BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: DMcG
Date: 21 Mar 23 - 02:09 PM

I have just seen the relevant bit of the Guardian. Not surprisingly, it is edited down from what I said, and it does give the impression that barn dances and ballroom are directly affected by spaces for clubbing going, as if during the day a ceilidh band takes over the mosh pit, but never mind!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Mar 23 - 02:07 PM

ALL The comments, Nigel? Who else has commented on OFSTED but Steve? Also, as far as I know, the current body began in 1992 so there has been 18 years of Tories and 13 years of Labour since. When does 2 wrongs make a right anyway?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Rain Dog
Date: 21 Mar 23 - 02:03 PM

Governments of what ever party are forever tinkering with education policy. They can never agree on what counts as a 'good' education. They can only agree that the policy at the time is not working, especially if it is a policy of another party.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: DMcG
Date: 21 Mar 23 - 02:00 PM

I emailed it, Rain Dog

These days, the post is such that it could be very "out of date" by the time it gets there.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Rain Dog
Date: 21 Mar 23 - 01:56 PM

Already online DMcG.

Did you post a letter or email it?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 21 Mar 23 - 01:07 PM

So for all the comments we get about 'the Tories have been in power for 13 years, why haven't they done anything'
Since the start of OFSTED the Labour Party had a 13 year period in government . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: DMcG
Date: 21 Mar 23 - 01:07 PM

Not Brexit related, not political, unless you subscribe to the idea the personal is political. However:

I have just had an email notifying me a letter I sent to The Guardian is to be published online tonight and in the print edition tomorrow.

It was in response to a lament that a lot of the clubbing scene is closing down, and it talked about how dance is a fundamental part of human socialising going back forever.   I was pointing out that for other forms of dance there are very few commercial places you can dance. Most of them are village or church halls.

As it happens, a dance I was supposed to go tomorrow isn't taking place as the number of attendees was too low :(

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Mar 23 - 10:18 AM

Pressure mounts on Ofsted amid outcry after death of headteacher
"Ruth Perry’s death a ‘direct result of pressure’ from report by England’s education watchdog, says family" [Guardian]

Ofsted started as a Tory confection for judging schools. Teams of "inspectors," many of whom had never been in a classroom and/or who had been given just a couple of days' training, descended at short notice on schools to interrogate staff and children, "observe" lessons, look at box-ticking test and exam results (taking no account whatsoever of the social background of the school) and produce a report that was highly-judgemental and completely unsupportive. Anyone could read the reports but most people would rely on headline single-word summaries such as "satisfactory" or "inadequate." The Ofsted teams neither gave any support to teachers nor were in any way qualified to do so. Ofsted has evolved in in its methods and policies since those beginnings but remains highly arbitrary and judgemental.

A proper inspection regime would identify weaknesses and have teams of experienced and supportive educationists to help schools to improve. When I worked in London, and, to begin with, in Devon, we had teams of experienced, successful senior teachers, trained in specific subject areas, who would come into schools, see what we were up to and show us how to do it better. It wasn't perfect and there wasn't enough of it but it was at least the basis of what a good supporting inspectorate should be.

Instead of that we have teams of highly-paid people whose only aim is to put the screws on teachers. The upshot is headteachers, worried about their reputation, putting more and more pressure on their classroom teachers, who are compelled to use up tons of energy to produce mountains of paperwork and spend hours every night and at weekends close-marking work and producing highly-detailed lesson plans and worksheets, following a content-stuffed curriculum which goes a long way towards turning both the teachers and the pupils into automatons. No wonder the best teachers leave in droves and that mental ill-health is rife. I can only hope that this latest tragic case will be a turning point. Ofsted is not fit for purpose, never has been, has been found not to be so more than once and needs to be scrapped.

