Coronavirus - political views - supporting or otherwise...

[Old Skier]

Am curious to know where you've pulled that from.
Not https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Piers Morgan, the knowledge on all things Covid

 

[GB72]

It was frustrating for me today as there were some simple questions I wanted asked that were just not raised. Biggest question for me was why announce meetings of 6 people in gardens just before a scorching hot weekend. Either start it up now or leave the announcement until Monday. Nobody is going to wait until next week and almost impossible to try and fine for a breach of a restriction ending in 72 hours

 

[ColchesterFC]

So even though it is universally acknowledged he did something that was at the very least against the spirit of the guidance, and no body believes the Barnard Castle eye test story so that is a lie, the fact that the BBC who were putting Darren Grimes on prime time radio yesterday and Daily Mail (actually I'll give you that one, fair point about the gutter press) want him to go means he shouldn't?

To be honest what razzes most people off is the lack of contrition, the lack of him looking vaguely sorry, the attempt by the government to say it was lawful, the fact that it is patently obvious that a message has come down that he can not apologize. And if the Labour MPs knowingly travelled somewhere when they knew a person travelling with them had Covid and then were not sorry then I agree, they should go as well.

Nope he did something that broke the actual guidelines. The fact he went home from work to see his wife who had symptoms of the virus and then later that day returned to work rather than isolating for 14 days (whether that was in London or in Durham) is a clear breach of the guidelines. What came after that is open to debate but that is a clear and absolute breach of the guidelines.

 

[ColchesterFC]

Yet to hear any reason to suggest why I should. You can put lipstick on a pig.................

I didn't realise you'd met my ex wife.

 

[rulefan]

No. With the current majority it will make no difference.

 

[larmen]

So the virtual parliament is to end and only MPs present in the House of Commons will be able to participate in debates. Currently that's limited to 50 at a time. It's not safe to vote in the lobbies so no voting will take place.

Anyone got a problem with that?

I would cut down parliament to 50 and save the expenses on all the others. Work it out proportionally and give all the others the boot. Then redraw the lines for the next election.
So much party lines politics going on, we don’t need MPs anymore.

 

[clubchamp98]

Yet to hear any reason to suggest why I should. You can put lipstick on a pig.................

Any particular shade?

 

[SocketRocket]

 

[Deleted member 18588]

So the virtual parliament is to end and only MPs present in the House of Commons will be able to participate in debates. Currently that's limited to 50 at a time. It's not safe to vote in the lobbies so no voting will take place.

Anyone got a problem with that?

Yes I have a problem with it.

How can the democratic principle be upheld if only approx 8% of MP's can be present.

I don't care how big their majority may be this smacks of contempt for the electorate.

 

[clubchamp98]

So the virtual parliament is to end and only MPs present in the House of Commons will be able to participate in debates. Currently that's limited to 50 at a time. It's not safe to vote in the lobbies so no voting will take place.

Anyone got a problem with that?

While I think some old customs are nice.
Parliament needs to get into the modern world.
If this is the start of a change it MIGHT be a good thing.
But knowing politicians they will use it to their advantage.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

So the virtual parliament is to end and only MPs present in the House of Commons will be able to participate in debates. Currently that's limited to 50 at a time. It's not safe to vote in the lobbies so no voting will take place.

Anyone got a problem with that?

Are you saying voting is suspended? Or that bills/laws etc will be passed without a vote?

 

[MegaSteve]

Will anyone ever change their opinion on this matter?

At first I thought hanging would be sufficient... Now I've moved on to feeling nothing less than hanging, drawing and quartering will do...

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Just seeing warning signs. Hopefully they will work something out but it is a worry.

The speaker says "it is for the Government to decide what proposal for voting it wishes to put forward"

Not great, though, that they have allowed the remote working to end without putting an alternative mechanism in place.

Doesn’t seem ok, and I’d hope they don’t rush it through without the correct checks and balances in place.

 

[clubchamp98]

It's the exact opposite of that. The remote access should have been a positive change that was made permanent. Now it looks like we're not going to have a functioning democracy at all.

While Boris has a big majority it’s not that much of a problem he can get most things through Parliament anyway.
He proved today he will do what he likes.
Hopefully it won’t last for years!

 

[Blue in Munich]

Surely if he was considered to have breached the rules all they would have done is to issue the standard fine , this is not, as far as I understand, a court matter

Unless it has changed drastically, he would not have been issued a fine, as police cannot dissue a fine. He would have been issued with a Fixed Penalty Notice, which carries a standard financial penalty. If the recipient of the FPN accepts their guilt, they can discharge their liability to prosecution by paying the penalty. Alternatively if they do not accept their guilt, or wish to discuss some aspect of the case with the court they can request a court hearing & the matter will go to trial in front of a magistrate or magistrates, who will decide the guilt of innocence of the accused.

It should be noted that the FPN can only be issued for breaches of the law, not breaches of the guidance, and these are not necessarily the same thing.

 

[chrisd]

Unless it has changed drastically, he would not have been issued a fine, as police cannot dissue a fine. He would have been issued with a Fixed Penalty Notice, which carries a standard financial penalty. If the recipient of the FPN accepts their guilt, they can discharge their liability to prosecution by paying the penalty. Alternatively if they do not accept their guilt, or wish to discuss some aspect of the case with the court they can request a court hearing & the matter will go to trial in front of a magistrate or magistrates, who will decide the guilt of innocence of the accused.

It should be noted that the FPN can only be issued for breaches of the law, not breaches of the guidance, and these are not necessarily the same thing.

That's exactly what I meant to say ??

 

[Deleted member 18645]

The civil liberties "individual" who has just stated on the news that a 14-day quarantine could be "'unimaginably disruptive to people's lives".

So could you or one or your elderly relatives dying of Covid-19.

 

[patricks148]

View attachment 30912

if you are happy to use and manipulate the media to your ends when its suites, how can you complain when it bites you on the arse, it is what it is

 

[rulefan]

the matter will go to trial in front of a magistrate or magistrates, who will decide the guilt of innocence of the accused.

Which is of course what I said.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

So the virtual parliament is to end and only MPs present in the House of Commons will be able to participate in debates. Currently that's limited to 50 at a time. It's not safe to vote in the lobbies so no voting will take place.

Anyone got a problem with that?

Yes, absolutely. We live in a democracy, votes are essential to that. This is 2020, can it be that hard to arrange an online voting system for MPs?

The building, Westminster, the systems, the terminology, everything about parliament is archaic and needs bringing into the modern era.