Anyone who isn't Reform is part of the 'establishment.'
If anyone disagrees with them they are 'part of the establishment.'
It's a convenient populist catch-all and shorthand for the media, academia, the Westminster system as it stands, local and regional government, any lobby or group Reform disapproves of.
What I don't understand is how anyone falls for it. A privately educated former stockbroker who hasn't had a job in decades that didn't involve being a professional politician and he's supposed to be somehow "anti-establishment"?
They fall for it because they've defined 'establishment' differently to how you define it.
It's an elastic phrase that stretches to include the likes of thee and me - in my case a liberal arts educated social democrat, in your case a socialist. Both are part of the 'establishment' as they see folk like that as running the media, local government, the arts ...
That said, I heard Tory turncoat Robert Jenrick say that his former Party was all about their wealthy pals in Belgravia whereas Reform were genuinely about the working people of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
I don't think Reform have any cohesive or coherent view on these things. They are simply far-right opportunists who use any sense of grievance to further their own ends, be it 'immigrants taking our jobs' to council tax precepts to whatever else they think will get a reaction.
Sarah Pochin complained about the number of people of colour on TV adverts for goodness sake ...
They seize on anything they feel will appeal to their 'everyone's out to get us' supporters.
I will accept Nigel Farage’s request to be appointed Steward and Bailiff of the Manor of Northstead.
It is a farce and a desperate distraction, and the people of Clacton deserve better.
But if he wants to spend the summer arguing with a bin, I won't stop him.
...and Andy Burnham remarks that it's good to know when bin day is...
Meanwhile, Count Binface has already raised about £15k for his election campaign. I'm tempted to bung him a couple of ££, just for the hell of it.
I wonder how long it'll take for Farage to realise what a complete fool he's making of himself?
Forever. I doubt Farage will ever realise he is in any way wrong, foolish or misguided. His privileged background and education has given him the boneheaded sense of entitlement provides.
Forever. I doubt Farage will ever realise he is in any way wrong, foolish or misguided. His privileged background and education has given him the boneheaded sense of entitlement provides.
"privileged background and education ... boneheaded sense of entitlement ", see dictionary under "Establishment".
Well, the problem with only a joke opposition character running is that you underline the notion that politicians don't care for them in the mind of the electorate.
And in this case it isn't even a purely organic candidate.
This is the problem I have with the Leader's Courtesy, when a party-leader with no seat runs in a by-election and the other parties refrain from fielding candidates so as to allow him or her to get into the Commons. It just seems to say: "We care more about getting our opponents a seat in the House than in giving our supporters in that constituency someone to vote for."
(The Courtesy is not universally observed in Canada; I think it was actually most common in Quebec provincial politics, for whatever reason.)
I don't think I've ever encountered "Leader's Courtesy" in the UK. Though, it would normally be the case that a party leader would stand in the safest possible constituency they can find, so although the other parties field candidates they do so without expectation of winning.
So if I follow correctly, the election will have a comedy candidate who has no serious intention of working as an MP against a man who wears a dustbin?
I don't think I've ever encountered "Leader's Courtesy" in the UK. Though, it would normally be the case that a party leader would stand in the safest possible constituency they can find, so although the other parties field candidates they do so without expectation of winning.
Traditionally people don’t contest the Speaker’s seat, but I think that is the only instance,
So if I follow correctly, the election will have a comedy candidate who has no serious intention of working as an MP against a man who wears a dustbin?
I don't think I've ever encountered "Leader's Courtesy" in the UK. Though, it would normally be the case that a party leader would stand in the safest possible constituency they can find, so although the other parties field candidates they do so without expectation of winning.
Traditionally people don’t contest the Speaker’s seat, but I think that is the only instance,
I think the Greens put up a candidate against the Speaker.
I don't think I've ever encountered "Leader's Courtesy" in the UK. Though, it would normally be the case that a party leader would stand in the safest possible constituency they can find, so although the other parties field candidates they do so without expectation of winning.
Traditionally people don’t contest the Speaker’s seat, but I think that is the only instance,
Having a non-partisan Speaker who is also an elected MP is one Westminster relic I would happily see abolished. Not that I've ever really seen the office put to outrageously partisan ends, but it's just always seemed kinda weird to me.
I don't think I've ever encountered "Leader's Courtesy" in the UK. Though, it would normally be the case that a party leader would stand in the safest possible constituency they can find, so although the other parties field candidates they do so without expectation of winning.
Traditionally people don’t contest the Speaker’s seat, but I think that is the only instance,
Having a non-partisan Speaker who is also an elected MP is one Westminster relic I would happily see abolished. Not that I've ever really seen the office put to outrageously partisan ends, but it's just always seemed kinda weird to me.