End of rant by bloke who has both experienced Ofsted and who knows several inspectors who know that they will always get a piece of my mind, as much as I love them dearly!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Mar 23 - 09:38 AM

They'd probably tell you how great things are now because we've got hundreds of food banks. We never had THAT under Labour!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 21 Mar 23 - 08:43 AM

I have acquaintances, including members of my wife’s family, who are still telling me that ‘Boris is a great guy who did a great job’. When I question that opinion, the answer I almost always get is, “Ah but, think how much worse things would be if Labour had got in”.

I really do doubt some people’s sanity, and I really, really do despair.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Mar 23 - 08:35 AM

Concerning Johnson defending himself by saying that he only ever acted in good faith over Partygate, this comment appeared below-the-line in the Guardian:

"This farce is angering me no end. He lied. We know it, he knows it everyone knows it. His defence that he didnt know what he was doing is far too ridiculous to even take seriously. If this were a trial the jury would find him guilty in 5 mins tops. Instead we have to endure this protracted nonsense. All the while the country is barely being governed. Farce."

Alleluja. And this farce is being conducted at public expense, by a panel that has a majority of Tories on it.

(Giving credit where it's due, that post was responded to appropriately by one Tattie_Bogle!)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 20 Mar 23 - 08:40 AM

Lineker was right.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 20 Mar 23 - 08:23 AM

If \Tory party gets its own way with deciding international law no longer applies to the UK, then the rest of the world has an absolute right to wash its hands of its obligations. thus effectively stripping people seeking asylum of all human rights, thus reducing people fleeing oppression, murder, torture, rape at the hands of their regimes to a status of less than human. Same as the ideology that allowed the slave trade and the treatment of those in slavery.

If the tories insist on ignoring international law, then the international community has a duty to apply sanctions to being this country to its knees, even if it means the majority of the UK population living in abject poverty, suffering power and fuel blockades, banning all imports and exports to/from the UK etc. International boycotts, etc. We must be made to profoundly suffer for our government's actions.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: DMcG
Date: 20 Mar 23 - 07:26 AM

Not, perhaps, connected with Geordie Greig becoming editor in chief of "The Independent" in January 2023, after being editor of the Daily Mail?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Rain Dog
Date: 20 Mar 23 - 07:13 AM

I imagine they are just quoting from a briefing from Braverman and/or the Home Office. I have read much the same elsewhere but cannot find the link right now.

The Independent did add the following to the piece you quoted.

++
This article was amended on March 20 2023. The headline originally referred to ‘EU judges’ but the ECHR is not an EU institution.
++

Of course we will have to wait and see what happens.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: DMcG
Date: 20 Mar 23 - 05:13 AM

Over the last few weeks, it has seemed to me that "The Independent" has moved a lot closer to the tabloids than it used to be. The headline that struck me this morning was

EU judges ‘close to backing down’ on blocking Rwanda flights as Braverman hails ‘constructive talks’

Those quotation marks around "close to backing down" would normally imply it is a direct quotation from some spokesman, but the rest of the article does not make that claim. Even the actual quotation given ("A government source said that if implemented, the reforms “would remove a key barrier to getting flights off the ground”) does not talk of the EU backing down, but more of a joint agreement, whereas 'backing down' suggests the UK has got everything it wanted at no cost, and the EU has lost but not gained anything.

(For a long time now, other tabloid staples with articles like "15 films with an unexpected twist" have been in place, but you can at least ignore that fluff.)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Mar 23 - 07:18 PM

Just seen a placard on a photo of an NHS rally in the Guardian that read:

"The only good Tory is a supposi-Tory"

I bloody love that! Best placard ever!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 19 Mar 23 - 02:18 PM

In local news- my partner arrived at Stansted yesterday and she was asked a raft of questions by customs: where she was stating, who with, how long for. Obviously the border force official is a nasty piece of work who thinks he is entailed to poke his nore into her, and by assovition my private life and is too stupid or racist to understand what Freedom of Movement for EU national meant. It is of his business why my partner is staying here to be with me for a month. Surely I am now entitled to know where he lives and and anything I want to kbow about hiz private life.

