UK Politics General - Speakers, Whips and a Black Rod.

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Given the interest in the EU referendum thread I feel a thread on UK politics generally might be appreciated.

The United Kingdom has a complex constitution contained not in one codified document but a byzantine mix of informal conventions, traditions and customs. Accordingly while i will give a general outline here and will explain the major roles there are various ceremonial, dormant and honorary titles i will not cover such as the Lord High Steward, Royal Champion, Knight Marischal, Black Knight etc.

I am also not going to explain how the military interacts with the crown and parliament beyond saying that by convention military does not comment on civil politics and this is generally kept to.

I am not going to comment on the relationship with those territories like the Isle of Mann or Guernsey which are outside the UK but under the crown.

The uk consists of a tiered series of bodies- at the pinnacle is the crown-in-parliament at westminster, below these is the devolved parliament of scotland and then the regional assemblies of Wales and Northern Ireland, below these are the mayoral cities and then at the smallest level the Local Authorities (councils)

The mother of parliaments remains the federal and supreme body of governance and legislature in the United Kingdom. Before 2011 it was also the supreme court.

The parliament consists or 3 parts- the ceremonial(ish) crown, the house of commons and the house of Lords. The general structure if a bill is thus: it is put before the commons sent to the lords who ammend and approve or dispute it, it returns to the commons for final reading and changes and the sent to the lords if they rejected it or to the queen for royal assent if the lords have already passed it. By convention the queen does not withold consent.

The upper house- The House of Lords has no fixed size. In the past it was made up of the peers of the realm- roughly 81 of the most powerful nobles. From 1702 it expanded to include several hundred aristocrats however as it grew in size it lost political power. For the past 100 years it has been reduced to ammendments to legislation, preventing abuse of the constitution and is unable to permanently veto bills or touch finance bills. It retains the power to reject a bill for 2 years twice, effectively meaning a gov must always have won a general election with a clear manifesto mandate before passing highly controversial legislation. By convention the lords did not vote down bills included in a manifesto of a majority government. With the changes to selection (see below) this is no longer the case.

The house of lords formerly contained a committee of non voting 'law lords' who were the uks highest court. This was split off in 2008-10 to form the UK Supreme court. A cosmetic change to reflect the reality of practice.

The lords are appointed by the crown on the advice of the prime minister and appointments committee. By convention the advice is always followed. Before the reforms hereditary peers all had a right to sit however now they elect 80 odd members to sit. 20 odd bishops of the church of england also have the right to sit. The reduction of the right to sit means that where the house was formerly dominated by hereditary earls and dukes it now is mostly populated by appointed Baron life peers, whose peerage and title are not inherited. Peers sit for life.

As a consequence of needing to control the HoL and the fact that sitting is a privilege and not a right which many peers do not actually use it is swollen in size to 800 members down from its 1999 peak of 1200. There are rarely that many actually in house.

The house is moderated by the Lord Speaker who they elect from the house and who cuts ties with their previous party on assuming the role. The Lord Speaker only votes on ties. The Leader of the House is the cabinet position of the leader of the governments faction of lords and allocates time to debate the legislation that reaches the lords from the commons.

The benches are divided into three groups- the government, the opposition and those lords who have no political alignment.

Most appointees are former senior politicians, businessmen, civil service or armed forces heads or other 'notables'

The house of commons although technically the lower house is the more powerful chamber. Members are elected to seats for 5 year terms. By convention the government is drawn from the party that commands a majority from the commons. There are two divisions- Government and opposition. The commons is the source of legislature and committees which draft legislation to be debated. The most notable offices of the house (as opposed to government) are:

the speaker- the moderator of the house, elected from mps and cuts tues with their party on assuming the role. Before the creation of the office of prime minister in the early 1690s this was the most powerful position in the house.
The leader of the commons- an old office that has changed a great deal over the centuries. Currently they set the timetable for debate.

Security in both houses is administered by an official referred to as Black Rod, by convention a decorated general who took early retirement. Both houses have a period set aside each weak where the government takes questions from the house. Ministers are subject to the oversight of their house.

