UK Politics Thread: Conservative Losses in Local Elections

[-Britain-]

Hell he is! He's a leftist-libertarian. Don't be fooled by his knighthood.

Can you back this up by identifying any one left wing policy currently proposed by the Labour Party?

He endorses legalising euthanasia.

[Philjia]

Can you back this up by identifying any one left wing policy currently proposed by the Labour Party?

He endorses legalising euthanasia.

So do the Liberal Democrats. Try again.

[Emotional Support Crocodile]

So constitutional experts of NSG could Rishi Sunak delay the local elections, say until June, as claimed by Jess Philips?

[Atrito]

So constitutional experts of NSG could Rishi Sunak delay the local elections, say until June, as claimed by Jess Philips?

I would not describe myself as a constitutional expert, but here's my thoughts:

1. Parliament must be dissolved at latest on the fifth anniversary of its first meeting according to statute law (the Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act 2022)
2. To postpone such a dissolution (and therefore an election), Sunak would have to pass a new law overturning this Act
3. Any attempt to extend a parliament's term can be blocked by the House of Lords, as they may block bills that extend a parliament's term beyond five years
4. Seeing how the Lords is responding to the Safety of Rwanda Bill, I find it hard to believe that they would allow Sunak to pass such an act that arguably leads to an elective dictatorship

There may be other constitutional reasons preventing the extension of a parliament, but considering the 37th Parliament (1935-1945) was extended to 10 years, and historically elections happened every 7 years, I think statute is the authority.

[The Archregimancy]

So constitutional experts of NSG could Rishi Sunak delay the local elections, say until June, as claimed by Jess Philips?

I would not describe myself as a constitutional expert, but here's my thoughts:

1. Parliament must be dissolved at latest on the fifth anniversary of its first meeting according to statute law (the Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act 2022)
2. To postpone such a dissolution (and therefore an election), Sunak would have to pass a new law overturning this Act
3. Any attempt to extend a parliament's term can be blocked by the House of Lords, as they may block bills that extend a parliament's term beyond five years
4. Seeing how the Lords is responding to the Safety of Rwanda Bill, I find it hard to believe that they would allow Sunak to pass such an act that arguably leads to an elective dictatorship

There may be other constitutional reasons preventing the extension of a parliament, but considering the 37th Parliament (1935-1945) was extended to 10 years, and historically elections happened every 7 years, I think statute is the authority.

ESC is asking about delaying the local elections, not the general election.

Councillors serve a statutory term of four years, but I'm struggling to find anything definitive about the specific timing of those elections. They seem to be traditionally held in May, but the relevant legislation that I can track down gives the Secretary of State some discretion over the elections.

So that's a fancy way of saying 'I'm not sure'.

[Atrito]

I would not describe myself as a constitutional expert, but here's my thoughts:

1. Parliament must be dissolved at latest on the fifth anniversary of its first meeting according to statute law (the Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act 2022)
2. To postpone such a dissolution (and therefore an election), Sunak would have to pass a new law overturning this Act
3. Any attempt to extend a parliament's term can be blocked by the House of Lords, as they may block bills that extend a parliament's term beyond five years
4. Seeing how the Lords is responding to the Safety of Rwanda Bill, I find it hard to believe that they would allow Sunak to pass such an act that arguably leads to an elective dictatorship

There may be other constitutional reasons preventing the extension of a parliament, but considering the 37th Parliament (1935-1945) was extended to 10 years, and historically elections happened every 7 years, I think statute is the authority.

ESC is asking about delaying the local elections, not the general election.

Councillors serve a statutory term of four years, but I'm struggling to find anything definitive about the specific timing of those elections. They seem to be traditionally held in May, but the relevant legislation that I can track down gives the Secretary of State some discretion over the elections.

So that's a fancy way of saying 'I'm not sure'.

Ah, missed that. My apologies

[Emotional Support Crocodile]

I'm struggling to think of anything they could gain by doing so, but I suppose it might then be a possible scenario.

[Almonaster Nuevo]

Who knows - maybe the horse will sing.

[The Archregimancy]

Who knows - maybe the horse will sing.

15 March, this thread:

Rishi Sunak's approach to calling an election is increasingly reminding me of the old Persian parable about teaching a horse to sing.

Once upon a time, there lived an Emperor who owned a majestic white stallion, the finest beast in all his Kingdom. One night, Rishi Sunak tried to slip in and steal the horse, but was captured by the palace guards and thrown into the dungeon.

The next morning, he was dragged before the Emperor's court. "How dare you lay hand on my royal steed!" bellowed the Emperor, "Jailor, put him to death!"

Immediately, Rishi Sunak bowed deeply. "Your judgement is peerless and wise, O Emperor," he calmly replied, "but my life is of little value. I should offer you a gift before I depart. Your mount is quite a fine one, but if your eminence would spare my life for just a year and a day, I swear to you I can teach your horse to sing!"

The court burst in to laughter, but the Emperor was intrigued. He had been tempted to be merciful, anyway. Now, admiring the audacity of Sunak, and being a gambler at heart, he accepted his proposal.

As they were leaving the chambers, the jailor whispered to Sunak, "You are a fool! What have you accomplished by promising to teach the Emperor's horse to sing? You are bound to fail, and when you do, he will not only have you killed - you will be tortured as well, for mocking him!"

"I am a fool?" he replied. "Much can happen in a year and a day. The King may die. The horse may die. I may die...

And maybe, just maybe, I will teach the horse to sing."

[Hirota]

He endorses legalising euthanasia.

So do the Liberal Democrats. Try again.

How about instead of that, you discuss the original claim, instead of trying to shift the burden of proof?

