Sunak is another Dave Cameron. Very well presented, not much there. Hopefully, if he does get the top job he will not do as much damage as Cameron did.
Don't agree about Cameron. I think he was a good PM and the Coalition government in particular was one of our better governments who eased us out of a very difficult situation with surprisingly little pain. As for Sunak he is clearly very bright. My slight concern is that his meteoric rise has given him very little experience of governing or politics outside his comfort zone of finance. I'd like to see him spread his wings a bit but his boss probably wouldn't.
I am not so sure history will be as kind as you are! Cameron's legacy is what we are living through now: a deeply divided country that is poorer than it should be, less relevant internationally and whose citizens have lost an unprecedented amount of freedom, with more on the way. Mistaking well-spoken verbal fluency for intelligence is the perennial British problem.
Well quite, Camerons time as PM ended in an abject failure, That is demonstrably obvious. Unlike other PMs he was not a victim of ‘events’, he carefully crafted the conditions of his own failure. He played with fire for short term political expediency and destroyed himself. History will judge him a tragic figure and one of our worst PMs.
His time as PM ended up as such an "abject failure" that having been behind in almost every poll in the 2010-15 Parliament, and having surprisingly won quite a narrow majority in 2015 . . . he managed to set his party up for another two General Elections and still be strong favourites for the next election too.
He exorcised the issue that has bedevilled the country and the Party for generations. Real generations, not Scottish ones.
EDIT: Its funny how your post is getting plenty of "likes" from people who probably don't want and don't vote for a series of Conservative governments that are Cameron's legacy.
Some exorcism.
You are meant to pretend that PMs are too be judged on what they do for their country, not their party, unless you want people confusing you with hyufd
Philip is both right and wrong (which is usual). Yerp was an issue not going away. The problem was that the referendum scheme was not done because the country needed it. It was because the Tories were under threat from UKIP.
The referendum, the aftermath, the form of Brexit - all have been done solely on the equation that what is good for the party is good for the country. Which incidentally is the same mindset as the Chinese Communist Party...
Funny understanding of democracy on this forum sometimes. Politicians react to democratic pressure. Presumably far more than 52% felt it appropriate to have a specific say on our relationship with Europe. That there was a referendum with the result then enacted after not one but two further general elections, shows to me that in the end our democracy worked as it is supposed to.
Direct democracy is not how our democracy is supposed to work at all.
I don't think there is a 'supposed to'. University seats was how our democracy was supposed to work, until it wasn't. Votes for women wasn't how our democracy was supposed to work, until it was. The expansion of the franchise wasn't how our democracy was supposed to work, until it was.
The referendum was the direct result of our indirect democracy failing to represent a significant chunk of public opinion for 30 years or so. I remember John Major's argument that we shouldn't have a referendum on Maastricht because that's not the way we do things. It was disingenuous then and it's disingenuous now.
The main argument that I can see against a referendum is that indirect democracy allows us the ability to pretend all our disagreements are just the result of 'stupid politicos' - direct democracy shines a spotlight on our disagreements that we would rather not have.
The main argument against a referendum is that it polarises debate around two stark alternatives when in reality there is always a range of positions that can be taken, even where they are subsidiary to the main question, and hence the referendum itself polarises (some would say poisons) the political debate whilst at the same time delivering an incomplete outcome.
I'm not sure that he can - unless he really does want to torpedo the Treasury Bench by allowing a stack of UQs about the budget before Sunak is allowed to summarise the various media rounds in his actual speech.
Given that Hoyle is trying to hold the upper hand against the government I can't see this - the Budget Speech is one of the big set-piece parliamentary events. How he skewers government business after the speech is more likely the tactic he will use.
This is silly season stuff. If the Speaker denied a government with a huge majority from reading a finance bill he would be out on his arse for politicising the office of Speaker.
Indeed. So I expect he will bookend it with a broadside of criticism and then torpoedo passage of the Finance Bill by allowing as many disruptive back bench / opposition UQs etc as Erskine May allows.
By the book. In direct contrast to the Treasury Bench.
As objectively as possible, it is sometimes an error to announce the goodies first and then all the negatives on the day. The media coverage of the goodies is suppressed in the immediate aftermath (because they've headlined them before) and the negatives are actually the news. Being new, and all.
From previous thread - See reply to you on previous thread. Caught out by new thread and slow typing.
Good answer.
I'd also add:
- Motivated reasoning (deciding what conclusion he wants and torturing the argument to fit) - Perception that admitting being wrong is weakness and "losing" - Perception that loyalty to a Party regardless of what they actually do is strength
I'm not sure that he can - unless he really does want to torpedo the Treasury Bench by allowing a stack of UQs about the budget before Sunak is allowed to summarise the various media rounds in his actual speech.
Given that Hoyle is trying to hold the upper hand against the government I can't see this - the Budget Speech is one of the big set-piece parliamentary events. How he skewers government business after the speech is more likely the tactic he will use.
This is silly season stuff. If the Speaker denied a government with a huge majority from reading a finance bill he would be out on his arse for politicising the office of Speaker.
Indeed. So I expect he will bookend it with a broadside of criticism and then torpoedo passage of the Finance Bill by allowing as many disruptive back bench / opposition UQs etc as Erskine May allows.
By the book. In direct contrast to the Treasury Bench.
Oh give over. You sound like a stereotypical old person complaining about the kids music without realising every generation has done the same.
This happens every single year. The Treasury leaks like a sieve, the Speaker acts all indignant. Its been going on so long even the Leader of the House himself was once a backbencher who was famous for being indignant before he became Leader of the House.
Quinton de Kock withdrew from South Africa's T20 World Cup match against the West Indies after refusing to take a knee.
South Africa's players have been told to take a knee before the start of their remaining T20 World Cup matches after they were pictured taking varying stances before their defeat to Australia on Saturday.
The Cricket South Africa (CSA) Board unanimously agreed on Monday to "adopt a consistent and united stance against racism".
I heard Michael Atherton describe de Kock as "a pariah", which seems more over the top than the criticism the cricket pundits dished out to Ollie Robinson earlier in the year. Compare and contrast with football...
Marcos Alonso: Chelsea defender to stop taking knee after claiming anti-racism gesture is 'losing strength'
The Spain left-back says he will instead point to the Premier League 'No Room for Racism' badge on his sleeve; players have been taking a knee since the summer of 2020 to show support for the movement for racial equality; Thomas Tuchel: "This is his decision, we accept it"
Sunak is another Dave Cameron. Very well presented, not much there. Hopefully, if he does get the top job he will not do as much damage as Cameron did.
Don't agree about Cameron. I think he was a good PM and the Coalition government in particular was one of our better governments who eased us out of a very difficult situation with surprisingly little pain. As for Sunak he is clearly very bright. My slight concern is that his meteoric rise has given him very little experience of governing or politics outside his comfort zone of finance. I'd like to see him spread his wings a bit but his boss probably wouldn't.
I am not so sure history will be as kind as you are! Cameron's legacy is what we are living through now: a deeply divided country that is poorer than it should be, less relevant internationally and whose citizens have lost an unprecedented amount of freedom, with more on the way. Mistaking well-spoken verbal fluency for intelligence is the perennial British problem.
Well quite, Camerons time as PM ended in an abject failure, That is demonstrably obvious. Unlike other PMs he was not a victim of ‘events’, he carefully crafted the conditions of his own failure. He played with fire for short term political expediency and destroyed himself. History will judge him a tragic figure and one of our worst PMs.
His time as PM ended up as such an "abject failure" that having been behind in almost every poll in the 2010-15 Parliament, and having surprisingly won quite a narrow majority in 2015 . . . he managed to set his party up for another two General Elections and still be strong favourites for the next election too.
He exorcised the issue that has bedevilled the country and the Party for generations. Real generations, not Scottish ones.
EDIT: Its funny how your post is getting plenty of "likes" from people who probably don't want and don't vote for a series of Conservative governments that are Cameron's legacy.
Some exorcism.
