2017 UK General Election - 8th June

interlocked

I'd put a fair few bob on, that the majority of Britain would wish that statesmen like John Major and John Smith were facing each other across the floor of the House of Commons today.

Even the very notion of Boris Johnson being PM illustrates the depth that UK Politics has sunk.

Persephone kindness

interlocked wrote: »

I'd put a fair few bob on, that the majority of Britain would wish that statesmen like John Major and John Smith were facing each other across the floor of the House of Commons today.

Even the very notion of Boris Johnson being PM illustrates the depth that UK Politics has sunk.

David Cameron rejected a coalition with the DUP. I respect that. Nice man. Gentleman.

Zubeneschamali

flatty wrote: »

she had never really been aware of the DUP, and had hence done some research.
Visibly upset, she said, and I quote, "but they're nothing but thugs and criminals".

That's a label you might apply to some of them, but many are just ordinary law-abiding bigoted religious lunatics.

spiralism

SF stating now that the Tories have breached the Good Friday Agreement through favouring Loyalists and giving them an unfair advantage by putting them in power in Westminster, a more than fair appraisal of the situation given the circumstances with the institutions in deadlock right now and a DUP backed govt likely to oversee direct rule.

This could get messy.

May's cynical clinging to power is actually undermining the GFA now, this surely cant last very long.

Chester Copperpot

Persephone kindness wrote: »

David Cameron rejected a coalition with the DUP. I respect that. Nice man. Gentleman.

I would second that. He even brought the pig to dinner afterwards

bobbyss

Peregrinus wrote: »

They're counted by hand.

But, because of the absurdly simplistic voting system, they can be counted much more quickly than in Ireland.

Yes of course.

So I suppose they don't need to spend, what, E90m on electronic voting machines/computers then.

Persephone kindness

spiralism wrote: »

May's cynical clinging to power is actually undermining the GFA now, this surely cant last very long.

Several UK voters have said the same thing.

Dyr

spiralism wrote: »

SF stating now that the Tories have breached the Good Friday Agreement through favouring Loyalists and giving them an unfair advantage by putting them in power in Westminster, a more than fair appraisal of the situation given the circumstances with the institutions in deadlock right now and a DUP backed govt likely to oversee direct rule.

This could get messy.

May's cynical clinging to power is actually undermining the GFA now, this surely cant last very long.

You'd wonder to what degree that's a fair assesement of the GFA/SAA

They wont get any support from Prince Leo for that angle anyway.

spiralism

spiralism wrote: »

SF stating now that the Tories have breached the Good Friday Agreement through favouring Loyalists and giving them an unfair advantage by putting them in power in Westminster, a more than fair appraisal of the situation given the circumstances with the institutions in deadlock right now and a DUP backed govt likely to oversee direct rule.

This could get messy.

May's cynical clinging to power is actually undermining the GFA now, this surely cant last very long.

That's gas!

SF now whining that their refusal to participate in the legislature to which they are elected gives an unfair advantage to those who do? On what planet does that makes sense? Are they so removed from politics that they forgot that the rules allow for this, and they didn't think of it when they signed up to the GFA?

FrancieBrady

Deleted User wrote: »

That's gas!

SF now whining that their refusal to participate in the legislature to which they are elected gives an unfair advantage to those who do? On what planet does that makes sense? Are they so removed from politics that they forgot that the rules allow for this, and they didn't think of it when they signed up to the GFA?

The British cannot take sides, they have agreed to be neutral. Even if there are difficulties.

If you have done a deal with one side to keep you in power then you are not neutral.

LuckyLloyd

Deleted User wrote: »

That's gas!

SF now whining that their refusal to participate in the legislature to which they are elected gives an unfair advantage to those who do? On what planet does that makes sense? Are they so removed from politics that they forgot that the rules allow for this, and they didn't think of it when they signed up to the GFA?

Even if SF participated in the legislature they could not be in government (unless May invited them both to join the supply and confidence arrangement, but we all know hammering out such a deal would be unrealistic). It's a simple violation of a simple principle - neutrality in the affairs of Northern Ireland.

Persephone kindness

Bambi wrote: »

You'd wonder to what degree that's a fair assesement of the GFA/SAA

They wont get any support from Prince Leo for that angle anyway.

He will have to deal with them. Like any other UK govt.

