terror bill passed by a single vote

[Streathamite]

oooh, innit gone all quiet over in swappie corner?
c'mon chaps, you can do better than this! donna ferrentes is doing better than you, and he ain't even Swappie OR WESPECK no more!

 

[butchersapron]

In form anyway.

 

[Streathamite]

yeah, i guess i meant that, in that members of the Church Of Latter Day Swappies never really leave. it's practically jesuitical ("gimme a child of 7, etc" - that is jesuits, innit? )
<taps watch>
<drums fingers on table>
well, Mr Rees's little helpers?

 

[Pickman's model]

yeah, i guess i meant that, in that members of the Church Of Latter Day Swappies never really leave. it's practically jesuitical ("gimme a child of 7, etc" - that is jesuits, innit? )

the church of jonathan king and the latter day paedos?

 

[past caring]

Read closer boys and girls, that's for next weeks vote on the bill itself, not this weeks amendments. Nothing to stop people lobbying on those though.

Fair enough, but what kind of odds d'you reckon ern would have given at his bookies on Galloway being marked absent next week and all?

 

[marty21]

It might well have even been withdrawn...

exactly, makes it even worse that he couldn't be arsed turning up for it

 

[butchersapron]

Fair enough, but what kind of odds d'you reckon ern would have given at his bookies on Galloway being marked absent next week and all?

Now? It's odds on - there's no way he'll be allowed to miss the vote. He may well have hoped to sneak it under cover of a large govt majority before...but not now...

 

[marty21]

Now? It's odds on - there's no way he'll be allowed to miss the vote. He may well have hoped to sneak it under cover of a large govt majority before...but not now...

but what if he has a commercial engagement?

 

[JTG]

but what if he has a commercial engagement?

He's reaching out

 

[Random]

 

[Fisher_Gate]

English Constitution 101 - Lesson 1: Procedures of the Houses of Parliament

What is happening is the Committee stage of the Bill. Every Bill goes through it in each House of Parliament, between second and third reading. Normally the Committee is formed from a cross-section of members representing the various parties in parliament and it sits over a few weeks in a committee room. Occasionally the whole house sits as a Committee - which is what is happening at this time. For government bills, it is a convention of the constitution that the government is allowed to control the passage of the bill and manouevre over different amendments, some of which are introduced by the government and bill supporters and are 'friendly', sometimes opponents of the bill introduce wrecking amendments which if passed the government will try to overturn later.

After the committee stage, the Bill returns to debate by the whole House for the third reading. This is when the Bill as amended by committee is further revised and the principles behind the Bill considered again. This is the stage at which principled opposition to the passage of the bill is attempted.

Then the whole process is repeated again in the other House.

Contrary to claims in earlier posts, there was no vote on the substantive issues of the Bill on the 3 November - a series of amendments by the opposition parties (Tories and LibDems) were voted down. Over 140 MPs failed to vote in the committee.

I'm sure Galloway would have preferred to have been there - but he wasn't to know when his speaking engagements were fixed that the Committee stage would be happening. I still fully expect him to be in the house for the third reading - and if he isn't criticism will be justified. Until then, it remains the usual knee-jerk Respect-bashing with little regard to the issues.

 

[butchersapron]

Yawn, we've done this. Everyone knows and everyone has tailored their argument accordingly. No one is arguing on the substantive content of the bill or the amendments but on the damage that a lost whipped bill would have for blair.

Urban75 101 - Lesson 1: Procedures of the board:

read the fucking thread fred.

 

[cogg]

English Constitution 101 - Lesson 1: Procedures of the Houses of Parliament

What is happening is the Committee stage of the Bill. Every Bill goes through it in each House of Parliament, between second and third reading. Normally the Committee is formed from a cross-section of members representing the various parties in parliament and it sits over a few weeks in a committee room. Occasionally the whole house sits as a Committee - which is what is happening at this time. For government bills, it is a convention of the constitution that the government is allowed to control the passage of the bill and manouevre over different amendments, some of which are introduced by the government and bill supporters and are 'friendly', sometimes opponents of the bill introduce wrecking amendments which if passed the government will try to overturn later.