You are meant to pretend that PMs are too be judged on what they do for their country, not their party, unless you want people confusing you with hyufd
Philip is both right and wrong (which is usual). Yerp was an issue not going away. The problem was that the referendum scheme was not done because the country needed it. It was because the Tories were under threat from UKIP.
The referendum, the aftermath, the form of Brexit - all have been done solely on the equation that what is good for the party is good for the country. Which incidentally is the same mindset as the Chinese Communist Party...
Funny understanding of democracy on this forum sometimes. Politicians react to democratic pressure. Presumably far more than 52% felt it appropriate to have a specific say on our relationship with Europe. That there was a referendum with the result then enacted after not one but two further general elections, shows to me that in the end our democracy worked as it is supposed to.
Direct democracy is not how our democracy is supposed to work at all.
I don't think there is a 'supposed to'. University seats was how our democracy was supposed to work, until it wasn't. Votes for women wasn't how our democracy was supposed to work, until it was. The expansion of the franchise wasn't how our democracy was supposed to work, until it was.
The referendum was the direct result of our indirect democracy failing to represent a significant chunk of public opinion for 30 years or so. I remember John Major's argument that we shouldn't have a referendum on Maastricht because that's not the way we do things. It was disingenuous then and it's disingenuous now.
The main argument that I can see against a referendum is that indirect democracy allows us the ability to pretend all our disagreements are just the result of 'stupid politicos' - direct democracy shines a spotlight on our disagreements that we would rather not have.
The main argument against a referendum is that it polarises debate around two stark alternatives when in reality there is always a range of positions that can be taken, even where they are subsidiary to the main question, and hence the referendum itself polarises (some would say poisons) the political debate whilst at the same time delivering an incomplete outcome.
Surely the main argument against referendum is the representative democracy argument. That is we elect clever people to parliament who take time to consider the issues and make a considered judgement (I know I can't believe I typed that when you consider the lot we elect) so we don't have to because we neither have the ability or time to do so.
We elect them on their sales pitch of broad principles and obvious intelligence (just fallen off my seat laughing at that assumption also)
Quinton de Kock withdrew from South Africa's T20 World Cup match against the West Indies after refusing to take a knee.
South Africa's players have been told to take a knee before the start of their remaining T20 World Cup matches after they were pictured taking varying stances before their defeat to Australia on Saturday.
The Cricket South Africa (CSA) Board unanimously agreed on Monday to "adopt a consistent and united stance against racism".
I heard Michael Atherton describe de Kock as "a pariah", which seems more over the top than the criticism the cricket pundits dished out to Ollie Robinson earlier in the year. Compare and contrast with football...
Marcos Alonso: Chelsea defender to stop taking knee after claiming anti-racism gesture is 'losing strength'
The Spain left-back says he will instead point to the Premier League 'No Room for Racism' badge on his sleeve; players have been taking a knee since the summer of 2020 to show support for the movement for racial equality; Thomas Tuchel: "This is his decision, we accept it"
Does it really need pointing out that steps to combat racism might have a different context in South Africa?
Quinton de Kock withdrew from South Africa's T20 World Cup match against the West Indies after refusing to take a knee.
South Africa's players have been told to take a knee before the start of their remaining T20 World Cup matches after they were pictured taking varying stances before their defeat to Australia on Saturday.
The Cricket South Africa (CSA) Board unanimously agreed on Monday to "adopt a consistent and united stance against racism".
I heard Michael Atherton describe de Kock as "a pariah", which seems more over the top than the criticism the cricket pundits dished out to Ollie Robinson earlier in the year. Compare and contrast with football...
Marcos Alonso: Chelsea defender to stop taking knee after claiming anti-racism gesture is 'losing strength'
The Spain left-back says he will instead point to the Premier League 'No Room for Racism' badge on his sleeve; players have been taking a knee since the summer of 2020 to show support for the movement for racial equality; Thomas Tuchel: "This is his decision, we accept it"
Does it really need pointing out that steps to combat racism might have a different context in South Africa?
In which case there is even more reason to allow some degree of nuance.
The protestors who have glued themselves to the road should be pulled off and if they need a skin graft that's self-inflicted.
The smack of firm libertarianism.
Well the freely liberal solution is to say to the drivers they have a choice and can run over someone who is glued to the road and won't be prosecuted if they do that. 🤷♂️
Quinton de Kock withdrew from South Africa's T20 World Cup match against the West Indies after refusing to take a knee.
South Africa's players have been told to take a knee before the start of their remaining T20 World Cup matches after they were pictured taking varying stances before their defeat to Australia on Saturday.
The Cricket South Africa (CSA) Board unanimously agreed on Monday to "adopt a consistent and united stance against racism".
I heard Michael Atherton describe de Kock as "a pariah", which seems more over the top than the criticism the cricket pundits dished out to Ollie Robinson earlier in the year. Compare and contrast with football...
Marcos Alonso: Chelsea defender to stop taking knee after claiming anti-racism gesture is 'losing strength'
The Spain left-back says he will instead point to the Premier League 'No Room for Racism' badge on his sleeve; players have been taking a knee since the summer of 2020 to show support for the movement for racial equality; Thomas Tuchel: "This is his decision, we accept it"
Does it really need pointing out that steps to combat racism might have a different context in South Africa?
You think there is onus on white Saffers to prove their anti-racist credentials? Sounds pretty xenophobic to me.
Sunak is another Dave Cameron. Very well presented, not much there. Hopefully, if he does get the top job he will not do as much damage as Cameron did.
Don't agree about Cameron. I think he was a good PM and the Coalition government in particular was one of our better governments who eased us out of a very difficult situation with surprisingly little pain. As for Sunak he is clearly very bright. My slight concern is that his meteoric rise has given him very little experience of governing or politics outside his comfort zone of finance. I'd like to see him spread his wings a bit but his boss probably wouldn't.
I am not so sure history will be as kind as you are! Cameron's legacy is what we are living through now: a deeply divided country that is poorer than it should be, less relevant internationally and whose citizens have lost an unprecedented amount of freedom, with more on the way. Mistaking well-spoken verbal fluency for intelligence is the perennial British problem.
Well quite, Camerons time as PM ended in an abject failure, That is demonstrably obvious. Unlike other PMs he was not a victim of ‘events’, he carefully crafted the conditions of his own failure. He played with fire for short term political expediency and destroyed himself. History will judge him a tragic figure and one of our worst PMs.
His time as PM ended up as such an "abject failure" that having been behind in almost every poll in the 2010-15 Parliament, and having surprisingly won quite a narrow majority in 2015 . . . he managed to set his party up for another two General Elections and still be strong favourites for the next election too.
He exorcised the issue that has bedevilled the country and the Party for generations. Real generations, not Scottish ones.
EDIT: Its funny how your post is getting plenty of "likes" from people who probably don't want and don't vote for a series of Conservative governments that are Cameron's legacy.
The Coalition was seen in the round as good government. And the Cameron / Osborne half of the quad utterly outmanoeuvred the Clegg / Alexander half by managing to deflect all the credit to the Tories (especially for LD policies) and deflect all the blame to the LDs (especially for Tory policies).
Winning an outright majority was a stunning victory as nobody expected it least of all Cameron. Sadly that was the absolute zenith of his ministry - the pure Tory government that followed was dire, was getting eaten by that fool Farage and Cameron massively misjudged his own talent and forced through a referendum against his own senior team's advice.
Looking back, my instinct is that the Lib Dems should have manufactured a split with the Tories with about a year to go. Pick an area where they wanted something that the Tories would not give (PR was out thanks to the cock-up with the AV referendum "compromise"). Possibly saying "We've looked at the effects of the student funding restructuring and x, y, z does not work. Accordingly, we wish to pass it into legislation that it will be officially a graduate tax rather than a loan and the rate will drop to however much percent with an aim of reducing it progressively as the finances improve.
If it's granted, it's an obvious Lib Dem win which helps to an extent with the famous betrayal. If it causes a split, then the Lib Dems can go into opposition and keep citing the good things that were done under the Coalition whilst criticising the Tory government since then.
Under FPTP, you need some separation, or why should people vote for you rather than the larger partner? Especially if they've won the PR war.