He can't really make comment he will have to be diplomatic whatever his personal feelings.

solodeogloria

Deleted User wrote: »

That's gas!

SF now whining that their refusal to participate in the legislature to which they are elected gives an unfair advantage to those who do? On what planet does that makes sense? Are they so removed from politics that they forgot that the rules allow for this, and they didn't think of it when they signed up to the GFA?

Good morning!

Indeed - I can't for the life of me imagine why anyone votes for Sinn Féin at Westminster. Every vote is just another seat that stands empty. I was sad to see the decline of the SDLP at this election. I think if I voted in NI it would probably be for Alliance or the SDLP.

As for the point that David Cameron didn't go into coalition with the DUP, remember that he didn't go into coalition with the DUP because he didn't need to. Theresa May is in a rock and a hard place with this result. If Cameron had returned a hung parliament in 2015 I have no doubt that he would have done the same thing as May here.

It's a bloody horrible result, but a government must be formed. What is the alternative given the numbers?

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The British cannot take sides, they have agreed to be neutral. Even if there are difficulties.

If you have done a deal with one side to keep you in power then you are not neutral.

They run candidates in the 26 counties on the basis that, if they get into power, that legislature will advocate for a United Ireland. Clearly they don't see one legislature has to remain neutral, but demands it of the other. It's arcane reasoning, and illogical.

FrancieBrady

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Even if SF participated in the legislature they could not be in government (unless May invited them both to join the supply and confidence arrangement, but we all know hammering out such a deal would be unrealistic). It's a simple violation of a simple principle - neutrality in the affairs of Northern Ireland.

They discussed this on the Any Answers programme on Radio 4 last night.

Will Leo stop Britain's Tories from walking all over an international agreement in their own selfish interests?

My bets are on a simpering FG, 'deferential, politic, glad to be of use' strategy. :rolleyes:

FrancieBrady

Deleted User wrote: »

They run candidates in the 26 counties on the basis that, if they get into power, that legislature will advocate for a United Ireland. Clearly they don't see one legislature has to remain neutral, but demands it of the other. It's arcane reasoning, and illogical.

Regardless of what SF do.

The British are mandated to be neutral in an international agreement with Ireland.

Persephone kindness

FrancieBrady wrote: »

They discussed this on the Any Answers programme on Radio 4 last night.

Will Leo stop Britain's Tories from walking all over an international agreement in their own selfish interests?

My bets are on a simpering FG, 'deferential, politic, glad to be of use' strategy. :rolleyes:

I think being aggressive would only make things worse.

Enzokk

I am more worried that Theresa May has already indicated that she has the votes to form a government with the DUP, yet they haven't had negotiations yet on what the deal will be like. That is dangerous from Theresa May. What if the DUP asks for support that goes against the agreements that forged the peace in NI? Has she actually thought this through? She really is one of the worst politicians out there and arguably will go down as the worst PM ever. The damage she has done is staggering and there is still so much more damage that she can do.

FrancieBrady

Persephone kindness wrote: »

I think being aggressive would only make things worse.

Didn't take long for the stock FG reaction. :rolleyes:

They don't have to be aggressive, they need to be strong and say this is not a runner under the agreement.

mugsymugsy

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

I think if I voted in NI it would probably be for Alliance or the SDLP.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Not taking your post out context but highlighting this part and I would fully agree but with the first past the post system in the UK it doesn't lend itself to be able to vote who you want to in some cases.

You have to sometimes tactically vote the lesser of two evils as in would you prefer a nationalist or unionist party and then you jump on the bandwagon of whoever is biggest in your area to not split the vote.

If they changed the system to STV or AV then it could allow for alliance / greens / ukip (not a fan but their voice should be heard) to all have a small say rather than currently what happens.

Enzokk

I also cannot see how the 13 seats that the Scottish Conservatives hold can agree with a deal with the DUP? Ruth Davidson is in such a difficult position in that if she agrees to the deal that her English colleagues will demand she will be seen as going against her morals. Does she agree with the agreement whatever shape it will take? Will she sell out for power? How will this play out in the next election for her?

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Regardless of what SF do.

The British are mandated to be neutral in an international agreement with Ireland.

And those who take their seats at Westminister are mandated to participate in government. If SF wanted the GFA to specify that this should be removed, well they should have thought of it when that Agreement was made. If not, they should look to their own negotiators and say "lads...ye forgot that".