After the committee stage, the Bill returns to debate by the whole House for the third reading. This is when the Bill as amended by committee is further revised and the principles behind the Bill considered again. This is the stage at which principled opposition to the passage of the bill is attempted.

Then the whole process is repeated again in the other House.

Contrary to claims in earlier posts, there was no vote on the substantive issues of the Bill on the 3 November - a series of amendments by the opposition parties (Tories and LibDems) were voted down. Over 140 MPs failed to vote in the committee.

I'm sure Galloway would have preferred to have been there - but he wasn't to know when his speaking engagements were fixed that the Committee stage would be happening. I still fully expect him to be in the house for the third reading - and if he isn't criticism will be justified. Until then, it remains the usual knee-jerk Respect-bashing with little regard to the issues.

My main criticism of Galloway here is that he missesd a good chance to stick the knife into Blair, because he was more interested in making some money for himself. Imagine how he could have pushed this in the media: "X number of Labour MPs defied the whip to vote against it but I didn't need to as it's Respect policy." Even though I don't think representation in Parliament is an important thing in itself, the propaganda vaule is useful. Galloway wasted it for personal gain. Surely even you SWPers realise this was an own-goal...

If you don't, your politics are even more degenerate than I thought previously.

 

[JTG]

Yawn, we've done this. Everyone knows and everyone has tailored their argument accordingly. No one is arguing on the substantive content of the bill or the amendments but on the damage that a lost whipped bill would have for blair.

Urban75 101 - Lesson 1: Procedures of the board:

read the fucking thread fred.

Precisely. Who is to say that when it gets back to the Commons that there won't have been some substantial leaning on the rebels to get a few of them back onside?

 

[belboid]

fucking hell, according to the Guardian today, Galloway claims he was 'legally obliged' to miss the vote! What a load of cock and bull.

Contrary to Fisher Gates appaling attempts at justification, he said he would have voted against the amendment had he been there. And while the egomaniac may 'need' to do the tour to raise money for Respect, wouldn't it have been rather wiser to time it so that it wasn't held when Parliament sits? It's not as if they dont have long enough holidays.

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/otherparties/story/0,9061,1634966,00.html

 

[butchersapron]

Lovely, GG himself pulls the carpet out from under Groucho's and FG's argument that it was the conetent of the amendment itself that led to his absence. Well done.

 

[Groucho]

Contrary to Fisher Gates appaling attempts at justification, he said he would have voted against the amendment had he been there. ]

No, he says he would have supported the amdt. but, supporting my view on here as to the value of the amendment, he also dismisses it as only making the bill 'less bad.' I would add only slightly at that.
I still believe that there was a strong case for not voting on it, since passing the amdt. makes the Bill itself more likely to go through. If you read my posts I actually say that I would not have voted for or against, and that I believe that Galloway has his priorities right in not hanging around the HoC all the time in case something interesting happens. He has to pick and choose particular issues while concentrating on building RESPECT across the country.

 

[cogg]

No, he says he would have supported the amdt. but, supporting my view on here as to the value of the amendment, he also dismisses it as only making the bill 'less bad.' I would add only slightly at that.
I still believe that there was a strong case for not voting on it, since passing the amdt. makes the Bill itself more likely to go through. If you read my posts I actually say that I would not have voted for or against, and that I believe that Galloway has his priorities right in not hanging around the HoC all the time in case something interesting happens. He has to pick and choose particular issues while concentrating on building RESPECT across the country.

Oh, is that he was doing? I thought he was trousering a grand a night for his ranting.

 

[belboid]

and in Ireland - not somewhere Respect even exists!

 

[hibee]

Why is anyone surprised that Galloway is lining his pockets rather than putting a serious issue first? We all remember what happened with his expenses at War on Want.

 

[Random]

And I'm sure pilch can also fill us in on similar cases of constituent-abandonment in Glasgow.