Quinton de Kock withdrew from South Africa's T20 World Cup match against the West Indies after refusing to take a knee.
South Africa's players have been told to take a knee before the start of their remaining T20 World Cup matches after they were pictured taking varying stances before their defeat to Australia on Saturday.
The Cricket South Africa (CSA) Board unanimously agreed on Monday to "adopt a consistent and united stance against racism".
I heard Michael Atherton describe de Kock as "a pariah", which seems more over the top than the criticism the cricket pundits dished out to Ollie Robinson earlier in the year. Compare and contrast with football...
Marcos Alonso: Chelsea defender to stop taking knee after claiming anti-racism gesture is 'losing strength'
The Spain left-back says he will instead point to the Premier League 'No Room for Racism' badge on his sleeve; players have been taking a knee since the summer of 2020 to show support for the movement for racial equality; Thomas Tuchel: "This is his decision, we accept it"
Does it really need pointing out that steps to combat racism might have a different context in South Africa?
You think there is onus on white Saffers to prove their anti-racist credentials? Sounds pretty xenophobic to me.
You don't think there is an onus on everyone to combat racism?
If de Kock's colleagues many of whom will have been subjected to racism have chosen to take a stand against racism and he fails to live up to it, that's his choice. And its his colleagues choice to no longer play with him then as a result.
Quinton de Kock withdrew from South Africa's T20 World Cup match against the West Indies after refusing to take a knee.
South Africa's players have been told to take a knee before the start of their remaining T20 World Cup matches after they were pictured taking varying stances before their defeat to Australia on Saturday.
The Cricket South Africa (CSA) Board unanimously agreed on Monday to "adopt a consistent and united stance against racism".
I heard Michael Atherton describe de Kock as "a pariah", which seems more over the top than the criticism the cricket pundits dished out to Ollie Robinson earlier in the year. Compare and contrast with football...
Marcos Alonso: Chelsea defender to stop taking knee after claiming anti-racism gesture is 'losing strength'
The Spain left-back says he will instead point to the Premier League 'No Room for Racism' badge on his sleeve; players have been taking a knee since the summer of 2020 to show support for the movement for racial equality; Thomas Tuchel: "This is his decision, we accept it"
Does it really need pointing out that steps to combat racism might have a different context in South Africa?
You think there is onus on white Saffers to prove their anti-racist credentials? Sounds pretty xenophobic to me.
"Am I Not a Man and a Brother" dates from 1837, long BEFORE Marxism existed.
Quinton de Kock withdrew from South Africa's T20 World Cup match against the West Indies after refusing to take a knee.
South Africa's players have been told to take a knee before the start of their remaining T20 World Cup matches after they were pictured taking varying stances before their defeat to Australia on Saturday.
The Cricket South Africa (CSA) Board unanimously agreed on Monday to "adopt a consistent and united stance against racism".
I heard Michael Atherton describe de Kock as "a pariah", which seems more over the top than the criticism the cricket pundits dished out to Ollie Robinson earlier in the year. Compare and contrast with football...
Marcos Alonso: Chelsea defender to stop taking knee after claiming anti-racism gesture is 'losing strength'
The Spain left-back says he will instead point to the Premier League 'No Room for Racism' badge on his sleeve; players have been taking a knee since the summer of 2020 to show support for the movement for racial equality; Thomas Tuchel: "This is his decision, we accept it"
Does it really need pointing out that steps to combat racism might have a different context in South Africa?
You think there is onus on white Saffers to prove their anti-racist credentials? Sounds pretty xenophobic to me.
This is absolutely bizarre. South Africa's all white cricket team was entirely symbolic of the deemed virtue, but in truth racial segregation, of apartheid.
I absolutely think that SA's cricketers should expect to demonstrate their anti-racist credentials. Apartheid hadn't yet fully ended when de Kock was born; he is only 28.
Completely off topic, but interesting trend from our university, wondering whether it's been repeated elsewhere in public or private sector.
The University, since the start of the pandemic - also coinciding with a newish VC - has been dishing out extra paid leave days. We got two extra Easter 2020, 4 extra Christmas 2020 and are getting two extra Christmas 2021. Those fall in three different leave years, so it was two extra in 2019/20, four in 2020/21 and two (so far) in 2021/22.* Ostensibly to give staff extra downtime due to challenges of Covid, homeworking with kids around etc etc.
Interesting tactic - I know when all the buildings were closed the university actually found it had an embarassment of riches, but that is no longer the case. Some onoging savings from fewer people in the office maybe... The cynic in me notes that while it is great for staff who can only work when present, for academics etc the workload does not change and so we'll still need to get as much done - for many of the university roles this doesn't actually cost anything in work per unit pay.
(For watchers of cushy academia, that took annual leave entitlement to 40, 42 and 40 days respectively, including bank holidays - so 32, 34 and 32 without)
Quinton de Kock withdrew from South Africa's T20 World Cup match against the West Indies after refusing to take a knee.
South Africa's players have been told to take a knee before the start of their remaining T20 World Cup matches after they were pictured taking varying stances before their defeat to Australia on Saturday.
The Cricket South Africa (CSA) Board unanimously agreed on Monday to "adopt a consistent and united stance against racism".
I heard Michael Atherton describe de Kock as "a pariah", which seems more over the top than the criticism the cricket pundits dished out to Ollie Robinson earlier in the year. Compare and contrast with football...
Marcos Alonso: Chelsea defender to stop taking knee after claiming anti-racism gesture is 'losing strength'
The Spain left-back says he will instead point to the Premier League 'No Room for Racism' badge on his sleeve; players have been taking a knee since the summer of 2020 to show support for the movement for racial equality; Thomas Tuchel: "This is his decision, we accept it"
Does it really need pointing out that steps to combat racism might have a different context in South Africa?
You think there is onus on white Saffers to prove their anti-racist credentials? Sounds pretty xenophobic to me.
You don't think there is an onus on everyone to combat racism?
If de Kock's colleagues many of whom will have been subjected to racism have chosen to take a stand against racism and he fails to live up to it, that's his choice. And its his colleagues choice to no longer play with him then as a result.
If my work insisted I stuck "black lives matter" on my email signature, would I have a right to refuse? I think de Kock has a right to go about his work without being dragged into politics on the pitch.
The protestors who have glued themselves to the road should be pulled off and if they need a skin graft that's self-inflicted.
The smack of firm libertarianism.
Well the freely liberal solution is to say to the drivers they have a choice and can run over someone who is glued to the road and won't be prosecuted if they do that. 🤷♂️
As always it is a case of where you draw the line. I have always liked the argument that bank robbers are just expressing their belief in the free enterprise model
Quinton de Kock withdrew from South Africa's T20 World Cup match against the West Indies after refusing to take a knee.
South Africa's players have been told to take a knee before the start of their remaining T20 World Cup matches after they were pictured taking varying stances before their defeat to Australia on Saturday.
The Cricket South Africa (CSA) Board unanimously agreed on Monday to "adopt a consistent and united stance against racism".
I heard Michael Atherton describe de Kock as "a pariah", which seems more over the top than the criticism the cricket pundits dished out to Ollie Robinson earlier in the year. Compare and contrast with football...
Marcos Alonso: Chelsea defender to stop taking knee after claiming anti-racism gesture is 'losing strength'
The Spain left-back says he will instead point to the Premier League 'No Room for Racism' badge on his sleeve; players have been taking a knee since the summer of 2020 to show support for the movement for racial equality; Thomas Tuchel: "This is his decision, we accept it"
No one should be forced to make any gesture like this. No one should be forced to wear a poppy, rainbow armband, whatever.
Apart fom anything else, gestures that are enforced lose all meaning.
Quinton de Kock withdrew from South Africa's T20 World Cup match against the West Indies after refusing to take a knee.
South Africa's players have been told to take a knee before the start of their remaining T20 World Cup matches after they were pictured taking varying stances before their defeat to Australia on Saturday.
The Cricket South Africa (CSA) Board unanimously agreed on Monday to "adopt a consistent and united stance against racism".
