Westministenders: Oh No Not Another One. Thread that is.

[RedToothBrush]

In this edition of Westministers we play a game of ‘Where are they now?’

In June 2016 our screens were subjected to the sight of a number of particularly vocal MPs who participated in debates and stood on soap boxes to talk about the referendum.

The most noticeable of these for Leave were perhaps Boris Johnson, Michael Gove, Andrea Leadsom, Gisela Stuart, Nigel Farage, Priti Patel and Kate Hoey. For Remain it was David Cameron, George Osborne, Jeremy Corbyn, Ruth Davidson, Sadiq Khan, Nicola Sturgeon, Nick Clegg and Tim Farron.

It is starting to seem that anyone involved in campaigning either for or against Brexit in June 2016 has faced an epic battle for survival. Just how long can they last before being defeated or conceding defeat.

David Cameron’s scalp was the first to go, as he swanned off leaving everyone to clear up his mess.

Boris Johnson, who was keen to stamp his mark and pitch for the leadership by stitching up Cameron, got stitched up by Michael Gove who also lost his own bid for leadership as a result.

Johnson, of course, still lives to fight another day by getting a nice job as Theresa’s whipping boy. He’s occasionally let out by himself, but its Michael Fallon who does the ‘Grown Up Business’. He was said to be one of the last to support an early election. I can’t think why that might be.

Poor old Gove is now confined to a straight-jacket, the back benches where he’s been told to think about what he’s done like a naughty school child and a column in the Times

Andrea Leadsom was sent to a field of cows never to be seen again except to pop up for the odd cameo line shouting about ‘Jam’.

Queen Theresa also dealt with the other Conservative Leader Leave Candidate Mr Liam Fox, by shipping him off to every dodgy corner of the global to get pampered by state hostility.

Stephen Crabb simply crawled back under his rock.

The announcement of the General Election seems to be like the major soap incident episode where half the cast get killed off by a totally unrealistic disaster because their acting contracts weren’t being renewed.

The quitters and abdicators who now have legged it at the sight of a General Election are Gisela ‘Champion of the Brexit Bus’ Stuart and Nigel ‘Too chicken to be defeated for an eighth time and risk losing my nice EU pension’ Farage. George Osborne took the advice of his school teachers and had another career to fall back on when he didn’t become successful in his first choice.

Its rather starting to look like the curse of being a leading Brexiteer is to be made to disappear off the face of the earth or fuck off when the going gets tough. Have you seen Priti Patel lately? Does she even still exist? And Chris Grayling? He was convinced he was going to get chancellor when he supported May in her bid for the leadership.
Instead he got packed off transport and disappeared off the face of the earth much to the annoyance of everyone caught up in the rail strikes.

The only one who is remotely visible seems to be David Davis and is like May’s pet poodle who just tries to please his owner.

It’s almost like the only one still standing or hasn’t been banished is Kate Hoey. And the Lib Dems are trying to work on that one and make her sink beneath the waves, on board her Alan Partridge Titanic once and for all.

Conversely the visible Remainers seem to be – on the face of it - fairing rather better at the moment.

Sadiq Khan is hugely popular and actually does his job rather than fannying about on zip wires. Ruth Davidson is also well respected and apparently has saved Priti Patel’s job from abolition. If the rumours are to be believed bored with scrapping with Nicola, she might be lining herself up for ‘Big Things’ in Westminister. Cameron’s one time love interest, Nick Clegg hasn’t shaken the tarnish of the coalition but he is enjoying a new reputation as the Brexit Soothsayer and some people actually know who Tim Farron is now, which is progress. Nicola Sturgeon is of course riding high and seems to be a permanent thorn in Theresa’s side.

Jeremy ‘I’m a Remainer, honest comrades’ Corbyn is the one who seems to be something of a walking disaster area yet is also thriving with it like a zombie who just keeps going regardless of what you throw at him.

And then of course there is Queen Theresa. The Remainer. Who has crushed everyone in her party. Not just the saboteurs. Even her supposed ally Hammond and BBF Rudd have been thrown under the bus at her wimb when its suited May personally.

