Off Topic Politics Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
St. Luigi Scrosoppi said:
What happened to the BBC being impartial. This is on their News website today:

In one of his first acts as Labour leader, Sir Keir Starmer announced he would not indulge in opposition for opposition's sake.

This was seen as a decisive break from his own party's recent past.

But now he wants to create more distance between the government and the opposition.

Some say they have noted a more hostile, less consensual tone towards Boris Johnson from Sir Keir.

In an interview with the Guardian, he has suggested that the prime minister lacks "grip". At Prime Minister's Questions today, he accused the prime minister of undermining public trust in his own government with his actions, just at the time when it is needed most.

But, in truth, Sir Keir's stated policy of "constructive criticism" had already tended to emphasise the latter of those two words at PMQs.

And his approach to today's session had as much in common with his approach before - to put down a marker in case things go wrong.

One step beyond

Sir Keir called for an exit strategy from the government at a time when some of his own MPs - and certainly grassroots members - wanted to see him clash with No 10 more robustly on issues of the day.

He now feels vindicated as he believes the lack of a strategy - "an exit without a strategy", as he puts it - is becoming apparent.

The Labour leader is determined to stay one step ahead of the government.

So, by raising questions now over the easing of lockdown while doubts remain about the alert level and the efficacy of the track and trace system, he is positioning the party to distance itself further from the government's approach if the R number goes up.

But it is true that his tone towards Boris Johnson himself is hardening.

Frustration

Labour insiders say this isn't so much the result of a strategic change, but is borne of a sense of frustration with the prime minister over recent days.

As part of the "constructive criticism" approach, the Labour leader sent a letter to Boris Johnson on 18 May about the re-opening of schools.

At PMQs, Sir Keir said he had not received a reply.

The Labour leader was also annoyed by the way advice to those who are shielding was released, without proper consultation.

And he is irritated by what he perceives as an attempt by the PM to keep shifting responsibility for the crisis away from the door of No 10 to local councils, officials, and individuals.

So, Sir Keir is attempting to ensure that if things do go wrong and there are local lockdowns and/or higher infection rates in the weeks ahead, the buck must stop at Downing Street.

And this all appears to be part of a wider narrative he has been pursuing - that the government was too slow to go in to lockdown, and potentially too cavalier in easing it.

Questions, questions

At PMQs, it is Boris Johnson's job to answer Sir Keir's questions.

But there are questions for the Labour leader too.

Some of his political opponents are finding it frustrating that it appears to be the Labour leader and not the prime minister who is having his cake and eating it.

While Sir Keir has been focussed on the government's handling of the crisis, his critics say there has been less scrutiny of what he would do instead.

For example, he has complained of a lack of consultation over the re-opening of schools.

He is also concerned about the effect the closures will have had on the educational attainment of disadvantaged pupils in particular.

But if he were prime minister, would he have led from the front and pushed for partial re-opening? Or would councils and unions have had an effective veto?

Perspiration not inspiration?

More widely though, is he prioritising perspiration over inspiration?

Sir Keir has done some heavy-lifting to make his party look like a more effective opposition and he has proved he can make Boris Johnson sweat.

His own standing in the polls has risen - but his party still lags behind the Conservatives.

So far, the more positive policies that will be necessary to rally new converts to his banner have been less apparent.

Of course, he has talked about valuing public sector workers more, and of rebuilding the economy in a fairer way after the crisis has passed.

He will seek to "win the peace".

But while we may see a laser-like focus on the government's perceived failings, Sir Keir's own vision for the UK remains hazy.
Click to expand...

The bbc hadn’t been impartial for a very long time, sadly. When I worked abroad, I used to rely on the Beeb for impartial, focused and professional news (unlike the US particularly). Now, well, when I was in South Africa recently, it was shocking how biased they are .......
 
  • Like
Reactions: OddRiverOakWizards
Did anyone see C4 ‘Dispatches’ last night? I didn’t, but, reading about on Twitter this morning, I am now going to watch it on catch up.
Seems they absolutely rinsed the government, Cummings and some of the stupidity of following “herd immunity”
 
Our Part Time Prime Minister excelled himself by working a whole day this week. He was in the House of Commons on Wednesday morning for PMQT and then in the afternoon he did the Coronavirus press conference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davecg69
- Doing The Lambert Walk said:
You must log in or register to see media
Click to expand...
Copied from Facebook:

WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE OVEN-READY DEAL?

