Rumours going around that Cameron has been summoned to the 1922 committee tomorrow. Thats not good news for any Tory leader at the best of times.
Rumours going around that Cameron has been summoned to the 1922 committee tomorrow. Thats not good news for any Tory leader at the best of times.
Idiot, whatever else Murdoch may have done, he's 80 years old and doesn't deserve common assault.
Actually, he does deserve it, but the guy is STILL an idiot, because this helps Murdoch and takes some of the pressure off him.Originally Posted by XenosisReaper
if you honestly believe that then please remove yourself from the gene pool.
What is this? Some kind of Tory Star Chamber?
[Nyan Infraction] "Winning at all costs, costs everything" - Me, just now. [Nyan Infraction]
The 1922 Committee is the name for the backbench tory MPs as a collective. Frontbech ministers are explicitely banned from voting, and until this year couldn't even attend the meetings unless invited. The 1922 to all intents and purposes runs the party. They direct the election of senior posts within the party and handle all leadership matters. They're analogous to labour's Parliamentary Labour Party and National Executive Council, just rolled into one.
It's worrying for any tory leader to be called to face the comittee because it takes a mere 15% of memberss to sign a motion to trigger a vote of confidence, which at this point is a mere 30 or so MPs. Normally this would be electoral suicide for a sitting government, but the complicating factor is any change of leadership from the tories, in the context of a coalition government, would almost guarantee a snap general election on grounds of breach of the agreement. It's not staggeringly outlandish to imagine there are some on the tory right who could see a snap election under a different leader as good for the party.
Still all just rumour and theorycraft and stupidly unlikely, though. I've not seen the 1922 committee rumour anywhere, and the Graun would usually be on such a rumour like a bad case of herpes.
Last edited by elmicker; July 19 2011 at 06:35:08 PM.
I preferred AEdwards (fuck your first letter) idea
Technically already done due to the vasectomy. I shall be sure to warn you if it's reversed however ^^
Unlucky, son. Or is he?.Jonnie Marbles girlfriend @pageantmalarkey has just changed her Twitter profile: 'Not funny. Not clever. Not your girlfriend.'
Two birds with one stone so to speak!
So in the end politicians couldn't ask the fun questions because of "police investigation" so it made the Murdochs regain terrain in this battle. Retarded.
It says something when the most apt questioning besides Watson was coming from Louise Mensch, who writes "chick lit" (read: thinly veiled woman porn) for a living. It's mostly because the culture, media and sport committee is a joke.
I dunno, aside from the pie idiot I saw two people who consider their job to be meeting prime ministers and being protected by their dad. Murdoch owning so many shares in news corp makes him difficult to replace but it looks very likely to happen.
Agreed. Also says something when Tom Watson was trying to get to what must've been his serious point and he's cut off by the chairman. Bring on the judicial inquiry.
Beeb
Well atleast its more than twitter twattle.When bloodless coups come about in dictatorships, often it's when the head of government is away on a foreign visit.
But democracies bring their own dangers for absent political leaders.
If David Cameron had not trekked to Africa, he may as well have hired the vast illuminated advertising space in Piccadilly Circus and adorned it with the legend "government in crisis -official".
But no sooner had he departed than some of his own leading backbenchers were whispering that it looked like he was running away.
Chancellor George Osborne was meant to address the restless membership of the influential 1922 committee of backbench MPs on Monday, but the meeting was scrapped - with members settling for nothing less than an encounter with the prime minister himself on Wednesday.
Labour has been on the front foot, but for that very reason restlessness might not turn to revolt as the Conservatives see the logic in closing ranks.
Febrile atmosphere
But a previous Conservative prime minister, Harold Macmillan, was right to warn of the hazards of "events, dear boy".
It might not take much for some backbenchers to change their view that, grudgingly, David Cameron is an asset - to seeing him as a potential liability.
The outgoing Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson has already taken a pop at the prime minister and may do so again at the Home Affairs Select Committee later.
When the Murdochs and Rebekah Brooks go before the culture, media and sport committee, some members will be intent on asking questions about Andy Coulson, David Cameron's former communications director, in an attempt to bring the crisis closer to the door of number 10.
Now the febrile atmosphere may dissipate.
