Can you name a politician who is? I suspect this is one of those issues where hand-wringing from the opposition benches is much, much easier than enacting policy - and staying elected.
So they need to worry far, far less about staying elected and get on with what matters.
This is a bit of a tangent, but I'm pretty pessimistic about major policy changes with respect to climate until such policy is forced on us by circumstances.
This is a bit of a tangent, but I'm pretty pessimistic about major policy changes with respect to climate until such policy is forced on us by circumstances.
In that case we're fucked. I don't see the USA doing anything until some East Coast cities are flooded, and even then the Yahoos will blame The Gayz for it as God's Judgment on America.
There was a chair for Theresa at the meeting with Greta. And I know other party leaders were encouraging her to come along. So I don't think she can claim ignorance.
There was a chair for Theresa at the meeting with Greta. And I know other party leaders were encouraging her to come along. So I don't think she can claim ignorance.
Caroline Lucas.
She can. And she probably will. Credibility? Well that's a different matter all together.
Sorry, I forgot to come back and look at the thread.
She definitely was handing out contracts to G4S like candy while at the Home Office with apparent impunity. I was working at HMPS at the time they got the transport contract and were shockingly awful, yet went on to be given contracts to run prisons ..which we know all about now. I quickly came to think that signing the official secrets act had little to do with secrets and everything to do with not telling the public what was really going on and what an absolute shambles of a disgrace it was.
Whenever I’ve been inclined to feel a hint of sympathy for her, I remember her time in the Home Office and the fact that she has lined her husband’s pockets with contracts for G4S and not been investigated for it. The feeling evaporates quite swiftly.
I believe that accusation was shown to be wrong - but I have no evidence at this point.
She did create the hostile environment. She did send the vans around saying "Go Home". She was a total steaming heap of shit.
I have no real sympathy for her. I don't like to see people suffer, but she has brought this on herself. It is like someone hitting their head with a hammer - the level of sympathy is limited becasue she is hitting her own head with the hammer.
It seems they misuse the OSA to hide mistakes, incompetence and dodgy deals when it should be national Security.
Sir Humphrey Apppleby blew the gaff in Yes Minister when he said that "The Official Secrets Act is not there to protect secrets: it's there to protect officials".
It seems they misuse the OSA to hide mistakes, incompetence and dodgy deals when it should be national Security.
Sir Humphrey Apppleby blew the gaff in Yes Minister when he said that "The Official Secrets Act is not there to protect secrets: it's there to protect officials".
That said - and Sir Humphrey certainly knew how Westminster works - the sacking of Gavin Williamson - aka Private Pike - seems, as with most things Treeza does, to have created almost as many problems as it solves.
If the man is indeed guilty as charged, then why can't he be shown the evidence against him? I presume Treeza's working on the basis that since he's guilty he must already know what it is.
I heard on the radio (BBC, of course) someone saying that the massive defeats for the Tories and Labour are a clear message that we should get on with Brexit.
Both Labour and Tory leaders are saying that these local elections were a sign to get on with Brexit in the Guardian live coverage too. In response, there has been a trending #BrexitBacklash on Twitter all day.
Locally, a majority leave voting area, the LibDems came first and second in both wards, only fielding 4 candidates in all for 12 seats, the conservative candidates had significantly lower votes In both wards a conservative sitting councillor lost their seats, Labour came last and the far right candidate just above them. There was, supposedly, a Leave campaign for spoiling papers: in this local election there were 28 spoiled papers, compared with 813/814 votes for the two Lib Dem candidates. That worked well, didn't it.
This doesn't read as a protest to get on with Brexit in this area. Not sure what it looks like in the other parts of the country
The tories have lost over 1300 seats, Labour last I looked, 77. Why are people treating these scales of loss as equivalent ?
Also, there’s been a jump to Green and Lib Dem by remainers, and a jump to ‘independents’ and other + a rash of spoiled ballots with Brexit written on them. So the problem is really not any clearer. These numbers 5-600 in either direction are similar.
They ar enot entirely equivalent, btu teh Tories being in power in Westminster would expect to lose seats, Labour being in opposition did expect to gain seats.
Also, the Tories have more seats to start with - still nearly twice as many as Labour. They have suffered a 27% loss, Labour expected 5-10% imcrease but managed a 4% loss.
So not quite equivalent. But not as far off as is seems.
... a rash of spoiled ballots with Brexit written on them ...
According to an article in the Independent, a Tory councillor somewhere in the Cotswolds held on to his seat by one vote - and that one was a spoiled ballot with "Brexit" written on it, which the officials took to mean a vote for the Tory.