Boris Johnson in part won the general election because he said he could ‘get Brexit done’. He promised an excellent Brexit deal which he claimed was ‘oven-ready’.

Mr Johnson personally negotiated the deal with the EU, which included a political declaration promising close collaboration and a ‘level playing field’ to enable free and fair trade between the UK and the EU.

He told Parliament on 20 December, just after winning the general election by a landslide, that the task now was to build “our future relationship with the EU.”

He quoted clause three of the ‘Political Declaration’ that aimed to establish, “the parameters of an ambitious, broad, deep and flexible partnership, rooted in our shared history and ideals, and standing together against threats to rights and values from without or within.”

He promised that “this great project will not be a project of one government, or one party, but the British nation as a whole.”

The agreement was passed by our Parliament after Mr Johnson won the general election. It was signed by both the UK and the EU in good faith.

But today we have learnt the truth. The EU’s Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier, announced at a conference in Brussels that almost no progress had been made in achieving the goals agreed in the so-called ‘oven-ready’ agreement.

The negotiations between the EU and the UK to achieve a new, long-term collaborative relationship from 1 January 2021 – after the expiry of the ‘transition period’ – were going nowhere.

“We engaged in this negotiation on the basis of a joint Political Declaration that clearly sets out the terms of our future partnership,” said Monsieur Barnier.

“This declaration was negotiated with and approved by Prime Minister Johnson,” he added.

“It was approved by the leaders of the 27 Member States at the European Council in October 2019.

“It has the backing of the European Parliament.

“It is – and it will remain for us – the only valid reference, the only relevant precedent in this negotiation, as it was agreed by both sides.”

And yet. “Round after round, our British counterparts seek to distance themselves from this common basis.”

M Barnier gave four “concrete examples” of how the UK had “backtracked” on its commitment to the agreement.

▪ THE LEVEL PLAYING FIELD

Said M Barnier, “Prime Minister Johnson agreed, in paragraph 77 of the Political Declaration, that ‘given our geographic proximity and economic interdependence', our future agreement must encompass robust commitments to prevent distortions of trade and unfair competitive advantages.

“This is what, together, we chose to call the ‘level playing field’.

“In this paragraph, Prime Minister Johnson agreed to uphold the common high standards applicable in the Union and the UK at the end of the transition period in these areas: state aid, competition, social and employment standards, environment, climate change, and relevant tax matters.”

And yet. “We are today very far from this objective.”

▪ CIVIL NUCLEAR COOPERATION

Said M Barnier, “Prime Minister Johnson agreed, in paragraph 66 of the Political Declaration on civil nuclear cooperation, to maintain our existing high standards of nuclear safety.”

And yet. “We are very far from this objective.”

▪ ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING

Said M Barnier, “Prime Minister Johnson agreed, in paragraph 82 of the Political Declaration that our agreement should cover anti-money laundering and counter terrorism financing.”

And yet. “We are very far from this objective.”

▪ FUTURE RELATIONSHIP BASED ON AREAS OF COOPERATION

Said M Barnier, “Prime Minister Johnson agreed, in paragraph 118 of the Political Declaration, to base our future relationship on an overarching institutional framework, with links between specific areas of cooperation.”

And yet. “We are, once again, very far from this objective.”

He added, “In all these areas – and many others – the UK continues to backtrack on the commitments it has undertaken in the Political Declaration.”

In conclusion, said M Barnier, “We cannot accept this backtracking on the Political Declaration. And we will request the full respect of the Withdrawal Agreement.”

But it seems Britain has gone into these negotiations in the absence of respect or good faith.

What was the point of the UK signing an agreement covering future co-operation with the EU, that took years to achieve, that was democratically passed by our Parliament, the European Parliament and all the leaders of the EU27, if it wasn’t to be taken seriously?