Only racists would find that behaviour anything but reprehensible.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 18 Mar 23 - 11:33 PM

Here’s the link to the article Steve refers to…

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Mar 23 - 09:15 PM

'Vanity project’: Braverman under fire for taking only rightwing press to Rwanda
Home secretary’s trip to publicise refugee policy has been compared with Donald Trump’s news management

Vanessa Thorpe and Michael Savage

This is from today's Guardian. The rather lengthy article is well worth a read.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Mar 23 - 03:50 PM

Number of people trafficked to Rwanda since the deal was struck last April: 0

Number of people who arrived just yesterday in small boats: 200.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Mar 23 - 02:58 PM

Perhaps they hope that they will row their boats to Rwanda

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: DMcG
Date: 18 Mar 23 - 02:06 PM

I admit to having some trouble getting my head round telling people people how wonderful the accommodation and opportunities are in Rwanda is supposed to put off people deciding to come here.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Mar 23 - 01:45 PM

Have a look at what that nice Rwandan regime is getting up to in the country next door (from a report by Human Rights Watch on Feb 6):

(Goma) – The Rwanda-backed M23 armed group has committed summary executions and forced recruitment of civilians in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, Human Rights Watch said today. The Congolese army is responding to the M23’s offensive by collaborating with ethnic militias with abusive records.

The warring parties have increasingly appealed to ethnic loyalties, putting civilians in remote areas of North Kivu province at a heightened risk.

“Rwanda-backed M23 rebels in North Kivu are leaving behind a growing trail of war crimes against civilians,” said Thomas Fessy, senior Congo researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Rwanda should end its military support for the M23 while Congolese government troops should prioritize protecting civilians and cease using abusive militias as proxy forces.”

Recent investigations by the United Nations Group of Experts on Congo, as well as Human Rights Watch research, provide significant photographic and other evidence that Rwanda is not only giving logistical support to the M23, but that Rwandan troops are reinforcing or fighting alongside the armed group inside Congo.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: DMcG
Date: 18 Mar 23 - 12:47 PM

The trouble is the Guardian, the i and so on would want to photograph and comment on things apart from the rooms that are the equivalent of show houses on new estates. That's not the idea: only the positive side of Rwanda is to be shown.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Mar 23 - 06:35 AM

So Suella Braverman is heading off to Rwanda to showboat about her non-deal (so far) to traffic refugees there. In tow will be journalists from the Telegraph, the Mail and GB News. Pointedly uninvited are the Guardian, the Independent, the Mirror and the BBC. This trip is funded by the taxpayer. Democracy in action, eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Mar 23 - 03:19 AM

We only watched till 10 anyway. May watch some more on iPlayer later.

You recorded it? How eighties :-D

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 23 - 08:09 PM

Good show, though we recorded it and stopped watching at ten for the news. We'll watch the rest tomorrow. No spoilers, please! I might put in a few entries to win the queen's jag...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 17 Mar 23 - 06:38 PM

Just watched comic relief and excellent it was too. Raised over £31 million. I always wonder though why the government (of any leaning) doesn't give money to these causes and let, for instance, comedians raise money for MPs expenses or vanity projects

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Mar 23 - 06:11 PM

Reeves! Thank God there's only one of her!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Mar 23 - 06:10 PM

Well done Michael Rosen.

I've just had an email from Rachel Reeve (because I'm still a Labour member), the usual anti-budget guff. But not a mention of the four-year freeze on the tax-free allowance. When wages are going up faster than for many years, that drags the lower-paid into paying tax or paying more tax. No mention of the massive pension tax reliefs for the richest, just a vague and formulaic mention of "tax cuts for the rich." Well what do you know. I think I'll vote Monster Ravin' Loony next time.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Mar 23 - 03:47 PM

Michael Rosen on Linekers tweet

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: DMcG
Date: 15 Mar 23 - 10:23 AM

Not Brexit, but significabt UK historical political interest.

