stb12
Top Poster
Posts: 8,379 
|
Post by stb12 on Mar 13, 2024 23:35:50 GMT
Brighton Kemptown and Peacehaven
|
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Mar 17, 2024 10:19:28 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Forfarshire Conservative on May 29, 2024 17:06:12 GMT
Lloyd Russell Moyle effectively barred from standing.
|
|
|
|
Post by jakegb on May 29, 2024 17:13:05 GMT
Couldn't happen to a nicer person ...
His behaviour at the 2019 declaration was disgusting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Forfarshire Conservative on May 29, 2024 17:23:18 GMT
Couldn't happen to a nicer person ... His behaviour at the 2019 declaration was disgusting. It was yes, and I have no doubt that he'd factionally cheerlead himself, but even the most odious MPs deserve fair justice and it's very suspicious that he's accused now. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2024 17:25:46 GMT
Execute Order 66
|
|
|
|
Post by riccimarsh on May 29, 2024 17:30:05 GMT
Couldn't happen to a nicer person ... His behaviour at the 2019 declaration was disgusting. It was yes, and I have no doubt that he'd factionally cheerlead himself, but even the most odious MPs deserve fair justice and it's very suspicious that he's accused now. This is basically opening the door to anyone making an anonymous accusation against any MP after prorogation but before candidate nominations have closed and just forcing them out of Parliament… seems a bit unsatisfactory to me. |
|
|
|
Post by matureleft on May 29, 2024 17:45:13 GMT
It’s obviously an opportunity for someone with a grudge to come forward but no party can simply ignore such things.
|
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on May 29, 2024 17:54:47 GMT
Nonsense. It's typical of the useless "Labour" party.
There's no way I will vote for Labour. Frankly I'll be happy when Labour doesn't work - they are disgusting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Forfarshire Conservative on May 29, 2024 17:56:23 GMT
It’s obviously an opportunity for someone with a grudge to come forward but no party can simply ignore such things. Why couldn't they acknowledge the complaint, pledge a fair and independent investigation, pledge to kick him out if he's guilty and then move on. I think they could get away with saying that it'll be investigated after the election and that to suspend him now would open the door to abuses and rob his constituents of the chance to elect him. Personally it looks to me as if this a stitch up by the leadership to jettison a left-wing MP out of an uber safe seat and parachute a factional loyalist in. |
|
andrea
Non-Aligned
Posts: 7,772
|
Post by andrea on May 29, 2024 17:56:49 GMT
Does Sam Tarry still have the house in Brighton?
Can we just put him in every seat where a candidate is suspended at the very last minute because of an anonymous allegation?
|
|
rcronald
Likud
Posts: 6,370
Member is Online
|
Post by rcronald on May 29, 2024 18:03:57 GMT
Does Sam Tarry still have the house in Brighton? Can we just put him in every seat where a candidate is suspended at the very last minute because of an anonymous allegation? should probably deter some false allegations against members of the left wing of the party… Should probably put Ian Austin as a stand-in in constituencies that have more centrist candidates. lol |
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 16,028
|
Post by Sibboleth on May 29, 2024 18:07:50 GMT
Why couldn't they acknowledge the complaint, pledge a fair and independent investigation, pledge to kick him out if he's guilty and then move on. Because that particular approach cost the Party a seat in the Parliament that is presently being dissolved. |
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 15,785
|
Post by john07 on May 29, 2024 18:11:52 GMT
Does Sam Tarry still have the house in Brighton? Can we just put him in every seat where a candidate is suspended at the very last minute because of an anonymous allegation? If not, he should have tarried there a little longer? |
|
|
|
Post by matureleft on May 29, 2024 18:13:51 GMT
It’s obviously an opportunity for someone with a grudge to come forward but no party can simply ignore such things. Why couldn't they acknowledge the complaint, pledge a fair and independent investigation, pledge to kick him out if he's guilty and then move on. I think they could get away with saying that it'll be investigated after the election and that to suspend him now would open the door to abuses and rob his constituents of the chance to elect him. Personally it looks to me as if this a stitch up by the leadership to jettison a left-wing MP out of an uber safe seat and parachute a factional loyalist in. 1. We don’t know the exact nature of the allegations. 2. I’d be amazed if your party (assuming it still is your party) said, “oh that’s fine”. Of course they’d pursue this, and I can understand why. Labour certainly didn’t give a free pass on these sorts of allegations. 3. He would have an appalling time being pestered by journalists and others. 4. Anyway it’s manifestly Inconsistent to handle allegations in one way outside of an election and quits differently when one is imminent. For what it’s worth I am told he suspects the complainant comes from a cause that wouldn’t normally be identified with the right of the party, but who knows. |