And oh that pathetic exercise when the Speaker is hauled off the benches to the Speaker’s chair. The staged reluctance and idiotic giggling. Its like they are initiating someone to Pop (an Eton college society).
I don't think I've ever encountered "Leader's Courtesy" in the UK. Though, it would normally be the case that a party leader would stand in the safest possible constituency they can find, so although the other parties field candidates they do so without expectation of winning.
Traditionally people don’t contest the Speaker’s seat, but I think that is the only instance,
Having a non-partisan Speaker who is also an elected MP is one Westminster relic I would happily see abolished. Not that I've ever really seen the office put to outrageously partisan ends, but it's just always seemed kinda weird to me.
And oh that pathetic exercise when the Speaker is hauled off the benches to the Speaker’s chair. The staged reluctance and idiotic giggling. Its like they are initiating someone to Pop (an Eton college society).
These daft rituals (and I include that bollocks with Black Rod) always reminds me of St Pterry and the Ceremony of the Archancellor's Keys
They also take an MP 'hostage' during the state opening of Parliament to echo the practice after the Restoration when an MP was held temporarily during Charles II's visits to ensure he wasn't seized and forced to pass legislation against his will.
I don't think I've ever encountered "Leader's Courtesy" in the UK. Though, it would normally be the case that a party leader would stand in the safest possible constituency they can find, so although the other parties field candidates they do so without expectation of winning.
Traditionally people don’t contest the Speaker’s seat, but I think that is the only instance,
Having a non-partisan Speaker who is also an elected MP is one Westminster relic I would happily see abolished. Not that I've ever really seen the office put to outrageously partisan ends, but it's just always seemed kinda weird to me.
There are so many issues with the tradition. Top of the list for me is that the Speaker is then an MP who is limited in what they can do to represent the constituents who elected them - no point in writing emails to ask them to support or oppose particular motions, for example. And, fewer MPs available to do all the committee work etc. You also get someone in the role who is often an amateur in terms of chairing discussions, and even if they're acting impartially to the best of their ability they can still make mistakes. I would rather an appointed civil servant with experience in chairing debates and a good foundation in knowledge of the standing orders for debate.
Unfortunately, when the Scottish Parliament was created there was an opportunity to get rid of these sort of weird features but we ended up with a Presiding Officer drawn from the ranks of the small number of MSPs.
Early in my civil service career I remember someone asking a moderately senior civil servant this question, and the response was that we serve the public first and foremost whereas the speaker serves Parliament. We saw when John Bercow was Speaker that he spoke for Parliament and not the ministers.
One of my regrets is that civil servants are now expected to serve ministers firstly instead of the public.
If the speaker primarily serves Parliament rather than the public then why not get Parliament to appoint someone to do this job rather than stealing the public's MP?
If the speaker primarily serves Parliament rather than the public then why not get Parliament to appoint someone to do this job rather than stealing the public's MP?
I think the smooth running of parliament also serves the publics needs. Plenty of parliaments have their equivalents of MPs as speaker.
If the speaker primarily serves Parliament rather than the public then why not get Parliament to appoint someone to do this job rather than stealing the public's MP?
I think the smooth running of parliament also serves the publics needs. Plenty of parliaments have their equivalents of MPs as speaker.
Though the role of Speaker in e.g. the US House of Representatives is very different.
If the speaker primarily serves Parliament rather than the public then why not get Parliament to appoint someone to do this job rather than stealing the public's MP?
I think the smooth running of parliament also serves the publics needs. Plenty of parliaments have their equivalents of MPs as speaker.
Though the role of Speaker in e.g. the US House of Representatives is very different.
I recently departed from a left-wing forum dedicated to US politics, consisting largely of self-loathing Americans and elsewhere-anglosphere types who agreed with them. During one of the perennial discussions on comparative politics, an American lamented the the supposedly hyper-powerful office of POTUS(*), and wished that his nation's system was more like Canada's, where, he said, "the Speaker has way more power than the prime minister".
I suspect that my friend assumed that the Speaker in Canada has as much power as the Speaker in the USA, PLUS the ability to give policy directions to the prime minister. I'd further speculate that he acquired this misconception from watching Question Period a few times, and misinterpreting what he saw.
(*) While it as a somewhat contestable question in the era of slapdash war-powers and expansive EOs, the tragicomic history of the League of Nations should put to rest any motion of the American presidency as some sorta rampaging legislative monster.
I'm actually wondering whether Reform have lost the plot. Beaten in a by-election by the Green Party's plumber? Let's nominate a plumber for the next by-election. Oh look, Labour have suddenly become a bit more popular after holding a by-election. Let's try that too, although we can't go on to change our leader because Nigel.
I'm reading a biography of Anthony Blunt (which includes the other spies - Philby et al). Am I alone in suspecting Farage could be a foreign agent?
