Page 139 of 232

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 3:45 pm
by Puja
Sandydragon wrote:
Zhivago wrote:Just to remind folks where the bar was set when Corbyn was in charge
https://labourlist.org/2016/02/corbyns- ... ions-test/

Starmer must go
Corbyn lost two general elections, including the worst results for decades. A revert to a Corbyn alike isn’t your answer.
All the time that Corbyn was leader, the right wing of the party was harping on that someone with strong convictions and ideology wasn't the solution and that the only route to power was through an inoffensive Aaron Burr "Talk less, smile more" type who could occupy the middle ground. Turns out that that wasn't the answer either.

Plus, I'd argue that the policies under Corbyn were pretty popular and sold to the public pretty well. He lost on his personal brand, history, and inability to sell himself. Someone from the left wing of the party who doesn't have skeletons and has charisma with the public at large might be just what is needed - gods knows being utterly inoffensive and offering no vision whatsoever isn't working.

Puja

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 4:09 pm
by Digby
You still need someone to appeal to the middle classes. But there are disconnects all over the shop at this point, and I don't know if anyone has a good idea how to start joining the dots back up.

I would also note during a pandemic whilst in local election we might be getting some results returned which aren't reflective of the broader picture. Okay if it turns out the voter turnout is over 70% there are some huge problems.

I voted for Labour in the mayoral vote, first time I've ever voted Labour. Partly to give them something, also the Lib Dei candidate just annoyed me with their appeal along the lines of 'if you're fed up being ruled over by Westminster' in a polite rewording of a UKIP take from recent history. I didn't even vote Lib Dem as 2nd choice, that went to the Greens.

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 5:05 pm
by Zhivago
Digby wrote:You still need someone to appeal to the middle classes. But there are disconnects all over the shop at this point, and I don't know if anyone has a good idea how to start joining the dots back up.

I would also note during a pandemic whilst in local election we might be getting some results returned which aren't reflective of the broader picture. Okay if it turns out the voter turnout is over 70% there are some huge problems.

I voted for Labour in the mayoral vote, first time I've ever voted Labour. Partly to give them something, also the Lib Dei candidate just annoyed me with their appeal along the lines of 'if you're fed up being ruled over by Westminster' in a polite rewording of a UKIP take from recent history. I didn't even vote Lib Dem as 2nd choice, that went to the Greens.
It's got nothing to do with class, and everything to do with nationalism. Tories are doing so well because they became the English nationalist party in all but name. That's what England wants, so that's what England gets. Freud regarded nationalism as collective narcissicm, but viewed narcissicm as a form of idealism. They love Boris because he presents an idealistic nationalistic vision of Britain to the masses (with 'Britannia Rules the Waves (Global Britain) crossed with Churchillian WWII Britain vs Europe (Brexit)' motifs). Labour need someone who can present a Labour equivalent.

And a staid suited lawyer aint gonna cut it.

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 8:55 pm
by Sandydragon
Puja wrote:
Sandydragon wrote:
Zhivago wrote:Just to remind folks where the bar was set when Corbyn was in charge
https://labourlist.org/2016/02/corbyns- ... ions-test/

Starmer must go
Corbyn lost two general elections, including the worst results for decades. A revert to a Corbyn alike isn’t your answer.
All the time that Corbyn was leader, the right wing of the party was harping on that someone with strong convictions and ideology wasn't the solution and that the only route to power was through an inoffensive Aaron Burr "Talk less, smile more" type who could occupy the middle ground. Turns out that that wasn't the answer either.

Plus, I'd argue that the policies under Corbyn were pretty popular and sold to the public pretty well. He lost on his personal brand, history, and inability to sell himself. Someone from the left wing of the party who doesn't have skeletons and has charisma with the public at large might be just what is needed - gods knows being utterly inoffensive and offering no vision whatsoever isn't working.

