would fall onto the employer.
If the Welsh Government was really serious about this, though, there’s an obvious answer:
A contact system for whistleblowers.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
This is what you get if you vote Tory: Boris Johnson partied it up (he’s seen here asking Christmas Quiz questions for groups of Downing Street workers at a Christmas party last year) while millions of people cancelled their own celebrations and hundreds more died alone because of his social distancing demands. Do the people of North Shropshire want another party boy, or would they rather try to have an MP who actually represents them?
Does Westminster really need another rule-breaking Tory who’ll rave it up at parties rather than work for the interests of everybody in the UK?
That’s the question that should be on the minds of every voter in North Shropshire as they head for the polling stations today (Thursday, December 16, 2021).
The Conservative candidate may have said he does not approve of what is alleged to have happened – but then, Boris johnson said last night that he follows the rules, and if you believe that, then you were born yesterday and shouldn’t be allowed to vote!
Some political agitators are claiming that the Tories who are already in Parliament aren’t guilty of committing crimes because the Metropolitan Police, run by a woman who owes her job to the Tory government, are refusing to investigate the rule-busting Christmas parties last year.
Well, workers at the Met had a bit of a surprise recently, when a mobile billboard used by the media organisation Led By Donkeys broadcast the facts of the case at them in their Scotland Yard offices, to great public interest.
Take a look at the message yourself:
Damning – of both the Met and the Tories.
Do the people of North Shropshire want a member of Parliament who will represent them? Or do they want to send another sponger off to have a party while hundreds of people die?
By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. This includes scrolling or continued navigation. more information
The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.
