General British politics discussion thread

ancapailldorcha

It was suggested that a new thread for non-Brexit political matters regarding the United Kingdom might be warranted so here we are.

Please bear the charter in mind when posting.

Thanks.

Threadbans:
hotmail.com

ancapailldorcha

It looks like the Home Secretary's problems are growing:

The claims are from her time as International Development Secretary from 2016 to 2017, and follow similar claims at the Home Office and the Department for Work and Pensions.

A Tory source said "dark forces" were trying to influence an inquiry into Ms Patel's conduct in her current role.

Ms Patel denies all the allegations.

The latest claims were reportedly brought to a senior official at the Department for International Development after she quit as its Secretary of State in 2017.

Link:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51731753

It'll be interesting to see how Johnson's government handles this. The cynic in me expects all sorts of gymnastics to justify keeping Patel around should she be found guilty but either way, it's going to be the first test of the new administration.

kowloon

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It was suggested that a new thread for non-Brexit political matters regarding the United Kingdom might be warranted so here we are.

It'll be hard to separate Brexit from a lot of stories when BoJo and friends are trying so hard to make every move a part of the 'Brexit that people voted for.'

Might be interesting to hear where people think the structures and balances in UK politics end up in 5 or 10 years. Brexit is a part, but not all, of the changes that could happen.

It might give some context to the (sometimes unexpected) steps the UK government takes (treaties, appointees, trade agreements, constituency boundaries, new laws)

The relevance is that we live next door to it. Obviously the day to day News/scandals will need a place too

PommieBast

I think the Labour Party leadership contest is due to end sometime soonish. If Long-Bailey wins they will be out of office for the next 15+ years..

ancapailldorcha

PommieBast wrote: »

I think the Labour Party leadership contest is due to end sometime soonish. If Long-Bailey wins they will be out of office for the next 15+ years..

Keir Starmer seems to be the solid frontrunner. In late January, the Guardian put him at 95% (Source).

Ultimately, I can't see Labour progressing unless it finds a way to reconcile it's socially liberal, city based and young metropolitan voters from the northern and rural socially conservative base. I think Starmer is best placed to accomplish this insofar as it can be done but he needs to win first.

PommieBast

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Ultimately, I can't see Labour progressing unless it finds a way to reconcile it's socially liberal, city based and young metropolitan voters from the northern and rural socially conservative base.

Real problem is that Labour offered nothing to places where there are simply no jobs. Anti-austerity is mostly relevant to public-spending recipients, and pay/conditions of the gig economy at least implies people who are working. Social conservatism (read: racism) filled the vacuum.

Rjd2

The Labour leadership race is to ling and its understandable why Boris is chilling right now.

Looking at the debate for labour leader, I assume they are pitching to the members who are mainly lefty and still like Jez.

Assume once Keir wins he will try and pivot more to the centre who are simply rather than worrying about keeping Ash Sarkar and Owen James happy.

As the US proved this week proved, both nations are centre right whether we on the internet like it or not.

Harry Palmr

The government has won the Huawei vote but only by 24, quite why they are so determined to stick with them when the other of the "5i" group has gone a different path is curious (other than in terms of pricing of course)

ancapailldorcha

Harry Palmr wrote: »

The government has won the Huawei vote but only by 24, quite why they are so determined to stick with them when the other of the "5i" group has gone a different path is curious (other than in terms of pricing of course)

I wonder if it's down to a reluctance to agitate the Chinese.

PommieBast

Harry Palmr wrote: »

The government has won the Huawei vote but only by 24, quite why they are so determined to stick with them when the other of the "5i" group has gone a different path is curious (other than in terms of pricing of course)

Probably because it would involve ripping out a load of kit that is already in place.

Harry Palmr

An amazing finding of money when it needs to be found - probably the most socialist budget in macro terms since the 70s and with a background of 0.25% interest rates (unlike the 70s)

Rjd2

Harry Palmr wrote: »

An amazing finding of money when it needs to be found - probably the most socialist budget in macro terms since the 70s and with a background of 0.25% interest rates (unlike the 70s)

Why are people surprised by this?

The Tories won the election by running to the left on economics and tacking to the right on social issues.

Yesterday's budge, busily printing money and cutting interest rates what happnes why they cant print more money nor cut interest rates anymore?