I heard Michael Atherton describe de Kock as "a pariah", which seems more over the top than the criticism the cricket pundits dished out to Ollie Robinson earlier in the year. Compare and contrast with football...
Marcos Alonso: Chelsea defender to stop taking knee after claiming anti-racism gesture is 'losing strength'
The Spain left-back says he will instead point to the Premier League 'No Room for Racism' badge on his sleeve; players have been taking a knee since the summer of 2020 to show support for the movement for racial equality; Thomas Tuchel: "This is his decision, we accept it"
Does it really need pointing out that steps to combat racism might have a different context in South Africa?
You think there is onus on white Saffers to prove their anti-racist credentials? Sounds pretty xenophobic to me.
You don't think there is an onus on everyone to combat racism?
If de Kock's colleagues many of whom will have been subjected to racism have chosen to take a stand against racism and he fails to live up to it, that's his choice. And its his colleagues choice to no longer play with him then as a result.
If my work insisted I stuck "black lives matter" on my email signature, would I have a right to refuse? I think de Kock has a right to go about his work without being dragged into politics on the pitch.
Of course you'd have the right to refuse. You can quit your work if you don't like it.
de Kock absolutely can do whatever he likes. He just can't wear a Cricket South Africa shirt while doing so if he's not following their policies.
Quinton de Kock withdrew from South Africa's T20 World Cup match against the West Indies after refusing to take a knee.
South Africa's players have been told to take a knee before the start of their remaining T20 World Cup matches after they were pictured taking varying stances before their defeat to Australia on Saturday.
The Cricket South Africa (CSA) Board unanimously agreed on Monday to "adopt a consistent and united stance against racism".
I heard Michael Atherton describe de Kock as "a pariah", which seems more over the top than the criticism the cricket pundits dished out to Ollie Robinson earlier in the year. Compare and contrast with football...
Marcos Alonso: Chelsea defender to stop taking knee after claiming anti-racism gesture is 'losing strength'
The Spain left-back says he will instead point to the Premier League 'No Room for Racism' badge on his sleeve; players have been taking a knee since the summer of 2020 to show support for the movement for racial equality; Thomas Tuchel: "This is his decision, we accept it"
Does it really need pointing out that steps to combat racism might have a different context in South Africa?
You think there is onus on white Saffers to prove their anti-racist credentials? Sounds pretty xenophobic to me.
You don't think there is an onus on everyone to combat racism?
If de Kock's colleagues many of whom will have been subjected to racism have chosen to take a stand against racism and he fails to live up to it, that's his choice. And its his colleagues choice to no longer play with him then as a result.
If my work insisted I stuck "black lives matter" on my email signature, would I have a right to refuse? I think de Kock has a right to go about his work without being dragged into politics on the pitch.
Of course you'd have the right to refuse. You can quit your work if you don't like it.
de Kock absolutely can do whatever he likes. He just can't wear a Cricket South Africa shirt while doing so if he's not following their policies.
So you'd have banned James McClean from playing in the PL if he didn't wear a poppy?
Royal British Legion stands by James McClean’s right not to wear poppy Armed forces charity condemns abuse suffered by Ireland international and his family
Quinton de Kock withdrew from South Africa's T20 World Cup match against the West Indies after refusing to take a knee.
South Africa's players have been told to take a knee before the start of their remaining T20 World Cup matches after they were pictured taking varying stances before their defeat to Australia on Saturday.
The Cricket South Africa (CSA) Board unanimously agreed on Monday to "adopt a consistent and united stance against racism".
I heard Michael Atherton describe de Kock as "a pariah", which seems more over the top than the criticism the cricket pundits dished out to Ollie Robinson earlier in the year. Compare and contrast with football...
Marcos Alonso: Chelsea defender to stop taking knee after claiming anti-racism gesture is 'losing strength'
The Spain left-back says he will instead point to the Premier League 'No Room for Racism' badge on his sleeve; players have been taking a knee since the summer of 2020 to show support for the movement for racial equality; Thomas Tuchel: "This is his decision, we accept it"
No one should be forced to make any gesture like this. No one should be forced to wear a poppy, rainbow armband, whatever.
Apart fom anything else, gestures that are enforced lose all meaning.
The other thing is, of course, that it reinforces the idea that what a bunch of unemployable jocks think actually matters.
Sunak is another Dave Cameron. Very well presented, not much there. Hopefully, if he does get the top job he will not do as much damage as Cameron did.
Don't agree about Cameron. I think he was a good PM and the Coalition government in particular was one of our better governments who eased us out of a very difficult situation with surprisingly little pain. As for Sunak he is clearly very bright. My slight concern is that his meteoric rise has given him very little experience of governing or politics outside his comfort zone of finance. I'd like to see him spread his wings a bit but his boss probably wouldn't.
I am not so sure history will be as kind as you are! Cameron's legacy is what we are living through now: a deeply divided country that is poorer than it should be, less relevant internationally and whose citizens have lost an unprecedented amount of freedom, with more on the way. Mistaking well-spoken verbal fluency for intelligence is the perennial British problem.
Well quite, Camerons time as PM ended in an abject failure, That is demonstrably obvious. Unlike other PMs he was not a victim of ‘events’, he carefully crafted the conditions of his own failure. He played with fire for short term political expediency and destroyed himself. History will judge him a tragic figure and one of our worst PMs.
His time as PM ended up as such an "abject failure" that having been behind in almost every poll in the 2010-15 Parliament, and having surprisingly won quite a narrow majority in 2015 . . . he managed to set his party up for another two General Elections and still be strong favourites for the next election too.
He exorcised the issue that has bedevilled the country and the Party for generations. Real generations, not Scottish ones.
EDIT: Its funny how your post is getting plenty of "likes" from people who probably don't want and don't vote for a series of Conservative governments that are Cameron's legacy.
Some exorcism.
You are meant to pretend that PMs are too be judged on what they do for their country, not their party, unless you want people confusing you with hyufd
Philip is both right and wrong (which is usual). Yerp was an issue not going away. The problem was that the referendum scheme was not done because the country needed it. It was because the Tories were under threat from UKIP.
The referendum, the aftermath, the form of Brexit - all have been done solely on the equation that what is good for the party is good for the country. Which incidentally is the same mindset as the Chinese Communist Party...
Funny understanding of democracy on this forum sometimes. Politicians react to democratic pressure. Presumably far more than 52% felt it appropriate to have a specific say on our relationship with Europe. That there was a referendum with the result then enacted after not one but two further general elections, shows to me that in the end our democracy worked as it is supposed to.
Direct democracy is not how our democracy is supposed to work at all.
I don't think there is a 'supposed to'. University seats was how our democracy was supposed to work, until it wasn't. Votes for women wasn't how our democracy was supposed to work, until it was. The expansion of the franchise wasn't how our democracy was supposed to work, until it was.
The referendum was the direct result of our indirect democracy failing to represent a significant chunk of public opinion for 30 years or so. I remember John Major's argument that we shouldn't have a referendum on Maastricht because that's not the way we do things. It was disingenuous then and it's disingenuous now.
The main argument that I can see against a referendum is that indirect democracy allows us the ability to pretend all our disagreements are just the result of 'stupid politicos' - direct democracy shines a spotlight on our disagreements that we would rather not have.
The main argument against a referendum is that it polarises debate around two stark alternatives when in reality there is always a range of positions that can be taken, even where they are subsidiary to the main question, and hence the referendum itself polarises (some would say poisons) the political debate whilst at the same time delivering an incomplete outcome.
Surely the main argument against referendum is the representative democracy argument. That is we elect clever people to parliament who take time to consider the issues and make a considered judgement (I know I can't believe I typed that when you consider the lot we elect) so we don't have to because we neither have the ability or time to do so.
We elect them on their sales pitch of broad principles and obvious intelligence (just fallen off my seat laughing at that assumption also)
Referendums require decency and honesty on both sides in view of the susceptibility of the punters to demagoguery. Instead of which we get approving commentary of the cleverness of leave in lying about the NHS figure. Classic Dom. My objection to referendums is that they don't yield government by the people they yield government by the likes of Dom. Which is not democracy.
