Vote of no confidence

[El Pollo Diablo]

But Johnson can't call an election just because he loses the leadership. Her Majesty is required to reject a request for dissolution in that circumstance.

Where does that requirement come from? I didn't realise there was any impediment to Johnson calling for an election?

[lpm]

Lascelles Principles.

The Queen will refuse a request from the PM to dissolve Parliament if:

- the current Parliament is still viable, i.e. a clear majority for a party. Not a muddled minority govt situation like 1979
- another PM can be found who is able to command a majority in the House for a reasonable time

It's all written down in our uncodified constitution.

[El Pollo Diablo]

Ah, yes, thanks. Interesting that the second principle has been dropped, as that'd be hard to argue if it still remained. I suppose the irony of the matter is that it would just confirm Johnson as the shittiest PM simply for forcing her madge to make a sh.tty decision.

[bjn]

Watching with grim satisfaction as Dorries throws her party under a bus with regards to COVID preparedness while having a go at Hunt.

[jimbob]

Where do we reckon to the various ranges for size of rebel vote?

Something like this?

< 100 rebels = massive victory for Johnson
< 117 = better than Theresa May
100-130 = reasonable victory for Johnson, safe for a year
130-150 = walking dead, urged to do the honorable thing (ha ha)
150-178 = immediate stabbing in the back, cabinet ministers resign
179 = wins by one vote, maximum lols
180 = kicked out (I believe there are 359 Tory MPs under the whip, although one is banned from Westminster for being a rapist? A 179-179 draw would be amusing.)

Ladbrokes odds for rebel vote:

0-49 - 66/1
50-99 - 3/1
100-149 - 15/8
150-199 - 2/1

My personal guess: 150.

The one accused of being a rapist will be voting this evening

[lpm]

That's fair enough. All the other Tory MP rapists get to vote after all.

[Stranger Mouse]

Handy thread of MP responses

https://twitter.com/johnestevens/status ... 36rUNBeIIw

[Little waster]

Man doing a tally of declarations of support for Johnson is up to 90
https://twitter.com/johnestevens/status ... G-vvIoDgag

Still a long way to go for Johnson

That's a very courageous decision of them to publicly handcuff themselves to a man covered in petrol while he is trying to spark his Zippo. Very courageous indeed.

I hope their constituents are paying close attention so they can personally reward them all at the next election.

[Aitch]

If Johnson refused to resign the Queen would almost certainly not oblige him to do so. It would be seen as a party matter

Couldn't they withdraw the party whip from him? Or throw him out of the party? What would Betty do in that case?

[El Pollo Diablo]

If Johnson refused to resign the Queen would almost certainly not oblige him to do so. It would be seen as a party matter

Couldn't they withdraw the party whip from him? Or throw him out of the party? What would Betty do in that case?

The Conservative Party constitution is interesting. There contain various matters in there which would allow some flexibility, such as:

12 There shall be established and maintained a Board of the Conservative Party (referred to in this constitution as “the Board”) which shall be the supreme decision-making body in matters of Party organisation and management. The Board shall consist of [various people, none of whom is the Leader, but] The Leader shall be invited to attend all meetings of the Board.

17 The Board shall have power to do anything which in its opinion relates to the management and administration of the Party. It shall oversee all activities within the Party and in particular be responsible for:
...
17.7 the cancellation or refusal of membership, in its absolute discretion, of any Party Member or prospective Party Member;
...
17.22 The suspension of membership or the expulsion from membership of any member whose conduct is in conflict with the purpose, objects and values of the Party as indicated in Part I Article 2 or which is inconsistent with the objects or financial well-being of an Association or the Party or be likely to bring an Association or the Party into disrepute.

77 The Board of the Party shall appoint a Compliance Officer who shall be responsible for
77.1 ensuring that the provisions of this Constitution of the Party are complied with by all members of the Party;
77.2 identifying any breach of the provisions of this Constitution;
77.3 requiring, by written warning, the member of the Party to remedy any identified breach of the provisions of the Constitution within a specified period of time;
77.4 informing the Board of any failure of a member of the Party to comply with the notice to remedy the breach provided that in relation to any matter where there is an allegation of conduct bringing or likely to bring the Party into disrepute, that matter shall not be considered by the Compliance Officer but shall be considered in accordance with Articles 80 to 89 below.
77.5 The Board may appoint a Chairman to form a disciplinary committee to assist in hearing and determining the outcome of any particular breach of this Constitution. The remit of that committee shall be determined by the Board.

