Snap General Election called

[Digby]

Mainly it would seem No.10 is a place to go for infighting, whether that's how Johnson want it, or because he's weak on detail so many people see a chance to advance their agenda isn't perhaps clear, the only clear thing is day to day it's a bun fight in there

One way you can get the attention of Boris is to push an issue which gives coverage to Boris, so his vanity Boris the Builder projects come as much out of anything as it's hard to just get him to sit down and do his job, he's essentially a less mature version of Harry Enfield's portrayal of Kevin

[Stom]

Mainly it would seem No.10 is a place to go for infighting, whether that's how Johnson want it, or because he's weak on detail so many people see a chance to advance their agenda isn't perhaps clear, the only clear thing is day to day it's a bun fight in there

One way you can get the attention of Boris is to push an issue which gives coverage to Boris, so his vanity Boris the Builder projects come as much out of anything as it's hard to just get him to sit down and do his job, he's essentially a less mature version of Harry Enfield's portrayal of Kevin

[Puja]

Capture.jpg

Puja

[Son of Mathonwy]

Capture.jpg

Puja

It would be nice to think that there would be consequences for a minister acting illegally. Let alone acting illegally with billions of pounds of taxpayers' money in the middle of a pandemic.

[Digby]

Capture.jpg

Puja

It would be nice to think that there would be consequences for a minister acting illegally. Let alone acting illegally with billions of pounds of taxpayers' money in the middle of a pandemic.

We could well see there are consequences, the person who writes the report into the ineptitude and corruption inherent to our response could well have to resign when Boris decides no acton should be taken off a damning report. No consequences indeed!

[Son of Mathonwy]

Capture.jpg

Puja

It would be nice to think that there would be consequences for a minister acting illegally. Let alone acting illegally with billions of pounds of taxpayers' money in the middle of a pandemic.

We could well see there are consequences, the person who writes the report into the ineptitude and corruption inherent to our response could well have to resign when Boris decides no acton should be taken off a damning report. No consequences indeed!

Good point, I missed that one!

[Digby]

Shamima Begum can't come home then because we're not a free society, we're one where the home secretary's assessment given the role's responsibility and accountability to parliament for national security trumps rights. Obviously there's going to be a trade off in a governed society, for me this one sits with the thinking that those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. There's not really anywhere to take this now other than to lobby for a change to the politics in the UK executive. And we're unlikely to have a GE for a while, and as things stand it likely wouldn't make a difference anyway.

[Puja]

Shamima Begum can't come home then because we're not a free society, we're one where the home secretary's assessment given the role's responsibility and accountability to parliament for national security trumps rights. Obviously there's going to be a trade off in a governed society, for me this one sits with the thinking that those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. There's not really anywhere to take this now other than to lobby for a change to the politics in the UK executive. And we're unlikely to have a GE for a while, and as things stand it likely wouldn't make a difference anyway.

It is utterly despicable. She was groomed and abused as a child and now she's had her nationality stripped and been left effectively stateless, simply because our government are populist wankers and the Mail and Sun readers want to punish her.

Puja

[Digby]

Shamima Begum can't come home then because we're not a free society, we're one where the home secretary's assessment given the role's responsibility and accountability to parliament for national security trumps rights. Obviously there's going to be a trade off in a governed society, for me this one sits with the thinking that those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. There's not really anywhere to take this now other than to lobby for a change to the politics in the UK executive. And we're unlikely to have a GE for a while, and as things stand it likely wouldn't make a difference anyway.

It is utterly despicable. She was groomed and abused as a child and now she's had her nationality stripped and been left effectively stateless, simply because our government are populist wankers and the Mail and Sun readers want to punish her.

Puja

I don't have much, really any sympathy with her and I'm happy to join the group of not wanting her back. But not wanting her back isn't the same as thinking we can just refuse to accept our responsibility.

I wonder if there's any scope to advance this still given the reason for not wanting her back is national security, when given all else just how much of a risk can she possibly be? Brexit for instance is a much bigger risk and that's the will of the people, us bombing places and/or selling arms to certain regimes is a risk but that's a norm, and yet one 21 year old threatens the UK? Do my a favour.

If it turns out we get her back and there's little we can do about prosecuting her that's not her fault, exploiting this loophole that in theory she can become Bangladeshi is at best weak and craven. And one wonders what else now goes in the name of national security?

[Puja]

Quite apart from anything else, we're empowering a hundred other online groomers with a story of, "Look what the UK did to this Muslim girl; see how they don't care about people like you and don't think you're really British."

I can completely understand people feeling that her ideology hasn't changed - that much I get. It's the leaping straight over "then let's put her in jail" and all the way to "let's utterly deny her existence and pretend she's nothing to do with us" that throws me. Like, even if you can't find the humanity to view her as an abused child who now needs medical help as an adult, we still have to deal with our own criminals rather than leaving them in an oubliette.

Gah. Just, this country sometimes!