God, this thread is priceless

 

[rebel warrior]

No, he says he would have supported the amdt. but, supporting my view on here as to the value of the amendment, he also dismisses it as only making the bill 'less bad.' I would add only slightly at that.
I still believe that there was a strong case for not voting on it, since passing the amdt. makes the Bill itself more likely to go through. If you read my posts I actually say that I would not have voted for or against, and that I believe that Galloway has his priorities right in not hanging around the HoC all the time in case something interesting happens. He has to pick and choose particular issues while concentrating on building RESPECT across the country.

Indeed - moreover, the way New Labour are trying to use this to attack Galloway is gross hypocrisy.

Graham Taylor, agent for the ousted Labour MP Oona King in May's ill-tempered campaign, said the voters deserved better.

Yeah - because we all know Oona would have voted against this terrorist bill, wouldn't she...

This is the same Graham Taylor remember who compared Galloway to Oswald Mosley. Nice guy.

As for the idea that Galloway is doing this tour for his own personal gain, he says that at least some of the money is going to Respect.

The Guardian also shows this:

But the row does not appear to be affecting Mr Galloway's popularity among local Muslim supporters.

In Brick Lane, at the heart of the constituency, shopkeeper Rafiqul Haque said he should have attended the vote, but his broad view of the MP remained unchanged.

"I voted for him and I am happy that I did."

Nobab Uddin, editor of the Bengali newspaper Janomot added: "If he missed too many votes there would be a problem but people still applaud his tough stance during the war."

 

[catch]

How about answering the questions on the thread?

 

[oisleep]

As for the idea that Galloway is doing this tour for his own personal gain, he says that at least some of the money is going to Respect.

"he says", "at least some" so presumably the "rest" isn't going to him for "peronsal gain" or your statement is pointless

what a hero

why not "most" ?

 

[Bernie Gunther]

<snip>

why not "most" ?

Those big cigars are probably very expensive.

 

[JTG]

Nobab Uddin, editor of the Bengali newspaper Janomot added: "If he missed too many votes there would be a problem but people still applaud his tough stance during the war."

So there is a problem then?

 

[TAE]

he said he would have voted against the amendment had he been there.

In any case he should have been there. He'll loose a lot of, erm, respect over this.

 

[hibee]

And I'm sure pilch can also fill us in on similar cases of constituent-abandonment in Glasgow.

God, this thread is priceless

I've mentioned this before but it's worth bringing up again: my brother lives in Partick and was one of Galloway's old constituents. He did nothing, absolutely nothing for Kelvin. Except once every general election campaign he would go down the Byres Road (the main university district) with a loudhailer going, "Vote Galloway! For peace and socialism!" And all the professors would stroke their beards and say, "hmm, I'm voting for him." Then Galloway would fuck off back to the middle east. He would also make sure people with catholic surnames knew "whit fit he kicked wi'," a delightful sectarian strategy he's now bringing to the people of bethnal green and bow.

I knew a guy in the Labour party who said in his surgeries, when he turned up to them, Galloway used to pick fights with his constituents. You'd have some poor sod who'd come along because the corporation hadn't unblocked his drains and Galloway would react as though it was a personal attack on him. His favourite line was "I don't want you to vote for me!" Then he'd offer to pay their deposit so they could stand against him.

This all reminds me of the fact that the slimeball had to resign as GS of War on Want for fiddling his expenses so he could live it up in some of the poorest countries in the world. For all their bluster I suspect even the trotbots are starting to admit their doubts about him to themselves, even if "revolutionary discipline" means they wouldn't dream of doing so to any of us.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

I'm no fan of Galloway but I think that some of the above, particularly the last paragraph is the kind of thing which could get the editor in a bit of trouble. Making allegations of finanancial dishonesty against a notoriously litigious man is not a good idea.

 

[hibee]

Everything about Galloway and War on Want I've posted is out there across the internet - and indeed was all over the papers at the time. He did pay back his disputed expenses - and more - but only after it was revealed how much he was living it up when he was supposed to be speaking up for the world's poorest.

I know Galloway loves using the libel laws to intimidate people, like a litigious bully, but if he sued for what's above he'd have to sue half the internet and thousands of people in the west of Glasgow.