|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Apr 29, 2021 12:42:23 GMT
Sugar did turn up to make the affirmation on 3 March 2020 so it's just Rogers of Riverside (and Selsdon) who will lose their membership if they don't take leave of absence today.
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on May 11, 2021 11:10:39 GMT
|
|
johnloony
Conservative
Posts: 21,735
Member is Online
|
Post by johnloony on May 11, 2021 14:52:11 GMT
For no particular reason I'm wondering of Lord Maginnis of Drumglass has done any of the anti-bullying trainging (or whatever it's called) that he was supposed to? I'm guessing not
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on May 11, 2021 15:56:01 GMT
He was suspended for at least 18 months from December 2020, with his suspension continuing until he completed bespoke behaviour change training. So it only becomes relevant in a year's time.
|
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Post by neilm on May 13, 2021 21:41:30 GMT
Do the Lords authorities let them know they need to take action to keep membership or not?
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on May 13, 2021 21:44:17 GMT
Do the Lords authorities let them know they need to take action to keep membership or not? I suspect they did, which was why Lawson quickly went on leave of absence for two days just before he was about to be kicked out.
|
|
|
Post by Wisconsin on May 14, 2021 18:09:10 GMT
Six by-elections planned: www.parliament.uk/globalassets/documents/lords-information-office/2021/notice-to-hereditary-peers-by-elections-12-05-21.pdf.pdf• Following the retirement of the Earl of Selborne on 26 March 2020, the retirement of Lord Denham on 26 April 2021 and the non-attendance of Lord Selsdon during the 2019-21 Parliamentary session there are three vacancies among the excepted Conservative hereditary peers who sit in the House of Lords. The replacements for the Earl of Selborne, Lord Denham and Lord Selsdon will be elected in one ballot. • Following the retirement of the Countess of Mar [crossbench] on 1 May 2020 there is a vacancy among the excepted hereditary peers who sit in the House of Lords. • Following the death of Lord Rea on 1 June 2020 there is a vacancy among the excepted Labour hereditary peers who sit in the House of Lords. • Following the retirement of Lord Elton [Conservative] on 29 October 2020 there is a vacancy among the excepted hereditary peers who sit in the House of Lords.
|
|
Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,163
|
Post by Chris from Brum on May 14, 2021 19:07:13 GMT
Ok, so why does Elton's replacement get elected by all the hereditaries, while the other three Tories are elected just by the Tories?
|
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823
|
Post by timmullen1 on May 14, 2021 19:12:30 GMT
Ok, so why does Elton's replacement get elected by all the hereditaries, while the other three Tories are elected just by the Tories? Ok, so why does Elton's replacement get elected by all the hereditaries, while the other three Tories are elected just by the Tories? Because your replacement is elected by the group that elected you, and Elton and the Countess of Mar belonged to the group elected by all the Hereditaries and was free to take whatever Whip they chose. The others were elected by either the Conservative or Labour hereditaries and will be replaced by them (the latter of course may be a chance for Tony Benin’s son to make his debut).
|
|
Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,163
|
Post by Chris from Brum on May 14, 2021 19:18:50 GMT
Ok, so why does Elton's replacement get elected by all the hereditaries, while the other three Tories are elected just by the Tories? Ok, so why does Elton's replacement get elected by all the hereditaries, while the other three Tories are elected just by the Tories? Because your replacement is elected by the group that elected you, and Elton and the Countess of Mar belonged to the group elected by all the Hereditaries and was free to take whatever Whip they chose. The others were elected by either the Conservative or Labour hereditaries and will be replaced by them (the latter of course may be a chance for Tony Benin’s son to make his debut). Ok, I just remembered Elton as a Tory peer way back in the eighties, so assumed he'd been elected by his fellow Tories. Does he have to be replaced by another Tory?
|
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823
|
Post by timmullen1 on May 14, 2021 19:31:19 GMT
Because your replacement is elected by the group that elected you, and Elton and the Countess of Mar belonged to the group elected by all the Hereditaries and was free to take whatever Whip they chose. The others were elected by either the Conservative or Labour hereditaries and will be replaced by them (the latter of course may be a chance for Tony Benin’s son to make his debut). Ok, I just remembered Elton as a Tory peer way back in the eighties, so assumed he'd been elected by his fellow Tories. Does he have to be replaced by another Tory? Technically not, any of those who’ve gone on the Register are eligible to put their names forward unless they’ve specified they’re only interested in election by a particular group (I’m fairly sure at the time Benn’s son confined himself to just Labour Peers), however there does seem to be have developed a custom of replacing like with like, so, under normal circumstances he’d be replaced by another Conservative, however if more than one Crossbencher is nominated to replace Mar I guess there’s a chance of them filling both spots (or equally two Conservatives and no Crossbencher getting elected).
|
|
johnloony
Conservative
Posts: 21,735
Member is Online
|
Post by johnloony on May 15, 2021 11:46:49 GMT
Do the Lords authorities let them know they need to take action to keep membership or not? I suspect they did, which was why Lawson quickly went on leave of absence for two days just before he was about to be kicked out. I guess it's still possible for a former member of the House of Lords who has lost his seat in this way is still eligible to be appointed again?