Puja

[Digby]

15,000 arrivals in the UK daily from flights, of which only 150 are going into quarantine. This according to HMG is not a national security issue.

Whereas Begum, a 21 year old with a troubled background and little in the way of financing or organisational power is a national security issue the UK cannot cope with.

Which is the thing which makes we wonder, and hope, this isn't dead. The Home Secretary can state they're acting as they are on the grounds of national security, but is that purely a political matter or can that have a sensible standard be applied in law. For instance how does her case compare to other ISIS brides or those who are/were in something of a similar situation who have returned?

[Digby]

No real surprises in the budget, a little bit for everyone to complain about but there's no way of making everyone happy with a budget even before the pandemic. I don't love the increase to corporation tax because as ever I don't see the benefit to a capital system of having good (profitable) businesses essentially subsidise bad ones, and I don't love the can kicking avoiding making tough choices now because of politics, but Sunak is a politician so...

[Which Tyler]

https://www.marchforchange.uk/cross_party_letter

After four years of disagreement over Brexit and a second referendum, campaigners have buried the hatchet to unite against the government’s plans to limit political protests. All signatories of the letter were able to conduct large scale demonstrations in London and across the UK peacefully and safely under existing legislation. However, under the new proposals, which change the boundaries defining the ‘controlled area’ of Parliament Square, neither side would have been able to hold the high-profile demonstrations and events in Parliament Square that shaped the Brexit debate.

Campaigners say that despite their “different political views”, they “stand shoulder to shoulder to defend our right to express these views”.

The letter reads:

"As long as laws are made in Parliament, then British people must have a legal right to protest them in Parliament Square. Democracy is not an ‘inconvenience’. Public opposition and dissent are among the hard-won rights that make our democratic system function.

This Bill seeks to silence British people when avenues to express dissatisfaction and opposition by members of the public are already limited. In a democracy, the role of government and the police should be to facilitate the organisation of demonstrations such that people are able to participate safely and legally whilst making their voices heard. This bill does precisely the opposite, and provides no route of appeal or challenge either in law or otherwise.

Seeking to limit noise levels so people cannot be heard, and preventing people from assembling outside Parliament so they cannot be seen - these are the words and actions of authoritarians.

Our organisations may have different political views, but we stand shoulder to shoulder to defend our right to express these views be it by peaceful political protest or other peaceful means.

We call on the government to withdraw this Bill in its entirety until such a time as the COVID-19 pandemic is over, and proper scrutiny of its contents and long-term implications can take place."

Signatories of the open letter include pro-Brexit campaigner Richard Tice, leader of the Reform UK party (formerly the Brexit Party) and Leave Means Leave, Naomi Smith, CEO of Best for Britain, Tom Brufatto, former lead organiser of the People’s Vote demonstrations and now co-director of March for Change and Anna Bird, CEO of the European Movement UK.

Dr. Meenal Viz, who also signed the letter, lead a one-person protest during the first lockdown of the UK COVID-19 pandemic which successfully forced the government to drop guidance which asked NHS staff to re-use Personal Protective Equipment. This type of one person protest could also be banned under the government’s new proposals.

Signatories of the letter agree that “the role of government and the police should be to facilitate the organisation of demonstrations such that people are able to participate safely and legally” while claiming the government’s proposals amount to “actions of authoritarians.”

Sign the petition https://www.marchforchange.uk/defend_democracyhere.

[Digby]

With the govt. paper on violence against women and girls due out this summer the govt has announced an interim response of £25 million for additional street lighting and additional CCTV. Dollars to doughnuts this gets less attention than telling some understandably upset people they can't assemble during a pandemic

[Digby]

And we're back at Cheltenham today, an event which will be more concerned about the photos of Gordon Elliott sat on a dead horse than the involvement of Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum in their industry, showing at minimum horse racing isn't that fussed about violence against women and girls and to follow a previous comment will not partner much with the government on their strategy around violence targeted at women and girls, but sit on a dead horse and they'll come for you.

[Zhivago]

Labour have a real problem. Starmer is plummeting in the ratings. See page 15.
https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/fil ... public.pdf

[Which Tyler]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56361599

Covid: The inside story of the government's battle against the virus

[Puja]

Labour have a real problem. Starmer is plummeting in the ratings. See page 15.
https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/fil ... public.pdf

Page 16 is hilarious: "Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the way Ed Davey is doing his job as leader of the Liberal Democrats?"

Satisfied: 15%
Dissatisfied: 28%
Don't Know: 57%

Sums him up really.

Puja

[Digby]

Labour have a real problem. Starmer is plummeting in the ratings. See page 15.
https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/fil ... public.pdf

Page 16 is hilarious: "Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the way Ed Davey is doing his job as leader of the Liberal Democrats?"

Satisfied: 15%
Dissatisfied: 28%
Don't Know: 57%

Sums him up really.