You mean in the way that the Cambridge Five were? Handing over secrets and whatnot? What evidence would suggest that?
Unlikely. Blunt and the others were recruited as idealists while at university. Farage has only gone to any university to speak, not to learn, and I don’t think any intelligence service would touch him with a bargepole. Utterly unsound, unable to keep his counsel and lacking, as they say in the civil service, capacity.
I'm reading a biography of Anthony Blunt (which includes the other spies - Philby et al). Am I alone in suspecting Farage could be a foreign agent?
I think it's unlikely. If (and I emphasise *if*) he's the tool of a foreign power it would be as an asset rather than an agent. It's a lot easier for malign actors to boost existing threats in the direction they were already going than create a Manchurian candidate. The evidence of the last few years is that social media propaganda bots are used to stoke division and amplify (predominantly far right and pro-Russia) voices, and undermine solidarity against Russian aggression. That doesn't require Farage to be directed, controlled, or even in contact with foreign powers, only that they find his rhetoric and actions suit their goals.
Nigel Farage has launched his bid for Clacton with a rally for a few of his loyal followers, sympathetic press and his team in a private area in Colchester. It was a small private event only invited guests. Hiding much Nigel?
I note he's continuing the theme of not being in Clacton.
I seem to recall that he carried on campaigning for leave when everyone else paused after Jo Cox's murder. I wonder whether the murder of one of his own has rattled him? Milkshakes and paper cups certainly seemed to scare him.
ETA plus his attempt to make the narrative about him seems to have badly backfired thus far.
@Gamma Gamaliel That's beside the point. He was elected to represent Clacton, not Colchester. He said he wanted the voters of Clacton to judge him, but he's afraid to show his face there because he thinks they already have...
If he wins, he has to face the music about where his money comes from and nobody will ever forget that he was almost defeated by a bin. If he loses, we have The Rt. Hon. Count Binface MP and the media will quickly lose interest in Farage whining about his defeat. Either way, we win.
Of course, which was rather the ironic point I was making. Hence my 'more seriously' comment.
He's never been particularly visible in Clacton before. Why should that change now? He believes he's entitled to their vote regardless.
If he wins he'll believe he's entitled to do so. If he loses it will be everyone else's fault.
When asked if he'd ever visited Clacton, Binface replied; ' No, but I understand from the previous incumbent that this isn't a requirement.'.
More seriously, the Clacton by-election has had a knock-on effect by diverting attention and Reform UK* resources from the arguably more important by-election taking place in Manchester on 30th July to replace Andy Burnham as mayor. Labour will certainly win because of the supplementary vote system, but there were worries that Reform UK might top the first preference votes and claim a sort of victory ( and that the system was rigged against them by 'The Establishment '). Latest polling puts Labour on 38% with Reform UK on 24% and the Greens on 17%, all other parties on single figures. This hands Burnham a nice electoral boost early in his premiership.
* whenever I type Reform UK, predictive text always suggests the next word should be ' headbangers '
Comments
They fall for it because they've defined 'establishment' differently to how you define it.
It's an elastic phrase that stretches to include the likes of thee and me - in my case a liberal arts educated social democrat, in your case a socialist. Both are part of the 'establishment' as they see folk like that as running the media, local government, the arts ...
That said, I heard Tory turncoat Robert Jenrick say that his former Party was all about their wealthy pals in Belgravia whereas Reform were genuinely about the working people of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
I don't think Reform have any cohesive or coherent view on these things. They are simply far-right opportunists who use any sense of grievance to further their own ends, be it 'immigrants taking our jobs' to council tax precepts to whatever else they think will get a reaction.
Sarah Pochin complained about the number of people of colour on TV adverts for goodness sake ...
They seize on anything they feel will appeal to their 'everyone's out to get us' supporters.
Forever. I doubt Farage will ever realise he is in any way wrong, foolish or misguided. His privileged background and education has given him the boneheaded sense of entitlement provides.
This is the problem I have with the Leader's Courtesy, when a party-leader with no seat runs in a by-election and the other parties refrain from fielding candidates so as to allow him or her to get into the Commons. It just seems to say: "We care more about getting our opponents a seat in the House than in giving our supporters in that constituency someone to vote for."
(The Courtesy is not universally observed in Canada; I think it was actually most common in Quebec provincial politics, for whatever reason.)
Traditionally people don’t contest the Speaker’s seat, but I think that is the only instance,
Sounds about right!
I think the Greens put up a candidate against the Speaker.
Will this cause another “joke election?”
Only if Jenrick decides to follow the example of his Beloved Leader.
IIRC, he was elected as a tory MP, but subsequently defected to Reform - a by-election might enable the tories to get their own back...
Having a non-partisan Speaker who is also an elected MP is one Westminster relic I would happily see abolished. Not that I've ever really seen the office put to outrageously partisan ends, but it's just always seemed kinda weird to me.