Is it my imagination, or is Britain sinking to Trumpian levels of corruption and chicanery?
Local elections, I could be persuaded to vote for a good local councillor - particularly if I had more than enough votes. (Voting results said that was a common voting pattern - this particular councillor did by far and away the best of the Conservative candidates.)
Guidance from the Electoral Commission states that a ballot paper can be rejected if the voter’s intention is uncertain but not if it is not marked in the proper place or other than by a cross or by more than one mark.
and this ballot paper had a large arrow pointing to one candidate and the word Brexit.
It happens every election and it always annoys me when politicians and pundits look at how people voted and say this a a message about a particular issue.
The only message that can legitimately be taken from the way I voted is that I wanted a particular person to win the election. My vote does not say why I wanted that person to win, nor does it say what I want them to do if they do win although any manifesto and other promises are probably worth following up on.
If I want to send a particular message to a politician I can write, email or graffiti. If they ignore that (probable) I can make more of a fuss.
The Brexit excuse is a classic because Brexit itself will go away in the foreseeable future and then the Tories can pretend that the masses love them again and support all their disastrous policies.
... a rash of spoiled ballots with Brexit written on them ...
According to an article in the Independent, a Tory councillor somewhere in the Cotswolds held on to his seat by one vote - and that one was a spoiled ballot with "Brexit" written on it, which the officials took to mean a vote for the Tory.
Is it my imagination, or is Britain sinking to Trumpian levels of corruption and chicanery?
I read this story, and there are two points of significance from what I read.
1. The vote was otherwise tied, and the officer had to find a way of resolving the deadlock. In another place, it was a pick out of a hat. It is up to the officer to find a way of resolving it.
2. The losing candidate has registered a complaint.
Having said that, I think it was a wrong decision. And there should be a better way of resolving a tie - like letting them both serve.
Mary Beard posted on twitter that it seems like a current fudge. This seems to be typical of our sitting politicians - get the headlines now and kick all the actual problems down the road for others. Knowing that they will not be in power in 4 year time.
Given the new levels of mistrust between John Macdonald and May as expressed yesterday, and the absolute revolt both Labour and the Tories will face - Labour MPs will not vote for anything without a confirmatory plebiscite, and the Tories won't vote for anything that's acceptable to Labour - then the deal will go back to the people and the Tory party will implode.
I can't see a deal happening, but they are both trying to avoid being the fall-guy. For Corbyn to do such a deal would be suicide, Ramsay MacDonald redux. He is not daft.
I know what game May is playing.
I don't understand what Corbyn is doing.
I have increasingly convinced that the May/Corbyn deal will not go anywhere. They may agree (on balance, notwithstanding the recent encouraging statements, I don't think so) but I don't think it will get through Parliament. So I think this way of delivering Brexit is indeed dead. I think it unlikely that Corbyn doesn't know this.
So I am deeply distressed by the Labour Party's current position. But I don't think this route to pushing through Brexit will work; so a PV is still a realistic possibility.
However, the clock is ticking...
Strongly mixed feelings - well various forms or anger, frustration, despair and a hope that won't die...
Yes, I find Corbyn puzzling. I get that he wants maximum advantage, hence let the Tories impale themselves on Brexit. But is he negotiating to that end, or does he genuinely think he can be the midwife to a Tory deal, (hint of bias creeping in)? But why are people resigning from Labour, I don't get that.
I don't know about Corbyn. I suspect he is trying to show that he is pursuing Brexit as much as he can, because he wants it and he believes it is The Will Of The People.
I think he wants to get his deal supported by May. Just like May wants her deal ot be supported by Corbyn. But they are so different, it is not possible.
Stupid fucking politicians. All looking for short-term gain and not looking at the long-term.
The Telegraph is now reporting that Treeza has been holding talks with her aides about a three-way second referendum.
Which, of course, was inevitable the moment she promised that it would never happen. She's a sort of reverse-Cassandra: everything that she foretells will not happen, duly occurs; and no-one believes a word she says anyway.
Stupid fucking politicians. All looking for short-term gain and not looking at the long-term.
They just look to the next election. That's the problem with our democratic system. What we need is a life-long dictator. Once Donald Trump has organised that for himself we can study his methods and take inspiration.
Stupid fucking politicians. All looking for short-term gain and not looking at the long-term.
They just look to the next election. That's the problem with our democratic system. What we need is a life-long dictator. Once Donald Trump has organised that for himself we can study his methods and take inspiration.
I have argued before that a benevolent dictatorship is the only real solution. Specifically, someone who can get things done that they need to, but cannot personally benefit from the office once they have left (or while they are in office).
