Bercow resigning as Speaker

[NoNeed]

bhstewie said:

Troubleatmill said:

Boris just needs to say "You do a job. You get paid for it. Why should a peerage be a given?"

Our resident losers seem to be frothing that one of theirs has been besmirched.

Happy days!!!

Personally I couldn't careless whether Bercow gets a peerage.

With the honours system the real good news story is always the people most people haven't heard of who are recognised for what is often a lifetimes work selflessly promoting worthy causes in their communities.

Even with his far-right past and all the bullying allegations he used parliamentary privilege to bury?

[anonymous-user]

On the plus side he didn't get his home address printed in the papers

Plus you can get to dance to this gem

https://youtu.be/4r96Pb_Lqrk

[Mr Tidy]

techiedave said:

On the plus side he didn't get his home address printed in the papers

On the minus side nobody got to find out where he lives - arrogant F*cker!

[anonymous-user]

ClaphamGT3 said:

jsf said:

ClaphamGT3 said:

DMN said:

Very pathetic from Johnson. But did anyone expect any better?

No - sadly all too predictable

This current New Years Honours list was created by Theresa May's government and has to go through a time consuming vetting process started months ago.

It will be next year before Boris gets to produce his list.

Bercow getting his peerage (or not) is nothing whatsoever to do with the New Years Honours list, that is granted via a different system.

As often with your posts, presented as fact but actually incorrect. It is customary for retiring speakers to have their peerage confirmed in the honours list nearest to their retirement. They do not go through the same vetting process as ordinary recipients of honours as they are already known to the Cabinet Office honours committee and do not need their credentials confirming.

You are, I suppose, at least partially correct in that a Govt can create life peers as and when it wants or needs to but, by convention, it doesn’t do so for retiring speakers

As often with your posts, utterly tedious where you tell people they are wrong and yet then have to say they were right, just not written in the way you would have phrased them yourself.

[MYOB]

ClaphamGT3 said:

In Zac’s case it would be “you had a job, the electorate fired you from it but I’m giving you a peerage so that you can keep it anyway”

The electorate dumped him as their MP. The Gov handed him a peerage to continue his ministerial position. Don't confuse the two.

[Ridgemont]

techiedave said:

On the plus side he didn't get his home address printed in the papers

Plus you can get to dance to this gem

https://youtu.be/4r96Pb_Lqrk

I do wonder whether the collective brains trust that was the nexus of Grieve, Soubry, Bercow, Campbell, Starmer et al ever considered the scenario that actually occurred: that the Lib Dems and the SNP would bottle it and hand the Tories the whip hand.

I mean there were so many miscalculations along the way; the Lib Dems believing that Swinson was bankable. That labour thought that Corbyn wouldn’t. scare any reasonable voter. That conservative constituencies might vote for a Tory before someone who had been suspended from the whip or just fecked off.

In retrospect it’s amazing how badly the remain elements played this. They had Johnson over a barrel prior to the election. Why agree to play his game?

[ClaphamGT3]

jsf said:

As often with your posts, utterly tedious where you tell people they are wrong and yet then have to say they were right, just not written in the way you would have phrased them yourself.

Read my post again slowly. Get a grown up to help you with any big words. Come back when you’ve understood it....

[ClaphamGT3]

Ridgemont said:

techiedave said:

On the plus side he didn't get his home address printed in the papers

Plus you can get to dance to this gem

https://youtu.be/4r96Pb_Lqrk

I do wonder whether the collective brains trust that was the nexus of Grieve, Soubry, Bercow, Campbell, Starmer et al ever considered the scenario that actually occurred: that the Lib Dems and the SNP would bottle it and hand the Tories the whip hand.

I mean there were so many miscalculations along the way; the Lib Dems believing that Swinson was bankable. That labour thought that Corbyn wouldn’t. scare any reasonable voter. That conservative constituencies might vote for a Tory before someone who had been suspended from the whip or just fecked off.

In retrospect it’s amazing how badly the remain elements played this. They had Johnson over a barrel prior to the election. Why agree to play his game?

There is a great deal in this. In years to come, historians will look back and marvel at how the opposition squandered the opportunity to skewer the Govt and how remain supporting politicians failed to create common cause to stop Brexit. The former will be a study in the disfunctionality of the Labour Party but the latter will be the greater failing as it betrayed the will of the majority of the electorate

[turbobloke]

ClaphamGT3 said:

Ridgemont said:

techiedave said:

On the plus side he didn't get his home address printed in the papers

Plus you can get to dance to this gem

https://youtu.be/4r96Pb_Lqrk

I do wonder whether the collective brains trust that was the nexus of Grieve, Soubry, Bercow, Campbell, Starmer et al ever considered the scenario that actually occurred: that the Lib Dems and the SNP would bottle it and hand the Tories the whip hand.