Boris Johnson’s oven-ready Brexit now looks half-baked.

We are now heading for a no-deal Brexit commencing from 1 January, that both sides warn will be devastating for both sides.

Did the Prime Minister make false promises both to the EU and to the British people?

▪ Link to Michel Barnier's full announcement: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/speech_20_1017

▪ Link to the Political Declaration agreed by the UK and the EU: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/publications/revised-political-declaration_en
 
  • Like
Reactions: milton archer, davecg69 and StJabbo1
ChilcoSaint said:
Copied from Facebook:

WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE OVEN-READY DEAL?

Boris Johnson in part won the general election because he said he could ‘get Brexit done’. He promised an excellent Brexit deal which he claimed was ‘oven-ready’.

Mr Johnson personally negotiated the deal with the EU, which included a political declaration promising close collaboration and a ‘level playing field’ to enable free and fair trade between the UK and the EU.

He told Parliament on 20 December, just after winning the general election by a landslide, that the task now was to build “our future relationship with the EU.”

He quoted clause three of the ‘Political Declaration’ that aimed to establish, “the parameters of an ambitious, broad, deep and flexible partnership, rooted in our shared history and ideals, and standing together against threats to rights and values from without or within.”

He promised that “this great project will not be a project of one government, or one party, but the British nation as a whole.”

The agreement was passed by our Parliament after Mr Johnson won the general election. It was signed by both the UK and the EU in good faith.

But today we have learnt the truth. The EU’s Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier, announced at a conference in Brussels that almost no progress had been made in achieving the goals agreed in the so-called ‘oven-ready’ agreement.

The negotiations between the EU and the UK to achieve a new, long-term collaborative relationship from 1 January 2021 – after the expiry of the ‘transition period’ – were going nowhere.

“We engaged in this negotiation on the basis of a joint Political Declaration that clearly sets out the terms of our future partnership,” said Monsieur Barnier.

“This declaration was negotiated with and approved by Prime Minister Johnson,” he added.

“It was approved by the leaders of the 27 Member States at the European Council in October 2019.

“It has the backing of the European Parliament.

“It is – and it will remain for us – the only valid reference, the only relevant precedent in this negotiation, as it was agreed by both sides.”

And yet. “Round after round, our British counterparts seek to distance themselves from this common basis.”

M Barnier gave four “concrete examples” of how the UK had “backtracked” on its commitment to the agreement.

▪ THE LEVEL PLAYING FIELD

Said M Barnier, “Prime Minister Johnson agreed, in paragraph 77 of the Political Declaration, that ‘given our geographic proximity and economic interdependence', our future agreement must encompass robust commitments to prevent distortions of trade and unfair competitive advantages.

“This is what, together, we chose to call the ‘level playing field’.

“In this paragraph, Prime Minister Johnson agreed to uphold the common high standards applicable in the Union and the UK at the end of the transition period in these areas: state aid, competition, social and employment standards, environment, climate change, and relevant tax matters.”

And yet. “We are today very far from this objective.”

▪ CIVIL NUCLEAR COOPERATION

Said M Barnier, “Prime Minister Johnson agreed, in paragraph 66 of the Political Declaration on civil nuclear cooperation, to maintain our existing high standards of nuclear safety.”

And yet. “We are very far from this objective.”

▪ ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING

Said M Barnier, “Prime Minister Johnson agreed, in paragraph 82 of the Political Declaration that our agreement should cover anti-money laundering and counter terrorism financing.”

And yet. “We are very far from this objective.”

▪ FUTURE RELATIONSHIP BASED ON AREAS OF COOPERATION

Said M Barnier, “Prime Minister Johnson agreed, in paragraph 118 of the Political Declaration, to base our future relationship on an overarching institutional framework, with links between specific areas of cooperation.”

And yet. “We are, once again, very far from this objective.”

He added, “In all these areas – and many others – the UK continues to backtrack on the commitments it has undertaken in the Political Declaration.”

In conclusion, said M Barnier, “We cannot accept this backtracking on the Political Declaration. And we will request the full respect of the Withdrawal Agreement.”

But it seems Britain has gone into these negotiations in the absence of respect or good faith.