The General Election now sets a new scene and opportunity for new characters to emerge. Now the rats have left the ship or been put in their place.

Will May set course to the left or to the right or simply plow on like a bull in a china shop?

Anyway I’m now looking forward to the shocking soap opera moment where your favourite hero or villain gets killed off in a twist you didn’t see coming. Role on June 8th. If only to get pass the upcoming horror of the next six weeks.

Is it really the case that the conservatives haven't released any membership figures since 2013?

Can we assume the numbers are therefore bad or am i missing something?

Can we assume the numbers are therefore bad or am i missing something?

I think you can safely assume that. Is it possible that LD membership will outstrip Tory membership in this election period? And what does that do for the parties' respective abilities to organise an election campaign?

It also says something about where the different parties are getting their funding from.....

From members (who are usually but not always voters) or from ???.....

The Conservative Party doesn't seem short of money, especially at a national level

From Mike Hind on Twitter. I'm not actually sure who Mike Hind is and he can be a tad smug and full of himself but he does make a lot of interesting posts. I don't always agree with him but this is his latest.

Random thoughts on populist political purity, inspired by the new 'BUT EMAILS!!!!!!'

1 I'm often told that Tim Farron is homophibic

2 I'm also often reminded of the Liberal Democrats' volte face on tuition fees

3 Thus the argument is mounted that you shouldn't vote Liberal Democrat.

4 On Tim Farron's 'homophobia' he may or may not think gay sex is a 'sin' but I see no evidence of this in his voting record.

5 I do see in his voting record evidence of defending public officials from being forced to go against their religious beliefs.

6 That is not homophobia. That is liberalism. Protecting the individual from state authoritarianism.

7 I am devoutly atheist & also a liberal. Whatever Farron thinks is HIS business. What he does is OUR business.

8 If he does (& he says he doesn't) think gay sex is a sin, that's his business UNLESS he threatens anyone's right to have gay sex

9 That is the only point at which his thoughts would become relevant to me. His voting record is consistent with liberal principles

10 Farron's voting record is explained by an LGBQT thinker @misssb here miss-s-b.dreamwidth.org/1825800.html

11 As I see it, if you object to him thinking something (but not acting upon it) you're being a bit 'thought crimey'.

12 'Thought crimeyness' is a big part of why although people identify me as left wing, I don't really belong on the left.

13 Because, for me, the authoritarian tendencies of the left are almost as big a turn off as bigoted small c conservatism

14 Incidentally this reminds me of why my views on the idiotic 'ban the burqa' movement also lead to my excommunication from the left

15 I'm certain the burqa has no place on the steets of a western liberal democracy (thought crime!). But nor do laws that would ban it

16 This is why liberals are attacked from the left and the right. Because life just isn't as simple as the left & right want it to be

17 So, onto the Liberal Democrats' historic volte face on tuition fees. Yes, it's a blot on their record.

18 It also was not a Liberal Democrat aim. It was a dodgy trade-off with a partner that WANTED tuition fees. It was a mistake.

19 But in the populist world of left & right purity is everything. Leading your party to glorious uncompromising defeat is applauded

20 Even though you end up helping no one, by failing to get elected, you have at least remained PURE OF THOUGHT

21 Now can we crack on with tackling the real enemy? The authoritarian power-grabbing moral vacuum known as the Conservatives?

22 The Prime Minister who said 9 times 'no election', while secretly plotting an election.

23 The Prime Minister who IGNORES the 48% and the Labour leader who cravenly whips his MPs to help her

Mike Hind - saboteur‏
@MikeH_PR

24 And stop with the BUT EMAILS!!!!!!!!!! nonsense. Because look where that got them in America, yeah?

He makes a lot of good points. Especially about populism and purity.

BUT if a politician is not going to act based on what they believe then where does that leave the question of trust ESPECIALLY when they were prepared to enter dodgy deals and compromise on the core liberal principle of access to education.