I mean there were so many miscalculations along the way; the Lib Dems believing that Swinson was bankable. That labour thought that Corbyn wouldn’t. scare any reasonable voter. That conservative constituencies might vote for a Tory before someone who had been suspended from the whip or just fecked off.

In retrospect it’s amazing how badly the remain elements played this. They had Johnson over a barrel prior to the election. Why agree to play his game?

There is a great deal in this. In years to come, historians will look back and marvel at how the opposition squandered the opportunity to skewer the Govt and how remain supporting politicians failed to create common cause to stop Brexit. The former will be a study in the disfunctionality of the Labour Party but the latter will be the greater failing as it betrayed the will of the majority of the electorate

Second place is easily forgotten, though in Corbyn's case the scale of Labour's annihilation will linger a few chip wrappers longer than usual.

People will remember Boris's thumping majority far longer if not indefinitely, reflecting the will of the electorate at a critical moment...unless one is operating mentally in some fictional alternative reality electoral context, and that wouldn't be so, surely, not by a long shot.

A common cause to stop brexit, what's that undemocratic fantasy about? The common cause to enable brexit was the democratic process which produced a Leave referendum majority, which won't be forgotten as it's a major moment in UK, EU (and therefore world) history.

John who?

[anonymous-user]

ClaphamGT3 said:

Read my post again slowly. Get a grown up to help you with any big words. Come back when you’ve understood it....

I read and understood it just fine thanks.

What you wrote was bks.

The previous speaker, Michael Martin, was created a life peer on 25 August 2009.
The previous speaker Betty Boothroyd was created a life peer on 15 January 2001.
The previous speaker Bernard Weatherill was created a life peer on 15 July 1992.

As i said, the peerage of the speaker has bugger all to do with the New Years honours list and is not announced as part of that list.

[ClaphamGT3]

jsf said:

ClaphamGT3 said:

Read my post again slowly. Get a grown up to help you with any big words. Come back when you’ve understood it....

I read and understood it just fine thanks.

What you wrote was bks.

The previous speaker, Michael Martin, was created a life peer on 25 August 2009.
The previous speaker Betty Boothroyd was created a life peer on 15 January 2001.
The previous speaker Bernard Weatherill was created a life peer on 15 July 1992.

As i said, the peerage of the speaker has bugger all to do with the New Years honours list and is not announced as part of that list.

Jesus you are painful.....

Creations of peerage are dated from when the peer is sworn in, not from the date that they are announced. In terms of the three examples you’ve picked out, Martin was sworn in after the Queen’s birthday list in 2009, Boothroyd after the New Years honours list in 2000 and Weatherill after the dissolution honours list in 1992

[Robertj21a]

ClaphamGT3 said:

There is a great deal in this. In years to come, historians will look back and marvel at how the opposition squandered the opportunity to skewer the Govt and how remain supporting politicians failed to create common cause to stop Brexit. The former will be a study in the disfunctionality of the Labour Party but the latter will be the greater failing as it betrayed the will of the majority of the electorate

Can't you Remainers ever get over it ? - pathetic waffle about betrayal.

[turbobloke]

Robertj21a said:

ClaphamGT3 said:

There is a great deal in this. In years to come, historians will look back and marvel at how the opposition squandered the opportunity to skewer the Govt and how remain supporting politicians failed to create common cause to stop Brexit. The former will be a study in the disfunctionality of the Labour Party but the latter will be the greater failing as it betrayed the will of the majority of the electorate

Can't you Remainers ever get over it ? - pathetic waffle about betrayal.

Fantasy is all that Remains at this point, with media-hungry Bercow seen as just another loser.

[anonymous-user]

ClaphamGT3 said:

Jesus you are painful.....

Creations of peerage are dated from when the peer is sworn in, not from the date that they are announced. In terms of the three examples you’ve picked out, Martin was sworn in after the Queen’s birthday list in 2009, Boothroyd after the New Years honours list in 2000 and Weatherill after the dissolution honours list in 1992

Again, you are talking bks.

The procedure showing how Lords are appointed and take their place in the HOL is covered on the Parliament website. https://www.parliament.uk/business/lords/whos-in-t...

It's nothing to do with the Honours lists, or the timing of those lists, Peers are appointed and then sworn in, as and when required by the procedure covered in the link provided. In the case of Bercow you usually have those Peerages sworn in at the start of a new Parliament.