Jamiekelly

[Deleted User] wrote: »

They run candidates in the 26 counties on the basis that, if they get into power, that legislature will advocate for a United Ireland. Clearly they don't see one legislature has to remain neutral, but demands it of the other. It's arcane reasoning, and illogical.

And as elected representatives it's their job to advocate for what they claim to represent. You're comparing apples and oranges because SF "north" must abide by a different set of rules to SF "south".

If FF were to need SF votes here to form a government and then promised to put pressure on the UK government on behalf of SF to have a border poll then the UK parties would have more than enough reason to complain and call into question the legitimacy of the GFA.

SF and the DUP signed the GFA and are the main beneficiaries of it but it was the UK and ROI governments that are tasked with guaranteeing it's existence regardless of current partisan politics.

Kind of hard to have a peace agreement that has to be reviewed everytime a close election occurs, whether in the UK or ROI.

Persephone kindness

We can speak our minds. Politicians cannot. We can spit fiery words. It's meaningless for us. It isn't for a Tsaoiseach. He will need to give himself room to maneuver. He will need to be diplomatic. He has been already.

https://www.rte.ie/news/uk-election-2017/2017/0609/881417-uk-election-irish-reaction/


I totally expected this and understand it.

And I dislike the DUP as much as anyone. But he can't spit acid back.

FrancieBrady

Enzokk wrote: »

I also cannot see how the 13 seats that the Scottish Conservatives hold can agree with a deal with the DUP? Ruth Davidson is in such a difficult position in that if she agrees to the deal that her English colleagues will demand she will be seen as going against her morals. Does she agree with the agreement whatever shape it will take? Will she sell out for power? How will this play out in the next election for her?

Well she may be somebody the DUP believe to be a sinner and disgusting. But Davidson is a Tory after all.
Tory selfishness may win the day if power is dangled. She did tweet an Amnesty lecture she gave last year, so that may have been a shot across May's bows.

Persephone kindness

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Didn't take long for the stock FG reaction. :rolleyes:

They don't have to be aggressive, they need to be strong and say this is not a runner under the agreement.

I am not FG ..not at all. Any PM would have to do the same.

Martin FF is giving out to SF right now for practicing abstention in westminster..for the love of god ...could they not practice abstention here? And could the DUP not join them?

FrancieBrady

Deleted User wrote: »

And those who take their seats at Westminister are mandated to participate in government. If SF wanted the GFA to specify that this should be removed, well they should have thought of it when that Agreement was made. If not, they should look to their own negotiators and say "lads...ye forgot that".

It's part of the agreement. Each government has to be a neutral player.
There is nothing to 'remove'.
They have to abide by what is there.

Persephone kindness

Right lads I will be voting Mick wallace from here on in ...he has hair and I trust NO ONE!

Arthur Daley

Enzokk wrote: »

I am more worried that Theresa May has already indicated that she has the votes to form a government with the DUP, yet they haven't had negotiations yet on what the deal will be like. That is dangerous from Theresa May. What if the DUP asks for support that goes against the agreements that forged the peace in NI? Has she actually thought this through? She really is one of the worst politicians out there and arguably will go down as the worst PM ever. The damage she has done is staggering and there is still so much more damage that she can do.

Britain is not in a good place these days pure and simple. This vote is the beginning of them starting to face up to that I think. When you stand back and think of it this result was fairly clear and obvious. The idea that a tory party in dissaray just last summer producing a landslide now was just hyperbole. This was the tory party that was almost about to select Andrea Leadsome as PM for God's sake.

solodeogloria

mugsymugsy wrote: »

Not taking your post out context but highlighting this part and I would fully agree but with the first past the post system in the UK it doesn't lend itself to be able to vote who you want to in some cases.

You have to sometimes tactically vote the lesser of two evils as in would you prefer a nationalist or unionist party and then you jump on the bandwagon of whoever is biggest in your area to not split the vote.

If they changed the system to STV or AV then it could allow for alliance / greens / ukip (not a fan but their voice should be heard) to all have a small say rather than currently what happens.

Good morning,

I'd never vote for Sinn Féin in any case. It's a vote for someone who isn't willing to go to Westminster and do the work.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

FrancieBrady

I can just imagine the furore and gnashing of teeth (on this forum alone) if it was Corbyn who was trying to convince SF to prop him up in a cling to power.

