BS: Brexit & other UK political topics

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 19 Nov 20 - 08:13 AM

I'll still continue futiley voting Labour,
for lack of a better alternative to never voting at all...

"Labour - The Hopeles Party for Hope"...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 19 Nov 20 - 08:18 AM

"s"..

.there it is.. found the litle buger..

I mentioned earlier in the wek
that my keyboard has developed a problem
with double leters...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 19 Nov 20 - 08:57 AM

I get totally fed up with factional foot stomping. it is pathetic when the factions threaten to inflict tory vermin on us until they get their way. They are not labour, they are not socialist because all they care about is their own faction having power and authority and they don't give a toss about labour and socialist values.

I was not a supporter of the previous Labour leadership, but I still gave up my time and energy to campaign on behalf of the labour party - and locally we have won every election: Council, GLA, London Mayor, local MP, even the local referendum vote as it was a democratic vote.

Now that leadership has changed as a result of another demographic vote, those who call themselves socialist are throwing their toys out of the pram and almost from day one have proved that they have no loyalty to the labour party at all as all they are interested in is personal power and not giving a toss about our society.

If factional in-fighting screws up the 2024 election, the tories MUST not be allowed to retain power.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Nov 20 - 09:24 AM

Well in my view an injustice was done to Jeremy Corbyn when he was suspended. Of course, he provided ammunition when he spoke out so quickly in the terms he used, but I repeat: he did not deny antisemitism, he spoke out against antisemitism, he did not say that nothing should be done and what he said was miles away from hate speech. I'll tell you summat for nowt: all through the seventies I was, for my sins, a hard-left trade union activist in the East End of London at a time when trade unions were perceived, incorrectly of course, as having too much clout, to be feared (cheers, media). What I learned then was that if you put two lefties together in a room, there will soon be a split. What I also learned is that all the disingenuous pleading for unity came from the more right-wing faction, every time. And what they really meant, every time, was "drop the argument and do things our way." It doesn't and shouldn't work. It's unprincipled for a start. The right in the Labour Party, go as far back as you like, not only disrespects the true socialism of the left ("because it's bad tactics") but routinely tries to sideline it. As in any political party, the quest for seniority provides grave danger of seeding careerism. Jeremy was a shining example of a principled man who shunned that. Keir has fallen for it hook, line and sinker. The only way he can see his ambition sustained is by ditching principle and pandering, pathetically, to the attack dogs behind his back whose antennae for mostly fake antisemitism are sharply tuned.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 19 Nov 20 - 11:38 AM

Great post SPB-Cooperator, thanks for that. Party before Personalities - the Golden Rule, understood perfectly by the Tories but not, apparently, by a substantial number of members of the Labour Party.

Get ready for permanent Tory rule.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Nov 20 - 12:51 PM

But as I say, the right have this habit of forever saying "Let's have unity and let's have it by doing things totally our way." A party leadership that thinks that way will forever be the leadership of a split party. Realpolitik.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 19 Nov 20 - 01:07 PM

Who'l last longer as leader of their parties, boris or starmer...???

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Raggytash
Date: 19 Nov 20 - 01:22 PM

I left the Labour party in the late 80's. Our branch had selected a candidate to be our prospective MP after a hustings meeting. We were very happy with the way she, above the other candidates, had presented herself.

At our next branch meeting 4 guys arrived from Central office dressed in Crombie's and red scarfs and told us we couldn't have her as our candidate and we should now select another woman who we didn't know, had never met, had never spoken to and who as we found out had never even visited the town she was picked to represent.

We were disgusted at their attitude and several of us resigned on the night, and others resigned later.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 19 Nov 20 - 02:47 PM

I would have told them to fuck off!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 19 Nov 20 - 02:55 PM

bonz - since of late you sem to be drifting further left in some of your posts.
Maybe time for you to aceopt it and join Labour.

There's not enough honest direct resorts to saying "fuck off!!!" in the party.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 19 Nov 20 - 03:05 PM

”But as I say, the right have this habit of forever saying "Let's have unity and let's have it by doing things totally our way."

