Manchester Gorton — Countermanded

[johnloony]

Apr 18, 2017 22:13:16 GMT Davıd Boothroyd said:

By all previous precedent, any byelection process stops immediately once Parliament is dissolved. I don't know why anyone is suggesting there is any uncertainty in what I'm saying here.

Because, as I understand it, it is based on precedent and ad-hoc decisions in previous cases, rather than being explicitly stated in statute law.

[yellowperil]

Apr 19, 2017 13:22:18 GMT andrew111 said:

Apr 19, 2017 13:13:22 GMT @benjl said:

what a mess, not to mention people that vote by post now and think that counts for June. There's an argument here for an emergency act of Parliament/ amendment to stop this and allow this by election to take place. Destroying people's votes simply isn't acceptable. What a farce.

Or Theresa could just hold her General Election on the 15th, rather than the 8th...

Now that's a great idea -and the rest of us have ours on the 8th

[peterl]

A quick one page Act of Parliament could provide that May 4th is general election day in Manchester Gorton and June 8th elsewhere.

[greenchristian]

Apr 19, 2017 13:58:18 GMT Richard Allen said:

Apr 19, 2017 13:13:22 GMT @benjl said:

what a mess, not to mention people that vote by post now and think that counts for June. There's an argument here for an emergency act of Parliament/ amendment to stop this and allow this by election to take place. Destroying people's votes simply isn't acceptable. What a farce.

An election cannot take place to a Parliament that has ceased to exist. That would be a real farce.

As for this mess, might I suggest that the obvious thing is for a large signs to be displayed in all polling stations explaining that the parliamentary by election has been cancelled due to the forthcoming general election. It isn't a particularly difficult concept to grasp, even for the intellectually challenged.

You'll still get some confusion from voters who don't read the signs. But that's probably the best thing for the elections office to do.

[J.G.Harston]

Why can't PR people use real English and write "Embargo: none"? It takes several attempts at reading "Embargo: Immediate" to decide if I can chat to you lot about it.

[Deleted]

From the BBC



A by-election for the Manchester Gorton constituency is set to be cancelled after the House of Commons backed a June general election.
The Cabinet Office said the election for the vacant seat, planned for 4 May, would now take place on 8 June as part of the nationwide polling day.
MPs will be asked to formally overturn the writ for the poll.
The proposed by-election would have created the anomaly of taking place after parliament had been dissolved.
The by-election was caused by the death of long-serving Labour MP Sir Gerald Kaufman in February.
Commons Leader David Lidington told MPs there was no statutory provision allowing for the cancellation of a by-election when a general election is in progress.
But he said a precedent was set in a similar situation in 1923, when a by-election writ was regarded as having been superseded.
The Commons vote would enable Manchester's acting returning officer Joanne Roney to cancel the by-election.

[J.G.Harston]

Apr 19, 2017 18:12:01 GMT doktorb🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️ said:

From the BBC
A by-election for the Manchester Gorton constituency is set to be cancelled after the House of Commons backed a June general election.
The Cabinet Office said the election for the vacant seat, planned for 4 May, would now take place on 8 June as part of the nationwide polling day.
MPs will be asked to formally overturn the writ for the poll.
...

There we are, now it's out I can "leak" my press release: "(the) Manchester Gorton ... election will now take place on June 8th, subject to approval by the House of Commons."

[peterl]

Apr 19, 2017 17:59:34 GMT @jamesdowden said:

Apr 19, 2017 5:25:28 GMT AdminSTB said:

i'm not sure we should yet to be honest. It makes sense that it should be but it will depend on the actual date of dissolution.

And "countermanded" would be a more appropriate term in any event.

Countermanded would have required a candidate to have died, and that may have been an excessive response to the situation.

[greatkingrat]

Depends which candidate ...

[Deleted]

There have been some exceptionally silly posts on this thread.

[Davıd Boothroyd]

What it is going to be is a Supersedeas. Last happened in 1880:

[Deleted]

Apr 19, 2017 19:55:41 GMT Davıd Boothroyd said:

What it is going to be is a Supersedeas. Last happened in 1880.

Which is this one?

PARLIAMENT—NEW WRIT FOR BER-WICK-UPON-TWEED.

HC Deb 08 July 1880 vol 253 cc1918-9 1918
§ Order [6th July] read, for the issue of a New Writ for Berwick-upon-Tweed.

