Politics in General

[Rhys Benjamin]

The government's problem last night was the fact two issues were being confused and obfuscated.

The standards committee can, and should, be reformed. This is not that controversial. Indeed, JRM has said they're keeping this on the table but wants to bring it back to the House for a "proper" way of doing it cross-party.

The vote on Paterson's suspension may have been disputed because of compassionate grounds, given his wife's suicide. This is more controversial, but still not a cut-and-dry "corruption" story.

What the govt got wrong was conflating both issues.

[Gavin Chipper]

Ian Hislop gave Boris Johnson and the Tories a good kicking on HIGNFY this evening. Rhys's favourite programme.

[Paul Anderson]

And now John Major has weighed in. He knows plenty about this topic, so his words will have an effect hopefully

[Martin Long]

In fairness, current Labour probably would be as bad. Starmer being a useless gombeen should probably get a bit mention here too.

I'm no fan of Starmer, but I think as with his predecessors, there is a big danger of people just assigning a sterotype to him and it sticking, and then the Tories win the next general election. With Starmer, it mainly seems to be that he's boring, and also there's the whole "But what does he stand for?" I was watching Frankie Boyle's New World Order the other day, and Boyle really ripped into him about being borng. I like Frankie Boyle on the whole, but here he was just being unoriginal. Is he really any more boring than your average politician? It seems to me that Boyle's just (unwittingly?) bought into the right wing media's sterotype of him. This kind of crap is why the Tories win elections.

There's far more to rip into about Boris Johnson, or indeed proabably any Tory leader ever, but unlike the left, the right are more likely to suck it up on the basis that they have a better chance of winning an election.

I very much doubt that Frankie Boyle has bought into right wing stereotypes of politicians given he is one of the most left wing people in the country. By his own admission, he is more left wing than Noam Chomsky. His political views are far more likely to be similar to that of Mark James.

[Mark James]

Why are the left expected to hold their nose and vote for centre, if not centre right, candidates just to beat tories or republicans. Shouldn't the likes of James O'Brien have be saying "I don't like Corbyn but we must vote Labour to defeat the Conservatives" instead of saying he would be voting lib dem. Voting for the lesser of two evils has gotten us nowhere. The current Labour Party needs to be humiliated at the next election.

[Callum Todd]

Why are the left expected to hold their nose and vote for centre, if not centre right, candidates just to beat tories or republicans. Shouldn't the likes of James O'Brien have be saying "I don't like Corbyn but we must vote Labour to defeat the Conservatives" instead of saying he would be voting lib dem. Voting for the lesser of two evils has gotten us nowhere. The current Labour Party needs to be humiliated at the next election.

Please forgive me if I've misunderstood you but I think the final sentence of your above comment answers the questions you pose earlier in the same comment. If you were to remodel your statement to be from the perspective of a more centrist or centre-left Labour perspective it could read:

"Why are the centre(-left) expected to hold their nose and vote for left, if not far left, candidates just to beat tories or republicans. Why should the likes of James O'Brien have be saying "I don't like Corbyn but we must vote Labour to defeat the Conservatives" instead of saying he would be voting lib dem. Voting for the lesser of two evils has gotten us nowhere. The current Labour Party needs to be humiliated at the next election."

[Martin Long]

I don't think people should be expected to vote for anyone and should vote for the party that matches their views the closest. I guess the only reason why you wouldn't do this is if you had a local candidate whose views didn't match yours but did a lot in your local area.

[Gavin Chipper]

I don't think people should be expected to vote for anyone and should vote for the party that matches their views the closest. I guess the only reason why you wouldn't do this is if you had a local candidate whose views didn't match yours but did a lot in your local area.

It's not about being expected to vote for people, although with our terrible voting system, there are arguments for going against your favourite.

But it's more about people with a voice actively sabotaging their most realistic way of getting rid of Boris Johnson. And it's just more annoying when it's with lazy stereotypes. And claiming to be more left than Chomsky doesn't absolve Boyle from this. If he has real problems with Starmer it would be more reasonable of course - I don't actually think he should escape all criticism from the left just in case the Tories get in again.

