Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Blair looses his first vote in commons

  1. Nov 9, 2005 #1
    ohh dear... I hope his fall from grace is a dignified one.


    IMO he will try and right the wrongs of the Iraq war and try to be remember for something else, as he slowly looses his grip on goverment...

    Will Brown be better for Labour, doubtful..

    (Does anyone even know what I am talking about :-) )
  2. jcsd
  3. Nov 9, 2005 #2


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    I heard about this on my way home. Is losing one vote really such a terrible thing, though? What's his support like from voters?
  4. Nov 9, 2005 #3
    Supposedly the biggest loss since WWII...

    Considering what was trying to get pushed through, it is a very Big vote to loose.. All the big guns were back in the UK, and were cracking the wip on the Labour Back benchers, but didnt matter, Blair lost this vote by over 30 in the negative..

    The Papers will be all over it tomorrow anyway, watch this space
  5. Nov 9, 2005 #4


    User Avatar

    As Blair has already declared he will be handing over to a successor (Gordon Brown is 99.9% certain) he will not personally have to face the electorate again.
    IMO having taken a lot of flak for the bombings in London which the press and several senior gov't members linked to the war in Iraq he is ensuring that if there is another attrocity he can share the blame around by claiming it is the fault of those who voted against allowing the police to question suspects for 90 days without charge. Although seeing as how the previous bombers hadn't been questioned for 30 secs between them it's hard to see what difference it would make in preventing terrorist attacks.
    This defeat did not come as a surprise to him. The whips would have told him how the votes were stacking up long before the debate. He could easily have ageed to a compromise to the 28 days (which was what eventually passed ) but clearly decided the embarassment of his first defeat in the commons was a reasonable price for being able to say "told you so" in the future.
    The danger I see in giving the police 90 days is that it will be abused.
    As an example in Ireland under the emergency powers act passed to combat the IRA, suspects could be arrested under section 4 of the offences against the state act which reduced their right to counsel and allows them to be questioned for 14 days without charge.
    This sounds fine in theory but in practice if somebody is arrested for kicking their dog they are charged under section 4 just in case the police want to hold onto them for a while.
    The same has happened to a lesser extent in England under the prevention of terrorism act.
    The other problem is that these acts are brought in supposedly temporarily but have a nasty habit of staying on the statute book.
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2005
  6. Nov 9, 2005 #5
    imo. the trouble with being able to hold people for any length of time with no charge or evidence of potential crime is that its often used on innocent people that act or look guilty based only on bias.
  7. Nov 10, 2005 #6
    yeh I wouldnt bet against Blair doing this, he's a shrew customer
  8. Nov 10, 2005 #7
    That implies that he expects more successful attacks.
  9. Nov 10, 2005 #8


    User Avatar

    I'm sure there will be. Despite Britain's years of experience and intelligence gathering the IRA still managed to penetrate Britain's defences at will and I imagine the muslim extremists are no less resourceful. :frown:
  10. Nov 10, 2005 #9
    For someone who has gone so long without losing a vote, the first loss is going to attract media attention. Major lost loads; no-one cared. But I don't think this is the real reason for the votes' importance.

    The thing people are focusing on, and the reason Howard called for Blair's resignation, is that this was pretty much only Blair's baby. Basically, he went unilateral. He ignored advice; he ignored requests for more detailed reports from the police (the real alarm bell); he even ignored his own home secretary's objections. Everyone thinks he is a knob who has not only lost touch with Europe, the British people and any sense of moral or ethical values, but has now lost touch with his own party and his own cabinet.

    There is something odd about Blair. He seems to think that if he says something, the country will believe and support him, and that he doesn't have to supply evidence. That's why he was a fool with this vote. He said what he wanted; he said what the police wanted; and he showed that the police had said that they wanted it. To him, that should be enough to pass the legislation. So when people asked for details on when and how such a law would be used, he ignored them.

    That's probably also why he tells such stupid, bare-faced obvious lies all the time too.
  11. Nov 10, 2005 #10
    Just wondering, when will Blair the Golem be finally stepping down? What is the popular guess?
  12. Nov 10, 2005 #11


    User Avatar

    My guess is within 6 months. He has some more controversial legislation coming up soon in relation to health and education and if he loses votes on that (which now seems likely) he will be forced to stand down.
  13. Nov 10, 2005 #12
    When the ID card system becomes so expensive he has to abandon it?
  14. Nov 10, 2005 #13
    I bet it's that Boy Bush he's been spending so much time hanging around with. Nothing but trouble, I tell ya.
  15. Nov 10, 2005 #14


    User Avatar

    Their 'special' relationship seems to have dulled a little lately. It's been a long while since Blair has been seen publically chumming up to his idol and as to whatever goes on behind closed doors.... well they're both adults (legally anyway). :biggrin:
  16. Nov 10, 2005 #15
    I wasn't aware that the leadership of the Labour Party was now a throne handed down by the outgoing king. I smell leadership ballot papers being burnt.
  17. Nov 10, 2005 #16
    I think the Labour party threw any semblance of internal party democracy out of the pram some time ago.

    Just some guy (member of the last major political party in Britain to form policy based on votes from the membership:wink: )
  18. Nov 10, 2005 #17
    I was once a young, idealistic and principled member of a major political party. Now I'm older, just as idealistic and principled and not a member of that political party because they now frown on these qualities.
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?

Similar Discussions: Blair looses his first vote in commons
  1. No Blair Force One? (Replies: 5)

  2. Bush loosing it (Replies: 39)