And oh that pathetic exercise when the Speaker is hauled off the benches to the Speaker’s chair. The staged reluctance and idiotic giggling. Its like they are initiating someone to Pop (an Eton college society).
These daft rituals (and I include that bollocks with Black Rod) always reminds me of St Pterry and the Ceremony of the Archancellor's Keys
They go for a champagne breakfast at the Palace.
Or so I'm told.
But then I'm a sucker for arcane ritual ...
Provided it's not Masonic.
Unfortunately, when the Scottish Parliament was created there was an opportunity to get rid of these sort of weird features but we ended up with a Presiding Officer drawn from the ranks of the small number of MSPs.
One of my regrets is that civil servants are now expected to serve ministers firstly instead of the public.
(Nb, I did join in 1978 and a lot has changed!)
I think the smooth running of parliament also serves the publics needs. Plenty of parliaments have their equivalents of MPs as speaker.
Though the role of Speaker in e.g. the US House of Representatives is very different.
I recently departed from a left-wing forum dedicated to US politics, consisting largely of self-loathing Americans and elsewhere-anglosphere types who agreed with them. During one of the perennial discussions on comparative politics, an American lamented the the supposedly hyper-powerful office of POTUS(*), and wished that his nation's system was more like Canada's, where, he said, "the Speaker has way more power than the prime minister".
I suspect that my friend assumed that the Speaker in Canada has as much power as the Speaker in the USA, PLUS the ability to give policy directions to the prime minister. I'd further speculate that he acquired this misconception from watching Question Period a few times, and misinterpreting what he saw.
(*) While it as a somewhat contestable question in the era of slapdash war-powers and expansive EOs, the tragicomic history of the League of Nations should put to rest any motion of the American presidency as some sorta rampaging legislative monster.
Pathetic.
You mean in the way that the Cambridge Five were? Handing over secrets and whatnot? What evidence would suggest that?
They do have some other emphases, such as cutting public expenditure and sticking it to the liberal 'establishment', as they see it.
Unlikely. Blunt and the others were recruited as idealists while at university. Farage has only gone to any university to speak, not to learn, and I don’t think any intelligence service would touch him with a bargepole. Utterly unsound, unable to keep his counsel and lacking, as they say in the civil service, capacity.
Doublethink, Admin
Please delete my post as you see fit.
I think it's unlikely. If (and I emphasise *if*) he's the tool of a foreign power it would be as an asset rather than an agent. It's a lot easier for malign actors to boost existing threats in the direction they were already going than create a Manchurian candidate. The evidence of the last few years is that social media propaganda bots are used to stoke division and amplify (predominantly far right and pro-Russia) voices, and undermine solidarity against Russian aggression. That doesn't require Farage to be directed, controlled, or even in contact with foreign powers, only that they find his rhetoric and actions suit their goals.
I seem to recall that he carried on campaigning for leave when everyone else paused after Jo Cox's murder. I wonder whether the murder of one of his own has rattled him? Milkshakes and paper cups certainly seemed to scare him.
ETA plus his attempt to make the narrative about him seems to have badly backfired thus far.
He continues to avoid Clacton.
He avoids Clacton, because he knows he's being made fun of by many people there, and he has no sense of humour whatsoever AFAICS.
He will be hiding in his cupboard with the skeletons
Meanwhile, a suggestion from a YouTube viewer of one of Count Binface's videos:
'Come on, Clacton! Just DO IT!!'
It does seem as though he's keeping well away from Clacton, perhaps afraid that Count Binface might pursue him relentlessly around the streets...
Given the choice ... ?
More seriously, if Farage wins it will be 'despite' the 'establishment' (as he defines it).
If he loses it will be 'because' of the 'establishment' (as he defines it).
He will feel vindicated by the first outcome, victimised by the second.
He's never been particularly visible in Clacton before. Why should that change now? He believes he's entitled to their vote regardless.
If he wins he'll believe he's entitled to do so. If he loses it will be everyone else's fault.
When asked if he'd ever visited Clacton, Binface replied; ' No, but I understand from the previous incumbent that this isn't a requirement.'.
More seriously, the Clacton by-election has had a knock-on effect by diverting attention and Reform UK* resources from the arguably more important by-election taking place in Manchester on 30th July to replace Andy Burnham as mayor. Labour will certainly win because of the supplementary vote system, but there were worries that Reform UK might top the first preference votes and claim a sort of victory ( and that the system was rigged against them by 'The Establishment '). Latest polling puts Labour on 38% with Reform UK on 24% and the Greens on 17%, all other parties on single figures. This hands Burnham a nice electoral boost early in his premiership.
* whenever I type Reform UK, predictive text always suggests the next word should be ' headbangers '