Nody

mariaalice wrote: »

Yesterday's budge, busily printing money and cutting interest rates what happnes why they cant print more money nor cut interest rates anymore?

History repeating itself of course.

AllForIt

Rishi Sunak is a very impressive politician whatever your politics. He has incredible presence and he's obviously highly intelligent. Doesn't come across as your typical 'nasty' Tory, like that hugely unlikable Dominic Raab. Quite possibly the next Tory party leader I'd say. His first budget speech was so well delivered.

On the other hand there isn't a single stand out politician in the Labour party. Keir Starmer is hard to listen to, hard to look at, and I'm not even sure he wants the job. Rather like Corbyn I feel he's being pushed into it.

I think since the Labour party will be insignificant for the foreseeable future they would be better off going with Rebecca Long-Bailey. It would give some credibility to their 'equality' ethos instead of appointing women of color to shadow ministerial jobs who are useless.

Really? All I hear when he speaks is "I've had public speaking lessons" on a loop.

AllForIt

Deleted User wrote: »

Really? All I hear when he speaks is "I've had public speaking lessons" on a loop.

All I hear from that is a typical lefty disdain for ppl who have had an education.
Up the working classes.

Peregrinus

Sunak (Winchester College (head boy) and Lincoln College, Oxford; MBA from Stanford; investment analyst with Goldman Sachs) is not really a plausible representative of the working classes. On top of the advantages of his birth and education, he had the foresight to marry a billionaire's daughter that he met while studying at Stanford, which must led to family connections helpful when raising the $700 million seed capital with which he launched his hedge fund firm in 2009.

PommieBast

AllForIt wrote: »

I think since the Labour party will be insignificant for the foreseeable future they would be better off going with Rebecca Long-Bailey. It would give some credibility to their 'equality' ethos instead of appointing women of color to shadow ministerial jobs who are useless.

Realistically Labour are going to be using 2024 as a stepping-stone for 2029, and they seriously need to spend the time thinking how they are going to do it. They more or less ran the same policy platform three times in a row, so just doing it a fourth time with a continuation leader is going to see them standing still..

BonnieSituation

Seems Laura Keunssberg was coughing up a lung over on BBC earlier on. So much so that it's trending.

https://twitter.com/The_Iceman2288/status/1237744299632201729?s=19

The UK response to this pandemic has been nigh on bizarre. Actually, no, it's not bizarre for them, it's just been brutal.

That Wales Scotland is going ahead tomorrow as well is shocking. Well, not shocking, stupid.

Podge_irl

AllForIt wrote: »

On the other hand there isn't a single stand out politician in the Labour party. Keir Starmer is hard to listen to, hard to look at, and I'm not even sure he wants the job. Rather like Corbyn I feel he's being pushed into it.

Corbyn was pushed into being leader of the Labour party!? He barely scraped into the vote and wasn't remotely wanted by the vast majority of the parliamentary party.

An Ciarraioch

Sam Russell wrote: »

GBP is on the slide again.

Nearly up to 89p=€1.

The virus, the disruption to supply chains, the extra spend in the budget, the prospect of delays to EU FTA discussions and the huge drop in the shares must be having an effect.

And nearly 91p tonight.

Professor Moriarty

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

And nearly 91p tonight.

Christ! Parity here we come.

Sam Russell

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

And nearly 91p tonight.

According to xe.com, it has not passed 90p (89.3) yet, but it was 82.9 on Feb 17th.

The markets do not like what is going on - either Brexit or Corona is not seen as good.

An Ciarraioch

Sam Russell wrote: »

According to xe.com, it has not passed 90p (89.3) yet, but it was 82.9 on Feb 17th.

The markets do not like what is going on - either Brexit or Corona is not seen as good.

90.7p on the same site?

https://www.xe.com

Gerry T

Is it just me or has the UK lost all ability to make rational decisions. Brexit from what I've observed has been a fundamental failure of rational decision making. Each step of the process has demonstrated bizzar decision making, but it's been wrapped up in etonian empire think and that's been some excuse. But now it's really serious, the decision of the UK to effectively want their population to be infected to build a resistance to the crisis, is one that ignores the dire position the old or frail living amongst them. How many hundreds of thousands have been put at risk by the uk response.
We may have hoped for some maturity from the uk in the brexit process, but for me that hope has been dashed this week.