What did they get in return? A referendum on AV they were never going to win and a massive increase in the personal allowance which resulted in erosion of support for families and the tax base. The Tories justify their claims about the rich paying all the tax and then it is only a small step to say those who pay have more right to a say in decision making. Erode the tax base=erode democracy.

swedish that's kind of where I'm at too. There's a convenient forgetting that the Tories and Labour also have blood on their hands with tuition fees too.

howabout many people in not even just public roles are able to separate their personal views from performing a function. Like most of local government, especially at higher politically neutral roles.

Is it really the case that the conservatives haven't released any membership figures since 2013?

Yes I've seen several places comment on this and how they couldn't get more recent data.

One of the reasons they don't have that info is in part because of how the Conservatives manage their own membership. They do not have a centralised data base. The reality is that the party themselves only have a rough idea of their membership numbers too because of this because membership is managed primarily by local associations.

The general thought is membership is in decline though.

Interesting article on Party Funds. Labour was £10 million ahead of the Conservatives in 2015 at £51 million. LibDems raised £8 million and SNP £6 million.

labourlist.org/2016/08/labour-becomes-party-with-largest-income-after-50m-boost-last-year/

Labour and Conservative are fairly transparent on membership fees, but SNP need you to apply before they tell you afaics while LibDems have a small minimum fee with a suggested amount of 4 times higher. Just been looking out of curiosity.

Not clear how many cream tea fundraisers the Tory members are obligated to hold or how union subs to Labour work these days. My Mum donated to Labour through her Union most of her working life while delivering Tory leaflets. She would never join a political party.

One visible indication is the lack of attendees at Conservative Party conferences and the average age of those that do go.

Media cameras are usually very carefully placed to provide an illusion impression of more numbers. The two ladies in Union flag jackets at the recent conference was also a good distraction not sure that was intentional

I did wonder if it might be something like that with their membership red. But then i think thought ... what sort of modern organisation wouldn't have a centralised database of their membership in this day and age? And then i thought... Oh yeah, it's the Tories

So who funded Leave? Why were DUP used to siphon Leave funding? Who's funding the ERG and CRG?

Very mysterious funding of hard brexit which is now official conservative party policy.

Who paid for all those illegal election expenses and the battle buses in 2015?

There are more questions than answers on conservative and leave funding.

Other 'politicians' compromised by Russian loans:

MLP just got a bunch of new Russian loans.
Kushner is up to his doo dahs in Russian loans.

Like Blair said on the world at one, and people have said here on this thread, a million times, it's few rich old men holding the country to ransom.

I wonder if they're even that rich, and if they aren't who is.

Good little article here on costs of membership for the different parties:

www.theguardian.com/money/2015/jun/13/party-politics-cost-getting-involved-pitfalls

A couple of years out-of-date (so I think the Labour membership fees in particular are out of date as it doesn't include the "associate membership" (?) that I believed allowed you to vote for Corbyn in the recent Leadership elections) but as far as I can recollect, the SNP fees haven't changed.

Scottish National Party
How much does it cost? A minimum of £12 a year, but the default option on the SNP website is £60.

Any concessions? Anyone who doesn’t earn a wage, and pensioners can pay as little as £5 a year.

Age restrictions: You must be over 15. Younger applicants can join as associate members but cannot vote or stand for election in any party position.

Do you have to live in the UK? No.

Can you vote on party policies? Yes, at the party conference.

Wrt to Tory party funding, the Conservatives have always relied on high-roller donors who will chuck six- or seven-figure sums in their direction. Who can forget the Conservative Party auction a few years ago where a Russian oligarch (and former Putin adviser) paid £160k to play tennis with Boris and Dave? And more recently, there have been donors walking away because of the party's embrace of a hard Brexit (Andrew Cook, £1.2 million, for example).

This article from Conservative Home is interesting - it also claims that TM wanted to cancel the Conservative Party ball because it was so bad for party image but fund-raising arguments won out.

It is certainly the case that donations dipped sharply after the EU referendum, falling from £4,379,695.05 in Quarter Two of 2016 to £2,919,316.93 in Quarter Three, the most recent quarter published by the Electoral Commission. That’s a disappointing figure – more so if you discount the £57,529.17 which came from public funds.