First of all, I’m not ‘the Right’ Steve, I’m Centre-Left. And it’s the Left who are wanting it ‘totally their way’ judging by the evidence here. People like me are saying, “Stop fighting each other, find centre-ground, and DO YOUR JOB which, you Corbynistas seem to have forgotten, is to FIGHT THE TORY GOVERNMENT.

Party members don’t elect Governments, the voting public do that and, in 2019, the voting public told Corbyn resoundingly to Fuck Off. Anyone with an ounce of dignity and self-respect who had led the LP to its worst GE defeat in living memory - a defeat by the weakest Tory party led by the weakest Tory leader in living memory and with nothing to offer but a one-issue manifesto - would need no ‘gentle behind the scenes persuasion to retire’. Rather than hanging around shit-stirring he’d have been compelled by his own sense of shame to do it of his own volition the day after the election.

I repeat, as I’ve repeated many times - the Party is far, far bigger than any individual, including Corbyn, and members should get their intransigent heads around that unarguable fact, unite behind the current leader, who was democratically elected by those same members, stop wasting the votes of those of us who demonstrated our trust in Labour at the GE and who were failed disastrously, and start working to free the nation from this self-serving, shameless, shameful bunch of Tory rogues currently raping the United Kingdom.

Until that begins to happen, the LP exists for no reason other than to stimulate its members’ vulgar public display of political onanism.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 19 Nov 20 - 03:24 PM

I'd have thought starmer would have suficient inteligence not to make such a political martyr of Corbyn..

.. unles.. he's doing it deliberately as part of a calculated strategy
to incite mas constructive dismisal from the leftiest members...???

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 19 Nov 20 - 04:07 PM

Corbyn is making a martyr of himself.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Nov 20 - 06:50 PM

Well, John. Starmer, McCluskey, Hodge, Lansman, Ellman and the Board Of Deputies are all making a hell of a lot of noise. One person who isn't making a noise is Jeremy Corbyn. Hardly the martyr style, that, is it? And let me just put this to you. Read the words that Jeremy Corbyn uttered in reaction to the report that basically damned him. Did he deny antisemitism? No he didn't. Did he say that nothing needed to be done? No he didn't. Did he speak intemperately and with hatred? No he didn't. He expressed some disagreement, in measured terms in my opinion, of a report that he regarded had unfairly excoriated him. So was that sufficient to suspend him? If you say no, though he was unwise to open his mouth at that time, your response by any measure is nothing if not fair-minded. If you say yes, you are effectively arguing against free speech, against that treasured concept of Labour being a broad church. You are also conniving in the opportunism that we have seen in the Party on a number of occasions recently aimed at using even the slightest pretext for getting rid of people who you don't like. Not that they've done much wrong, just that you don't like them because they don't fit your agenda. And before you jump down my throat with a litany of "wrong things" that Jeremy has done, just remember that he was suspended, ostensibly, for his form of words as the report was published. Not for anything else, eh? Or was he? And can you honestly say that that's the bandwagon you're not jumping on? It's not Corbyn who's a martyr. Starmer is making a martyr of the party.

As for left and right, my context in these posts has been the Labour Party. Corbyn, the Campaign Group and union representatives such as McCluskey, among others, are on the left of the party. Starmer and most of his cabinet are on the right of the party. There are far harder lefties outside the party than the people I've named and, in the overall scheme of things, Starmer and co are somewhere in the centre of UK politics ("centre-left" is definitely pushing it in my opinion). It's a bit weird really. Most lefties I've known are puffing their chests out with pride when they get called lefties, but, oddly, very few people ever like to be labelled "right." My remarks with regard to Labour are purely in the context of the party. I would have thought that was obvious, but hey ho.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Nov 20 - 07:05 PM

And on a slightly whimsical note, Priti Patel, who abused her position in government by making secret unauthorised liaisons with the Israeli regime, and who has now been found guilty of breaching ministerial rules via bullying, is likely to get no more than a slap on the wrist. Jeremy, chucked off the Labour benches. Priti, a cabinet minister and the most powerful woman in government. Jeremy, just a backbencher. Quite a contrast, eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: The Sandman
Date: 20 Nov 20 - 01:39 AM

i agree with Steve

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Nov 20 - 07:12 AM

Cheers, Dick.