Fr Tod Umptious

Enzokk wrote: »

I also cannot see how the 13 seats that the Scottish Conservatives hold can agree with a deal with the DUP? Ruth Davidson is in such a difficult position in that if she agrees to the deal that her English colleagues will demand she will be seen as going against her morals. Does she agree with the agreement whatever shape it will take? Will she sell out for power? How will this play out in the next election for her?

Are the Scottish "conservatives" a separate party or are they the same party . i.e "The Conservative and Unionist Party" ?

If it's the latter then no agreement is required, they are just taking the party whip like any other MP.

Enzokk

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Well she may be somebody the DUP believe to be a sinner and disgusting. But Davidson is a Tory after all.
Tory selfishness may win the day if power is dangled. She did tweet an Amnesty lecture she gave last year, so that may have been a shot across May's bows.

I think people are getting tired of politicians who, as Theresa May did, just flutters in the wind as it suits them. For Ruth Davidson she is finally under the microscope as the SNP has been since their remarkable performance in 2015. It is easy to look strong and look the part when you are not being asked tough questions. Her first tough question has arrived, and ironically it isn't anything even to do with her seat in the Scottish Parliament. But she is the leader of the Scottish Conservatives and if she isn't careful she will be seen as just another Tory.

Persephone kindness

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I can just imagine the furore and gnashing of teeth (on this forum alone) if it was Corbyn who was trying to convince SF to prop him up in a cling to power.

Rightly so. And we are feeling the same in this scenario I assure you.

And Leo Varadkar is Gay half indian and half Irish ..so you can imagine his personal feelings about the DUP. And theirs about him. But he has to be professional. That is the price of being a politician ...you know lying all the time.:)

FrancieBrady

Persephone kindness wrote: »

Rightly so. And we are feeling the same in this scenario I assure you.

And Leo Varadkar is Gay half indian and half Irish ..so you can imagine his personal feelings about the DUP. And theirs about him. But he has to be professional. That is the price of being a politician ...you know lying all the time.:)

And with a bit of backbone he could have knocked this on the head from the get go. By simply stating that he will have nothing to do with it and that the Irish government CANNOT, by dint of the GFA, have anything to do with it.

Next move - the Tories.

Enzokk

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Are the Scottish "conservatives" a separate party or are they the same party . i.e "The Conservative and Unionist Party" ?

If it's the latter then no agreement is required, they are just taking the party whip like any other MP.

I think it becomes blurred because of the devolved government in Scotland. I don't see how they can follow the same policy on Brexit as Theresa May, seeing how much the Remain vote was in Scotland.

A Dub in Glasgo

Enzokk wrote: »

I also cannot see how the 13 seats that the Scottish Conservatives hold can agree with a deal with the DUP? Ruth Davidson is in such a difficult position in that if she agrees to the deal that her English colleagues will demand she will be seen as going against her morals. Does she agree with the agreement whatever shape it will take? Will she sell out for power? How will this play out in the next election for her?

People seem to think that the Tory party in Scotland is different to the rest of the Tory party. Davidson is not an MP and those Tory MPs in Scotland will be subject to the Tory whip in the House of Commons

solodeogloria

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I can just imagine the furore and gnashing of teeth (on this forum alone) if it was Corbyn who was trying to convince SF to prop him up in a cling to power.

Good morning!

OK - let's work with this fanciful scenario for a moment since it's interesting.

It would be far from ideal in my mind for 2 reasons. A hard left Labour party would be economically disastrous and for Sinn Féin politics. I feel the same about the DUP by the by.

It would be good for two reasons:
Firstly because it would provide a government which is always better than none. Secondly, Sinn Féin would have to actually do the work of representing their constituents in parliament.

The problem with Northern Ireland is tribalism. This is why I would vote Alliance if I lived there first. Cross community politics is much better than tribalism.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

A Dub in Glasgo

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Are the Scottish "conservatives" a separate party or are they the same party . i.e "The Conservative and Unionist Party" ?

If it's the latter then no agreement is required, they are just taking the party whip like any other MP.

They are the same party and will be subject to the Tory HoC whip. The Tories in Scotland have cultivated a 'separate' party as they did not want to be scruntinised on what the Tories were doing in Westminster during the various elections in Scotland

A Dub in Glasgo

Enzokk wrote: »

I think it becomes blurred because of the devolved government in Scotland. I don't see how they can follow the same policy on Brexit as Theresa May, seeing how much the Remain vote was in Scotland.