And while people on the left and those nearer the "centre" bicker about Corbyn/Starmer etc., the Tories all stick together and win every time.

[Mark James]

Why are the left expected to hold their nose and vote for centre, if not centre right, candidates just to beat tories or republicans. Shouldn't the likes of James O'Brien have be saying "I don't like Corbyn but we must vote Labour to defeat the Conservatives" instead of saying he would be voting lib dem. Voting for the lesser of two evils has gotten us nowhere. The current Labour Party needs to be humiliated at the next election.

Please forgive me if I've misunderstood you but I think the final sentence of your above comment answers the questions you pose earlier in the same comment. If you were to remodel your statement to be from the perspective of a more centrist or centre-left Labour perspective it could read:

"Why are the centre(-left) expected to hold their nose and vote for left, if not far left, candidates just to beat tories or republicans. Why should the likes of James O'Brien have be saying "I don't like Corbyn but we must vote Labour to defeat the Conservatives" instead of saying he would be voting lib dem. Voting for the lesser of two evils has gotten us nowhere. The current Labour Party needs to be humiliated at the next election."

The point is the centrists are not expected to vote for the far left (or even centre left). Corbyn is hardly far left for one but it was fine for James O'Brien to say he would vote for lib dems ahead of Corbyn's Labour without being accused of handing the election to the tories in the same way progressives would get blamed if they say they are not going to vote for Starmer's Labour.

[Mark James]

I don't think people should be expected to vote for anyone and should vote for the party that matches their views the closest. I guess the only reason why you wouldn't do this is if you had a local candidate whose views didn't match yours but did a lot in your local area.

It's not about being expected to vote for people, although with our terrible voting system, there are arguments for going against your favourite.

But it's more about people with a voice actively sabotaging their most realistic way of getting rid of Boris Johnson. And it's just more annoying when it's with lazy stereotypes. And claiming to be more left than Chomsky doesn't absolve Boyle from this. If he has real problems with Starmer it would be more reasonable of course - I don't actually think he should escape all criticism from the left just in case the Tories get in again.

And while people on the left and those nearer the "centre" bicker about Corbyn/Starmer etc., the Tories all stick together and win every time.

Again, this argument never seemed to be made when Corbyn was leader. The best way of preventing Johnson gaining power was to vote for Corbyn's Labour in 2017 or 2019. People with a voice like James O'Brien or Russel Howard were using their voice to sabotage Corbyn as well as him having people in his own party actively working against him. Maybe you could make the argument that it was weak leadership from Corbyn to not expel those people and I could agree but this is why we need to move away from civility politics and lesser evilism and start calling these people out and holding them accountable. The likes of James O'Brien voting for lib dems ahead of Corbyn is just as responsible for Johnson gaining power as anyone.

[Gavin Chipper]

I think the criticism against Corbyn was ridiculous too, especially from his own party. And considering how close the 2017 election was, it's not hard to draw the conclusion that it made a difference.

And the whole thing about Corbyn being really far left was a fabrication too but people bought it. But no-one could point to specific policies. It was just based on him as an individual and his reputation. People are generally further to the left than the politicians they vote for. They just don't realise how far right the Tories are. There's this weird misalignment. Gyles Brandreth, take it away.

But anyway, that all said, I'd rather have Keir Starmer as Prime Minister than Boris Johnson.

[Marc Meakin]

Labour needs a new Messiah someone appealing to all.
Tony Blair Mark 2

[Gavin Chipper]

Labour needs a new Messiah someone appealing to all.
Tony Blair Mark 2

I'll pass on another Tony Blair, thanks.

[Mark James]

Saw someone on twitter describe the Democrats as the "party paid to not do good things party" and the Republicans as the "paid to do bad things party". Think that can be applied to Labour and the Conservatives too.

[Rhys Benjamin]

Why are the left expected to hold their nose and vote for […] candidates just to beat tories or republicans.

This is why I am against electoral pacts and always have been. Not only is it the politics of hate, voting explicitly against someone rather than voting for what you believe in (G Johnson, 2016), but it also relies on the postulate that you will vote for the party/candidate that “they” want you to vote for.

