Thread 41 How many more MPs will Sunak lose?

[BIossomtoes]

New thread. I took the liberty - the old one was at 999!

It's a bad look that Afghan soldiers who helped the UK and fled Afghanistan might be sent to Rwanda.

I've no idea. I was just using numbers for representation and chose a low number to represent what could happen if people did start not wanting a school over certain issues .

It was more to demonstrate how schooling isn't really as much as a choice as it's made out.

You get preference. But they can only allocate where there's space.

So are the Tories getting rid of the HoL then? I assumed they were keen on it.

Or are they suggesting it must nod through all legislation - I imagine that would be super handy for the next government.

No I think they are just so desperate now they'll say anything to reassure people a plane to Rwanda will be taking off.

How are they going to reward their donors without peerages?

Worse than that JessS1990, its rumoured that not only did she used to be poor but she is actually a socialist. Imagine that. Striding around with head held high-instead of looking at Leadsom, Truss and Dorries and admiring and emulating them. Pinko. Can't trust em.

I love the idea of completely secular schools, but if a Michaely style school had been my only option where I am, I'd have bloody well home educated.

Does anyone know how long the parliamentary ping pong about Rwanda can go on?

The ping pong is set to continue a little bit longer, from Sky News

Lords set to try and pass further changes to Rwanda bill

After the MPs rejected all four Lords amendments to the government's flagship Rwanda bill moments ago, our chief political correspondent Jon Craig has shed some light on what will happen next.

He says: "Opponents of the Rwanda bill [in the House of Lords] are going to attempt to force another round of ping pong."

He explains that today is round three of ping pong - and it could be set to continue even longer.

"I'm told that Labour peers are going to be whipped to join in with crossbenchers, bishops, and others to vote for two of these four amendments, or similar ones, and send them back to the House of Commons."

The two amendments these peers want to force through are:

• That the safety of Rwanda be conditional on the implementation of the treaty, and reports from the Independent Monitoring Committee on the implementation of the treaty;
• For those who have worked with the UK military or government overseas, such as Afghan interpreters, to be exempted from removal to Rwanda.

Jon explains that if peers vote in favour of these two amendments, the Rwanda bill will not return to the Commons tonight - but rather on Monday.

This means "the prime minister will not get his wish to get this bill on the statute book this week".

I can't help but wonder where all those donor lords were when their party needed them?

A few had to give up their seat so that they could pay tax abroad

I can't find any reason that suggests the Lords will vote differently on another occassion.
Although if all Tory peers turned up they could have enough votes to get it passed.

It’s not a bad look, it’s an absolute scandal.

Yah, somebody will start telling Sunak to use the Parliament Act next to get it through. The next constitutional cluster mess with the Conservatives is yet to come

How the fuck are we going to request the help of interpreters and other more local specialists in the future after the truly shitty way we've behaved towards those that have previously worked with us(and I include the crap way we bailed out of Afghanistan)?

This is so short sighted and will only serve to lower the UKs standing in the world.

I’m watching Michael Portillo bimbling around the coast and reminiscing about how he was the oiliest, untrustworthy Tory back in the day. Oh how times have changed!

IIRC correctly it operates on a lottery system rather than a distance from school admissions criteria so that may explain the wide catchment unless they have changed criteria.

will only serve to lower the UKs standing in the world.

Is that even possible?

Well the actual warmth of human contact did him some good. I used to like his double act with Diane Abbott on This Week with Andrew Neil

Portillo was surprised at the amount of loathing he'd managed to engender as a Tory MP and only fully recognised it when the cheering crowds booted him out in the 97 GE. Current braggarts should take note.

We’re already treating the Afghans like shit. It’s why Afghans who helped us are having to come over in small boats or looked to the EU or USA to get them out and house them. Even if their help put their lives and the lives of their family at risk under the Taliban after we left.

The ship has already sailed on this making us look bad.

The Tories wanted to do that when Brexit wasn't going their way remember? Then they realised they could just fill it with their cronies, which hasn't worked either.

Does that apply to a policy that wasn't in the manifesto?

I think I am going to have to make a list of which Tory MPs I will have a sip of something for when they are kicked out, else if I did it for each of them that is loathsome I might be in trouble.

@JessS1990 - I assume a weasel argument about the overall control of immigration as mentioned in the manifesto may be made to support this potential action. Sunak is desperate

Would be a brave move to decide the second chamber should be elected when they are potential electoral wipeout in the lower chamber.

Hilariously funny if they accidentally got themselves wiped out in both though. Even if it is bad for politics.