Puja
Popular? You got slaughtered in 2019. It wasn’t a loss it was a demolition. Even against May who did everything wrong Corbyn still lost.

Time for some serious review and if anyone thinks a move to the left is the solution then good luck with that and standby for a generation in opposition.

Since 1979 the only Labour leader to win any kind of majority was Tony Blair. All the other candidates failed. Labour have an identity crisis which they need to resolve.

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 10:27 pm
by Puja
Sandydragon wrote:
Puja wrote:
Sandydragon wrote: Corbyn lost two general elections, including the worst results for decades. A revert to a Corbyn alike isn’t your answer.
All the time that Corbyn was leader, the right wing of the party was harping on that someone with strong convictions and ideology wasn't the solution and that the only route to power was through an inoffensive Aaron Burr "Talk less, smile more" type who could occupy the middle ground. Turns out that that wasn't the answer either.

Plus, I'd argue that the policies under Corbyn were pretty popular and sold to the public pretty well. He lost on his personal brand, history, and inability to sell himself. Someone from the left wing of the party who doesn't have skeletons and has charisma with the public at large might be just what is needed - gods knows being utterly inoffensive and offering no vision whatsoever isn't working.

Puja
Popular? You got slaughtered in 2019. It wasn’t a loss it was a demolition. Even against May who did everything wrong Corbyn still lost.

Time for some serious review and if anyone thinks a move to the left is the solution then good luck with that and standby for a generation in opposition.

Since 1979 the only Labour leader to win any kind of majority was Tony Blair. All the other candidates failed. Labour have an identity crisis which they need to resolve.
First off, enough with the *you*. :D I'm not a Labour person. They were slaughtered in 2019, but are you actually telling me that was because of the policies or because Corbyn was a Remainer/Leaver (delete as appropriate depending on constituency) IRA-supporting Britain-hating Marxist traitor? The policies, stripped of their provenance, polled well.

I will absolutely agree on the bolded statement, but disagree that further tacking to the right is the way to accomplish it. Labour need to have an identity, of some kind and if, "We are the party of adequately funding public services and looking after the social safety net," is not it, then what the hell are they?

Puja

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Sat May 08, 2021 7:53 am
by Digby
Zhivago wrote:
Digby wrote:You still need someone to appeal to the middle classes. But there are disconnects all over the shop at this point, and I don't know if anyone has a good idea how to start joining the dots back up.

I would also note during a pandemic whilst in local election we might be getting some results returned which aren't reflective of the broader picture. Okay if it turns out the voter turnout is over 70% there are some huge problems.

I voted for Labour in the mayoral vote, first time I've ever voted Labour. Partly to give them something, also the Lib Dei candidate just annoyed me with their appeal along the lines of 'if you're fed up being ruled over by Westminster' in a polite rewording of a UKIP take from recent history. I didn't even vote Lib Dem as 2nd choice, that went to the Greens.
It's got nothing to do with class, and everything to do with nationalism.
A level of stupidity Priti Patel aspires to

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Sat May 08, 2021 8:04 am
by Sandydragon
Puja wrote:
Sandydragon wrote:
Puja wrote: All the time that Corbyn was leader, the right wing of the party was harping on that someone with strong convictions and ideology wasn't the solution and that the only route to power was through an inoffensive Aaron Burr "Talk less, smile more" type who could occupy the middle ground. Turns out that that wasn't the answer either.

Plus, I'd argue that the policies under Corbyn were pretty popular and sold to the public pretty well. He lost on his personal brand, history, and inability to sell himself. Someone from the left wing of the party who doesn't have skeletons and has charisma with the public at large might be just what is needed - gods knows being utterly inoffensive and offering no vision whatsoever isn't working.

Puja
Popular? You got slaughtered in 2019. It wasn’t a loss it was a demolition. Even against May who did everything wrong Corbyn still lost.

Time for some serious review and if anyone thinks a move to the left is the solution then good luck with that and standby for a generation in opposition.

