Blair will pay for this at the next election

[Thurston Howell IV]

Clifford Williams, helps run a pensioners group, where Kenneth Bigley's fate dominated last week's meeting. "There are 130 of us and it was on everybody's lips," he said.

The retired construction engineer, who like Bigley spent time working in the Middle East, said he was angered by the cruel nature of the kidnappers but also by British Prime Minister Tony Blair, whose government has repeatedly said it will not negotiate with the kidnappers.

"How can he say he won't negotiate with terrorists? What's he been doing in Northern Ireland?" said the 75-year-old, referring to talks between the government and Northern Irish parties last week.


http://www.gulf-news.com/Articles/World2.asp?ArticleID=133261

[fedsron2us]

1. Sadly, for the Bigley family

there is oil in Iraq but not in Northern Ireland. Blair has his orders. He knows better than not to obey.

[Tempest]

2. Labour Government Hits Rock Bottom in Poll

A poll for tomorrow’s News of the World put Labour on just 28% as it goes into what will probably be its last annual conference before a general election in the spring, one point behind the Liberal Democrats on 29% and three behind the Conservatives on 32%.

http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=3546519

[AndyTiedye]

7. Does This Mean the UK Gets the Tories Back for Another 30 Years?

[VegasWolf]

3. No problemo! * will loan them our "voting machines" n/t

[FlemingsGhost]

4. Two things: 1. English are the terrorists in "N. Ireland."

2. Bigley was in a war zone. He ignored various threats (and advice from friends and family members,) to immediately leave the country.

The company he was contracted from, Gulf Supplies and Commercial Services, operates out of the United Arab Emirates. The U.S. State Dept.'s very cozy pal, UAE.

[autorank]

5. What happened to Alan Prices impeachment motion? n/t/

[muriel_volestrangler]

6. From the legal opinion on British impeachment:

http://www.impeachblair.org/Legal_Opinion_final_22.09.04.pdf

Question 3: Can the Speaker refuse to accept a motion and supporting proofs? What are the Speaker’s Options?
23. Any member may move a motion, possibly but not necessarily supported by a speech. The rules governing notice of motions are set out in the latest edition of Erskine May.
24. Erskine May notes that the Speaker may refuse “to propose the question upon motions and amendments which are irregular”. A direct and clear notice of motion of impeachment of the Prime Minister would be necessary in order for the motion not to be ruled to be irregular. Early day motions (if this is the route that is chosen) should not generally exceed 250 words. The motion should not contain unbecoming expressions, infringe the House’s rules, or be otherwise irregular.

Question 4: If the Speaker can and does refuse to accept a motion and proofs what, if any, remedy is available to MPs?
25. A motion goes first to the Clerk at the Table. If it is refused, the Member is informed and has the right to refer the matter to the Speaker. If the Speaker upholds the Clerk’s opinion, the Member is entitled to see the Speaker to argue his or her case further. If the Member is still dissatisfied, then he or she can raise the matter in the House by way of a motion.
26. According to the leading scholarly work on the proceedings of Parliament, “ny member may give notice, and have it printed on the Order Paper … almost any motion on any subject”, with all that is being required is that the motion be expressed in proper parliamentary language and be a “proper subject for debate”.
Question 5: If he must accept the motion and proofs and he does so what must the Commons do before deciding whether the mover of the motion should go to the bar of the House of Lords?
27. After a motion has been agreed to by the House of Commons, the mover is “instructed to go to the House of Lords and impeach the offender of high crimes and misdemeanours and acquaint the Lords that the Commons ‘will, in due time, exhibit particular articles against him, and make good the same’”. Such a motion may be put more quickly than its proposer desires: under Standing Order No 29 (power of Chair to propose question), “when a Member is in the course of making a motion or moving an amendment at any stage of proceedings on a bill, a Member rising in his place may claim to move ‘That the question be now proposed’ and, unless it appears to the Chair that the motion is an abuse of the rules of the House, that question shall be put forthwith by the Chair. It is not debatable.”

which seems, to me, to say that an MP can get the impeachment motion started in the House of Commons, as long as it is expressed properly (unless the Speaker thinks it is not 'a proper subject for debate' - if he decides this, I wonder if a vote of no confidence in the Speaker could then be proposed - I would expect something of the sort could be done). However, another MP can then force a vote on it immediately, cutting short any debate. So all that would be achieved in the end might be a vote, rather than a debate. Realistically, no-one expects Blair to lose the vote in the Commons, so the process may not achieve much in the end.

[autorank]

9. Thanks! n/t

[AmanAplanKerry]

8. What's he been doing in Northern Ireland

I have not followed the NI conflict but has a group in Northern Ireland been threatening innocents with beheading unless Blair gives in to some demand? Is Cliff asking Blair to give in to the terrorist demands here? It's not really an option that I can see happening.

[T_i_B]

11. The Good Friday agreement

Blair has been negociating with all sides to acheive peace in Northern Ireland. IMHO it's actually his greatest achievement.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=191x382

[AP]

13. If the ONLY think Bush did as president was to stop supporting peace in NI

and to invite Ian Paisley to the WH on St Pat's day, Bush would still go to hell for eternity.

[T_i_B]

10. Get real. Labour will be elected again under Blair

We've been mulling over the likely results of the next election in the UK forum, and this is the article I posted down there on the subject.

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,9115,1303995,00.html

Up here, reports an East Midlands Labour official, we mostly still approve of Tony Blair, some of us strongly. A few of the members can't stand him. We had another resignation just last week, he says. On the other hand, we're also recruiting new members again. He's fairly confident Labour can retain this marginal seat.

Immersed in the passions of the briefing war, it is sometimes hard to believe that the Labour party, never mind the country, is full of people who are far less exercised by who's up and who's down at Westminster. But this is, nevertheless, the case. Among the constituency optimists and the pessimists alike, the more common view is a plague on both your houses.

The view from the constituencies can deceive, of course. Members tend to be loyalists. They don't like trouble and they hate the talk of a coup. Yet even among MPs, where the disgruntlement is probably stronger than at the grassroots, there is hesitation. It's not going to happen, so why waste time on it, is one extremely common view. If it did happen, it would be bloodier than we expect, says one northern candidate, so it's not worth it. It would probably be good for my chances but I don't think it's right, says a sitting MP.

In spite of the bitterness of the past days and weeks, the perhaps boring truth remains that more unites Blair and Brown than divides them. Their ideological differences have been absurdly exaggerated. Any idea that Brown would have behaved differently over Iraq is pie in the sky. Any idea that Brown has more interest than Blair in the unions' call for the return of secondary picketing is for the birds. Brown is as much a believer as Blair in competition, the reduction of state subsidies and market flexibility

[AP]

12. Wages up. Unemployment down. A message that embraces a lot of people.

A serious committment to building up wealth in the middle class. A record of building up wealth in the bottom two quintiles at a greater rate than the top three.

I don't see how he can lose the next election. Especially if Kerry wins.