What was the point of the UK signing an agreement covering future co-operation with the EU, that took years to achieve, that was democratically passed by our Parliament, the European Parliament and all the leaders of the EU27, if it wasn’t to be taken seriously?

Boris Johnson’s oven-ready Brexit now looks half-baked.

We are now heading for a no-deal Brexit commencing from 1 January, that both sides warn will be devastating for both sides.

Did the Prime Minister make false promises both to the EU and to the British people?

▪ Link to Michel Barnier's full announcement: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/speech_20_1017

▪ Link to the Political Declaration agreed by the UK and the EU: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/publications/revised-political-declaration_en
Click to expand...

Probably the worse thing of all is knowing that the people who voted for him won’t hold him to account, which makes them every bit as bad as him.
And we’re stuck with his party for another 4 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OddRiverOakWizards, AberdeenSaint, davecg69 and 3 others
Matthew Paris, a Tory, writing in today's Times says of Johnson.

How is this ludicrous travel quarantine ever going to work? Will our “world-beating” phone app ever be ready? Should we wear facemasks? Why does the virus appear to have fled London when only about 20 per cent have been infected? Where might it be headed next? What plans have we for localised lockdowns? Is the two-metre rule here to stay? What about schools when other year groups return? What about public transport as we return to work?

But leave it off: we’ve reached a point when firing questions is just embarrassing. Why bother unless we can address them to a presiding and commanding human intelligence? Which brings us to Boris Johnson, apparently still the prime minister.

You’ll have heard the mutterings. “Boris hasn’t fully recovered yet”, “not firing on all cylinders”, “no strategic direction”, “can’t concentrate”, “lost his bounce . . . ” Well he’s certainly lost his bounce. But as for all those other whispers about impaired judgment, they’re nonsense. He never had any judgment or strategic vision. His powers of concentration have always been weak. There never was a golden age of Boris Johnson, never was this fabled creature of whom we now see only a poor shadow. Mr Johnson was only ever a shallow opportunist with a minor talent to amuse.

No after-dinner speeches now. What at least he does realise is that this is not a time when his skills as a self-parodying light entertainer are called for. Sadly though, he doesn’t have any other skills. He broke into Downing Street by clambering up a drainpipe called Brexit and he never fully believed in that foolish endeavour, as the more deeply-rooted Brexiteers always knew.

Johnson may recover fully from the coronavirus but he is not going to get better, and a horrible national crisis has put that truth on show. Yet for him this, so far, has been the easy bit — the “rally round, boys, and let’s show a united face to our Covid-19 foe” bit.

What comes next must prove much more difficult for any occupant of No 10. Ahead lie two or perhaps three tremendous tests.

As Britain wakes up to the fact that we’ve messed up, the country faces a summer when our citizens, like children not allowed out to play, will watch with noses pressed to the window as continental Europe suns itself on beaches while we British are confined to Scrabble and computer games. It’s questionable whether this is even sustainable.

Second, as winter approaches, a big second wave of coronavirus may hit us. I’m not expecting this but the scientists guiding what’s left of government policy fear it’s a real risk. Unless the rest of the world is hit by comparable second waves, British voters would turn on a Tory government with real ferocity and a plausible Sir Keir Starmer is positioning Labour to profit from it.

Third, awaits the greatest test by far for any PM: struggling, maybe for years, to heal a gravely wounded national economy. Is Johnson the leader for a time of soaring unemployment, widespread bankruptcies, empty Treasury coffers and humiliating international comparisons? His parliamentary party at Westminster must wonder.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OddRiverOakWizards, AberdeenSaint, milton archer and 3 others
St. Luigi Scrosoppi said:
Matthew Paris, a Tory, writing in today's Times says of Johnson.

How is this ludicrous travel quarantine ever going to work? Will our “world-beating” phone app ever be ready? Should we wear facemasks? Why does the virus appear to have fled London when only about 20 per cent have been infected? Where might it be headed next? What plans have we for localised lockdowns? Is the two-metre rule here to stay? What about schools when other year groups return? What about public transport as we return to work?