|
|
|
Post by edgbaston on May 29, 2024 18:20:42 GMT
Why couldn't they acknowledge the complaint, pledge a fair and independent investigation, pledge to kick him out if he's guilty and then move on. Because that particular approach cost the Party a seat in the Parliament that is presently being dissolved. But the alternative is to remove any candidate with any complaint, at this stage? That just leaves the process open to naked politicisation |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,907
Member is Online
|
Post by YL on May 29, 2024 18:22:32 GMT
Why couldn't they acknowledge the complaint, pledge a fair and independent investigation, pledge to kick him out if he's guilty and then move on. Because that particular approach cost the Party a seat in the Parliament that is presently being dissolved. The timing of the Hartlepool allegation was not like this one. Of course I don't know the details of what the allegation is and perhaps if I did I'd think that the decision was the right one, but it's not hard to see why people are concerned. |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on May 29, 2024 18:24:17 GMT
Why couldn't they acknowledge the complaint, pledge a fair and independent investigation, pledge to kick him out if he's guilty and then move on. I think they could get away with saying that it'll be investigated after the election and that to suspend him now would open the door to abuses and rob his constituents of the chance to elect him. Personally it looks to me as if this a stitch up by the leadership to jettison a left-wing MP out of an uber safe seat and parachute a factional loyalist in. 1. We don’t know the exact nature of the allegations. 2. I’d be amazed if your party (assuming it still is your party) said, “oh that’s fine”. Of course they’d pursue this, and I can understand why. Labour certainly didn’t give a free pass on these sorts of allegations. 3. He would have an appalling time being pestered by journalists and others. 4. Anyway it’s manifestly Inconsistent to handle allegations in one way outside of an election and quits differently when one is imminent. For what it’s worth I am told he suspects the complainant comes from a cause that wouldn’t normally be identified with the right of the party, but who knows. It's simply wrong. If there are so-called complaints and it's obvious that this definitely chargeable (and, innocent unless guilty) - nothing more. |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on May 29, 2024 18:25:53 GMT
Because that particular approach cost the Party a seat in the Parliament that is presently being dissolved. But the alternative is to remove any candidate with any complaint, at this stage? That just leaves the process open to naked politicisation Quite. So, allegations of all right wing Labourites should stand. |
|
|
|
Post by Forfarshire Conservative on May 29, 2024 18:26:01 GMT
Why couldn't they acknowledge the complaint, pledge a fair and independent investigation, pledge to kick him out if he's guilty and then move on. I think they could get away with saying that it'll be investigated after the election and that to suspend him now would open the door to abuses and rob his constituents of the chance to elect him. Personally it looks to me as if this a stitch up by the leadership to jettison a left-wing MP out of an uber safe seat and parachute a factional loyalist in. 1. We don’t know the exact nature of the allegations. 2. I’d be amazed if your party (assuming it still is your party) said, “oh that’s fine”. Of course they’d pursue this, and I can understand why. Labour certainly didn’t give a free pass on these sorts of allegations. 3. He would have an appalling time being pestered by journalists and others. 4. Anyway it’s manifestly Inconsistent to handle allegations in one way outside of an election and quits differently when one is imminent. For what it’s worth I am told he suspects the complainant comes from a cause that wouldn’t normally be identified with the right of the party, but who knows. I am still a member of the Conservative Party, yes. I have been a member for seven and a half years, minus one month when I left over lockdown but was persuaded to re-join. Whilst I may vote for Reform, I am not abandoning my party when I can help put in the graft to rebuild it, and I'll take the punishment that comes in five weeks as it will be well deserved. As for what my party would say, so what? That's our job. You're adults, it would have been well within your abilities to take the criticism, rebut it and move on. It also seems to me that Russell Moyle wanted to fight, and if he wanted to go through that to prove his innocence, and why wouldn't you if you are innocent, he should have had that opportunity to have justice administered fairly. I also don't agree with the fourth point. I think it's perfectly consistent to point out that it isn't the same when you have a deadline that's open to abuse as opposed to having years in front of you. |
|