This week's edition of "The Rest is Politics" is all about the Iraq War, as it the 20th anniversary. As Alistair Campbell was central to this, it is well worth hearing his commentary it all.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Mar 23 - 10:18 AM

As you have nothing to say, piss off.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Donuel
Date: 15 Mar 23 - 09:46 AM

Dear Mr. Cynically Out-Of-Date,
Better late reading the tea leaves than never.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Mar 23 - 04:41 PM

Point taken, Nigel. Call me Mr Cynically Out-Of-Date.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: robomatic
Date: 14 Mar 23 - 03:08 PM

I think of Sir David Attenborough as an 'International' Resource. Watch anything he is in.

His brother Richard was a very good and watchable actor as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 14 Mar 23 - 02:00 PM

To a large extent the Beeb still has to raise money via commercial methods. Have you seen how much the Radio Times costs these days!

That is not fund raising for the BBC. They stopped publishing the RT in 2011. It is now published by Immediate Media.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Mar 23 - 01:51 PM

That's a great clip, John.

A couple of points on the licence fee (which costs every household with a telly, with a few exemptions - not every taxpayer - 42.5p per day). You could argue that you shouldn't pay it if you have no telly or device that can go online. That's a high bar these days, innit, and there are plenty of non-paying cheats around. Either we tell folks with the tellies and computers that they still have to pay up, despite their protestations, or they tell fibs about what they never tune into and risk being caught, or we trust what they say about their viewing habits, until some better way of monitoring them comes up. Your mileage may vary, but I think, you have a telly, you pay. We tend to regard the Beeb as a public service. We regard schools as a public service, but the people who never had kids, or use only public schools, don't get let off tax that contributes to state schools (though there's the outrage that public schools are treated as charities - ha bloody ha). Pacifists don't get let off the bit of tax that pays for the army, another public service. Etcetera.

To a large extent the Beeb still has to raise money via commercial methods. Have you seen how much the Radio Times costs these days! And they make a fortune by selling the Strictly Come Dancing brand, many of their dramas and comedy series and Attenborough's documentaries, to name but a few, overseas.

So if we scrap the licence fee, the BBC will resort to advertising. The advertisers pay the Beeb, and so we pay the advertisers more money for their stuff. I wonder whether the 42.5p per day would cover that, and you'll never get the extra money back that you paid for that stuff by claiming that you don't have a telly (I pay more for stuff that's advertised on commercial channels, which I seldom watch, and if I do I record it in advance so that I can fast-forward through the ads. What a cheat!).

The Attenborough notorious sixth episode: now what kind of a decision was that, being told as we are that, well, it wasn't really part of the series so we'll shove it aside on iPlayer (where it'll get fewer viewers).

Attenborough. The most watched and watchable stuff on telly ever. So we'll put it on iPlayer. Do you believe their reasons for that? Well I have no evidence, but I simply don't believe it. From what I read, that episode is going to shoot from the hip as to the true causes of our wildlife decline. So that would largely target farming practices, possibly including the use of neonicotinoid insecticides, and would cover the misuse of land by landowners, for grouse-shooting for example. Now all that would get right up the noses of the farming lobby and the landed gentry, including the royals. Call me Mr Cynical, but if you try to tell me that the Beeb hasn't been leaned on by this right-wing government and those vested interests, I might just accuse you of having a laugh.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Rain Dog
Date: 14 Mar 23 - 03:36 AM

Well when it comes to the BBC I do think it is a bit more complicated. I think that most of us want it to be impartial when it comes to reporting the news. I prefer hearing the facts rather than a view on the facts. That is when it gets more difficult when we talk about being impartial.

The BBC is public funded and that draws the ire of a lot of people. Governments, of whatever hue,are not happy when their policies are attacked or seen to be attacked by the BBC. Ministers get a harder grilling from TV and radio (not just the BBC) than they tend to get in parliament.

A lot of the public are not happy about the licence fee, especially when they don't watch or listen to BBC content.

Quite a few media outlets are not happy having to compete with the BBC in the commercial world. Print media look on with envy at the BBC's online content which is paid for by the public, while they have to cover their costs from the revenue they raise.