Headshot

Gerry T wrote: »

Is it just me or has the UK lost all ability to make rational decisions. Brexit from what I've observed has been a fundamental failure of rational decision making. Each step of the process has demonstrated bizzar decision making, but it's been wrapped up in etonian empire think and that's been some excuse. But now it's really serious, the decision of the UK to effectively want their population to be infected to build a resistance to the crisis, is one that ignores the dire position the old or frail living amongst them. How many hundreds of thousands have been put at risk by the uk response.
We may have hoped for some maturity from the uk in the brexit process, but for me that hope has been dashed this week.

It's pure madness that schools etc arent closed and it's disgraceful that Cheltenham was allowed to go ahead, just irresponsibility tbh

20silkcut

Headshot wrote: »

It's pure madness that schools etc arent closed and it's disgraceful that Cheltenham was allowed to go ahead, just irresponsibility tbh

They are acting on the advice of their highly respected chief medical officer.

But perhaps , he is a highly respected eminent chief medical officer with Brexity Tory leaning inclinations. He probably has, considering this government has culled pro EU people from positions of power.

The NI stance on the Coronavirus has spilt along political lines.
With Michelle o Neill advocating the European approach and Arlene advocating the British one. Like some tribal badge of honour.
It’s pathetic with lives at stake.

Rjd2

20silkcut wrote: »

They are acting on the advice of their highly respected chief medical officer.

But perhaps , he is a highly respected eminent chief medical officer with Brexity Tory leaning inclinations. He probably has, considering this government has culled pro EU people from positions of power.

The NI stance on the Coronavirus has spilt along political lines.
With Michelle o Neill advocating the European approach and Arlene advocating the British one. Like some tribal badge of honour.
It’s pathetic with lives at stake.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/mar/04/prof-chris-whitty-the-expert-we-need-in-the-coronavirus-crisis

Profile of the CMO in the pro Brexit Guardian.:)


He seems hugely impressive and I hope is right, because his life won't be worth living if wrong.

Sam Russell

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

90.7p on the same site?

https://www.xe.com

It is now, and so the slide continues. When I checked, it had not crossed the 90p mark.

beggars_bush

Rjd2 wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/mar/04/prof-chris-whitty-the-expert-we-need-in-the-coronavirus-crisis

Profile of the CMO in the pro Brexit Guardian.:)


He seems hugely impressive and I hope is right, because his life won't be worth living if wrong.

the problem is the Chief Science Officer seems to be barely qualified to hold his
position

and this thing about behaviour science, surely decisions should be based on medical grounds?

Lemming

20silkcut wrote: »

They are acting on the advice of their highly respected chief medical officer.

But perhaps , he is a highly respected eminent chief medical officer with Brexity Tory leaning inclinations. He probably has, considering this government has culled pro EU people from positions of power.

The WHO have questioned the plan around introducing herd immunity for the simple point that this virus' immunology effects are unknown at this point so any notions of herd immunity are guesses and assumptions.

There was a spokesperson from the WHO on the BBC4 radio earlier this morning talking about it.

When I first heard the proposal I was appalled at the brutal simplicity of it - something straight out of the Cold War UK civil defense nuclear attack planning for "looking after" the populace. Basically, they expect 80% of the population to be exposed to and get the virus with a mortality rate of 1%; roughly 500,000 people. Summed up quite eloquently by the "Yes Minister" scene being parodied about social media: URL="https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/coronavirus-pandemic-yes-minister-boris-johnson-uk-testing-outbreak-symptoms-a9396511.html"]link from Independent.co.uk[/URL

serfboard

Lemming wrote: »

When I first heard the proposal I was appalled at the brutal simplicity of it - something straight out of the Cold War UK civil defense nuclear attack planning for "looking after" the populace. Basically, they expect 80% of the population to be exposed to and get the virus with a mortality rate of 1%; roughly 500,000 people.

Sean Whelan of RTÉ has a good article about it here. He reports the number as 200,000 deaths - still pretty shocking.

Sam Russell

serfboard wrote: »

Sean Whelan of RTÉ has a good article about it here. He reports the number as 200,000 deaths - still pretty shocking.

That is a shocking number and wholly irresponsible for the UK Gov to accept that as a likely possibility, or even as a worst case number.

Will they bother counting the number of dead if it gets that bad, particularly in poorer areas with high numbers of illegal immigrants?