Since 1979 the only Labour leader to win any kind of majority was Tony Blair. All the other candidates failed. Labour have an identity crisis which they need to resolve.
First off, enough with the *you*. :D I'm not a Labour person. They were slaughtered in 2019, but are you actually telling me that was because of the policies or because Corbyn was a Remainer/Leaver (delete as appropriate depending on constituency) IRA-supporting Britain-hating Marxist traitor? The policies, stripped of their provenance, polled well.

I will absolutely agree on the bolded statement, but disagree that further tacking to the right is the way to accomplish it. Labour need to have an identity, of some kind and if, "We are the party of adequately funding public services and looking after the social safety net," is not it, then what the hell are they?

Puja
Corbyn was directly responsible to a large degree. Short of Dianne Abbott, I can’t think of a worse leader. The problem is that many of the Labour left aren’t that different in mindset. They may not have the years of cosying up to the IRA etc but it wouldn’t take long for their personal opinions to be just as obvious.

As for policies, are you suggesting free broadband was ever a good idea? Nationalisation may poll well with some people, it also sends many running for the hills. If Labour can recapture the sense of aspiration that new Labour had, pro business but also on the side of the little guy. Then they have a constituent base to work with. I still think that Starmer is trusted more than his party and a good way to move on is to completely refresh his front bench with some heavy hitters who get some visibility. Starmer would make a good PM but he need some of the shadow cabinet to be carrying the load.

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Sat May 08, 2021 10:58 am
by Puja
Sandydragon wrote:
Puja wrote:
Sandydragon wrote:
Popular? You got slaughtered in 2019. It wasn’t a loss it was a demolition. Even against May who did everything wrong Corbyn still lost.

Time for some serious review and if anyone thinks a move to the left is the solution then good luck with that and standby for a generation in opposition.

Since 1979 the only Labour leader to win any kind of majority was Tony Blair. All the other candidates failed. Labour have an identity crisis which they need to resolve.
First off, enough with the *you*. :D I'm not a Labour person. They were slaughtered in 2019, but are you actually telling me that was because of the policies or because Corbyn was a Remainer/Leaver (delete as appropriate depending on constituency) IRA-supporting Britain-hating Marxist traitor? The policies, stripped of their provenance, polled well.

I will absolutely agree on the bolded statement, but disagree that further tacking to the right is the way to accomplish it. Labour need to have an identity, of some kind and if, "We are the party of adequately funding public services and looking after the social safety net," is not it, then what the hell are they?

Puja
Corbyn was directly responsible to a large degree. Short of Dianne Abbott, I can’t think of a worse leader. The problem is that many of the Labour left aren’t that different in mindset. They may not have the years of cosying up to the IRA etc but it wouldn’t take long for their personal opinions to be just as obvious.

As for policies, are you suggesting free broadband was ever a good idea? Nationalisation may poll well with some people, it also sends many running for the hills. If Labour can recapture the sense of aspiration that new Labour had, pro business but also on the side of the little guy. Then they have a constituent base to work with. I still think that Starmer is trusted more than his party and a good way to move on is to completely refresh his front bench with some heavy hitters who get some visibility. Starmer would make a good PM but he need some of the shadow cabinet to be carrying the load.
While I wouldn't've put free broadband front and centre, it's hard to argue after the lockdown that it's not a utility rather than a luxury.

I'm not sure Starmer is more trusted - no-one knows what he stands for, what he believes in, what his Labour party means. Until he finds a policy to stand behind, he's nothing but a cipher in a suit.

Which heavy hitters would you bring in?

Puja

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Sat May 08, 2021 1:03 pm
by Zhivago
Digby wrote:
Zhivago wrote:
Digby wrote:You still need someone to appeal to the middle classes. But there are disconnects all over the shop at this point, and I don't know if anyone has a good idea how to start joining the dots back up.