But as David Cameron touches down on Tuesday evening, he will find that the bookies are taking bets that he will be gone -permanently - by the weekend.
Far fetched nonsense of course - but a few weeks ago the loss of the country's senior police officer, the resignation of the chief executive of a major newspaper group, the closure of the bestselling Sunday tabloid, and the death of a whistleblower in the hacking scandal would have seemed unthinkable.
So those disgruntled Tory backbenchers will be hoping the prime minister can swiftly get off the back foot.
shame it wasnt a grenade. not for murdoch but for that stupid author woman who is now a MP
Ok can someone explain exactly what this committee thing is supposed to be exactly?
Is this the brit equivilent to a Congressional hearing or is it much lower on the totem pole?
Also, if there is an ongoing police investigation, why are they holding a committee right now? Or is this more of a fact finding thing?
Third, if this phone hacking was so prevelent within the UK media, will all of the media CEO's have to go through this?
And fourth, what kind of sentence or ruling can this committee hand out? Is it civil only and they pull his licenses or something?
Was watching this with some co-workers at lunch today. Not sure if it was a replay or live but we saw the shaving cream incident. Everyone's opinion of your cops dropped a few dozen levels watching the guy just walk right up to Murdoch considering how emotionally charged a lot of Brits are getting over this thing. Surprised someone hasn't tried to take a hammer to the guy with such lax security.
wouldnt have happened if he had a gun amirite?
It depends. Committees always sit, they're not specially called, and they usually handle administrative shite, hammering out the fine wording of bills relevant to their area and acting as parliament's representatives in relevant issues. They've got no power at all, as everything is held by the commons as a whole or delegated to a minister. They report to parliament and act on behalf of parliament. Committee hearings are usually for the presentation/clarification of reports, or for queries over the operation of the police, the armed forces, the civil service and whathaveyer. Members of the public being called before the committee in a role other than expert testimony is rare.
They're doing it now because a committee hearing is the fastest way to get things in the open. Lying to the committee is, technically, a crime, and it all goes on the record and sets the stage for the later judge-led formal inquiry, which will be under oath and will probably call most, if not all, major media executives. While the committee hearing can take place, in theory, without prejudicing the criminal proceedings, the inquiry will have to wait until october 2011, when bail is up and prosecutions begin, at the very earliest to get underway in public. It'll likely be 2013, 2014 before anything serious happens there.
As said, the committee can't actually do anything on its own, and have no power, but they represent parliament and are therefore extremely influential, especially when a matter is so public and so charged. That's why when the murdochs initially turned down the invitiation to the hearing, the committee formally summoned them. Even though no one had any idea if the summons had any legal power [it probably didn't, even for brooks and james, british citizens both], they obeyed it on the grounds that playing pissing games with an elected dictatorship with absolute public backing on an issue isn't the smartest thing to do.
Any powers to strip murdoch of broadcasting licenses, or to impose fines lie with the regulator, Ofcom, and also probably with whatever minister is responsible for the area, but they also can't act before the criminal proceedings are through. What makes this little bit of politidrama more interesting is that the tory government, with murdoch's backing, have tried to enact a plan that may as well have been written by murdoch to completely de-tooth Ofcom, as well as trying to scale back the BBC and making it easier to monopolise the media. When the inquiry kicks off this is likely to be a serious point of contention. It's the main reason Cameron has done everything in his power to avoid this issue, but that has majorly backfired for him; he's taken a serious personal polls hit and has been summoned before his own party to answer questions.
Committee hearings are open to the public, and it stretched over five hours. People come and go all the time, and it's a working office building. Regardless, the hearing took place in Portcullis House, which has far from lax security. X-ray machines and metal detectors on the entrace and it's pass-only outside of the ground floor.Was watching this with some co-workers at lunch today. Not sure if it was a replay or live but we saw the shaving cream incident. Everyone's opinion of your cops dropped a few dozen levels watching the guy just walk right up to Murdoch considering how emotionally charged a lot of Brits are getting over this thing. Surprised someone hasn't tried to take a hammer to the guy with such lax security.
Last edited by elmicker; July 20 2011 at 03:38:40 AM.
To be fair, they don't really need heavy security judging by how Murdoch's wife (woman in pink, afaik) went for pie guy's face like that.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks