A former Conservative MP under investigation by the police over a rape allegation returned to Parliament last week to vote for a ban on transgender conversion therapy, The Telegraph can reveal.
Crispin Blunt’s decision to return to vote in the Commons for the first time since October is likely to reignite a fierce debate about whether MPs accused of sexual offences should be banned from the parliamentary estate.
Is he considered such a danger to the public that he’s on remand? No?
Therefore he is merely that, someone accused and not, in any way, guilty of anything. So, of course he cannot be banned from either the estate or voting.
Jeez, this isn’t difficult.
But, but, the feelz!
All MPs are a danger to the public
Mr Blunt returned to the Commons to vote for a private member’s Bill which would have banned conversion practices aimed at changing someone’s sexual orientation or to change them from being transgender. It failed to make progress after it was talked out by MPs opposed to the measure.
As an aside I find myself increasingly opposed to the practice of talking out (effectively a shorter version of the filibuster) to prevent a vote and therefore consigning private member bills to room 101. An even slightly partial speaker (surely not) exerts enormous power to block such legislation needing only to call one appropriate gobshite out of 650 highly qualified candidates. People often criticise the paltry numbers of members present for such “debates” without mentioning the salient fact that if 100 or more can be bothered to show up the MP proposing the bill can close the debate and request a vote – which is at least the first step on the ladder.
I may have misunderstood the procedure here so hopefully someone can put me right as needed.
’Crispin Blunt’s decision to return to vote in the Commons for the first time since October is likely to reignite a fierce debate …’
Pure wish fulfilment by the Teletubbygraph there. Who will care amongst the men and women on the Clapham omnibus, I wonder?
Lets accuse all MP’s of sexual offences so they should all be banned from the parliamentary estate.
I’ve just been reading Blunt’s Wiki page. He’s definitely guilty of being an MP. Hanging’s too good for him.
NB there’s no such thing as “transgender conversion therapy” and this is actually intended to allow the authorities to fit parents up for hate crimes if they don’t go along with their child’s “transition”.
I disagree. It should be extremely difficult to pass any legislation. Otherwise we just get an eu-style sausage factory of 1000s of stupid, intrusive and counterproductive laws every year.
Perhaps it’s working in the meeja that gives them the feeling that if they want something to stop, they just need to write or say that. Or perhaps it’s working in close proximity to politicians who certainly think that if they pass a law the thing they desire to happen will occur, as though it’s a magic lamp they’ve rubbed instead of just their egos.
Julia, I wonder just how many people actually travel on the Clapham omnibus nowadays given the murderous predilections of our high melanin content population in the neighbourhood or the religious diversity providers desire to blow the things up?
Just trying to get my head around this.
So, if I go to the doctor and say “I feel like a girl and I want to be a girl” the doctor can say “fine, let’s cut your cock off”.
But if I go to the doctor and say “I feel like a girl but I don’t want to feel like a girl” the doctor can’t treat my (self-acknowledged) delusion? But can, presumably, say “let’s cut your cock off”. And, I guess, tell me I am transphobic for not wanting to go through with it.
Have I understood this correctly? MP ‘under investigation’ for being a wrong’un of the private parts genre returns to the HoC after an absence of four or five months to vote in favour of legislation promoting unpleasantness to private parts?
Julia/Grist The Man on the Clapham Omnibus (this would hold for women too) would find their journey disrupted by all the police tape at the top of Clapham High Street thanks to an act of vibrancy outside The Belle Vue on Friday afternoon.
BiFR
Your interpretation might be consistent with Suella being concerned that if this sort of nonsense had ever become law she could be found guilty of telling her son “no dear, of course a boy cannot be a girl” (or whatever it was).
On the contrary, there absolutely *is* such a thing as transgender conversion therapy, and the intention of these ghastly people is to make it mandatory. How else should we interpret the use of surgery to mitigate a mental condition?
a private member’s Bill which would have banned conversion practices aimed at changing someone’s sexual orientation or to change them from being transgender
But shooting confused kids full of drugs and then cutting their tits/cock&balls off is just dandy.
Honkety-honk. Not only do will live in Clown World, but it’s the scary clown from It.