I would also note during a pandemic whilst in local election we might be getting some results returned which aren't reflective of the broader picture. Okay if it turns out the voter turnout is over 70% there are some huge problems.

I voted for Labour in the mayoral vote, first time I've ever voted Labour. Partly to give them something, also the Lib Dei candidate just annoyed me with their appeal along the lines of 'if you're fed up being ruled over by Westminster' in a polite rewording of a UKIP take from recent history. I didn't even vote Lib Dem as 2nd choice, that went to the Greens.
It's got nothing to do with class, and everything to do with nationalism.
A level of stupidity Priti Patel aspires to
The point is Labour need to deliver an optimistic vision of Britain. A vision that's relevant to people. Tories have delivered a nationalistic ideal of Britain, but Starmer lacks any vision at all. All Starmer stands for is negatives. Anti-corbyn, anti-brexit, anti-johnson etc etc. That isn't inspiring. It is insipid.

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Sat May 08, 2021 1:04 pm
by Puja
FB_IMG_1620475444907.jpg
Puja

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Sat May 08, 2021 1:11 pm
by Zhivago
Puja wrote:
Sandydragon wrote:
Puja wrote:
First off, enough with the *you*. :D I'm not a Labour person. They were slaughtered in 2019, but are you actually telling me that was because of the policies or because Corbyn was a Remainer/Leaver (delete as appropriate depending on constituency) IRA-supporting Britain-hating Marxist traitor? The policies, stripped of their provenance, polled well.

I will absolutely agree on the bolded statement, but disagree that further tacking to the right is the way to accomplish it. Labour need to have an identity, of some kind and if, "We are the party of adequately funding public services and looking after the social safety net," is not it, then what the hell are they?

Puja
Corbyn was directly responsible to a large degree. Short of Dianne Abbott, I can’t think of a worse leader. The problem is that many of the Labour left aren’t that different in mindset. They may not have the years of cosying up to the IRA etc but it wouldn’t take long for their personal opinions to be just as obvious.

As for policies, are you suggesting free broadband was ever a good idea? Nationalisation may poll well with some people, it also sends many running for the hills. If Labour can recapture the sense of aspiration that new Labour had, pro business but also on the side of the little guy. Then they have a constituent base to work with. I still think that Starmer is trusted more than his party and a good way to move on is to completely refresh his front bench with some heavy hitters who get some visibility. Starmer would make a good PM but he need some of the shadow cabinet to be carrying the load.
While I wouldn't've put free broadband front and centre, it's hard to argue after the lockdown that it's not a utility rather than a luxury.

I'm not sure Starmer is more trusted - no-one knows what he stands for, what he believes in, what his Labour party means. Until he finds a policy to stand behind, he's nothing but a cipher in a suit.

Which heavy hitters would you bring in?

Puja
I think the main problem was that it made Labour look uncredible. They need to focus on a few main goals and push those.
-Making the super rich (note not just 'rich' because affluent people might see themselves as targetted) pay their fair share of tax should be one.
-Fixing Britain's infrastructure (NHS/Rail/etc)
-Giving employees more of a say (Worker representation in companies etc)

Stick to a few key messages with detail backing them up and repeat the headlines.

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Sat May 08, 2021 4:55 pm
by Son of Mathonwy
Zhivago wrote:
Puja wrote:
Sandydragon wrote:
Corbyn was directly responsible to a large degree. Short of Dianne Abbott, I can’t think of a worse leader. The problem is that many of the Labour left aren’t that different in mindset. They may not have the years of cosying up to the IRA etc but it wouldn’t take long for their personal opinions to be just as obvious.

As for policies, are you suggesting free broadband was ever a good idea? Nationalisation may poll well with some people, it also sends many running for the hills. If Labour can recapture the sense of aspiration that new Labour had, pro business but also on the side of the little guy. Then they have a constituent base to work with. I still think that Starmer is trusted more than his party and a good way to move on is to completely refresh his front bench with some heavy hitters who get some visibility. Starmer would make a good PM but he need some of the shadow cabinet to be carrying the load.
While I wouldn't've put free broadband front and centre, it's hard to argue after the lockdown that it's not a utility rather than a luxury.