78 Where the Board is informed by the Compliance Officer of any failure of a member of the Party to comply with a notice to remedy a breach of the provisions of this Constitution within the time specified in the notice, the Board may take such action as it shall think fit against the member of the Party concerned, which action shall be unlimited.
79 No Member of Parliament of either House, no Assembly or prospective Assembly Member in England or Wales, no Assembly Member or prospective Assembly Member or its equivalent in Northern Ireland, no Councillor or prospective Councillor, no Candidate or prospective Candidate, no Party Member, or applicant for membership, no Party Officer or prospective employee; shall have engaged or engage in conduct which brings or is likely to bring the Party into disrepute.

So yes, they absolutely can remove him if they want. The Board of the Conservative Party has pretty much unlimited power in that respect.

[Little waster]

In a shock turn of event JRM turns out to an odious hypocritical little sh.t.

He (JRM) said that he was wrong in December 2018 when he said that Theresa May should resign after the no-confidence vote which she won, with 63% of Tory MPs backing her and 37% not supporting her. He said that comment was his “greatest mistake” at the time because “in a democracy one is enough”.
He claimed that Johnson would be able to continue as prime minister even if he won tonight’s vote by just one vote.

I'm shocked! Shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!

[El Pollo Diablo]

Apparently Johnson just told the 22 that he'd "do it again". "It", here, being the party scandal which he "humbly apologised" for last week.

That could go down very badly indeed.

[FlammableFlower]

Apparently Johnson just told the 22 that he'd "do it again". "It", here, being the party scandal which he "humbly apologised" for last week.

That could go down very badly indeed.

Definitely of the "never apologise, never back down" class.

[jimbob]

Apparently Johnson just told the 22 that he'd "do it again". "It", here, being the party scandal which he "humbly apologised" for last week.

That could go down very badly indeed.

Deanocs take on this

https://twitter.com/BarumDean/status/15 ... gMyRMqDGCQ

[IvanV]

Jeez, DAG has gone badly wrong. That's all utter nonsense, start to finish.

If we are clear what he means, I think he might be right.

The Conservative Party constitution is interesting.

It certainly is. This is what it says about the election of leaders. It is notable for how much it doesn't say. There's nothing about no confidence votes, or 15% of MPs, or how the MP stage of leadership nominations happens before it is put to the membership. Such things are elsewhere.

RULES FOR THE ELECTION OF THE LEADER
1 The Leader shall be elected by the Party Members and Scottish Party Members.
2 A Leader resigning from the Leadership of the Party is not eligible for re-nomination in the consequent Leadership election.
Election of Leader
3 Upon the initiation of an election for the Leader, it shall be the duty of the 1922 Committee to present to the Party, as soon as reasonably practicable, a choice of candidates for election as Leader. The rules for deciding the procedure by which the 1922 Committee selects candidates for submission for election shall be determined by the Executive Committee of the 1922 Committee after consultation of the Board.
4 If there is only one candidate at the time laid down for the close of nominations, that candidate shall be declared Leader of the Party.
5 Only those Party Members and Scottish Party Members who were members of the Party from the time of the call for nominations by the Chairman of the 1922 Committee for the election of the Leader and have been members for at least three months immediately prior to the close of the ballot for the election of the Leader shall be entitled to vote.
6 A candidate achieving more than 50% of the vote among the Party Membership shall be declared elected Leader of the Party.
7 In the event of there being only one valid nomination at the close of nominations prior to the first ballot being held by the Parliamentary Party for the election of the new Leader, the election of the nominee may if so ordered by the Board be ratified by a ballot of the Party Members and Scottish Party Members to be held within one month of the close of nomination.
8 Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, the rules for the conduct of the ballot or ballots of Party Members and Scottish Party Members shall be agreed by the Board and the Executive Committee of the 1922 Committee.
9 The Chairman of the 1922 Committee, acting on behalf of the Party, shall act as Returning Officer for all stages of the election.

So here is a House of Commons briefing paper setting out more detailed rules, as determined by the party for the time being. But as EPD says, the Board can vary these when it chooses. I'm quoting this HC Briefing Paper, because I can find nothing about these more detailed rules on the Party's website, so far as I can find.

So it is there that we see that if Johnson loses the confidence vote, there is a leadership election, and he cannot stand in it. These rules were introduced in 1998. They are different rules from the ones that resulted in Anthony Meyer the "stalking horse" standing against Margaret Thatcher, a sitting leader. That can't happen under these rules.

Under the current rules of the Conservative party, there is never a contest between a standing leader and a challenger. The only scenarios are that the leader can resign, or the leader can lose a confidence vote. In neither case can they stand again, in the first case because of Rule 2 in the constitution above, in the latter case because it says so in these "for the time being" rules.