AllForIt

Peregrinus wrote: »

Sunak (Winchester College (head boy) and Lincoln College, Oxford; MBA from Stanford; investment analyst with Goldman Sachs) is not really a plausible representative of the working classes. On top of the advantages of his birth and education, he had the foresight to marry a billionaire's daughter that he met while studying at Stanford, which must led to family connections helpful when raising the $700 million seed capital with which he launched his hedge fund firm in 2009.

Well, what kind of working class person is capable of being Chancellor of the Exchequer, when that job requires a wealth of knowledge and understanding of how business's and the economy works.

I'd hardly expect Sunak to mingle in some working class pub with a view to picking up a bird, just like working class people don't mingle in high society for same, which they despise. I've never heard of a man marrying a woman for dosh, that's a new one, it's usually the other way around.

More that that, working class people dropped the Labour party in droves in the last election like never seen before. Seems the working classes are pretty okay with upper middle class ppl managing their country.

farmerval

Very interesting article on the Guardian about the theory behind the UK Governments stance on Covid 19

Basically saying that this policy is being put forward by a Behavioral insights team, and their theory is that if bans are introduced too soon people will tire of the restrictions and stat to ignore them. Therefore delaying restrictions until nearer the crises peak may be better. ( I think this is total b******ks by the way)

The article goes on about this "nudge" theory, as a way of influencing peoples behavior.

At the end theirs a neat line about Boris Johnson appearing with experts beside him on Covid 19 announcements , showing he is using experts advice. The article neatly says how this is in total contrast to Brexit where he thought experts were completely wrong and to be ignored.

listermint

But all the advice from all quarters is that isolation action should be done up front not at the last minute. The strategy would make zero sense for pandemic control.

CelticRambler

Perhaps the logic (such as there is/may be) lies in a beautiful phrase used by a Sky commentator the other day: in the US, healthcare is an industry, not a service. Let's imagine for a moment that you had friends in the US healthcare industry, who desperately wanted an entry point into your country's healthcare service, what better way to prepare the terrain than to allow a disease to take hold, one that could be prevented with a newly-patented vaccine or treated with expensive anti-viral medications. As long as you can justify your action on the basis of "scientific advice" then it'd be perfectly reasonable to take a different approach to your neighbouring countries, wouldn't it?

I fully acknowledge that this kind of comment would be more at home in the conspiracy theories thread ... but the recently published Brexit negotiating position did make reference to decisions based on scientific advice, using language that reflected the US's approach of assuming that everything's good and safe unless proven otherwise.

Capt'n Midnight

PommieBast wrote: »

Probably because it would involve ripping out a load of kit that is already in place.

It's state of the art electronics so all that kit has to be ripped out every few years anyway.

And they are only at the start of the 5G rollout so it's not huge amounts of kit.

But they need Chinese money to pay for nuclear power construction, steel works, possibly even HS2 construction.

It's a huge gamble. Ask most African countries. It's like that bit at the start of Lucky Number Slevin

Just to be clear, if you lose...

...you're gonna owe a lot of money to the kind of men you do not want to owe the smallest amount of money to.

-


We use the Chinese kit too BTW

beggars_bush

beggars_bush wrote: »

the problem is the Chief Science Officer seems to be barely qualified to hold his
position

and this thing about behaviour science, surely decisions should be based on medical grounds?

Barely qualified?

I'd love to see what you think over qualified would mean

From 1986−95 he taught at St George's Hospital Medical School. From 1995−2002 he was Professor at UCL Medical School, and Professor of Medicine from 2002–2006, and Head of Medicine.[2] Prior to joining GSK he was registrar of the Academy of Medical Sciences.[1]

From 2006−10 he was Head of Drug Discovery at GSK, then from 2010−12 he was Head of Medicines Discovery and Development. In 2012 he was appointed head of R&D at GSK.[8][9][10][11] Under his leadership of GSK, new medicines for cancer, asthma, autoimmune diseases and HIV infection were discovered and approved for use worldwide. He championed open innovation and novel industry-academic partnerships globally,[6][11] and maintained a strong focus on discovery of antibiotics and medicines for tropical diseases.

In March 2018, Vallance left GSK and was appointed Chief Scientific Adviser to the UK Government, where he leads the Government Office for Science.[12][13]

beggars_bush

Aegir wrote: »

Barely qualified?