I'm not sure Starmer is more trusted - no-one knows what he stands for, what he believes in, what his Labour party means. Until he finds a policy to stand behind, he's nothing but a cipher in a suit.

Which heavy hitters would you bring in?

Puja
I think the main problem was that it made Labour look uncredible. They need to focus on a few main goals and push those.
-Making the super rich (note not just 'rich' because affluent people might see themselves as targetted) pay their fair share of tax should be one.
-Fixing Britain's infrastructure (NHS/Rail/etc)
-Giving employees more of a say (Worker representation in companies etc)

Stick to a few key messages with detail backing them up and repeat the headlines.
This "crisis" is overblown. One by-election result under freakishly unusual national circumstances. This is the constituency who were happy to vote for a corrupt New Labour politician, so what if they now vote for a Tory?

No doubt the right-wing press are over the moon about this as it takes headlines away from the Tory corruption stories. And plenty of the left can snipe at Starmer with their pre-prepared articles.

There's a lot that Starmer can do better, but he's clearly electable, a potential PM, and Labour have considerably improved in the polls under him.

IMO this is what he should do:

Stop making a point of agreeing with or supporting the government. No one can seriously accuse him of making political mileage out of the pandemic. He does look like the grown-up in the room, but enough is enough. Trying to look helpful just looks weak. Therefore...
He needs to look strong, so he needs to attack (eg on corruption, on the massive Covid-19 deathtoll due to delayed lockdowns). Maybe he needs to find someone like Alastair Campbell (but not Alastair Campbell) to help him with this.

On policy, still well away from the next general election, too much clarity is a problem: the Tories will simply re-brand their policies with the name of any novel Labour idea which seems popular; and obviously unpopular policies should be avoided. (NB that arsehole Blair was successful by having no policies, beyond crushing the left of his party, until just before the 1997 election when his policy was "change nothing".)

At this stage it would make sense to stand for general principles which are (a) self-evidently good, and (b) which do not sit easily with the Conservative party. I suggest the Labour party should set out to make the UK an Honest, Kind and Fair place to live. Then all issues and developing policies can be fitted into the framework.

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Sat May 08, 2021 6:35 pm
by Zhivago
Son of Mathonwy wrote:
Zhivago wrote:
Puja wrote:
While I wouldn't've put free broadband front and centre, it's hard to argue after the lockdown that it's not a utility rather than a luxury.

I'm not sure Starmer is more trusted - no-one knows what he stands for, what he believes in, what his Labour party means. Until he finds a policy to stand behind, he's nothing but a cipher in a suit.

Which heavy hitters would you bring in?

Puja
I think the main problem was that it made Labour look uncredible. They need to focus on a few main goals and push those.
-Making the super rich (note not just 'rich' because affluent people might see themselves as targetted) pay their fair share of tax should be one.
-Fixing Britain's infrastructure (NHS/Rail/etc)
-Giving employees more of a say (Worker representation in companies etc)

Stick to a few key messages with detail backing them up and repeat the headlines.
This "crisis" is overblown. One by-election result under freakishly unusual national circumstances. This is the constituency who were happy to vote for a corrupt New Labour politician, so what if they now vote for a Tory?

No doubt the right-wing press are over the moon about this as it takes headlines away from the Tory corruption stories. And plenty of the left can snipe at Starmer with their pre-prepared articles.

There's a lot that Starmer can do better, but he's clearly electable, a potential PM, and Labour have considerably improved in the polls under him.

IMO this is what he should do:

Stop making a point of agreeing with or supporting the government. No one can seriously accuse him of making political mileage out of the pandemic. He does look like the grown-up in the room, but enough is enough. Trying to look helpful just looks weak. Therefore...
He needs to look strong, so he needs to attack (eg on corruption, on the massive Covid-19 deathtoll due to delayed lockdowns). Maybe he needs to find someone like Alastair Campbell (but not Alastair Campbell) to help him with this.

