The Independent has been told that MPs – including ministers – considering rebelling against the government’s welfare reforms on Tuesday next week have been threatened with losing the whip and even, according to two sources, deselection.
The issue came to a head in a fiery meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party addressed by work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall on Monday evening with several MPs privately claiming it could end up with Sir Keir being forced out as leader.
The rebellion became official shortly after with an amendment to the welfare reform bill next week calling for a pause in the reforms, which some believe could be signed by as many as 100 MPs.
The government plans to make £5bn a year in savings on welfare mostly by reducing personal independence payments (PIPs) for those with disabilities by limiting access to them for all apart from the most disabled.
Previously, at least 80 Labour MPs, including 12 ministers, are understood to be considering rebelling against the legislation needed to cut the welfare bill by £5bn a year. But the new amendment, which is understood to be fronted by the Treasury select committee chair Meg Hillier and other committee chairs, may garner even more support.
[…]
[I]t is understood that MPs requesting permission to miss the vote are being denied because the government wants a show of loyalty on the second reading vote on 1 July.In the PLP meeting on Monday evening, just a week before the vote, Ms Kendall will try to persuade fellow Labour MPs that the government has no choice but to balance the books.
But former Jeremy Corbyn ally Richard Burgon MP has announced that he will be presenting a petition demanding wealth taxes instead of benefits cuts next week just 24 hours before the crucial vote.
[…]
The issue became a subject of tensions in the run-up to last month’s spending review when a leaked memo from Ms Rayner also proposed eight new wealth taxes on the richest individuals and big corporations as an alternative to cuts.The row played out during work and pensions questions in the Commons with one MP suggesting the benefits cuts will lead to "appalling poverty".
Labour MP Andy McDonald asked for further evidence on how many people will lose out on Personal Independence Payments as a result of the welfare reform bill.
It was a response to openly mocking people’s choice to raise their children Christian.
It really wasn't: https://p.feddit.uk/post/feddit.uk/31856602?thread=0.18336647#18336647
The premise of the meme is that's it's hypocritical to think that children can't understand the ideas of being gay or trans, but somehow can decide to be Christian. Your response is mostly non sequitur and implies it's actively dangerous to teach kids about gay people.
We could stop hosting the account and purge it from our DB, though IRRC the user can migrate to a new host and have Bluesky populate that with their old data, because everything is public on AT and is kept in Bluesky's relay (I think this is a bad thing, just fyi). The user would still be banned from the various labelers as these operate (I presume) on the accounts DID, which should stay the same across migration. PDS providers don't talk to each other, PDS don't do much so don't really need to. They just store data.
Bluesky does genuinely have some better moderation tools, labelers are something I think even us on Lemmy/PieFed/whatever might want to look at. But these aren't magic and there's plenty of toxicity on Bluesky, Bluesky just gives you some more tools to help manage it. When Mastodon gets the ability to disable replies I think will help a lot.