They are following the same policy as they are the same party

Calina

Tbf to Leo Varadkar, he is not yet Taoiseach. There are formalities.

When he is Taoiseach I expect a little more leadership.

Dyr

Persephone kindness wrote: »

We can speak our minds. Politicians cannot. We can spit fiery words. It's meaningless for us. It isn't for a Tsaoiseach. He will need to give himself room to maneuver. He will need to be diplomatic. He has been already.

https://www.rte.ie/news/uk-election-2017/2017/0609/881417-uk-election-irish-reaction/


I totally expected this and understand it.

And I dislike the DUP as much as anyone. But he can't spit acid back.

In the middle of the campaign for leadership of FG Leo made a remark that a united Ireland would require more than a simple majority in NI. The guy has a long history of mouthing off and I doubt that he's biting his tongue on the DUP and Tory arrangement. It suits him quite well

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I can just imagine the furore and gnashing of teeth (on this forum alone) if it was Corbyn who was trying to convince SF to prop him up in a cling to power.

You saying your reaction is furore and teeth gnashing right now? It seems that's the amusing reaction from SF, as they try to tell those in a legislature they refuse to attend why they should be nice to SF and respect a rule about not entering arrangements that is not actually specified in the GFA.

If Corbyn looked to SF to make up the numbers, my reaction would be the same...it's democracy.

FrancieBrady

Bambi wrote: »

In the middle of the campaign for leadership of FG Leo made a remark that a united Ireland would require more than a simple majority in NI. The guy has a long history of mouthing off and I doubt that he's biting his tongue on the DUP and Tory arrangement. It suits him quite well

I can't exactly see Leo in photo ops on the steps of the Dail with the 'victims' of DUP discrimination and bigotry, can you?

FrancieBrady

Deleted User wrote: »

You saying your reaction is furore and teeth gnashing right now? It seems that's the amusing reaction from SF, as they try to tell those in a legislature they refuse to attend why they should be nice to SF and respect a rule about not entering arrangements that is not actually specified in the GFA.

If Corbyn looked to SF to make up the numbers, my reaction would be the same...it's democracy.

It has nothing to do with SF.
It has everything to do with an internationally binding agreement between Ireland and the UK.

Dyr

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If Corbyn looked to SF to make up the numbers, my reaction would be the same...it's democracy.

Are you sure that you wouldn't be belly aching about corbyna being an IRA sympathiser?

Persephone kindness

This man makes some excellent points.

Persephone kindness

He is totally right about the moon it's my ruling planet you need to let cancerians take over now. we are the only ones who can deal with this energy

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It has nothing to do with SF.
It has everything to do with an internationally binding agreement between Ireland and the UK.

One that SF flouts every time they refer to coalition deals in the 26 counties.

Leonard Hofstadter

The thought of a Tory-DUP coalition is absolutely terrifying.

Puts Davidson in a very difficult position - while I don't expect (and don't want) openly LGBT politicians to seek special treatment for the community, I don't believe in virtue signalling, but I do expect that they will do everything to ensure that there is equal treatment of LGBT individuals (in the eyes of the law at least), that is why it is important for people to be visible and to be open about such matters.

I long for the day when it's a complete non-issue (indeed, the most remarkable thing about Varadkar becoming FG leader is how little his sexuality was mentioned in the Irish press whereas it got a massive write up abroad - just goes to show how much things have moved on in Ireland), but clearly with the prospect of the DUP in power in the national UK Government we still have a long way to go in a supposedly liberal country.

If the Tories team up with the bigoted, homophobic, creationist, anti-women DUP then they can kiss goodbye any vote from me for the rest of their lives even if they go back to being a pro-EU party.

There are some things that are more important to me than economic competence (my usual voting criterion because I don't believe in magic money trees like the left does and I don't believe in virtue signalling and pitting one group against another like the left does), human rights and equal rights for the LGBT community (and all citizens in general) being one of them. No good in having a productive economy if people don't have the freedom to be themselves, being gay or bi or trans or whatever it is should be a complete non-issue, it should be as interesting as someone having black or brown hair. Sadly the DUP still think it is and the Tories are guilty by association getting into bed with them.

A lot of liberal Tories are appalled by the notion of them teaming up with the DUP by the way.