Indeed, John Curtice just this week has published this which suggests that Brexit Party voters would split about 70/30 Con/Lab without a BRX candidate, https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ysis-finds, and that Farage’s (unilateral) decision not to stand in the 2017 Conservative seats only saved a handful of Conservatives.

Many people have kidded themselves into thinking that Martin Bell’s win in Tatton in 1997 was a rule rather than an exemption. The Conservatives stood down for Zac Goldsmith in a 2016 by-election (which he lost as an Independent), but regained it under a Conservative label in 2017.

[Rhys Benjamin]

In the interests of fairness, here are two great pieces of journalism today:

Ross Atkins’ fair and balanced summary of the Paterson case: https://twitter.com/bbcrosatkins/status ... 73128?s=21

Tom Harwood’s hilarious vox pops of climate change loonies: https://twitter.com/gbnews/status/14576 ... 58595?s=21

[JimBentley]

Tom Harwood’s hilarious vox pops of climate change loonies: https://twitter.com/gbnews/status/14576 ... 58595?s=21

That was pathetic. You right-wingers evidently set the bar very low for "comedy".

And Tom Harwood is just repulsive.

[Gavin Chipper]

Whatever one thinks of Alastair Campbell, he did a good job on Boris Johnson on Question Time on Thursday. Also, this is the video he referred to about Johnson's lies.

[Rhys Benjamin]

You still watch that rubbish?

[Gavin Chipper]

Question Time? Most weeks, yes. There is a lot of rubbish on it though. Mainly Tories.

[Paul Anderson]

Yeah I guess it's a decent barometer though. It has been very tory for a few years now but hey Brexit etc. The tide thankfully seems to be turning

[Mark James]

You still watch that rubbish?

You watch GB news.

[Rhys Benjamin]

You still watch that rubbish?

You watch GB news.

I don't. I follow them on Twitter. As I do with almost every newspaper and broadcast media.

[Mark James]

You still watch that rubbish?

You watch GB news.

I don't. I follow them on Twitter. As I do with almost every newspaper and broadcast media.

Sourced from viewtopic.php?f=7&t=14904

Meanwhile my "working from home" schedule has turned into filtering data with GB News on in the background.

I count having things on in the background and consuming their output as watching them.

[Rhys Benjamin]

Meanwhile my "working from home" schedule has turned into filtering data with GB News on in the background.

I count having things on in the background and consuming their output as watching them.

I don’t count having a news channel on in the background as “watching” it.

[Mark James]

Meanwhile my "working from home" schedule has turned into filtering data with GB News on in the background.

I count having things on in the background and consuming their output as watching them.

I don’t count having a news channel on in the background as “watching” it.

So if Gavin only had Question Time on in the background but was still able to absorb the content you wouldn’t have questioned him about "watching that rubbish"?

[Mark James]

Always amazes me how Conservatives know that being a Conservative and having Conservative opinions is shitty and they have to try and distance themselves from acknowledging it.

"No No, I don't watch the ludicrous far right propaganda channel, I just have it on in the background."

[Elliott Mellor]

Meanwhile my "working from home" schedule has turned into filtering data with GB News on in the background.

I count having things on in the background and consuming their output as watching them.

I don’t count having a news channel on in the background as “watching” it.

Come on Rhys, I've seen some daft arguments in this thread but this is a contender for the daftest of them all. You consciously chose to have it on in the background, so you must have at least been somewhat interested in it - you could have chosen a whole plethora of other channels but chose that specific one each day. It's not like you switch the television on and it forces you to have that channel, you have to choose to put it on. Nobody's claiming you're the most ardent fan of it, but for all intents and purposes you are watching it (at the very least, you're a viewer of it if you really insist on silly technical arguments).

Now, consume whatever material you want, but don't do some sort of dance when people acknowledge your doing so. If you're embarrassed by it, then I suggest you stop watching it. If not, then carry on - it's a free world and you can watch whatever channels you want.

[Matt Rutherford]

Meanwhile my "working from home" schedule has turned into filtering data with GB News on in the background.

I count having things on in the background and consuming their output as watching them.

I don’t count having a news channel on in the background as “watching” it.