Unlike Donald. Who - in fairness - will almost certainly not benefit from his office when he leaves, but will spend the rest of his pitiful life in prison.
Stupid fucking politicians. All looking for short-term gain and not looking at the long-term.
They just look to the next election. That's the problem with our democratic system. What we need is a life-long dictator. Once Donald Trump has organised that for himself we can study his methods and take inspiration.
I have argued before that a benevolent dictatorship is the only real solution. Specifically, someone who can get things done that they need to, but cannot personally benefit from the office once they have left (or while they are in office).
Unlike Donald. Who - in fairness - will almost certainly not benefit from his office when he leaves, but will spend the rest of his pitiful life in prison.
Donald’s successor will surely pardon him. I imagine that he’s counting on that.
As for a benevolent dictator, benevolence is in very short supply these days, and dictators aren’t generally known for possessing it.
To give Treeza her due, she does seem to be driving the Tories into some sort of electoral abyss - a consummation devoutly to be wished, IMHO.
Though, if the alternative to the Tories is the Brexit "Party" then ... maybe a case of better the devil you know.
I’m glad you put ‘party’ in quotes. It’s not a party, it’s a one trick pony and will implode just as UKip has done. The people who are standing are not known for co-operating with others!
What kind of mess they make in the meantime is another question.
I think that Corbyn is doing what he said he would do, try to deliver on the manifesto first, failing that get a GE failing that a 2nd referendum. What both parties are doing right now, is demonstrating to the leave constituency that everything has been done that is possible to try for a deal without another referendum. Only once that is exhausted is it politically possible to get a second referendum.
They both know that a second referendum will not necessarily be won by remain, so what deal goes on the ballot is important.
To give Treeza her due, she does seem to be driving the Tories into some sort of electoral abyss - a consummation devoutly to be wished, IMHO.
Though, if the alternative to the Tories is the Brexit "Party" then ... maybe a case of better the devil you know.
I’m glad you put ‘party’ in quotes. It’s not a party, it’s a one trick pony and will implode just as UKip has done. The people who are standing are not known for co-operating with others!
What kind of mess they make in the meantime is another question.
You are probably right about implosion, but Farage's views make me nervous. He is obviously in favour of private health, and other unpleasant stuff. But I don't think they would get many MPs, as opposed to MEPs.
I'm not sure how far to the right the English public could go.
To give Treeza her due, she does seem to be driving the Tories into some sort of electoral abyss - a consummation devoutly to be wished, IMHO.
Though, if the alternative to the Tories is the Brexit "Party" then ... maybe a case of better the devil you know.
I’m glad you put ‘party’ in quotes. It’s not a party, it’s a one trick pony and will implode just as UKip has done. The people who are standing are not known for co-operating with others!
What kind of mess they make in the meantime is another question.
You are probably right about implosion, but Farage's views make me nervous. He is obviously in favour of private health, and other unpleasant stuff. But I don't think they would get many MPs, as opposed to MEPs.
I'm not sure how far to the right the English public could go.
At least as far as the German public of 90 odd years ago, given the wrong circumstances.
Comments
So they need to worry far, far less about staying elected and get on with what matters.
In that case we're fucked. I don't see the USA doing anything until some East Coast cities are flooded, and even then the Yahoos will blame The Gayz for it as God's Judgment on America.
Caroline Lucas.
She can. And she probably will. Credibility? Well that's a different matter all together.
She definitely was handing out contracts to G4S like candy while at the Home Office with apparent impunity. I was working at HMPS at the time they got the transport contract and were shockingly awful, yet went on to be given contracts to run prisons ..which we know all about now. I quickly came to think that signing the official secrets act had little to do with secrets and everything to do with not telling the public what was really going on and what an absolute shambles of a disgrace it was.
Sir Humphrey Apppleby blew the gaff in Yes Minister when he said that "The Official Secrets Act is not there to protect secrets: it's there to protect officials".
That said - and Sir Humphrey certainly knew how Westminster works - the sacking of Gavin Williamson - aka Private Pike - seems, as with most things Treeza does, to have created almost as many problems as it solves.
If the man is indeed guilty as charged, then why can't he be shown the evidence against him? I presume Treeza's working on the basis that since he's guilty he must already know what it is.
Anyone else spot the logical fallacy here?
Which makes me wonder what the current crop (Hah!) of whips have beeen doing. Can't Treeza even control them??
Labour have suffered, too, but to a lesser degree.
https://bbc.co.uk/news/topics/ceeqy0e9894t/england-local-elections-2019
Still a way to go, but, if this is a protest vote, surely she should resign NOW.
O wait...this is Tricky Treeza Trainwreck......