I read The Guardian online. I bought the paper for many years and do still a copy from time to time. I understand their view on certain subjects and read any articles with that in mind. When they express an opinion I can either agree or disagree with it. It is an opinion. When they are reporting news I just want the facts. Of course they, like everyone else, choose what news they want to report and how they want to report it.

The 'missing' Attenborough programme is a case in point. The Guardian reported an episode had been pulled but that seems to be incorrect. Yesterday BBC Radio 4 had an interview with a member of one of the charities behind the Save Our Wild Isles appeal. She said they had made that 'missing' programme as part of their appeal, which they were launching off the back of the BBC Wild Isles series. The BBC had agreed to host it on iplayer.

Not quite as The Guardian reported it. They seem a bit slow in amending their original story, though they have made a start here.

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2023/mar/13/pulled-a-timeline-of-tv-tak


"David Attenborough documentary (BBC iPlayer, 2023)
Another use of this “split screen” approach will see Sir David Attenborough’s five-part series Wild Isles supplemented by a documentary about “re-wilding” that will only be available on iPlayer. Some BBC staff have suggested that a “sixth episode” was censored in case it upset rightwing anti-ecologists in government and elsewhere. But the film would irritate them just as much digitally, and the paper trail seems to show that the documentary was made separately and bought by the BBC as extra content for iPlayer, driving audiences there in line with its digital-first policy."

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 14 Mar 23 - 02:05 AM

Attila the Stockbroker on SM yesterday - right on-point, as ever…

”The Lineker saga has a lot of lessons for me in terms of the things I want to see from prominent people in public life and the contrasting response to them from the general public on the one hand and right wing politicians and media concerned about their influence on the other.

Lineker’s not a radical leftist by any means, but he does appear to be a very nice, compassionate bloke, he is highly intelligent and he loves and is incredibly knowledgable about his subject. In Lineker and Attenborough we have two truly wonderful presenters who get through to this non-TV fan in a way few others do (Chris Packham also worthy of a mention, not just because of the Clash quotes, but he is far more niche.)

Lineker and Attenborough frighten the Right because their easy-going humanity strikes a chord with many of those who may have been conditioned to consider themselves ‘right wing’ in terms of their viewing and reading habits but are basically kind, caring people.

Tory politicians and their pet newspapers don’t want people, especially people of my generation - their primary constituency by far these days - to be easy-going and kind. They want them to be scared, angry and defensive, constantly looking to protect their little English ‘castles’ from alien attack, whether from ‘invasions’ of immigrants, apocalyptic weather conditions, deadly diseases or attacks on their pensions. If you want a brilliant satire on this google ‘Daily Mail Headline Generator.’ It’s a work of beauty.

Tories want to foster division and create scapegoats because they think it will win them votes, and their main weapon is of course ‘the right wing press’ - an institution unique in Europe in terms of its size and virtual monopoly. One which leaves our continental neighbours open-mouthed in wonder that such a phenomenon can exist in a modern (supposedly) democratic country.

The discussion around the impartiality of the BBC must be extended to take in the partiality of the vast majority of the rest of the media. ‘The right wing press’ is a phrase used in a matter-of-fact way, accepting the fact that our papers are mostly owned by non-dom billionaires, such individuals are virtually always on the right of the political spectrum, and that therefore there is massive bias in our print media.

We have to start challenging the whole idea that the BBC has to be impartial because it’s publicly owned but other institutions can be festering pits of right wing bigotry, slant and obfuscation because they are privately owned.

In a democracy, the major political forces should have equal representation, end of, and the question of private or taxpayer ownership should be irrelevant. If the BBC is to be subject to such legislation so should the (currently) right wing press. At the moment, their brutal, baleful, strutting influence is a stain on our democracy.”

Who, but a brainwashed Tory-apologist, could dispute any of that?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Mar 23 - 08:29 PM

Here's a letter to the Guardian which is sublime in its measured tones and in its wisdom (in my opinion).