Picture the scene...

BOSS-Why did you have pornographic videos on your phone at your desk?

WORKER-I wasn't watching them, they were just 'in the background'

[Rhys Benjamin]

Am... I the only person who has the news on in the background when working from home? I've worked in offices with BBC One / BBC News / Sky News on...?

[Ian Volante]

Am... I the only person who has the news on in the background when working from home? I've worked in offices with BBC One / BBC News / Sky News on...?

I usually have music on. In the office, the Comms staff always have news on, but where there's a telly elsewhere (rarely), they were only usually on for FMQs or major relevant debates in the Parliament.

[Rhys Benjamin]

Am... I the only person who has the news on in the background when working from home? I've worked in offices with BBC One / BBC News / Sky News on...?

I usually have music on. In the office, the Comms staff always have news on, but where there's a telly elsewhere (rarely), they were only usually on for FMQs or major relevant debates in the Parliament.

Ah. So it is just me.

Now I understand some of the manufactured outrage above…

[Marc Meakin]

Its not Wagner by any chance

[Gavin Chipper]

People need to sort their quotes out. This outrage is not manufactured.

[Marc Meakin]

People need to sort their quotes out. This outrage is not manufactured.

My bad

[Gavin Chipper]

By the way, the taxi bomber was a Christian convert. Bloody Christianist terrorists.

[Gavin Chipper]

From the BBC

A campaign by PC Andrew Harper's widow to give mandatory life sentences to the killers of emergency service workers has been backed by the government.

I don't like this at all. It panders to the populist string-em-up mentality, and this is exactly what the justice system should be moving away from. I'm much more for rehabilitation and reintegration into society where possible. I also don't think some lives are worth more than others, so it shouldn't matter if someone is an emergency service worker. And I think actions and intent are more important than consequences, which can often be a matter of (bad) luck.

I obviously have every sympathy with Andrew Harper's widow for what has happened. However, laws should be set by more objective criteria and not based on emotions.

[Phil H]

From the BBC

A campaign by PC Andrew Harper's widow to give mandatory life sentences to the killers of emergency service workers has been backed by the government.

I don't like this at all... It panders to the populist string-em-up mentality... I also don't think some lives are worth more than others.

Totally agree. Painfully on-brand though for the current Govt, of course.

[Noel Mc]

It's laughable really, isn't it?

Any money on Sunak being the leaker of the video?

[Gavin Chipper]

It's laughable really, isn't it?

Any money on Sunak being the leaker of the video?

Since that post won't age well, this is the story being referred to. But anyway, could be Sunak after the top job. I've no idea really.

[Noel Mc]

It's laughable really, isn't it?

Any money on Sunak being the leaker of the video?

Since that post won't age well, this is the story being referred to. But anyway, could be Sunak after the top job. I've no idea really.

Oh sorry, yep, context is useful!

Will anything come of it?

[Gavin Chipper]

It's laughable really, isn't it?

Any money on Sunak being the leaker of the video?

Since that post won't age well, this is the story being referred to. But anyway, could be Sunak after the top job. I've no idea really.

Oh sorry, yep, context is useful!

Will anything come of it?

I doubt it will. This is Boris Johnson's government. They can get away with anything.

[Fiona T]

Since that post won't age well, this is the story being referred to. But anyway, could be Sunak after the top job. I've no idea really.

Oh sorry, yep, context is useful!

Will anything come of it?

I doubt it will. This is Boris Johnson's government. They can get away with anything.

It does feel like that.

[Rhys Benjamin]

Good to see my employer voted against the illiberal and authoritarian Covid passes tonight.

[Gavin Chipper]

Good to see my employer voted against the illiberal and authoritarian Covid passes tonight.

What are your main concerns with it?

[Gavin Chipper]

Tories got chucked out in the by-election, since it hasn't been mentioned.

[Rhys Benjamin]

Good to see my employer voted against the illiberal and authoritarian Covid passes tonight.

What are your main concerns with it?

1 - they don't work. Delta and Omicron have a high vaccine escape, and as Boris said on Sunday that means two doses doesn't work any more. So a vaccine pass means you can be spreading Covid around willy-nilly. The alternative is "third doses only", but that's discriminatory to those who have not had the opportunity to have it.