Sunak is another Dave Cameron. Very well presented, not much there. Hopefully, if he does get the top job he will not do as much damage as Cameron did.
Don't agree about Cameron. I think he was a good PM and the Coalition government in particular was one of our better governments who eased us out of a very difficult situation with surprisingly little pain. As for Sunak he is clearly very bright. My slight concern is that his meteoric rise has given him very little experience of governing or politics outside his comfort zone of finance. I'd like to see him spread his wings a bit but his boss probably wouldn't.
I am not so sure history will be as kind as you are! Cameron's legacy is what we are living through now: a deeply divided country that is poorer than it should be, less relevant internationally and whose citizens have lost an unprecedented amount of freedom, with more on the way. Mistaking well-spoken verbal fluency for intelligence is the perennial British problem.
Well quite, Camerons time as PM ended in an abject failure, That is demonstrably obvious. Unlike other PMs he was not a victim of ‘events’, he carefully crafted the conditions of his own failure. He played with fire for short term political expediency and destroyed himself. History will judge him a tragic figure and one of our worst PMs.
His time as PM ended up as such an "abject failure" that having been behind in almost every poll in the 2010-15 Parliament, and having surprisingly won quite a narrow majority in 2015 . . . he managed to set his party up for another two General Elections and still be strong favourites for the next election too.
He exorcised the issue that has bedevilled the country and the Party for generations. Real generations, not Scottish ones.
EDIT: Its funny how your post is getting plenty of "likes" from people who probably don't want and don't vote for a series of Conservative governments that are Cameron's legacy.
The Coalition was seen in the round as good government. And the Cameron / Osborne half of the quad utterly outmanoeuvred the Clegg / Alexander half by managing to deflect all the credit to the Tories (especially for LD policies) and deflect all the blame to the LDs (especially for Tory policies).
Winning an outright majority was a stunning victory as nobody expected it least of all Cameron. Sadly that was the absolute zenith of his ministry - the pure Tory government that followed was dire, was getting eaten by that fool Farage and Cameron massively misjudged his own talent and forced through a referendum against his own senior team's advice.
It seems that Cameron's critics consist of those who hated the EU referendum because they lost it
I was very content with the coalition government and give Cameron credit for putting the EU question to public
To all those who attack Cameron for offering a vote on our membership of the EU I would simply say why on earth were you all so complacent and lost a very winnable proposition
Maybe look at your own role and failure
And that's before we consider his role in the 'renegotiation' - which was a clear failure of presentation, which is supposed to be his professional competence.
The renegotiation is one of the strangest parts of the whole process. At the time I speculated that it might be a prelude to Cameron leading the Leave campaign, as it seemed to be designed to fail and was pursued only half-heartedly.
I wonder if Cameron regrets not pursuing that course. Announcing that he'd reluctantly concluded that meaningful reform within the EU was impossible and that therefore he recommended Britain leaving the EU, might have lead to Leave winning by a large margin, 60:40 or so. He could still be Prime Minister if he'd wanted to be.
Sunak is another Dave Cameron. Very well presented, not much there. Hopefully, if he does get the top job he will not do as much damage as Cameron did.
Don't agree about Cameron. I think he was a good PM and the Coalition government in particular was one of our better governments who eased us out of a very difficult situation with surprisingly little pain. As for Sunak he is clearly very bright. My slight concern is that his meteoric rise has given him very little experience of governing or politics outside his comfort zone of finance. I'd like to see him spread his wings a bit but his boss probably wouldn't.
I am not so sure history will be as kind as you are! Cameron's legacy is what we are living through now: a deeply divided country that is poorer than it should be, less relevant internationally and whose citizens have lost an unprecedented amount of freedom, with more on the way. Mistaking well-spoken verbal fluency for intelligence is the perennial British problem.
Well quite, Camerons time as PM ended in an abject failure, That is demonstrably obvious. Unlike other PMs he was not a victim of ‘events’, he carefully crafted the conditions of his own failure. He played with fire for short term political expediency and destroyed himself. History will judge him a tragic figure and one of our worst PMs.
His time as PM ended up as such an "abject failure" that having been behind in almost every poll in the 2010-15 Parliament, and having surprisingly won quite a narrow majority in 2015 . . . he managed to set his party up for another two General Elections and still be strong favourites for the next election too.
He exorcised the issue that has bedevilled the country and the Party for generations. Real generations, not Scottish ones.
EDIT: Its funny how your post is getting plenty of "likes" from people who probably don't want and don't vote for a series of Conservative governments that are Cameron's legacy.
The Coalition was seen in the round as good government. And the Cameron / Osborne half of the quad utterly outmanoeuvred the Clegg / Alexander half by managing to deflect all the credit to the Tories (especially for LD policies) and deflect all the blame to the LDs (especially for Tory policies).
Winning an outright majority was a stunning victory as nobody expected it least of all Cameron. Sadly that was the absolute zenith of his ministry - the pure Tory government that followed was dire, was getting eaten by that fool Farage and Cameron massively misjudged his own talent and forced through a referendum against his own senior team's advice.
Looking back, my instinct is that the Lib Dems should have manufactured a split with the Tories with about a year to go. Pick an area where they wanted something that the Tories would not give (PR was out thanks to the cock-up with the AV referendum "compromise"). Possibly saying "We've looked at the effects of the student funding restructuring and x, y, z does not work. Accordingly, we wish to pass it into legislation that it will be officially a graduate tax rather than a loan and the rate will drop to however much percent with an aim of reducing it progressively as the finances improve.
If it's granted, it's an obvious Lib Dem win which helps to an extent with the famous betrayal. If it causes a split, then the Lib Dems can go into opposition and keep citing the good things that were done under the Coalition whilst criticising the Tory government since then.
Under FPTP, you need some separation, or why should people vote for you rather than the larger partner? Especially if they've won the PR war.
After about 2.5 to 3 years I was asking, including on here, when the Coalition was going to end. It was obvious that all the electoral benefit was going to the Conservatives, although I must say I didn't expect the 2015 election was going to be quite as bad. I must admit though that I didn't expect the SNP surge, nor that people like Charles Kennedy would be out. Whether/how the LD's are ever going to recover I'm not sure
Quinton de Kock withdrew from South Africa's T20 World Cup match against the West Indies after refusing to take a knee.
South Africa's players have been told to take a knee before the start of their remaining T20 World Cup matches after they were pictured taking varying stances before their defeat to Australia on Saturday.
The Cricket South Africa (CSA) Board unanimously agreed on Monday to "adopt a consistent and united stance against racism".
I heard Michael Atherton describe de Kock as "a pariah", which seems more over the top than the criticism the cricket pundits dished out to Ollie Robinson earlier in the year. Compare and contrast with football...
Marcos Alonso: Chelsea defender to stop taking knee after claiming anti-racism gesture is 'losing strength'
The Spain left-back says he will instead point to the Premier League 'No Room for Racism' badge on his sleeve; players have been taking a knee since the summer of 2020 to show support for the movement for racial equality; Thomas Tuchel: "This is his decision, we accept it"
Does it really need pointing out that steps to combat racism might have a different context in South Africa?
You think there is onus on white Saffers to prove their anti-racist credentials? Sounds pretty xenophobic to me.
You don't think there is an onus on everyone to combat racism?
If de Kock's colleagues many of whom will have been subjected to racism have chosen to take a stand against racism and he fails to live up to it, that's his choice. And its his colleagues choice to no longer play with him then as a result.
If my work insisted I stuck "black lives matter" on my email signature, would I have a right to refuse? I think de Kock has a right to go about his work without being dragged into politics on the pitch.
Of course you'd have the right to refuse. You can quit your work if you don't like it.
de Kock absolutely can do whatever he likes. He just can't wear a Cricket South Africa shirt while doing so if he's not following their policies.
So you'd have banned James McClean from playing in the PL if he didn't wear a poppy?
Royal British Legion stands by James McClean’s right not to wear poppy Armed forces charity condemns abuse suffered by Ireland international and his family
Not me, I'm not Cricket South Africa.