"Thank you to Jonathan Freedland for his insightful article about the issues concerning asylum seekers (10 March). I would just take issue with his statement that Gary Lineker has 'deployed the wrong analogy' in saying the language is 'not dissimilar to that used by Germany in the 1930s.' I beg to differ. I believe the analogy was very well chosen.

'Not dissimilar' means there may be points of similarity; it does not mean that words and deeds correspond exactly. Anyone who watches series one of the BBC’s Rise of the Nazis will quickly see the truth of Mr Lineker’s words. In 2023, just as in Germany in the 1930s, we see the government curbing our right to engage in demonstrations, seeking to undermine the judiciary, making it less easy to cast a vote, and dehumanising and othering minority and migrant groups. Need I say more?

The steady suppression of dissenting voices in Germany in the 1930s created the conditions in which extreme rightwing ideology could flourish. I fully endorse Mr Lineker’s view that the government’s language is 'not dissimilar' to Germany in the 1930s, and I am most grateful to him for speaking out and sticking to his views, and for all those who have backed him."
Elizabeth Palmer
Oldham, Greater Manchester

I think we should all feel well and truly warned.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Mar 23 - 04:17 PM

From an editorial in the Guardian (a rather brilliant one, I thought):

"Much of what Mr Lineker said was not new, but such unabashed liberal dissent from a popular figure has been missing from political discourse. This is, in part, because the Labour party had not summoned the moral courage to say the right thing. Mr Lineker ought to be congratulated for shaming the opposition into action. The public is waking up to the dangerous incompetence of the Tory government."

Labour thinks that a bit of faint praise for Lineker wrapped in caveats is ok, viz for example the pusillanimous remark by Rachel Reeve ("Not the language I would have used..."). Well I think they should be robustly and honestly challenging the Tories' sinking ideology, and, if they don't they may well lose the next election.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Rain Dog
Date: 13 Mar 23 - 06:30 AM

Lineker is back.

The BBC will begin an independent review of its social media guidelines, focusing on how it applies to freelancers outside news - like Lineker.

Rumours that Lineker is to become the main Newsnight presenter are yet to be confirmed.

They think it's all over. Maybe.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: DMcG
Date: 13 Mar 23 - 04:37 AM

This afternoon is the second reading of the Illegal Immigrants Bill which is behind all the furore inspired by Lineker's tweet. The BBC has made a complete hash of the story so far, and this second reading will be a test for the Conservatives, but it is at least as much a test of Labour. Will they rise to the challenge Lineker has set, or will they not? It could be game changing.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Mar 23 - 12:38 PM

Very good, Nigel, and I say that as a rugby non-fan!

A good read in the Guardian:

Lineker and Vorderman are a more effective opposition than Labour. No wonder the Tories feel threatened
Hannah Jane Parkinson

"When indecent populists are challenged by people who are both decent and popular, they realise they’re in danger."

She's not exactly complimentary about Starmer either. I'm glad I'm not just a voice in the wilderness.

On another tack, I read a comment by the God-awful Rachel Reeves. After the usual anodyne and formulaic calls for Sharp to resign and for the Beeb to reverse its decision, she spoke pusillanimously of her support for Lineker "whether you agree with [his] tweets or not, and I wouldn't have used that language..."

What language of his would she not have used? And why not! I tell you, we're in trouble with this opposition...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 12 Mar 23 - 11:04 AM

Seen on Facebook

Comment on Lineker.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Mar 23 - 10:35 AM

Instant apology for calling you SBS. Argh!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: MaJoC the Filk
Date: 12 Mar 23 - 10:31 AM

Interesting side issue: TV news coverage of the Lineker kerfuffle has been wall-to-wall, notably on BBC News 24. Meanwhile, Radio Four's news bulletin coverage of the same story is over in a few minutes, and other important issues get a chance to be aired in the same bulletin.

I've seen this difference before, though not quite so extreme. Any ideas why it's so, folks .... ?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 12 Mar 23 - 10:30 AM

Many of us have, SPB, and probably will again in the future. But for now, I’m with you - a very nice change in atmosphere around here… <3