2 - if you went to LFTs only, these are not 100% either, so for much the same reason.

3 - there are so many edge cases and medical exemptions that you will never get universal coverage.

4 - those who don't want a vaccine should not be treated as second-class citizens.

[Noel Mc]

The staggered leaking of photos and videos is hilarious, as it is clearly a power move (probably by Rishi Sunak).
Doesn't pardon the fact Johnson is just an absolute tube though.

[Elliott Mellor]

The staggered leaking of photos and videos is hilarious, as it is clearly a power move (probably by Rishi Sunak).
Doesn't pardon the fact Johnson is just an absolute tube though.

What annoys me most about this is not the pictures themselves (I knew Boris Johnson was an utterly reprehensibly individual with no integrity at all so I didn't for one second believe he would have been making a concerted effort to follow his own rules when he was with his chums and there were no cameras), it's that whoever is responsible for these leaks (Sunak is a good shout, could also be perhaps Truss or Javid) is going to try and come out of it smelling of roses - "I wasn't at the gathering", "I wasn't at the Christmas party" etc. These photos could have been released MUCH sooner if they were trying to expose Johnson in the name of some sort of moral good - by sitting on them for this long, they are very much complicit and are proving that they only care about exposing wrongdoings when there's an opportunity for them to gain as a result. The spin that will be put on it, and that a great many people will likely buy in to, is that this person is "one of us" - they're extremely far from it.

What is costing Johnson at least as much as the fact he was clearly complicit in illegal gatherings, is that he's got no accountability when presented with irrefutable evidence that they went ahead. A lot of people made huge sacrifices amidst this (okay, I don't think anyone on here can honestly claim they followed every rule to the letter, but what Johnson was complicit in is likely orders of magnitude greater than what the majority on here would have to fess up to) and when there's clear evidence that the government was not making the sacrifices they expected of others and then when approached about this, they're acting as though it isn't even an issue, it breeds an awful lot of distrust-fuelled anger.

[Fiona T]

Blimey, not a mention of recent events - show how jaded we've all become with Bojo and his cronies.

[Marc Meakin]

Blimey, not a mention of recent events - show how jaded we've all become with Bojo and his cronies.

I was too busy getting pissed at my office meeting

[Jon O'Neill]

Who's surprised?

[Elliott Mellor]

Blimey, not a mention of recent events - show how jaded we've all become with Bojo and his cronies.

I must say I was quite surprised by this too - what he's done is so indefensible that perhaps people feel like there's really no debate to be had.

What really infuriates me is that whoever is leaking this (someone wanting to get the top job) has waited until now, long after these events occurred. There'll be an attempt to push "I'm one of you" to the public and this couldn't be further from the truth - it's all for self gain. They could have reported the stuff at the time if they were really concerned about the ethics of it - by waiting until now they are culpable as well.

[Marc Meakin]

I would say Cummins is behind a lot of this.
Hell hath no fury and all that

[Elliott Mellor]

I would say Cummins is behind a lot of this.
Hell hath no fury and all that

He may well be behind some of it, but I think there's a definite push by someone to get the top job here.

[Gavin Chipper]

When did TikTok become "acceptable"? When it was first getting big, there was a lot of controversy abut it being this scary Chinese product that the Chinese government were presumably using to spy on everyone. Now it's everywhere, and you get the BBC going on about these viral TikTok videos with no reference to what they used to say about it.

[Ian Volante]

When did TikTok become "acceptable"? When it was first getting big, there was a lot of controversy abut it being this scary Chinese product that the Chinese government were presumably using to spy on everyone. Now it's everywhere, and you get the BBC going on about these viral TikTok videos with no reference to what they used to say about it.

Probably around the time they were forced to spin off an American-based version of themselves.

[Mark James]

Privatising Channel 4 would be very bad. That is all.

[Paul Anderson]

This government privatising it especially, smacks of a Banana Republic

[Gavin Chipper]

Nadine Dorries.

Oh sorry - I thought this was the joke items thread.