As mentioned above the government is drawn from the majority party of the house of commons. The leader of this party becomes the Prime Minister. The prime minister appoints members of either the lords or commons to head up various branches of the civil service. These individuals form a council ferred to as the cabinet. By convention the PM is always from the commons. These positions can be termed either 'minister of X' or 'secretary of state for X' depending on the office. Each is twinned to a professional civil servant called the 'under secretary of x'. Some roles such as the 'Chancellor of the exchequer' who runs the treasury have unique titles. The structure of the civil service and cabinet are not fixed and can be varied between terms with departments split, merged and renamed. The cabinet sits on the front benches and members without government positions are referred to as back benchers.

The largest opposition party (in the commons) forms Her Majesties Loyal Opposition and appoints a shadow cabinet whose jobs are to monitor, hound and question their govmt opposites. The shadow cabinet represents an alternate government and so does not,irror exactly the gov- positions which are merged in one are separated in the other and new minor postions may exist- the shadow minister for mental health has no gov equivalent atm as an example. The three most powerful offices are the treasury, foreign office and home office with health and education following close behind.

While only the largest party forms the official opposition all opposition parties are expected to form a shadow cabinet and so the frontbench of the opposition contains multiple parties.

Discipline is enforced by the whip system whereby appointed officials within a party keep dirt on mps and make sure they turn up and vote with the party on key issues. Where mps cannot make it into parliament whips from gov and opposition liase to match up missing mps so neither side is unfairly disadvantaged. Where a mp has died en route to a vote whips on the opposing side will remove a corresponding vote where a motion is close. Various bills mandate varying levels of discipline- a three line whip being most severe. A single line whip means members can vote as they wish and a two line whip means members should speak to the whip before not voting, normally the whip will agree provided the vote is not close/an opposite mp can be matched who is also not voting. Defying a three line whip means expulsion from the party or withdrawal of the whip- ie all party support is withdrawn and the mp becomes isolated.

By convention cabinet members resign before defying the whip. They are never expelled or punished for doing so. The chief whip of the gov is a cabinet position.

Whips are always sitting mps.
I'll give a brief summary of the political landscape as it stands at westminster. For the record in the past decade i have voted for every major party except the lib dems.

The current government- the conservatives:
One of the two ancient parties the tories have been in power more than any other party this century.
Centre right,
Individualistic- favouring part privatisation of state assets and individual rights,
Widely blamed for the deindustrialisation in the 80s but also for rejuvenating the economy and curbing ridiculous unions. The destruction of the unions and heavy industry earned them hatred in scotland and the north of england that has never really dissipated.
Often accused of being in the palm of big business.
Changes to the education and benefits system in the last parliament considered incompetent.
The party has suffered splits over the eu since 1989 and these led to the recent referendum. All three of the last tory pms went out of office at least in part due to infighting about the eu.
The party often pledges to reduce immigration. So far it has never managed.
The tories won the last election despite the polls indicating a hung parliament.
The party is popular in the rich south of england and the wealthy rural areas.
The party is in favour of greatly reducing benefits and of withdrawing from the echr and writing a new, reduced, human rights act.

The players to watch in their leadership election are: Boris Johnston, former London Mayor, Theresa May the home secretary.

Michael Gove the Lord Chancellor is an outside bet following his success in the leave campaign, tainted by his poor tenure as education secretary.

The Chancellor George Osborne ruined his chance by losing his temper and threatening a punishment budget if the uk voted to leave. If he can recover the £ he might gain it back.

The Opposition- the labour party.
Formerly the political arm of the unions the second major party of the post war era labour was the party that founded the welfare state.
Originally socialist the parties socialist economics lead to disaster in the winter of 1979 when strikes brought down its government.
The party always contained 'moderates' who in the 80s split to from the lib dems (see below)
In the early 80s a leader called Foot led a lurch to the left that led to their biggest ever defeat.
Over the next 17 years the party drifted to the centre until by the time of blairs election in 1997 they were a centre party.

New Labour were characterised by:
Low regulation
High immigration
Multiculturalism
In favour of the eu
Reducing child poverty
Devolution
Expanding the welfare systems
The war in iraq and banking clash rendered new labour toxic. The party was further tainted by its local councils covering up muslim child rape gangs under fears of provoking racism.

Under a leader called milliband it refused to apologise for past mistakes made re immigration, to offer a eu referendum, to limit immigration ot to accept responsibility for excessive deregulation.

Following their defeat the party lurched left under leader jeremy corbyn whose election was a sanders esque revolt against larty establishment. Corbyn is a socialist hangover from old labour and a protege of Foot. He returned to the policies of 1979 and while very popular with the party membership is widely unpopular with mps who see him as a liability.