The membership aren't expected to pony up for the big election expenses, just deliver leaflets, hold the occasional garden fete so they all get to rub shoulders with one another and, more recently, turn up and keep shtum when Dear Leader descends upon them.

LDs pay a levy (before tax i believe) on any wage they make as an elected representative to the party. This is for both local level and council level.

This is another source of funding for them.

They have a lot more trouble raising funds than the other parties and in the last election lost a lot of money because they didn't get their deposits back.

I think I've seen that they have raised £500,000 through donations since the GE announcement, which doesn't seem a lot but relatively speaking is a lot for the party in a very short space of time. They have to do a lot more begging for money usually than Labour and the Conservatives.

They in theory are less subject to lobbying just because they have less money from big donors but in theory could be more at risk from it, if that were to change too, though their structure of how policy is set by members does reduce that risk to a degree too.

The issue of funding is an important one though and i wish more was made of it as it's a another key part of democracy.

pretty Tories would argue their members are too busy keeping the economy going to attend conference

woman I am surprised Labour is pushing as hard as they are on the Battle Bus question as the indications are that ALL the parties could be tarred with the same brush if it was worth the bother.

Howabout Aye right

Only one party has (30 ?) people facing the prospect of prosecution
No evidence that the police, CPS etc are particularly biased against the Tories.

If anything, with the current Tory attitude that dissent means you are a saboteur, I'd say investigating and prosecuting Tory electoral malfeasance is not a good career move for public servants.

From what I've observed over several GEs, there are occasionally 1 or 2 constituencies where a party is careless about expenses
(e.g. I remember Norman St Stevas. Funny that it's so often a Tory)

However the Tory actions in the 2015 GE was far larger scale and seemed planned.
Apparently they got away with it on a much smaller scale in 2010, so decided they could get away with much more in 2015

I'm completely against making manifesto commitments binding, because a govt must be allowed to adapt to a changing situation.
The voters at the next GE have the say on whether that was a betrayal.

Regarding lies / errors of fact, that should be where a free independent press / media comes in, to highlight these and shame those responsible.

Unfortunately, although the UK is not normally subject to official govt censorship, the ownership of much of it by billionaire oligarchs means most of the media is not independent

The BBC is intimidated by being dependent on its licence fee.
High time it was allowed to sell ads as another source of funding.

I read the Guardian despite it's many annoying characteristics because although it is not neutral at least it is not the mouthpiece of a billionaire owner.
One of the reasons that the rightwingers slag it off so much.
I wish there was also a similarly independent paper on the right.

This little exchange from last night, somewhat interesting.

Jimmy Wales @jimmy_wales
I see that only a LibDem (@libdemkeith) is standing against @jeremycorbyn in Islington North. The area was 75% remain. Interesting.

Keith Angus‏*@LibDemKeith*

Remain vote was 78.4% in this constituency. These people are seriously unhappy with Corbyn. All to play for

Jimmy Wales‏**@jimmy**_wales
Follow me so I can DM you?

He was referring to who has been entered as a candidate on Wikipedia, rather than who is going to stand eventually.

(The above exchange was later followed by the Greens saying they were going to stand a candidate and they had more change in Islington North).

The exchange is interesting because of who Jimmy Wales is. He is one of the founders of Wikipedia. He is American but lives in London. He is married to Tony Blair's former diary secretary and has two daughters. He was thought of as a Labour sympathiser and offered help to Ed Miliband with his social media strategy in 2015 but was turned down.

You tell me why he might be pretty interested in contacting a candidate standing against Jeremy Corbyn...

I'd like some sort of independent fact checker too. And something to be done if politicians repeatedly make a false claim, like the big red bus of lies. I'm all for forgiving a 'mistake' or a 'misspeak' by a politician, but not repeated abuse of alternative facts.

It'd solve a whole heap of problems if JC failed to retain his seat . I suppose some of the party would try to find him someone to step down from a safe seat to make way for him but, given his popularity with his parliamentary colleagues, that could be quite a task. (I know I'm in fantasy land but let me dream awhile...)