§LORD RICHARD GROSVENOR said, that owing to an unexpected delay the ne- 1919 cessary formalities had not been gone through in connection with the transference of one of the hon. Members for Berwick (Mr. Strutt) to the Upper House, in succession to Lord Belper. The Writ which had been moved for that borough had, therefore, been prematurely issued. He accordingly moved— That Mr. Speaker do issue his Warrant to the Clerk of the Crown to make out a supersedeas to the said Writ for the Election of a Member to serve, in the present Parliament, for the Town of Berwick-upon-Tweed.
§LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL said, the noble Lord would not be surprised if the House expected some explanation of his extraordinary, if not unprecedented, Motion. The seat became vacant only last week, and the Writ was moved for on Tuesday; but it now appeared that at that time the seat was not legally vacant. He wished to ask whether the usual steps were taken to ascertain whether a vacancy really existed; and what it was that influenced the noble Lord in moving for the Writ in such unusual haste? It was just possible that, in a town like Berwick-on-Tweed, it might be important to a party to have the election over with great speed. He was not going to make such a statement; but, at the same time, he would point out that various constructions might be put on the action of the noble Lord. At all events, the House ought to have some further information on the subject.
§LORD RICHARD GROSVENOR said, that the facts were very simple. He had moved for the Writ a little too hastily, as he understood that when a vacancy occurred by the death of a Peer his eldest son immediately thereupon became ipso facto a Peer. He was not aware that certain formalities had to be gone through; and, if there had not been unexpected delay in this case, those formalities, which were very simple, would have been observed, and there would have been no occasion to move for the Writ of Supersedeas. He trusted that this explanation would be satisfactory.
§ Motion agreed to.

[The Bishop]

Apr 19, 2017 19:01:02 GMT joe said:

There have been some exceptionally silly posts on this thread.

Well, that narrows it down

[carlton43]

All that bluster and nonsense and there it is settled.....done......no by-election just as all sensible people expected.

Also, all that bluster and nonsense over the FTPA............for what? As Richard had been at some pains to explain any PM could call an election whenever and usually it would just be a simple two-thirds vote to pass it with most of the opposition voting for it because they wanted one or were fearful of looking scared and incompetent.

Many of you get obsessed with utter trivia and irrelevant detail, whilst the grown-ups solve it and move on. That is why a number of you are so spectacularly unsuccessful in your lives. Pay attention to the IMPORTANT and only the important.

Oh! Why do I bother?

[Deleted]

The fixed term parliament act was a daft piece of constitutional nonsense.

[Deleted]

Apr 20, 2017 12:05:42 GMT joe said:

The fixed term parliament act was a daft piece of constitutional nonsense.

I disagree. But you know that.

[The Bishop]

Its main fault, it seems, was that it was fairly easy to circumvent.

IMO a no-confidence vote should have been mandatory for an early dissolution - if there is good reason for a snap poll, that shouldn't embarrass the government too much.

[Foggy]

Apr 20, 2017 12:17:15 GMT doktorb🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️ said:

Apr 20, 2017 12:05:42 GMT joe said:

The fixed term parliament act was a daft piece of constitutional nonsense.

I disagree. But you know that.

I don't see how anyone can argue otherwise now. Unless this country were to adopt the Swedish, Norwegian or (heaven forfend) American system, then the concept of fixed terms would always be incompatible with it. 

[andrew111]

Apr 20, 2017 23:23:06 GMT Foggy said:

Apr 20, 2017 12:17:15 GMT doktorb🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️ said:

I disagree. But you know that.

I don't see how anyone can argue otherwise now. Unless this country were to adopt the Swedish, Norwegian or (heaven forfend) American system, then the concept of fixed terms would always be incompatible with it. 

It seems that the foolishness of politicians makes it pointless! It was actually cleverly designed so that the opposition could stop an election merely by abstaining. I am still in shock that Corbyn was so keen to vote with May on this when by abstaining he could have made her look so weak and foolish..

[andrew111]

Apr 20, 2017 12:04:03 GMT carlton43 said:

All that bluster and nonsense and there it is settled.....done......no by-election just as all sensible people expected.

Also, all that bluster and nonsense over the FTPA............for what? As Richard had been at some pains to explain any PM could call an election whenever and usually it would just be a simple two-thirds vote to pass it with most of the opposition voting for it because they wanted one or were fearful of looking scared and incompetent.

Many of you get obsessed with utter trivia and irrelevant detail, whilst the grown-ups solve it and move on. That is why a number of you are so spectacularly unsuccessful in your lives. Pay attention to the IMPORTANT and only the important.

Oh! Why do I bother?

Your self congratulatory tirade was going so well Carlton until you equated the idiotic Labour Party with "any opposition". An opposition leader with the slightest political instinct would have forced this issue into a confidence vote and May would have entered the election looking out of control of events. Can you see that though?