On policy, still well away from the next general election, too much clarity is a problem: the Tories will simply re-brand their policies with the name of any novel Labour idea which seems popular; and obviously unpopular policies should be avoided. (NB that arsehole Blair was successful by having no policies, beyond crushing the left of his party, until just before the 1997 election when his policy was "change nothing".)

At this stage it would make sense to stand for general principles which are (a) self-evidently good, and (b) which do not sit easily with the Conservative party. I suggest the Labour party should set out to make the UK an Honest, Kind and Fair place to live. Then all issues and developing policies can be fitted into the framework.
Blair was only as successful as he was because of the good progress made by John Smith before his untimely death.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opende ... -not-take/

If Labour have good policies and the Tories steal them I have no problem with that. I don't buy into this notion that Labour needs to keep their cards close to their chest. Advocate loud enough and influence the Tories into legislating if need be. There are always more policies to advocate in the run up to an election. There is so much to fix.

Starmer isn't electable. He burnt too many bridges with the left of the party. You can't get elected without a base.

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Sat May 08, 2021 10:41 pm
by Son of Mathonwy
Zhivago wrote:
Son of Mathonwy wrote:
Zhivago wrote:
I think the main problem was that it made Labour look uncredible. They need to focus on a few main goals and push those.
-Making the super rich (note not just 'rich' because affluent people might see themselves as targetted) pay their fair share of tax should be one.
-Fixing Britain's infrastructure (NHS/Rail/etc)
-Giving employees more of a say (Worker representation in companies etc)

Stick to a few key messages with detail backing them up and repeat the headlines.
This "crisis" is overblown. One by-election result under freakishly unusual national circumstances. This is the constituency who were happy to vote for a corrupt New Labour politician, so what if they now vote for a Tory?

No doubt the right-wing press are over the moon about this as it takes headlines away from the Tory corruption stories. And plenty of the left can snipe at Starmer with their pre-prepared articles.

There's a lot that Starmer can do better, but he's clearly electable, a potential PM, and Labour have considerably improved in the polls under him.

IMO this is what he should do:

Stop making a point of agreeing with or supporting the government. No one can seriously accuse him of making political mileage out of the pandemic. He does look like the grown-up in the room, but enough is enough. Trying to look helpful just looks weak. Therefore...
He needs to look strong, so he needs to attack (eg on corruption, on the massive Covid-19 deathtoll due to delayed lockdowns). Maybe he needs to find someone like Alastair Campbell (but not Alastair Campbell) to help him with this.

On policy, still well away from the next general election, too much clarity is a problem: the Tories will simply re-brand their policies with the name of any novel Labour idea which seems popular; and obviously unpopular policies should be avoided. (NB that arsehole Blair was successful by having no policies, beyond crushing the left of his party, until just before the 1997 election when his policy was "change nothing".)

At this stage it would make sense to stand for general principles which are (a) self-evidently good, and (b) which do not sit easily with the Conservative party. I suggest the Labour party should set out to make the UK an Honest, Kind and Fair place to live. Then all issues and developing policies can be fitted into the framework.
Blair was only as successful as he was because of the good progress made by John Smith before his untimely death.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opende ... -not-take/

If Labour have good policies and the Tories steal them I have no problem with that. I don't buy into this notion that Labour needs to keep their cards close to their chest. Advocate loud enough and influence the Tories into legislating if need be. There are always more policies to advocate in the run up to an election. There is so much to fix.

Starmer isn't electable. He burnt too many bridges with the left of the party. You can't get elected without a base.
I agree on Smith. His death was possibly the greatest tragedy for this country (not to mention Iraq) in the last 30 years. It's painful to think how much better a course we would be on now, had he lived (or if Blair had not!).