But leave it off: we’ve reached a point when firing questions is just embarrassing. Why bother unless we can address them to a presiding and commanding human intelligence? Which brings us to Boris Johnson, apparently still the prime minister.

You’ll have heard the mutterings. “Boris hasn’t fully recovered yet”, “not firing on all cylinders”, “no strategic direction”, “can’t concentrate”, “lost his bounce . . . ” Well he’s certainly lost his bounce. But as for all those other whispers about impaired judgment, they’re nonsense. He never had any judgment or strategic vision. His powers of concentration have always been weak. There never was a golden age of Boris Johnson, never was this fabled creature of whom we now see only a poor shadow. Mr Johnson was only ever a shallow opportunist with a minor talent to amuse.

No after-dinner speeches now. What at least he does realise is that this is not a time when his skills as a self-parodying light entertainer are called for. Sadly though, he doesn’t have any other skills. He broke into Downing Street by clambering up a drainpipe called Brexit and he never fully believed in that foolish endeavour, as the more deeply-rooted Brexiteers always knew.

Johnson may recover fully from the coronavirus but he is not going to get better, and a horrible national crisis has put that truth on show. Yet for him this, so far, has been the easy bit — the “rally round, boys, and let’s show a united face to our Covid-19 foe” bit.

What comes next must prove much more difficult for any occupant of No 10. Ahead lie two or perhaps three tremendous tests.

As Britain wakes up to the fact that we’ve messed up, the country faces a summer when our citizens, like children not allowed out to play, will watch with noses pressed to the window as continental Europe suns itself on beaches while we British are confined to Scrabble and computer games. It’s questionable whether this is even sustainable.

Second, as winter approaches, a big second wave of coronavirus may hit us. I’m not expecting this but the scientists guiding what’s left of government policy fear it’s a real risk. Unless the rest of the world is hit by comparable second waves, British voters would turn on a Tory government with real ferocity and a plausible Sir Keir Starmer is positioning Labour to profit from it.

Third, awaits the greatest test by far for any PM: struggling, maybe for years, to heal a gravely wounded national economy. Is Johnson the leader for a time of soaring unemployment, widespread bankruptcies, empty Treasury coffers and humiliating international comparisons? His parliamentary party at Westminster must wonder.
Click to expand...

Such a great article. I seriously hope the voter turns on Blojo and his incompetent (some may say corrupt) government. Sadly, though, I’m of the opinion that we will almost certainly have another 4+ years of this mob, because nowhere near enough sitting Tory MPs are going to turn and vote against the government. My prime example is my own MP, Caroline Nokes, who, after standing in parliament and arguing against the end of remote voting, then caved into the whips (which is EXACTLY what Rees-Mogg wanted) and voted ‘yes’. I despair.
We may well see the Tories drop Blojo like a hot potato, but there’s exactly no one in that party with any concern for the “ordinary voter” (or “little man” as, no doubt, Cummings calls us) so there’s little way out.
I can only hope and pray that the voter remembers in 4 years time what this government did to them and how much it gave the venture capitalists and cronies who fund the Tories and who will make billions out of this fiasco. However, knowing the British capacity for sheer apathy, I still worry ......
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChilcoSaint and StJabbo1
St Badger said:
This guy should be given a 5 minute stint on MSM to give a weekly up date on the chaotic way our government is “working”.

You must log in or register to see media
Click to expand...

He's spot on. It's a joke. But no one is holding the government to account.

I feel so distanced from this country. My local MP replied to my letter about Dominic Cummings backing the government's stance.

None of the people in government have a backbone, none of the media are asking the right questions, politicians are openly lying with flagrant disregard for anyone but themselves.

We are nowhere near as bad as America. Society here is by and large great, and improving in almost all areas. But I am going to have to stop going on twitter or following any politics news for my own sanity. Morals, ethics and decency seem to have disappeared, and I can't watch any more.

The morals of open democracy and caring for the people of the country have completely gone, and things are only going to get worse. I hope I am wrong, but all of the evidence I have seen suggests a downward trajectory until we can vote these absolute loathsome morons out in 4 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: San Tejón, ChilcoSaint and davecg69
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back