I think combatting racism is far, far more important to the players suffering racism than a poppy. So if they only wish to play with colleagues who are standing with them in that, then that's their choice.
I'm not in favour of either a ban or no ban, I'm content to let the players decide. But if all but one of the players decide they want to do this collectively and won't play with anyone who's not standing with them, then that's their choice. You either dump everyone else, or you dump the one who's not standing with them.
Quinton de Kock withdrew from South Africa's T20 World Cup match against the West Indies after refusing to take a knee.
South Africa's players have been told to take a knee before the start of their remaining T20 World Cup matches after they were pictured taking varying stances before their defeat to Australia on Saturday.
The Cricket South Africa (CSA) Board unanimously agreed on Monday to "adopt a consistent and united stance against racism".
I heard Michael Atherton describe de Kock as "a pariah", which seems more over the top than the criticism the cricket pundits dished out to Ollie Robinson earlier in the year. Compare and contrast with football...
Marcos Alonso: Chelsea defender to stop taking knee after claiming anti-racism gesture is 'losing strength'
The Spain left-back says he will instead point to the Premier League 'No Room for Racism' badge on his sleeve; players have been taking a knee since the summer of 2020 to show support for the movement for racial equality; Thomas Tuchel: "This is his decision, we accept it"
Does it really need pointing out that steps to combat racism might have a different context in South Africa?
I don't think it is a good idea to demand he does this gesture any more than it was to demand that NFL players gesture in support of the national anthem, both come across stronger and louder when they are choices. But, yes, clearly that it is in the South African context makes my views and other British views less informed and worthwhile than we can be on PL football for example.
Sunak is another Dave Cameron. Very well presented, not much there. Hopefully, if he does get the top job he will not do as much damage as Cameron did.
Don't agree about Cameron. I think he was a good PM and the Coalition government in particular was one of our better governments who eased us out of a very difficult situation with surprisingly little pain. As for Sunak he is clearly very bright. My slight concern is that his meteoric rise has given him very little experience of governing or politics outside his comfort zone of finance. I'd like to see him spread his wings a bit but his boss probably wouldn't.
I am not so sure history will be as kind as you are! Cameron's legacy is what we are living through now: a deeply divided country that is poorer than it should be, less relevant internationally and whose citizens have lost an unprecedented amount of freedom, with more on the way. Mistaking well-spoken verbal fluency for intelligence is the perennial British problem.
Well quite, Camerons time as PM ended in an abject failure, That is demonstrably obvious. Unlike other PMs he was not a victim of ‘events’, he carefully crafted the conditions of his own failure. He played with fire for short term political expediency and destroyed himself. History will judge him a tragic figure and one of our worst PMs.
His time as PM ended up as such an "abject failure" that having been behind in almost every poll in the 2010-15 Parliament, and having surprisingly won quite a narrow majority in 2015 . . . he managed to set his party up for another two General Elections and still be strong favourites for the next election too.
He exorcised the issue that has bedevilled the country and the Party for generations. Real generations, not Scottish ones.
EDIT: Its funny how your post is getting plenty of "likes" from people who probably don't want and don't vote for a series of Conservative governments that are Cameron's legacy.
The Coalition was seen in the round as good government. And the Cameron / Osborne half of the quad utterly outmanoeuvred the Clegg / Alexander half by managing to deflect all the credit to the Tories (especially for LD policies) and deflect all the blame to the LDs (especially for Tory policies).
Winning an outright majority was a stunning victory as nobody expected it least of all Cameron. Sadly that was the absolute zenith of his ministry - the pure Tory government that followed was dire, was getting eaten by that fool Farage and Cameron massively misjudged his own talent and forced through a referendum against his own senior team's advice.
It seems that Cameron's critics consist of those who hated the EU referendum because they lost it
I was very content with the coalition government and give Cameron credit for putting the EU question to public
To all those who attack Cameron for offering a vote on our membership of the EU I would simply say why on earth were you all so complacent and lost a very winnable proposition
Maybe look at your own role and failure
And that's before we consider his role in the 'renegotiation' - which was a clear failure of presentation, which is supposed to be his professional competence.
The renegotiation is one of the strangest parts of the whole process. At the time I speculated that it might be a prelude to Cameron leading the Leave campaign, as it seemed to be designed to fail and was pursued only half-heartedly.
I wonder if Cameron regrets not pursuing that course. Announcing that he'd reluctantly concluded that meaningful reform within the EU was impossible and that therefore he recommended Britain leaving the EU, might have lead to Leave winning by a large margin, 60:40 or so. He could still be Prime Minister if he'd wanted to be.
The amusing thing is I don't think Cameron was actually too bothered either way whether we remained or left. I think he's probably more frustrated that he lost personally, than that we left.
If he was younger then I could picture him like Truss now with the zeal of a convert pushing the benefits of Brexit.
Quinton de Kock withdrew from South Africa's T20 World Cup match against the West Indies after refusing to take a knee.
South Africa's players have been told to take a knee before the start of their remaining T20 World Cup matches after they were pictured taking varying stances before their defeat to Australia on Saturday.
The Cricket South Africa (CSA) Board unanimously agreed on Monday to "adopt a consistent and united stance against racism".
I heard Michael Atherton describe de Kock as "a pariah", which seems more over the top than the criticism the cricket pundits dished out to Ollie Robinson earlier in the year. Compare and contrast with football...
Marcos Alonso: Chelsea defender to stop taking knee after claiming anti-racism gesture is 'losing strength'
The Spain left-back says he will instead point to the Premier League 'No Room for Racism' badge on his sleeve; players have been taking a knee since the summer of 2020 to show support for the movement for racial equality; Thomas Tuchel: "This is his decision, we accept it"
Does it really need pointing out that steps to combat racism might have a different context in South Africa?
If I were feeling cheeky, is that context not now that an ethnic minority who has lived his entire life under majority rule is being required to bow down to the majority God and will likely now lose his job for refusing.
Because all this humongous spending has to be paid for, one way or another.
It could be paid for by economic growth, which would both increase the take from existing taxes, and increase gdp (so reducing debt/gdp, for example).
Do you mean by fiddling the books?
John's right.
Unlike in 2007/08 when Brown had already tanked the finances so we had a big deficit going into the recession and a ridiculous one years after coming out of it - this time we went into the recession with sound finances and are coming out with the deficit already closing.
We have a deficit due to the cycle. We need to fix it over the cycle.
Sunak is another Dave Cameron. Very well presented, not much there. Hopefully, if he does get the top job he will not do as much damage as Cameron did.
Don't agree about Cameron. I think he was a good PM and the Coalition government in particular was one of our better governments who eased us out of a very difficult situation with surprisingly little pain. As for Sunak he is clearly very bright. My slight concern is that his meteoric rise has given him very little experience of governing or politics outside his comfort zone of finance. I'd like to see him spread his wings a bit but his boss probably wouldn't.
I am not so sure history will be as kind as you are! Cameron's legacy is what we are living through now: a deeply divided country that is poorer than it should be, less relevant internationally and whose citizens have lost an unprecedented amount of freedom, with more on the way. Mistaking well-spoken verbal fluency for intelligence is the perennial British problem.
Well quite, Camerons time as PM ended in an abject failure, That is demonstrably obvious. Unlike other PMs he was not a victim of ‘events’, he carefully crafted the conditions of his own failure. He played with fire for short term political expediency and destroyed himself. History will judge him a tragic figure and one of our worst PMs.
His time as PM ended up as such an "abject failure" that having been behind in almost every poll in the 2010-15 Parliament, and having surprisingly won quite a narrow majority in 2015 . . . he managed to set his party up for another two General Elections and still be strong favourites for the next election too.
He exorcised the issue that has bedevilled the country and the Party for generations. Real generations, not Scottish ones.
EDIT: Its funny how your post is getting plenty of "likes" from people who probably don't want and don't vote for a series of Conservative governments that are Cameron's legacy.