Okay, I think we'll have to disagree on allowing the Tories to steal (or steal the name, if little else of) Labour policies. I fear the Tories will take all the credit and Labour will become irrelevant.

Starmer polls well, far better than Corbyn. Well enough to be called "electable". Blair was electable despite torching his bridges with the left (other than his pet, sell-out, token trade unionist Prescott).

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Mon May 31, 2021 6:30 pm
by Digby
So a bit of a weird weekend for Boris, not getting married he's used to that, more swearing under oath neither of his previous marriages technically existed. Which granted isn't likely the most offensive thing he's ever done to his ex wives, but still

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Mon May 31, 2021 6:47 pm
by fivepointer
Meanwhile from Friday -
Boris Johnson learned that a Tory donor had funded the refurbishment of the Number 11 flat from media reports in late February, it is claimed.
Lord Geidt says Boris Johnson was not aware David Brownlow had settled bill - said to be £200,000 - directly with the supplier on Oct 22.
Lord Geidt mildly censures Johnson for not having a more ‘rigorous regard’ for how the flat would be funded. He says that this was unwise.
He says that the prime minister ‘might reasonably expect’ to be curious about the arrangements.
Matt Hancock committed a ‘technical’ breach of the ministerial code by failing to declare that a family firm -which he has a 20% stake in - had won an NHS contract.
Lord Geidt says in mitigation that Hancock was unaware of contract and that he acted with ‘integrity throughout’
Boris Johnson acted ‘unwisely’ by failing to take more of an interest in who was funding refurb of his Downing Street flat, Lord Geidt finds.
But he castigates officials - who were informed that a Tory donor had paid for it - for not telling the PM, saying he was ‘ill-served’
Simon Case, the Cabinet Secretary, acknowledges the ‘shortcomings’ of officials in failing to tell Boris Johnson that his flat had been paid for by a Tory donor.
As Geidt acknowledges, however, these officials were ‘managing their own very difficult decision questions’
All of which leads to a question: Is it really incumbent on officials to tell the Prime Minister that the cost of refurbishing his flat was met by a Tory donor?
There’s an argument that Lord Geidt is placing a higher burden of probity on officials than he is on the PM himself


Johnson and his shower of a Govt are simply taking the piss. They know they can get away with abuses and breaches so they do. Geidt was specifically brought in to supply the whitewash.
They are openly sneering at us.
We are being played for mugs.

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Sat Jun 05, 2021 8:55 pm
by Sandydragon
fivepointer wrote:Meanwhile from Friday -
Boris Johnson learned that a Tory donor had funded the refurbishment of the Number 11 flat from media reports in late February, it is claimed.
Lord Geidt says Boris Johnson was not aware David Brownlow had settled bill - said to be £200,000 - directly with the supplier on Oct 22.
Lord Geidt mildly censures Johnson for not having a more ‘rigorous regard’ for how the flat would be funded. He says that this was unwise.
He says that the prime minister ‘might reasonably expect’ to be curious about the arrangements.
Matt Hancock committed a ‘technical’ breach of the ministerial code by failing to declare that a family firm -which he has a 20% stake in - had won an NHS contract.
Lord Geidt says in mitigation that Hancock was unaware of contract and that he acted with ‘integrity throughout’
Boris Johnson acted ‘unwisely’ by failing to take more of an interest in who was funding refurb of his Downing Street flat, Lord Geidt finds.
But he castigates officials - who were informed that a Tory donor had paid for it - for not telling the PM, saying he was ‘ill-served’
Simon Case, the Cabinet Secretary, acknowledges the ‘shortcomings’ of officials in failing to tell Boris Johnson that his flat had been paid for by a Tory donor.
As Geidt acknowledges, however, these officials were ‘managing their own very difficult decision questions’
All of which leads to a question: Is it really incumbent on officials to tell the Prime Minister that the cost of refurbishing his flat was met by a Tory donor?
There’s an argument that Lord Geidt is placing a higher burden of probity on officials than he is on the PM himself


Johnson and his shower of a Govt are simply taking the piss. They know they can get away with abuses and breaches so they do. Geidt was specifically brought in to supply the whitewash.
They are openly sneering at us.
We are being played for mugs.
Yeah, but 'Get Brexit Done'. Boris can do no wrong in the eyes of some based on that alone. At least for the moment.