I'd love to see what you think over qualified would mean

Most public health doctors don't go off to work for a pharma company

How come he was never involved with the European or world bodies for disease control?

Sam Russell

beggars_bush wrote: »

Most public health doctors don't go off to work for a pharma company

How come he was never involved with the European or world bodies for disease control?

Most politicians (and the general public) are confused be the difference between 'Health' and 'Public Health'.

Health (starting with GPs) is concerned with the health outcome for the patient.

While Public Health is concerned with the outcome for the public at large, taking into account cost, general health, what screening and vaccination programmes are worth doing, and who should be eligible. It requires a very good grasp of medicine coupled with an high expertise in statistics.

Yer man sounds as if he has no Public Health expertise.

sweet ****ing jesus.

There is also a Chief Medical officer for the UK.

Plus one for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

There are also deputies.

Peregrinus

AllForIt wrote: »

Well, what kind of working class person is capable of being Chancellor of the Exchequer, when that job requires a wealth of knowledge and understanding of how business's and the economy works . . .

Dear God, the snobbery.

There have been many working-class Chancellors. Sunak's immediate predecessor, Sajid Javid, is the son of a bus-driver. John Major is the son of a music-hall performer and trapeze artist. James Callaghan was the son of a sailor. Denis Healey's father was a mechanic.

All this is richly ironic, given that I posted in response to this post of yours:

AllForIt wrote: »

All I hear from that is a typical lefty disdain for ppl who have had an education.
Up the working classes.

It seesm the disdain here is yours. And your advocacy of the working classes is less than convincing, given your conviction in the teeth of the easily-observed evidence that they couldn't possibly aspire to competence in a high office of state.

looksee

Just as a bit of an aside, has anyone noticed how Johnson keeps referring to 'the four nations' when talking about the UK recently? Almost as if he his trying to spread responsibility - or something. Scotland and Wales seem to be more in line with Ireland in terms of covid 19 deaths, they need to feel that they are tied in to England rather than possibly thinking of closing borders to the much more affected (plague pit) country.

CelticRambler

Peregrinus wrote: »

10. Some have suggested that NI could join the EU+ area, even if the rest of the UK does not. I don’t think this is likely. It would mean an entry ban on NI affecting travellers from GB. I can’t see the NI executive agreeing to do it and, even if they did, I don’t think they have the power; Westminster would need to agree also. The Commission communication does not mention the possibility.

If Johnson's delay in imposing social isolation (as opposed to suggesting that it'd be quite nice if people kept themselves apart) sees England become Italy-on-Thames, especially compared to a Republic of Ireland that's got a handle on things, then I can easily imagine unionists adopting an attitude akin to Ian Paisley's "our cows are Irish" stance. Reluctantly, but with grim resignation.

Leroy42

What makes you think Ireland has a handle on things?

Lack of testing, lack of ICU, there are clear gaps in the planning for stuff like social care, welfare officials etc.

Sam Russell

Leroy42 wrote: »

What makes you think Ireland has a handle on things?

Lack of testing, lack of ICU, there are clear gaps in the planning for stuff like social care, welfare officials etc.

Watch the number of deaths. That number is irrespective of testing, and is a week or more behind the onset of symptoms. Currently 2, and hopefully does not rise.

If everyone followed the advice - wash hands, do not touch one's face, and keep isolated by at least 1 metre - then after the incubation period, the virus should be finished (we hope).

For everyone who deviates, it is another opportunity for this virus to spread. Everyone should be aware of this so, everyone, please treat everyone else as if they are infected. If we all do this we can get through this quickly.

moon2

Leroy42 wrote: »

What makes you think Ireland has a handle on things?

Lack of testing, lack of ICU, there are clear gaps in the planning for stuff like social care, welfare officials etc.

We're doing comparatively well when you look at the policies being adopted by other countries.

Compare our testing to the US or UK testing rates and we're ahead.

Compare our ICU bed count to Scotland, which has roughly equivalent population count, and we have multiples of what they have.

Compare our response to paid sick leave with that of the US OR UK.

Compare our handling of large public gatherings with the plans in place for either the US or UK.

Where exactly do you see us falling short when compared to other nations? You can definitely point to gaps, but since this is a plan being created and enacted more or less on the fly, do you think the ordering in which these gaps are being plugged has been better, or worse, than our neighbours?

Leroy42

It's not about comparison, the post I replied to stated Ireland had a handle on it.