The Coalition was seen in the round as good government. And the Cameron / Osborne half of the quad utterly outmanoeuvred the Clegg / Alexander half by managing to deflect all the credit to the Tories (especially for LD policies) and deflect all the blame to the LDs (especially for Tory policies).
Winning an outright majority was a stunning victory as nobody expected it least of all Cameron. Sadly that was the absolute zenith of his ministry - the pure Tory government that followed was dire, was getting eaten by that fool Farage and Cameron massively misjudged his own talent and forced through a referendum against his own senior team's advice.
It seems that Cameron's critics consist of those who hated the EU referendum because they lost it
I was very content with the coalition government and give Cameron credit for putting the EU question to public
To all those who attack Cameron for offering a vote on our membership of the EU I would simply say why on earth were you all so complacent and lost a very winnable proposition
Maybe look at your own role and failure
And that's before we consider his role in the 'renegotiation' - which was a clear failure of presentation, which is supposed to be his professional competence.
The renegotiation is one of the strangest parts of the whole process. At the time I speculated that it might be a prelude to Cameron leading the Leave campaign, as it seemed to be designed to fail and was pursued only half-heartedly.
I wonder if Cameron regrets not pursuing that course. Announcing that he'd reluctantly concluded that meaningful reform within the EU was impossible and that therefore he recommended Britain leaving the EU, might have lead to Leave winning by a large margin, 60:40 or so. He could still be Prime Minister if he'd wanted to be.
His signalling was quite anti EU until it came to crunch time. I wonder whether in practice he outsourced his decision to Osborne.
Sunak is another Dave Cameron. Very well presented, not much there. Hopefully, if he does get the top job he will not do as much damage as Cameron did.
Don't agree about Cameron. I think he was a good PM and the Coalition government in particular was one of our better governments who eased us out of a very difficult situation with surprisingly little pain. As for Sunak he is clearly very bright. My slight concern is that his meteoric rise has given him very little experience of governing or politics outside his comfort zone of finance. I'd like to see him spread his wings a bit but his boss probably wouldn't.
I am not so sure history will be as kind as you are! Cameron's legacy is what we are living through now: a deeply divided country that is poorer than it should be, less relevant internationally and whose citizens have lost an unprecedented amount of freedom, with more on the way. Mistaking well-spoken verbal fluency for intelligence is the perennial British problem.
Well quite, Camerons time as PM ended in an abject failure, That is demonstrably obvious. Unlike other PMs he was not a victim of ‘events’, he carefully crafted the conditions of his own failure. He played with fire for short term political expediency and destroyed himself. History will judge him a tragic figure and one of our worst PMs.
His time as PM ended up as such an "abject failure" that having been behind in almost every poll in the 2010-15 Parliament, and having surprisingly won quite a narrow majority in 2015 . . . he managed to set his party up for another two General Elections and still be strong favourites for the next election too.
He exorcised the issue that has bedevilled the country and the Party for generations. Real generations, not Scottish ones.
EDIT: Its funny how your post is getting plenty of "likes" from people who probably don't want and don't vote for a series of Conservative governments that are Cameron's legacy.
Some exorcism.
You are meant to pretend that PMs are too be judged on what they do for their country, not their party, unless you want people confusing you with hyufd
Philip is both right and wrong (which is usual). Yerp was an issue not going away. The problem was that the referendum scheme was not done because the country needed it. It was because the Tories were under threat from UKIP.
The referendum, the aftermath, the form of Brexit - all have been done solely on the equation that what is good for the party is good for the country. Which incidentally is the same mindset as the Chinese Communist Party...
Funny understanding of democracy on this forum sometimes. Politicians react to democratic pressure. Presumably far more than 52% felt it appropriate to have a specific say on our relationship with Europe. That there was a referendum with the result then enacted after not one but two further general elections, shows to me that in the end our democracy worked as it is supposed to.
Direct democracy is not how our democracy is supposed to work at all.
I don't think there is a 'supposed to'. University seats was how our democracy was supposed to work, until it wasn't. Votes for women wasn't how our democracy was supposed to work, until it was. The expansion of the franchise wasn't how our democracy was supposed to work, until it was.
The referendum was the direct result of our indirect democracy failing to represent a significant chunk of public opinion for 30 years or so. I remember John Major's argument that we shouldn't have a referendum on Maastricht because that's not the way we do things. It was disingenuous then and it's disingenuous now.
The main argument that I can see against a referendum is that indirect democracy allows us the ability to pretend all our disagreements are just the result of 'stupid politicos' - direct democracy shines a spotlight on our disagreements that we would rather not have.
The main argument against a referendum is that it polarises debate around two stark alternatives when in reality there is always a range of positions that can be taken, even where they are subsidiary to the main question, and hence the referendum itself polarises (some would say poisons) the political debate whilst at the same time delivering an incomplete outcome.
Surely the main argument against referendum is the representative democracy argument. That is we elect clever people to parliament who take time to consider the issues and make a considered judgement (I know I can't believe I typed that when you consider the lot we elect) so we don't have to because we neither have the ability or time to do so.
We elect them on their sales pitch of broad principles and obvious intelligence (just fallen off my seat laughing at that assumption also)
Well there's also the fundamental constitutional principle that no Parliament can bind its successors, so how can it practically be bound by a referendum?
Where it can just about work is if you have Parliament pass a new Act that contains within it a provision that the laws it contains only enter into force following a confirmatory vote in a referendum. Then you have a specific proposition to vote on, and Parliament is not compelled to take any further action to put the result of the referendum into effect, so there's no sense that the referendum directs the later votes of MPs.
Who'd have thought the Tories voting to allow raw shit to continue to be pumped into the rivers and the seas wild have seen a decline in their vote share with a swing to the greens.
Because all this humongous spending has to be paid for, one way or another.
It could be paid for by economic growth, which would both increase the take from existing taxes, and increase gdp (so reducing debt/gdp, for example).
Do you mean by fiddling the books?
I for one believe our Brexity overlords when they promised we would be hundreds of billions of pounds better off outside the EU. But even sceptics should remember that growth is the normal state for the economy.
The protestors who have glued themselves to the road should be pulled off and if they need a skin graft that's self-inflicted.
Please see my comments yesterday on what we should do to anti vaxxers going into school. Sometimes you have to take a deep breath before punching them.
I'm not sure that he can - unless he really does want to torpedo the Treasury Bench by allowing a stack of UQs about the budget before Sunak is allowed to summarise the various media rounds in his actual speech.
Given that Hoyle is trying to hold the upper hand against the government I can't see this - the Budget Speech is one of the big set-piece parliamentary events. How he skewers government business after the speech is more likely the tactic he will use.
This is silly season stuff. If the Speaker denied a government with a huge majority from reading a finance bill he would be out on his arse for politicising the office of Speaker.
Indeed. So I expect he will bookend it with a broadside of criticism and then torpoedo passage of the Finance Bill by allowing as many disruptive back bench / opposition UQs etc as Erskine May allows.
By the book. In direct contrast to the Treasury Bench.
You think the speaker will 'torpedo passage of the finance bill' which raises the NLW and other benefits
Adelaide United player Josh Cavallo has come out as gay, becoming the only current male professional footballer in the world to do so.
That (bit in bold) is nuts. I'm all for respecting private lives and it's all players' own choices, but there must surely be a hell of a lot of gay players out there. It would be much healthier if this was common knowledge and no big deal, as in politics (my perception, at least), women's football (true? I'm vaguely aware of there being some openly gay women footballers, I think). It's sad that a male pro footballer being gay is news, in other areas - e.g. politics - there have been many people I've only realised are gay when I see something about ther partners mentioned in passing, which is how it should be, no big deal.
Sunak is another Dave Cameron. Very well presented, not much there. Hopefully, if he does get the top job he will not do as much damage as Cameron did.
Don't agree about Cameron. I think he was a good PM and the Coalition government in particular was one of our better governments who eased us out of a very difficult situation with surprisingly little pain. As for Sunak he is clearly very bright. My slight concern is that his meteoric rise has given him very little experience of governing or politics outside his comfort zone of finance. I'd like to see him spread his wings a bit but his boss probably wouldn't.