The act of becoming a Peer occurs when the queen seals the letters of patent, from that point on you are referred to as a Lord and can use that as your title and in written documents you issue. The swearing in to the house is a separate matter regarding the access to the chamber and ability to speak, again, the timing of that is not linked to any honours lists.

[anonymous-user]

jsf said:

ClaphamGT3 said:

Jesus you are painful.....

Creations of peerage are dated from when the peer is sworn in, not from the date that they are announced. In terms of the three examples you’ve picked out, Martin was sworn in after the Queen’s birthday list in 2009, Boothroyd after the New Years honours list in 2000 and Weatherill after the dissolution honours list in 1992

Again, you are talking bks.

The procedure showing how Lords are appointed and take their place in the HOL is covered on the Parliament website. https://www.parliament.uk/business/lords/whos-in-t...

It's nothing to do with the Honours lists, or the timing of those lists, Peers are appointed and then sworn in, as and when required by the procedure covered in the link provided. In the case of Bercow you usually have those Peerages sworn in at the start of a new Parliament.

The act of becoming a Peer occurs when the queen seals the letters of patent, from that point on you are referred to as a Lord and can use that as your title and in written documents you issue. The swearing in to the house is a separate matter regarding the access to the chamber and ability to speak, again, the timing of that is not linked to any honours lists.

Whatever happens Bercow will always be referred to as a tt.

[NoNeed]

Ridgemont said:

techiedave said:

On the plus side he didn't get his home address printed in the papers

Plus you can get to dance to this gem

https://youtu.be/4r96Pb_Lqrk

I do wonder whether the collective brains trust that was the nexus of Grieve, Soubry, Bercow, Campbell, Starmer et al ever considered the scenario that actually occurred: that the Lib Dems and the SNP would bottle it and hand the Tories the whip hand.

I mean there were so many miscalculations along the way; the Lib Dems believing that Swinson was bankable. That labour thought that Corbyn wouldn’t. scare any reasonable voter. That conservative constituencies might vote for a Tory before someone who had been suspended from the whip or just fecked off.

In retrospect it’s amazing how badly the remain elements played this. They had Johnson over a barrel prior to the election. Why agree to play his game?

They most certainly did, and n not forming a government of their own they handed Johnson the opportunity to do what he did. Swinson in effect said Brexit was better than Corbyn and Corbyn believed his own hype and lies.

[Blackpuddin]

Ridgemont said:

techiedave said:

On the plus side he didn't get his home address printed in the papers

Plus you can get to dance to this gem

https://youtu.be/4r96Pb_Lqrk

I do wonder whether the collective brains trust that was the nexus of Grieve, Soubry, Bercow, Campbell, Starmer et al ever considered the scenario that actually occurred: that the Lib Dems and the SNP would bottle it and hand the Tories the whip hand.

I mean there were so many miscalculations along the way; the Lib Dems believing that Swinson was bankable. That labour thought that Corbyn wouldn’t. scare any reasonable voter. That conservative constituencies might vote for a Tory before someone who had been suspended from the whip or just fecked off.

In retrospect it’s amazing how badly the remain elements played this. They had Johnson over a barrel prior to the election. Why agree to play his game?

Because at heart they were Brexit-inclined and were basically virtue-signalling to the Remain faction.

[kev1974]

Anyone want to meet and greet him? I see he is doing a small tour of the nation to promote his book. Not sure where the other stops are.
https://www.toppingbooks.co.uk/events/ely/john-ber...
Luckily for him there is no McDonalds or Five Guys in Ely city centre to supply milkshakes. The event isn't going down well on local facebook groups!

[GoodCompany]

kev1974 said:

Anyone want to meet and greet him? I see he is doing a small tour of the nation to promote his book. Not sure where the other stops are.
https://www.toppingbooks.co.uk/events/ely/john-ber...
Luckily for him there is no McDonalds or Five Guys in Ely city centre to supply milkshakes. The event isn't going down well on local facebook groups!

Isn't that more of a lefty tactic though? Those who hate Bercow and his ilk have historically used hunting rifles and knives IIRC.

[Agammemnon]

ClaphamGT3 said:

There is a great deal in this. In years to come, historians will look back and marvel at how the opposition squandered the opportunity to skewer the Govt and how remain supporting politicians failed to create common cause to stop Brexit. The former will be a study in the disfunctionality of the Labour Party but the latter will be the greater failing as it betrayed the will of the majority of the electorate

I've checked. The majority of the electorate didn't actually want to remain- they either voted leave or abstained. Remain voters were a minority. The figures are available online if you wish to check.


HTH