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on May 15, 2021 12:06:34 GMT
I suspect they did, which was why Lawson quickly went on leave of absence for two days just before he was about to be kicked out. I guess it's still possible for a former member of the House of Lords who has lost his seat in this way is still eligible to be appointed again? No. House of Lords Reform Act 2014, s. 4(8) provides that "a person who ceases to be a member of the House of Lords in accordance with this Act may not subsequently become a member of that House."
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on May 18, 2021 15:08:39 GMT
|
|
johnloony
Conservative
Posts: 21,735
Member is Online
|
Post by johnloony on May 25, 2021 16:28:58 GMT
"Valuing Everyone"? What impertinent and preposterous nonsense is this?!? " Valuing Everyone is a Parliament-wide training programme. It is designed to help ensure that everyone working in Parliament is able to recognise bullying, harassment and sexual misconduct, and feels confident taking action to tackle and prevent it." Are members of the House of Lords now, ex-officio, assumed to be bullies and sexual molesters, until and unless they are correctively re-educated, by the state and at taxpayers' expense, to teach them how not to be? Why have they "all now done so"? Why did the vast majority of members of the House of Lords not simply and straightforwardly tell this presumptuous and insulting body (whoever they are) to mind their own business and not be so impertinent?
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on May 25, 2021 16:35:37 GMT
"Valuing Everyone"? What impertinent and preposterous nonsense is this?!? " Valuing Everyone is a Parliament-wide training programme. It is designed to help ensure that everyone working in Parliament is able to recognise bullying, harassment and sexual misconduct, and feels confident taking action to tackle and prevent it." Are members of the House of Lords now, ex-officio, assumed to be bullies and sexual molesters, until and unless they are correctively re-educated, by the state and at taxpayers' expense, to teach them how not to be? Why have they "all now done so"? Why did the vast majority of members of the House of Lords not simply and straightforwardly tell this presumptuous and insulting body (whoever they are) to mind their own business and not be so impertinent? Given the events surrounding the dishonourable member for Delyn which have become apparent today, I'd suggest that it is more than necessary. No-one is assuming anything - but everyone should be able to "recognise bullying, harassment and sexual misconduct, and feel confident taking action to tackle and prevent it"
|
|
johnloony
Conservative
Posts: 21,735
Member is Online
|
Post by johnloony on May 25, 2021 17:29:35 GMT
"Valuing Everyone"? What impertinent and preposterous nonsense is this?!? " Valuing Everyone is a Parliament-wide training programme. It is designed to help ensure that everyone working in Parliament is able to recognise bullying, harassment and sexual misconduct, and feels confident taking action to tackle and prevent it." Are members of the House of Lords now, ex-officio, assumed to be bullies and sexual molesters, until and unless they are correctively re-educated, by the state and at taxpayers' expense, to teach them how not to be? Why have they "all now done so"? Why did the vast majority of members of the House of Lords not simply and straightforwardly tell this presumptuous and insulting body (whoever they are) to mind their own business and not be so impertinent? Given the events surrounding the dishonourable member for Delyn which have become apparent today, I'd suggest that it is more than necessary. No-one is assuming anything - but everyone should be able to "recognise bullying, harassment and sexual misconduct, and feel confident taking action to tackle and prevent it" The vast majority of people are able to do that without being impertinently and patronisingly being forced to attend indoctrination sessions at which they are "taught" how to do so.
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on May 25, 2021 19:03:47 GMT
Given the events surrounding the dishonourable member for Delyn which have become apparent today, I'd suggest that it is more than necessary. No-one is assuming anything - but everyone should be able to "recognise bullying, harassment and sexual misconduct, and feel confident taking action to tackle and prevent it" The vast majority of people are able to do that without being impertinently and patronisingly being forced to attend indoctrination sessions at which they are "taught" how to do so. You are neither being "taught" or indoctrinated - training exists to make you understand , recognise and think. It's called being aware rather than entirely wrapped up in oneself. And if what you say is true then why did no one recognise what was going on in the case of the aforementioned Dishonourable, or the recently resigned former MP for Hartlepool?
|
|
johnloony
Conservative
Posts: 21,735
Member is Online
|
Post by johnloony on May 27, 2021 20:34:13 GMT
The vast majority of people are able to do that without being impertinently and patronisingly being forced to attend indoctrination sessions at which they are "taught" how to do so. You are neither being "taught" or indoctrinated - training exists to make you understand , recognise and think. It's called being aware rather than entirely wrapped up in oneself. And if what you say is true then why did no one recognise what was going on in the case of the aforementioned Dishonourable, or the recently resigned former MP for Hartlepool? What makes you think that nobody recognised it? In any case, the actions of the MPs for Delyn and Hartlepool do not constitute a reason for such an impertinent imposition on 648 MPs or 800 Peers as if they are naughty children.
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on May 27, 2021 21:13:59 GMT
You are neither being "taught" or indoctrinated - training exists to make you understand , recognise and think. It's called being aware rather than entirely wrapped up in oneself. And if what you say is true then why did no one recognise what was going on in the case of the aforementioned Dishonourable, or the recently resigned former MP for Hartlepool? What makes you think that nobody recognised it? In any case, the actions of the MPs for Delyn and Hartlepool do not constitute a reason for such an impertinent imposition on 648 MPs or 800 Peers as if they are naughty children. It's basis awareness training, not impertinent at all. I have to do safeguarding training as part or my job. Standard stuff these days I think those who screech the most are often those who would benefit most from it.
|
|