Again, FWIW, the LibDems have done Very Well. All shall have prizes.
OTOH, TBTG, the UKippers appear to have been wiped out.
That really is boss-level mind-fuckery.
Locally, a majority leave voting area, the LibDems came first and second in both wards, only fielding 4 candidates in all for 12 seats, the conservative candidates had significantly lower votes In both wards a conservative sitting councillor lost their seats, Labour came last and the far right candidate just above them. There was, supposedly, a Leave campaign for spoiling papers: in this local election there were 28 spoiled papers, compared with 813/814 votes for the two Lib Dem candidates. That worked well, didn't it.
This doesn't read as a protest to get on with Brexit in this area. Not sure what it looks like in the other parts of the country
Also, there’s been a jump to Green and Lib Dem by remainers, and a jump to ‘independents’ and other + a rash of spoiled ballots with Brexit written on them. So the problem is really not any clearer. These numbers 5-600 in either direction are similar.
Also, the Tories have more seats to start with - still nearly twice as many as Labour. They have suffered a 27% loss, Labour expected 5-10% imcrease but managed a 4% loss.
So not quite equivalent. But not as far off as is seems.
Is it my imagination, or is Britain sinking to Trumpian levels of corruption and chicanery?
The only message that can legitimately be taken from the way I voted is that I wanted a particular person to win the election. My vote does not say why I wanted that person to win, nor does it say what I want them to do if they do win although any manifesto and other promises are probably worth following up on.
If I want to send a particular message to a politician I can write, email or graffiti. If they ignore that (probable) I can make more of a fuss.
The Brexit excuse is a classic because Brexit itself will go away in the foreseeable future and then the Tories can pretend that the masses love them again and support all their disastrous policies.
I read this story, and there are two points of significance from what I read.
1. The vote was otherwise tied, and the officer had to find a way of resolving the deadlock. In another place, it was a pick out of a hat. It is up to the officer to find a way of resolving it.
2. The losing candidate has registered a complaint.
Having said that, I think it was a wrong decision. And there should be a better way of resolving a tie - like letting them both serve.
Damn.
And Blarst.
Still, it was a fair way of resolving the issue, ISTM.
Which I read as There will be no deal, and both sides are looking for someone else to blame.
I know what game May is playing.
I don't understand what Corbyn is doing.
I have increasingly convinced that the May/Corbyn deal will not go anywhere. They may agree (on balance, notwithstanding the recent encouraging statements, I don't think so) but I don't think it will get through Parliament. So I think this way of delivering Brexit is indeed dead. I think it unlikely that Corbyn doesn't know this.
So I am deeply distressed by the Labour Party's current position. But I don't think this route to pushing through Brexit will work; so a PV is still a realistic possibility.
However, the clock is ticking...
Strongly mixed feelings - well various forms or anger, frustration, despair and a hope that won't die...
AFZ
I think he wants to get his deal supported by May. Just like May wants her deal ot be supported by Corbyn. But they are so different, it is not possible.
Stupid fucking politicians. All looking for short-term gain and not looking at the long-term.
Which, of course, was inevitable the moment she promised that it would never happen. She's a sort of reverse-Cassandra: everything that she foretells will not happen, duly occurs; and no-one believes a word she says anyway.
They just look to the next election. That's the problem with our democratic system. What we need is a life-long dictator. Once Donald Trump has organised that for himself we can study his methods and take inspiration.
Please can someone call Lord Vetinari?
Now?
Please? Pretty please?
I have argued before that a benevolent dictatorship is the only real solution. Specifically, someone who can get things done that they need to, but cannot personally benefit from the office once they have left (or while they are in office).
Unlike Donald. Who - in fairness - will almost certainly not benefit from his office when he leaves, but will spend the rest of his pitiful life in prison.
Donald’s successor will surely pardon him. I imagine that he’s counting on that.
As for a benevolent dictator, benevolence is in very short supply these days, and dictators aren’t generally known for possessing it.
Not necessarily. It depends on whether Pence gets impeached first...
AFZ
I’m glad you put ‘party’ in quotes. It’s not a party, it’s a one trick pony and will implode just as UKip has done. The people who are standing are not known for co-operating with others!
What kind of mess they make in the meantime is another question.
They both know that a second referendum will not necessarily be won by remain, so what deal goes on the ballot is important.
You are probably right about implosion, but Farage's views make me nervous. He is obviously in favour of private health, and other unpleasant stuff. But I don't think they would get many MPs, as opposed to MEPs.
I'm not sure how far to the right the English public could go.
At least as far as the German public of 90 odd years ago, given the wrong circumstances.
Not.