Aside from that, it's a very daft line of argumentation to try and make that because one party endorses x, that another party endorsing x automatically invalidates it being an example.

[Celritannia]

He endorses legalising euthanasia.

So do the Liberal Democrats. Try again.

Railway nationisation.

[The Huskar Social Union]

Every man a publicly owned train

[Ifreann]

Every man a publicly owned train

Tough on trains. Tough on the causes of trains.

[Almonaster Nuevo]

Railpolitik at its finest.

[Philjia]

So do the Liberal Democrats. Try again.

How about instead of that, you discuss the original claim, instead of trying to shift the burden of proof?[/url]
I wasn't engaging with that particular claim but since you asked I think Starmer vaguely aligns with some prior versions of the Conservatives (although not so much the out of control half hearted right populism of the present Conservatives) in that he is a proponent of very very orthodox neoliberalism with a bend towards tough talking nationalist rhetoric on issues like crime and policing and immigration. Renationalising the railways is pretty much the only component of the Labour platform that points towards any significant change in overall policy direction under the incoming government, but this is in its own way a fairly uncontroversial policy because the current system of rail privatisation has been such an unmitigated disaster. (And even then I'm not quite sure how committed Labour are since they've also said nationalisation wouldn't meet their fiscal rules, although they have reiterated that they want to do it more recently than they've said they might not)

[Forsher]

Every man a publicly owned train

Tough on trains. Tough on the causes of trains.

There we have it. Keir Starmer. Same person as Rishi "we are a nation of drivers" Sunak. Straight from this totally sincere and extremely studious comment from... Ifreann, a well known serious person.

So do the Liberal Democrats. Try again.

How about instead of that, you discuss the original claim, instead of trying to shift the burden of proof?

Aside from that, it's a very daft line of argumentation to try and make that because one party endorses x, that another party endorsing x automatically invalidates it being an example.

Well, euthanasia is like the single most obvious libertarian position. The problem with pointing out that Starmer supports euthanasia isn't that Kamudeen thinks Starmer's a Tory, but that -BRITAIN- thinks Starmer is a left-libertarian and then cited a libertarian policy to prove that position.

I have to imagine Starmer is what I'd term a Hipkinite. Eliminates policies that fit with the ethos of a Labour party, keeps anything they think might win votes with "middle New Zealand" (I guess the UK version of that would be little Britain? Is middle Britain a thing people talk about?) and then gets annoyed when people point out that he's indistinguishable from John Key/David Cameron politically (I haven't seen anyone saying Starmer gets annoyed at the David Cameron comparison... I imagine he does... and I do mean politically; the pig thing would cause a lot of people to be annoyed at being compared to Cameron).

[Shrillland]

So do the Liberal Democrats. Try again.

Railway nationisation.

If he promises to bring back the Utility Boards and the CEGB as well, I'll take it.

[Celritannia]

Michael Sheen will play one of the greatest Labour Politicians the UK has ever known, Nye Bevan.

[Emotional Support Crocodile]

How much credence do we give to the claim by Sir Simon Clarke that only a couple more letters of no confidence in Rishi Sunak are needed? I mean he's a Truss ally, so surely we file this under 'he would say that wouldn't he'?

[The Archregimancy]

How much credence do we give to the claim by Sir Simon Clarke that only a couple more letters of no confidence in Rishi Sunak are needed? I mean he's a Truss ally, so surely we file this under 'he would say that wouldn't he'?

Here's a link: https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/rishi-sunak- ... on-clarke/

I would take it with a big pinch of salt. It's likely designed to encourage waverers to come forward and submit letters in the hope that they'll reach the magic number of 53, but the fact remains that the only person who knows how many letters have been received is 1922 Committee Chair Graham Brady, and even if a leadership contest is triggered, there's no guarantee that Sunak wouldn't stand and win; he would emerge bloodied and even weaker, but he could win.

My feeling is that most Tory MPs realise that it would be electoral suicide for them to trigger another leadership contest, even if 2 May goes badly (as it almost certainly will), and so they're stuck with their bland, condescending, bend-in-the-wind political tin-ear plutocrat through the next general election whether they like Sunak or not simply because the alternatives are worse.

[Philjia]

How much credence do we give to the claim by Sir Simon Clarke that only a couple more letters of no confidence in Rishi Sunak are needed? I mean he's a Truss ally, so surely we file this under 'he would say that wouldn't he'?

I don't think this is actually true, and tentatively I don't think enough Tory MPs are stupid enough to try it, but I am always ready to be proven wrong about how stupid the Conservatives can be.

[Juristonia]

I'm gonna say it's true, but only because it'd be really funny.

[Philjia]

A report by the think tank The Resolution Foundation has concluded that Britain has the worst value housing among any advanced economy.

[The Archregimancy]

How much credence do we give to the claim by Sir Simon Clarke that only a couple more letters of no confidence in Rishi Sunak are needed? I mean he's a Truss ally, so surely we file this under 'he would say that wouldn't he'?

I don't think this is actually true, and tentatively I don't think enough Tory MPs are stupid enough to try it, but I am always ready to be proven wrong about how stupid the Conservatives can be.

It's a fair point that if the the last 3 years have taught us anything, it's not to underestimate the Conservative Party's capacity for self-immolation; at least in the party's current form.

[Forsher]

A report by the think tank The Resolution Foundation has concluded that Britain has the worst value housing among any advanced economy.

I find that very hard to believe. Basically nothing in NZ, anywhere in the country, older than maybe 15 years has any kind of insulation. Anything in Auckland or Wellington costs about 350-500,000 pounds, if not substantially more, though other parts of the country are cheaper.

I would read the article to see on what basis that claim is made but it's paywalled.