So Priti was adjudged by a lengthy enquiry to have breached the ministerial code and bullied her underlings. but Boris, on his own and overnight, before anyone has had a proper chance to see the report, sez Oh no she didn't, so end of, right? (We'll see...)

Jeremy Corbyn was adjudged by a lengthy enquiry to have not adequately addressed the antisemitism issue. He acknowledged the issue and accepted that more had to be done, but protested, in mild language, that the issue had been exaggerated (and he wasn't exactly in a minority of one in thinking that, was he?). But he was thrown out of the party, and then, when reinstated by a unanimous vote of an NEC committee, was denied the whip.

Compare and contrast. And don't forget to compare and contrast the levels of "media outrage" being generated by each. A budgie might land on Priti's shoulder whilst the hawks will circle over Jeremy's head...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 20 Nov 20 - 07:22 AM

I'd rather a seagull shat on her head...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Nov 20 - 07:26 AM

...Or a rather athletic one that could shit horizontally right on to that smirk....

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 20 Nov 20 - 08:14 AM

It is a pity pigs don't fly.....Pottymouth Patel seems to be proud of being xenophobic.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 20 Nov 20 - 09:02 AM

I'll reserve judgement until/unless we see the report. But it is being reported differently in the Telegraph.
According to the front page:
"Priti Patel 'unintentionally' breached the ministerial code. . . However, the inquiry also found she had become 'justifiably frustrated' by obstructive mandarins who failed to tell her about the impact of her behaviour."

That seems to be in line with her previous claim that there had been no complaints for her to respond to.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Nov 20 - 09:12 AM

*Sigh*. Why am I not surprised at that, Nigel?

And now we're hearing that the government sourced PPE from factories in China that were using North Korean slave labour...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 20 Nov 20 - 09:27 AM

And now we're hearing that the government sourced PPE from factories in China that were using North Korean slave labour...

At the start of the pandemic countries around the world were attempting to source whatever supplies of PPE they could get, and the NHS was suffering through a shortage of such equipment.
Under such circumstances the government were justified in buying what equipment they could, from almost any source.
In better times, when demand does not greatly outstrip supply, you can afford the luxury of selecting your suppliers with greater care.
The same supply and demand rules means that we (as a country) are placing orders for vaccines before they have been thoroughly tested, and from multiple suppliers (10 million here, 40 million there).
Some knowledge of 'market forces' helps people to understand what is happening, and why.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Nov 20 - 10:10 AM

Ye gods, Nigel, two posts, two efforts to defend the indefensible...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 20 Nov 20 - 10:53 AM

Ye gods, Nigel, two posts, two efforts to defend the indefensible...

No, If you would read, and understand, first. "I'll reserve judgement until/unless we see the report."

1, I wasn't defending Priti Patel, but pointing out that the report has yet to be published. Until it is then different sources will highlight different parts which may be in the original.
2, It may be possible, with the benefit of hindsight, to show the PPE was sourced from China, but made under unsuitable conditions. But I don't doubt that PPE obtained from other countries (or from UK suppliers) might also have a similar origin. At the time of purchase it was important to get PPE supplies from somewhere, and there was a global shortage.
Would you have preferred that the NHS were told they could have no further PPE until after suppliers (and their whole supply chain) had been given full vetting?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Raggytash
Date: 20 Nov 20 - 10:58 AM

What was reported Nigel was:

"Sir Alex Allan’s findings, based on the Cabinet Office investigation, concluded that Patel’s approach “amounted to behaviour that can be described as bullying” – noting instances of shouting and swearing – and decided that she had breached the ministerial code, although he said her actions may have been “unintentional”.

So the man in charge of the report quite clearly states her action WERE bullying and had broken the ministerial code but tempered that by saying her actions MAY have been unintentional.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 20 Nov 20 - 12:38 PM

I would just point out that being "unintentional" does not excuse breaches of law, and rarely codes of behaviour of any kind. After all, almost anyone could claim a behaviour was unintentional, if that was all it took. But of course, the claim she was unaware of such behaviour bears little weight when Sir Philip Rutnam resigned after accusing her of being involved in a "vicious and orchestrated campaign". Even if she denies it, it would be reasonable if you were accused of it to wonder why people might think you were.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Nov 20 - 12:48 PM

From today's Daily Mash.