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2021 8:53 pm
by Zhivago
Boris flying to a climate summit, what a plonker (in place of many stronger words).

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Fri Jun 18, 2021 7:51 pm
by Which Tyler
The war against checks and balances continues apace.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 68407.html

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Fri Jun 18, 2021 11:19 pm
by Digby
"But Chloe Smith, the constitution minister, insisted “the proper place for criminal investigations and prosecutions relating to electoral law is with the police and the Crown Prosecution Service”."

An interesting take given when the police wondered about looking into Boris accidentally giving £100k of public money to Jenny Accuri for 'reasons' the police were told not to look into the matter because if you don't look you can't find anything.

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Fri Jun 18, 2021 11:26 pm
by Digby
And just on the Lib Dems getting over the line in the by-election in Chesham and Amersham I'm sort of pleased to see any sort of Lib Dem recovery, but again it's come where the the local candidate has somewhat ignored national policy.

Keir will no doubt be delighted this will trigger days of questions on whether he wants an election deal between the centre and centre-left parties, and indeed whether there's already one in place

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Sat Jun 19, 2021 9:20 pm
by Banquo
Digby wrote:And just on the Lib Dems getting over the line in the by-election in Chesham and Amersham I'm sort of pleased to see any sort of Lib Dem recovery, but again it's come where the the local candidate has somewhat ignored national policy.

Keir will no doubt be delighted this will trigger days of questions on whether he wants an election deal between the centre and centre-left parties, and indeed whether there's already one in place
Who? Oh, the leader of the opposition...

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Sun Jun 20, 2021 11:33 am
by Digby
Banquo wrote:
Digby wrote:And just on the Lib Dems getting over the line in the by-election in Chesham and Amersham I'm sort of pleased to see any sort of Lib Dem recovery, but again it's come where the the local candidate has somewhat ignored national policy.

Keir will no doubt be delighted this will trigger days of questions on whether he wants an election deal between the centre and centre-left parties, and indeed whether there's already one in place
Who? Oh, the leader of the opposition...
is that Bercow now?

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Sun Jun 20, 2021 12:03 pm
by Banquo
Digby wrote:
Banquo wrote:
Digby wrote:And just on the Lib Dems getting over the line in the by-election in Chesham and Amersham I'm sort of pleased to see any sort of Lib Dem recovery, but again it's come where the the local candidate has somewhat ignored national policy.

Keir will no doubt be delighted this will trigger days of questions on whether he wants an election deal between the centre and centre-left parties, and indeed whether there's already one in place
Who? Oh, the leader of the opposition...
is that Bercow now?
Ha ha, looks that way. If he thought the Tories would be sad to lose him, and Labour glad to welcome him, he really has lost the plot.

Re: Snap General Election called

Posted: Sun Jun 20, 2021 12:09 pm
by Digby
Banquo wrote:
Digby wrote:
Banquo wrote: Who? Oh, the leader of the opposition...
is that Bercow now?
Ha ha, looks that way. If he thought the Tories would be sad to lose him, and Labour glad to welcome him, he really has lost the plot.
The Tories should be sad to lose him, but they're assuming for now they pay little to no price for losing people who're free market advocates, who're pro business, pro European, and are reasonably socially liberal. If nativism/populism starts to grind to halt they'll be proved wrong, if they can drag the country down a populist/nativist path, well, they'll also I fear be proved wrong, or at least to date no one has made a success of populism and moving towards autocracy, maybe they'll buck that trend.