So Johnson is automatically dismissed as party leader if he loses the confidence vote, though in practice remains until the election is complete. The resignation that Johnson might refuse to give, referred to by DAG, is refusing to resign as PM, not refusing to resign as party leader. So DAG is saying that he can stay on as PM even if he is no longer party leader. DAG is saying that the Queen will not dismiss him merely if the party dismisses him as leader and he refuses to resign as PM. Because her power to dismiss him comes from the House dismissing him, not the party. LPM is saying "of course she will dismiss him at this point, because he wouldn't command the confidence of the house". But if he doesn't resign and the House doesn't actually put up and win a motion of no confidence, is she allowed to make that judgment? I think DAG is saying that she isn't. I find that plausible. And surely he couldn't have printed this if he was quite wrong on this single crucial point. It's also plausible that the Conservatives might vote against a No Confidence motion, because that would lead to a general election in an unattractive situation.

[lpm]

Are you claiming Johnson could form a government for Her Majesty, when the Tory MPs are cheering their new leader and cabinet ministers are grovelling in the hopes of keeping their job? Are you mad?

The monarch appoints as Prime Minister whoever is recommended as commanding the confidence of the House. It is simple as that. The head of state has total power to hire and fire so long as she obeys this rule. Doesn't have to be a party leader, or the leader of the largest party. Just has to be able to form Her Majesty's Government.

Or are you arguing the Tory Party in Westminster splits and the Johnsonite Party refuses to support the new Conservative Party leader?

[WFJ]

It's also plausible that the Conservatives might vote against a No Confidence motion, because that would lead to a general election in an unattractive situation.

A no confidence vote doesn't need to lead to an election if a government can be formed, does it? If the Tories have a new leader who has the House's confidence, a new government can be formed.

[El Pollo Diablo]

It's also plausible that the Conservatives might vote against a No Confidence motion, because that would lead to a general election in an unattractive situation.

A no confidence vote doesn't need to lead to an election if a government can be formed, does it? If the Tories have a new leader who has the House's confidence, a new government can be formed.

Indeed - the Lascelles Principles explicitly state that an election should not be held under those circumstances.

[jimbob]

Apparently Johnson just told the 22 that he'd "do it again". "It", here, being the party scandal which he "humbly apologised" for last week.

That could go down very badly indeed.

Deanocs take on this

https://twitter.com/BarumDean/status/15 ... gMyRMqDGCQ

Deano's

[Allo V Psycho]

Man doing a tally of declarations of support for Johnson is up to 90
https://twitter.com/johnestevens/status ... G-vvIoDgag

Still a long way to go for Johnson

That's a very courageous decision of them to publicly handcuff themselves to a man covered in petrol while he is trying to spark his Zippo. Very courageous indeed.

I hope their constituents are paying close attention so they can personally reward them all at the next election.

139 as of 10 minutes ago. Not exactly a ringing endorsement.

[monkey]

Man doing a tally of declarations of support for Johnson is up to 90
https://twitter.com/johnestevens/status ... G-vvIoDgag

Still a long way to go for Johnson

That's a very courageous decision of them to publicly handcuff themselves to a man covered in petrol while he is trying to spark his Zippo. Very courageous indeed.

I hope their constituents are paying close attention so they can personally reward them all at the next election.

139 as of 10 minutes ago. Not exactly a ringing endorsement.

Dude on the radio was suggesting that some of them might be lying too.

[lpm]

The Queen has technical power to appoint and dismiss cabinet ministers, not just prime ministers. She never needs to use her power to dismiss a minister, because such a scenario is so insane it will never happen. But it's totally clear in our constitution that the power exists.

She is required by convention to deny a request to dissolve parliament if a viable government is ready and waiting to go. That possibility was closed down during her father's reign. If 200 Tory MPs defect to Labour tomorrow, Johnson can't prevent Starmer forming a govt by asking for a dissolution.

In the current situation is trivially straightforward. A new leader of the Conservative Party will be elected. That person will command the confidence of the House (assuming a bunch of Tories don't resign the whip to become Johnsonite Party MPs). Johnson will resign and recommend to the Queen the new leader. If he refuses to resign the Queen simply dismisses him.

This is basic stuff. It would only get fun if it became a minority government.

[lpm]

My personal guess: 150.

Revised down to 143 after running detailed maths.

[El Pollo Diablo]

https://nitter.net/johnestevens/status/ ... 6266055680

Theresa May has arrived to vote in a ballgown

[temptar]

Wanted, a photo of that ball gown.