PRITI Patel has confessed she had no idea that Chinese burns, nutsack drawer-slammings and regular wedgies were what the weak considered ‘bullying’.

The home secretary faces allegations of what civil servants call bullying and she calls ‘robust motivational techniques’, including getting your briefcase thrown onto the roof and swirlies.

She said: “So calling a senior civil servant a four-eyed pisswipe who shags his mum is ‘bullying’ now, is it? Well I didn’t know.

“May I remind you that some of these people insist they are ‘politically neutral’ instead of backing Brexit to the absolute hilt? If that’s not provocation I don’t know what is.

“Yes, perhaps I did flush the occasional lunch down the toilets. Perhaps a few pairs of glasses got stamped on. Perhaps copies of the ministerial code left on my desk, with key passages highlighted, were returned smeared with excrement.

But I am a strong, decisive woman who demands a lot of my employees, and I don’t apologise for that. Now come here. Me and my gang are going to throw you in the bins.”

Conservative MP Eleanor Shaw said: “Priti is not a bully and is a kind, wonderful person. When I hear her coming I definitely do not hide in the toilets.”

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 20 Nov 20 - 12:53 PM

Aha.. "Plausible deniability" rears it's predictable head again
as a flimsy defence for a high ranking tory wrongdoer...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 20 Nov 20 - 02:27 PM

From: Raggytash
Date: 20 Nov 20 - 10:58 AM
What was reported Nigel was:
"Sir Alex Allan’s findings, based on the Cabinet Office investigation . . .

"What was reported" where? and by whom?. (It helps to judge the value of any "quoted" comment)
At least Steve's quote is shown to be from a satirical website.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Raggytash
Date: 20 Nov 20 - 03:01 PM

From the actual report Nigel. It is in much of the media.

"“My advice is that the Home Secretary has not consistently met the high standards required by the Ministerial Code of treating her civil servants with consideration and respect. Her approach on occasions has amounted to behaviour that can described as bullying in terms of impact felt by individuals.

To that extent her behaviour has been in breach of the Ministerial Code, even if unintentionally."

You can try and spin it all you want but the facts remain the same. I am appalled that you can even try and defend her.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 20 Nov 20 - 03:31 PM

From the Guardian:

However, Sir Philip Rutnam, who resigned as the Home Office’s permanent secretary after accusing Patel of a “vicious and orchestrated briefing campaign” against him, added to the pressure on Patel by challenging a claim in the bullying report that she had been given no feedback about her behaviour by civil servants, and was therefore unaware of the impact.

The Guardian Today newsletter: the headlines, the analysis, the debate – sent direct to you

 

Read more

“This is not correct,” Rutnam said. “As early as August 2019, the month after her appointment, she was advised that she must not shout and swear at staff. I advised her on a number of further occasions between September 2019 and February 2020 about the need to treat staff with respect, and to make changes to protect health, safety and wellbeing.”

In another remarkable admission, he said he was “at no stage asked to contribute evidence to the Cabinet Office investigation”.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Nov 20 - 05:42 PM

Doesn't that make her a liar and the investigation a whitewash, or what?

By the way, Nigel, satirical or not, many a true sentiment has been expressed in jest....

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Nov 20 - 02:05 AM

Steve - that's very true....

There's a despairingly serious subtext
to most of my sarcastic absurdist comments...


They are not just shite jokes...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: The Sandman
Date: 21 Nov 20 - 02:44 AM

i have a suspicion that boris and cruella were ex bed mates, pigs may not fly but they seem to fornicate,

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Nov 20 - 09:54 AM

ex.. or he still thinks he's in with a chance if he continues 'looking after' her...

If he scratches her back, she might.....