Today 21/28 shadow cabinet ministers resigned in protest to his handling of the referendum.

The broad gist of old labour policies is:
Nationalisation
Strong union laws
immigration
Anti eu
Anti nuclear
Heavy regulation
A large welfare state

After campaigning for those issues in defiance of the whip for 30 years the corbyn policy group is something like this:
Nationalisation
Strong union laws
Open Immigration
Pro eu
Anti nuclear
Large welfare state
Tax on the rich
Tax on property

At this point its hard to say who could replace corbyn. If there is no election a split seems likely. His support amongst the party members means he would probably win one in the event of a contest watch: Chucka umma, dan jarvis, yvette cooper, hilary benn, stephen kinnock and gisela stuart. If corbyn does not run watch frank fields and john mcdonnel as well.

Labour have traditionally done well with migrants, urban areas, scotland and the north of england. Their vote in scotland collapsed to the snp after campaigning against independence.

The lib dems

The atrophied whig party the liberals were boosted by the merger with breakaway moderate labour in the 1980s.

They were the junior partners in a coalition in 2010-2015 where after running on a centre left platform they implemented centre right policies. Most infamously promising to end tuition fees before trebling them.
They were eviscerated in 2015 and reduced from third party to fourth.
Their policies have shifted over the years but are normally socially liberal, focussing on individual freedoms. Previously popular in the rural south west of england and rural scotland.
Their vote showed a glimmer of recovery in the recent local elections.

Ukip-
The party of nigel farage is a right wing party focussing on british nationalism and appealing to the working class, despite gaining 4 million votes they only have a single seat.
The party pressured cameron into offering a referendum after defeating tories in bye elections.

In 2015 it took a great many votes from northern labour seats and stands ready to take them if labour continue to remain pro eu in these strongly leave areas.

The snp- the supposedly socialist scottish national party has held power in scotland for the past decade. Ill go into them in detail when i describe scotland's politics but enough to say they swept scotland at the last election and are basically new labour in a kilt and waving a red flag.

It is likely the new conservative pm will trigger an election so he has a mandate for negotiating as gordon brown was severely criticised for not doing so when he took over from blair

That'll do for now, ill detail the devolved legislatures and their political climates at a later date.
 
Last edited:
Good, he's such a useless wet blanket as MPs and mayoral candidates went.

Either way, I actually wish the govt would be bolder and show to businesses that they... mean business. Expansion at Gatwick and Birmingham was on the cards and I say do both as well. Gatwick would be a more useful London hub while Heathrow is more useful for the rest of the country, and a birmingham able to expand to Heathrow-levels of traffic would help serve Wales, the Midlands and a good chunk of the North.

Meanwhile, the Brexit Select Committee has been set up and MPs selected, while arch-remainer Labour's Hilary Benn has taken the hot seat, of the tories selected for the committee pretty much all of them are leavers, so good things to come...
 
Good, he's such a useless wet blanket as MPs and mayoral candidates went.

Either way, I actually wish the govt would be bolder and show to businesses that they... mean business. Expansion at Gatwick and Birmingham was on the cards and I say do both as well. Gatwick would be a more useful London hub while Heathrow is more useful for the rest of the country, and a birmingham able to expand to Heathrow-levels of traffic would help serve Wales, the Midlands and a good chunk of the North.

Meanwhile, the Brexit Select Committee has been set up and MPs selected, while arch-remainer Labour's Hilary Benn has taken the hot seat, of the tories selected for the committee pretty much all of them are leavers, so good things to come...
True, the mayoral campaign was utterly crap, but you can blame Lynton Crosby for that.
I'm one of his constituents, and volunteered in the campaign for a while. I'd say he's pretty well-liked around here; not many people support the third runway, so it's nice to have an MP who does more than just pay lip service to their constituents. I expect he'll probably be re-elected, though more on the basis of Sarah Olney being an utter nonentity than because of his popularity.
 
I always love when people buy houses near an airport, then complain. I live under the flight path of East Midlands Airport, busiest cargo airport in all of Western Europe. They don't have the same luxurious quieting tech on the cargo craft as they do on the passenger aircraft and airports always have to expand or die increasingly in the modern age.

Mind, I live in one of the few practical areas of the country where most development seems to be welcomed because more jobs.

It's a bit like the dopey sods who oppose HS2 because "muh cotswolds" even though the sodding thing is predominantly going to be built on a disused rail line.

Or the prat who bought a house literally next door to Alton Towers (In 2006!) then sued them for noise level issues.
 
House of Lords: "Jews antagonized Hitler into genociding them, Israel is like Isis and the real antisemites are the Jews"



Jews were held accountable for their own fate during the Holocaust at a public meeting held at the House of Lords.
The extraordinary claim was made at the event organized by Baroness Jenny Tonge who is looking for support to demand that the UK government apologize for the 1917 Balfour Declaration, which determined Jewish people the right to a homeland in then-Palestine.

A spokesman for the Israeli embassy described the House of Lords gathering as “a shameful event, which gave voice to racist tropes against Jews and Israelis alike,” according to The Times.

In a video released on Twitter, Tonge listens silently when an audience member claims Jews “antagonised Hitler” and that the Holocaust was caused by “Judea declaring war on Germany”. Another participant added: “If anybody is antisemitic, it’s Israelis themselves”.

The speaker compared Israel to Islamic State, adding the best way to atone for the declaration was to prevent such things happening in future. “Just as the so-called Jewish state in Palestine doesn’t come from Judaism, this Islamic State in Syria is nothing to do with Islam. It is a perversion of Islam just as Zionism is a perversion of Judaism.”

Another audience member suggested that the “Zionist movement” had power over the British parliament comparable to the power which was once believed to have been wielded internationally by Jews.
 
Holy fucking shit what a garbage country. The House of Lords is still shit even after axing a good chunk of the inbred hereditary peers, I see. And they're apparently siding with the guy who practically carpet bombed their country, just because they hate Jews THAT much.

Seriously fuck every single one of these people.
 
Holy fucking shit what a garbage country. The House of Lords is still shit even after axing a good chunk of the inbred hereditary peers, I see. And they're apparently siding with the guy who practically carpet bombed their country, just because they hate Jews THAT much.

Seriously fuck every single one of these people.

Stupid thing is the hereditaries were banned because they were simply an inconvenience to the "modernizing" Tony Blair. A lot of the hereditaries actually took their duties seriously and did a decent job at balancing issues out. Largely because the Tories had a natural majority in the Lords and Blair didn't want that to last, so the Lords were stuffed. Only problem is once enobled you can't remove the ermine, so the result has been for the past two governments to stuff the house with people to the point there are idiotically over a thousand lords in what is effectively an advisory house/democratic deficit check.

The same dick head that ordered the portrait of Oliver Cromwell to be hung in Downing Street to show off their "republican cred" right before welcoming their fist foreign dignitary.

The fucking Taoiseach of Ireland.
 
According to the Guardian, .this is not the first time she has said stupid shit about Israel and jews.
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...r-suspension-for-alleged-antisemitic-comments
  • in 2004, she said that if she was a Palestinian, she could be a suicide bomber. She got sacked as an MP for that
  • She has also blame the rise of attacks on Jews in Europe and UK over how Israel treat the palestinian, basically, saying that they deserve it.
  • She has been suspended over this shit since 2012.
I can go on and on. Basically, she has a hardon for Palestine and won't shut the fuck up about it.
 
Last edited:
The funny thing is that the UK didn't keep up their side of the bargain with the Balfour Declaration.

The PM after WW1 said that UK has a better claim to France than das Juden to Palestine to justify not fulfilling the agreement.
 
Well, now the shit's going to hit the fan. The courts have just ruled that May cannot trigger article 50 by herself, and that it has to be done via a vote in parliament.

Now, this could actually have been a good thing for May, since she could just call a general election, obliterate Labour (and possibly even knock the SNP down a peg or three, considering the latest polls in Scotland) and pack the benches with pro-Brexit MPs to ensure that the vote succeeds... if not for the fact that back in the coalition days Cameron passed a law that meant that early general elections can't be held unless two-thirds of parliament agree to it.
 
Well, now the shit's going to hit the fan. The courts have just ruled that May cannot trigger article 50 by herself, and that it has to be done via a vote in parliament.

Now, this could actually have been a good thing for May, since she could just call a general election, obliterate Labour (and possibly even knock the SNP down a peg or three, considering the latest polls in Scotland) and pack the benches with pro-Brexit MPs to ensure that the vote succeeds... if not for the fact that back in the coalition days Cameron passed a law that meant that early general elections can't be held unless two-thirds of parliament agree to it.

It's fine really, no MP worth their salt would ever oppose the result and even the BBC expects Parliament to pass Article 50.

A
 
It's fine really, no MP worth their salt would ever oppose the result and even the BBC expects Parliament to pass Article 50.

A
No mp worth their salt, but the lords otoh.
 
It's fine really, no MP worth their salt would ever oppose the result and even the BBC expects Parliament to pass Article 50.

What this gives the remain side is the opportunity to fuck around and delay the process. If May calls a vote on it next March, then it'll most likely get defeated and the remain MPs will say "Oh, we're still committed to taking the country out of the EU, but we're not yet happy with the way the Prime Minister is handling the situation." And they'll keep doing it until either they come up with some miraculously perfect solution that satisfies both sides, or the 2020 election rolls around.

If nothing else, it probably puts paid to any hopes of a Brexit whereby the UK severs any and all ties (outside of a few trade agreements) with the EU.
 
No mp worth their salt, but the lords otoh.

Invoke the Parliament Acts. Although this will delay things.

I'm thinking that May should stick in plans for a Parliamentary vote on Article 50 now while at the same time seeking to appeal the Court decision.

Also, have we looked into Gina Miller and Deir de los Santos? Who's funding them?
 
Invoke the Parliament Acts. Although this will delay things.

I'm thinking that May should stick in plans for a Parliamentary vote on Article 50 now while at the same time seeking to appeal the Court decision.

Also, have we looked into Gina Miller and Deir de los Santos? Who's funding them?
The parliament acts takes 5 years to invoke from first reading in the commons, under the fixed term parliament act they are effectively unusable.
 
Worth noting that there is still thesupreme court to go although tbh i agree with the high courts reasoning.

At worst a snap election with brexit on a manifesto. This is a speed bump rather than a roadblock.
 
May can't just hold a snap election, though, you need a two-thirds vote of parliament to do that these days. Labour and the SNP would never agree to that, and chances are a few of May's own backbenchers are scared enough of a UKIP or possibly even Lib-Dem resurgence that they wouldn't back an early election either.
 
May can't just hold a snap election, though, you need a two-thirds vote of parliament to do that these days. Labour and the SNP would never agree to that, and chances are a few of May's own backbenchers are scared enough of a UKIP or possibly even Lib-Dem resurgence that they wouldn't back an early election either.
a snap election can be called by a repeal of the FTP act. The conservative party's discipline is imo strong enough for a three line whip to deliver one. There is a chance her own mps would rebel but tbh given labour and ukips poll ratings i would be surprised if they did.

I think the commons would likely pass a art 50 act in any case- given the referendum constituency map it would be political suicide not to. I think the Lords is the most likely place to sink such an act.
 
To be honest if it fails at the Supreme Court I will be utterly livid. I'm already furious some South Americans (pillar of democracy, that continent) have derailed the biggest single democratic vote enacted in british history, with the largest single mandate in history and now basically dropped us in the biggest constitutional crisis since The Glorious Revolution.

All because the woman who enacted the legal challenge felt "physically sick" at Brexit.

Want to help stoke xenophobia in the wider country? This is how you do it folks, be foreign, use your fortune amassed by fleecing the public and use low wage slaves from Eastern Europe in your business and fucking belittle people who don't vote the same as you.

I honestly despair at the intelligista and wonder when the snapping point finally comes and britain actually turns ugly, because the problem with a lot of these public, crowing morons is they're actually in a minority and stupidly prominent to boot.

I think the commons would likely pass a art 50 act in any case- given the referendum constituency map it would be political suicide not to. I think the Lords is the most likely place to sink such an act.

I honestly don't think Remain MPs are able to act rationally any more, certainly not the core who want to keep asking until we give the answer they want permenant referendum.

Any other time any other vote and referendum they'd abide by it and respect it, they aren't. A number of them are now actively behaving in a manner that in any other century would label them as traitors. I can see them voting against a GE as the ultimate sign they know they're doing wrong but don't give a singular fuck anyway because they don't belong to the british people but to a fetishized obsession with Brussels.

Most of them won't give two shits about which way their constituency voted because they're mostly Labour safe seats which'd vote for a pile of smelly shit so long as a red rosette was placed near it.
 
Back
Top Bottom