Puja

Heh, the Lib Dems are busy making themselves trans acceptable. Really cracking on with the sort of thinking that's going to make them and the Greens still ever more irrelevant, on the of chance the average voter even hears about it. But I shit you not there's some thinking this is going to draw in the youth crowd, make them look active as a party on social media and start the long climb back.

[Zhivago]

Labour have a real problem. Starmer is plummeting in the ratings. See page 15.
https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/fil ... public.pdf

Page 16 is hilarious: "Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the way Ed Davey is doing his job as leader of the Liberal Democrats?"

Satisfied: 15%
Dissatisfied: 28%
Don't Know: 57%

Sums him up really.

Puja

Heh, the Lib Dems are busy making themselves trans acceptable. Really cracking on with the sort of thinking that's going to make them and the Greens still ever more irrelevant, on the of chance the average voter even hears about it. But I shit you not there's some thinking this is going to draw in the youth crowd, make them look active as a party on social media and start the long climb back.

That's such a road to nowhere, they also haven't a clue, clearly.

[Sandydragon]

Labour have a real problem. Starmer is plummeting in the ratings. See page 15.
https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/fil ... public.pdf

Page 16 is hilarious: "Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the way Ed Davey is doing his job as leader of the Liberal Democrats?"

Satisfied: 15%
Dissatisfied: 28%
Don't Know: 57%

Sums him up really.

Puja

Heh, the Lib Dems are busy making themselves trans acceptable. Really cracking on with the sort of thinking that's going to make them and the Greens still ever more irrelevant, on the of chance the average voter even hears about it. But I shit you not there's some thinking this is going to draw in the youth crowd, make them look active as a party on social media and start the long climb back.

The liberals have been trying to workout why they exist since 1916 and there’s no sign yet that they really have a clue.

[Son of Mathonwy]

Page 16 is hilarious: "Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the way Ed Davey is doing his job as leader of the Liberal Democrats?"

Satisfied: 15%
Dissatisfied: 28%
Don't Know: 57%

Sums him up really.

Puja

Heh, the Lib Dems are busy making themselves trans acceptable. Really cracking on with the sort of thinking that's going to make them and the Greens still ever more irrelevant, on the of chance the average voter even hears about it. But I shit you not there's some thinking this is going to draw in the youth crowd, make them look active as a party on social media and start the long climb back.

The liberals have been trying to workout why they exist since 1916 and there’s no sign yet that they really have a clue.

They occasionally find it. During the 00s the joint desire of the two main parties to start an illegal war pushed them to a position of relevance and only FPTP prevented them from holding a significant chunk of parliament. Clegg destroyed all that.

[Sandydragon]

Heh, the Lib Dems are busy making themselves trans acceptable. Really cracking on with the sort of thinking that's going to make them and the Greens still ever more irrelevant, on the of chance the average voter even hears about it. But I shit you not there's some thinking this is going to draw in the youth crowd, make them look active as a party on social media and start the long climb back.

The liberals have been trying to workout why they exist since 1916 and there’s no sign yet that they really have a clue.

They occasionally find it. During the 00s the joint desire of the two main parties to start an illegal war pushed them to a position of relevance and only FPTP prevented them from holding a significant chunk of parliament. Clegg destroyed all that.

Clegg discovered that grown up politics meant compromises and took the only option open to him (aside from a a supply relationship with the Tories). Many of their supporters didn’t understand that and were used to the purity of opposition and couldn’t handle government.

[Digby]

I really liked Clegg, still do. The odd thing about him for me is that even for a political type he's hopeless at telling jokes in public. Actually given the circumstances the Cameron/Clegg government was about the best run I've seen in my lifetime, and as a consequence they were hammered by the public, go figure.

[Puja]

The liberals have been trying to workout why they exist since 1916 and there’s no sign yet that they really have a clue.

They occasionally find it. During the 00s the joint desire of the two main parties to start an illegal war pushed them to a position of relevance and only FPTP prevented them from holding a significant chunk of parliament. Clegg destroyed all that.

Clegg discovered that grown up politics meant compromises and took the only option open to him (aside from a a supply relationship with the Tories). Many of their supporters didn’t understand that and were used to the purity of opposition and couldn’t handle government.

Clegg got properly fucked by more experienced politicians. I don't blame him for compromising and working with the Conservatives; I blame him for compromising on a major piece of their policy that was a major driver of their vote and doing something which he'd specifically and categorically stated that he would not do pre-election. I also blame him for failing entirely to get his 30 pieces of silver's worth by allowing the AV referendum to be arranged immediately after him voting for tuition fees and allowing his coalition partners to turn it into a popularity vote on Clegg. I also blame him for losing control of the coalition and allowing the Conservatives to renege on supporting the reform of the House of Lords.

Supporting the Conservatives would've been forgiveable if they'd accomplished something. As it was, they enabled austerity and increased tuition fees, with the only part of their manifesto coming through being the raised basic tax threshold, which the Conservatives promptly adopted as their policy and their success.

Puja