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 21 Nov 20 - 12:34 PM

Following Major and Currie, anything is possible.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 21 Nov 20 - 02:02 PM

I was looking at the Kyrgystan tourism website and notice that UK currently has a visa free arrangement by virtue of being an EU member. Have the Foreign Office workers sorted out visa free travel for EVERY country for which EU visa free arrangements currently exist from 1 second past midnight on 1st January, or are they quite happy to face personal retribution form the public for their incompetence if they fail to do so (sort of ironic rant).

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 21 Nov 20 - 02:55 PM

The Patel saga gets murkier by the day.

In today's Guardian:
====
Boris Johnson’s former adviser on ministerial standards was prevented from interviewing a key witness for his formal bullying inquiry into Priti Patel.

Legal and Whitehall sources have revealed that Sir Alex Allan sought to interview the former top Home Office civil servant Sir Philip Rutnam about his dealings with Patel, but was blocked by government officials.

Allan’s bullying inquiry was launched by the prime minister following the resignation of Rutnam over’s Patel’s alleged behaviour and he is suing the government for constructive dismissal. Sources say Allan was informed he could not interview Rutnam for his independent inquiry because of the legal action.

Allan, however, felt that his inquiry was being denied potentially crucial evidence. The inability of the prime minister’s former ethics adviser to question Rutnam also prompted a “spirited row” within the government’s legal department.

Even so, he uncovered sufficient material to conclude that Patel had broken the code governing ministers’ behaviour.
=====

Whatever the truth of this, why Rutnam was not invited to contribute to the enquiry needs explaining.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Raggytash
Date: 21 Nov 20 - 03:37 PM

"I'll reserve judgement until/unless we see the report."

Well Nigel you've had 24 hours to consider this matter. What is your judgement now.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 21 Nov 20 - 03:43 PM

Whatever the truth of this, why Rutnam was not invited to contribute to the enquiry needs explaining.

Might it be that as Rutnam is currently suing the government for constructive dismissal, he has an interest in seeing her dismissed which would support his case? As such, his testimony to the tribunal might be biased.

I'm not saying that this is the case, but it does answer the question.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Nov 20 - 03:53 PM

But all the Patel apologist tories who are saying that is the case,
are yet again resorting to type
by closing ranks and automatically maliciously blaming the victim...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 21 Nov 20 - 03:57 PM

Well Nigel you've had 24 hours to consider this matter. What is your judgement now.

My judgement (not that it would have any effect) is that I have still not seen the report. I have seen quotes about the report, from both sides, but (unless you know of an online full copy) I still have not seen the report.

I'm not giving a conclusion one way or the other based on evidence which I haven't seen. Others may not be so scrupulous.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 21 Nov 20 - 04:00 PM

The problem with that, Nigel, is that there are others with stronger motivations to be biased.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Raggytash
Date: 21 Nov 20 - 04:01 PM

Wriggle, wriggle, wriggle Nigel.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 21 Nov 20 - 04:05 PM

From: Raggytash
Date: 21 Nov 20 - 04:01
Wriggle, wriggle, wriggle Nigel.

Wriggle, wriggle, wriggle, Raggy.
Do you have access to the report that you can provide?

No? I thought not!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 21 Nov 20 - 04:14 PM

The problem with that, Nigel, is that there are others with stronger motivations to be biased.
That is another possibility, but a very difficult view to come to without more evidence, which we're not being given.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Nov 20 - 04:40 PM

.. and whose interests are best served by controlling and suppressing
availability of evidence...???

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 23 Nov 20 - 02:31 PM

Bank of England governor says a "No-Deal" Brexit would cost more than covid

Speaking to MPs on the Commons Treasury committee, he said the fallout from the pandemic and the second national lockdown in England was having a much bigger short-term impact on the economy. However, “the long-term effects, I think, would be larger than the long-term effects of Covid. But … it would be better to have a trade deal, yes, no question about it.”

Nice to know, I suppose.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Nov 20 - 03:01 AM

On this last page alone we have discussed the Labour party divisions, Brexit, government contracts and Priti Patel's bullying behaviour. It really is about time the ridiculous rule about only having one UK politics thread is removed. There has been no acrimony or long running battles in the thread for weeks. The previous problems have been resolved. There are numerous threads about Donald Trump. Come on, Mods. It is about time!