I am not so sure history will be as kind as you are! Cameron's legacy is what we are living through now: a deeply divided country that is poorer than it should be, less relevant internationally and whose citizens have lost an unprecedented amount of freedom, with more on the way. Mistaking well-spoken verbal fluency for intelligence is the perennial British problem.
Well quite, Camerons time as PM ended in an abject failure, That is demonstrably obvious. Unlike other PMs he was not a victim of ‘events’, he carefully crafted the conditions of his own failure. He played with fire for short term political expediency and destroyed himself. History will judge him a tragic figure and one of our worst PMs.
His time as PM ended up as such an "abject failure" that having been behind in almost every poll in the 2010-15 Parliament, and having surprisingly won quite a narrow majority in 2015 . . . he managed to set his party up for another two General Elections and still be strong favourites for the next election too.
He exorcised the issue that has bedevilled the country and the Party for generations. Real generations, not Scottish ones.
EDIT: Its funny how your post is getting plenty of "likes" from people who probably don't want and don't vote for a series of Conservative governments that are Cameron's legacy.
The Coalition was seen in the round as good government. And the Cameron / Osborne half of the quad utterly outmanoeuvred the Clegg / Alexander half by managing to deflect all the credit to the Tories (especially for LD policies) and deflect all the blame to the LDs (especially for Tory policies).
Winning an outright majority was a stunning victory as nobody expected it least of all Cameron. Sadly that was the absolute zenith of his ministry - the pure Tory government that followed was dire, was getting eaten by that fool Farage and Cameron massively misjudged his own talent and forced through a referendum against his own senior team's advice.
It seems that Cameron's critics consist of those who hated the EU referendum because they lost it
I was very content with the coalition government and give Cameron credit for putting the EU question to public
To all those who attack Cameron for offering a vote on our membership of the EU I would simply say why on earth were you all so complacent and lost a very winnable proposition
Maybe look at your own role and failure
And that's before we consider his role in the 'renegotiation' - which was a clear failure of presentation, which is supposed to be his professional competence.
The renegotiation is one of the strangest parts of the whole process. At the time I speculated that it might be a prelude to Cameron leading the Leave campaign, as it seemed to be designed to fail and was pursued only half-heartedly.
I wonder if Cameron regrets not pursuing that course. Announcing that he'd reluctantly concluded that meaningful reform within the EU was impossible and that therefore he recommended Britain leaving the EU, might have lead to Leave winning by a large margin, 60:40 or so. He could still be Prime Minister if he'd wanted to be.
The amusing thing is I don't think Cameron was actually too bothered either way whether we remained or left. I think he's probably more frustrated that he lost personally, than that we left.
If he was younger then I could picture him like Truss now with the zeal of a convert pushing the benefits of Brexit.
I think the better parallel is with our current Prime Minister and his famous portfolio of articles on the subject when choosing which way to jump.
Johnson jumped the right way (for his future career) and is now supreme. It is easy to imagine Cameron being consumed by envy.
The protestors who have glued themselves to the road should be pulled off and if they need a skin graft that's self-inflicted.
Please see my comments yesterday on what we should do to anti vaxxers going into school. Sometimes you have to take a deep breath before punching them.
I am pretty liberal on most forms of peaceful protest but think schools should be one place that is off limits. On key infrastructure like motorways I am undecided, possibly a time limit of an hour for a protest in those scenarios if that could be made to work.
Quinton de Kock withdrew from South Africa's T20 World Cup match against the West Indies after refusing to take a knee.
South Africa's players have been told to take a knee before the start of their remaining T20 World Cup matches after they were pictured taking varying stances before their defeat to Australia on Saturday.
The Cricket South Africa (CSA) Board unanimously agreed on Monday to "adopt a consistent and united stance against racism".
I heard Michael Atherton describe de Kock as "a pariah", which seems more over the top than the criticism the cricket pundits dished out to Ollie Robinson earlier in the year. Compare and contrast with football...
Marcos Alonso: Chelsea defender to stop taking knee after claiming anti-racism gesture is 'losing strength'
The Spain left-back says he will instead point to the Premier League 'No Room for Racism' badge on his sleeve; players have been taking a knee since the summer of 2020 to show support for the movement for racial equality; Thomas Tuchel: "This is his decision, we accept it"
No one should be forced to make any gesture like this. No one should be forced to wear a poppy, rainbow armband, whatever.
Apart fom anything else, gestures that are enforced lose all meaning.
Enforced conformity is concerning as well as inappropriate in a liberal democracy. Especially when by the state but also when by others.
The protestors who have glued themselves to the road should be pulled off and if they need a skin graft that's self-inflicted.
Please see my comments yesterday on what we should do to anti vaxxers going into school. Sometimes you have to take a deep breath before punching them.
I am pretty liberal on most forms of peaceful protest but think schools should be one place that is off limits. On key infrastructure like motorways I am undecided, possibly a time limit of an hour for a protest in those scenarios if that could be made to work.
Bollocks to that. These idiots on the motorways are risking lives. I’d have no problem whatsoever if the state went in and smashed a few skulls to get them out the way.
Because all this humongous spending has to be paid for, one way or another.
I'm waiting with trepidation, because I am hosting a budget reaction event this afternoon and a client seminar on Friday, and so far there is really not much of interest to talk about, good or bad, on taxes. Particularly for corporates. The whole thing seemingly being pre-announced makes the job of presenting something interesting rather harder too (whatever others imply, this is much more heavily pre-briefed than any budget in recent history).
There is reasonable good news on public finances since March which means Sunak does have some flexibility not to raise taxes significantly. Remember there have already been 2 big tax raising announcements this year already: the CT rate rise to 25% and the health & social care levy.
Expect less and less money to local government though. The instinct of this government since 2010 has repeatedly been to cut money to councils where possible. They were already running on vapour and will soon be on their knees. That plus general neglect of the education budget is not good news if you are a LA trying to run primary schools while keeping the bin collections and road repairs going.
The protestors who have glued themselves to the road should be pulled off and if they need a skin graft that's self-inflicted.
Please see my comments yesterday on what we should do to anti vaxxers going into school. Sometimes you have to take a deep breath before punching them.
I am pretty liberal on most forms of peaceful protest but think schools should be one place that is off limits. On key infrastructure like motorways I am undecided, possibly a time limit of an hour for a protest in those scenarios if that could be made to work.
I would like to see these idiots have their lives severely disrupted by a prison sentence and many hours of community service. Perhaps they could protest inside the prisons and disrupt the other prisoners if they really are that brave.
Quinton de Kock withdrew from South Africa's T20 World Cup match against the West Indies after refusing to take a knee.
South Africa's players have been told to take a knee before the start of their remaining T20 World Cup matches after they were pictured taking varying stances before their defeat to Australia on Saturday.
The Cricket South Africa (CSA) Board unanimously agreed on Monday to "adopt a consistent and united stance against racism".
I heard Michael Atherton describe de Kock as "a pariah", which seems more over the top than the criticism the cricket pundits dished out to Ollie Robinson earlier in the year. Compare and contrast with football...
Marcos Alonso: Chelsea defender to stop taking knee after claiming anti-racism gesture is 'losing strength'
The Spain left-back says he will instead point to the Premier League 'No Room for Racism' badge on his sleeve; players have been taking a knee since the summer of 2020 to show support for the movement for racial equality; Thomas Tuchel: "This is his decision, we accept it"
No one should be forced to make any gesture like this. No one should be forced to wear a poppy, rainbow armband, whatever.
Apart fom anything else, gestures that are enforced lose all meaning.
Enforced conformity is concerning as well as inappropriate in a liberal democracy. Especially when by the state but also when by others.
The thing that occurs to me is that forcing people to make such statements/actions just reduces the meaning to lip-service.
The protestors who have glued themselves to the road should be pulled off and if they need a skin graft that's self-inflicted.
Please see my comments yesterday on what we should do to anti vaxxers going into school. Sometimes you have to take a deep breath before punching them.
I am pretty liberal on most forms of peaceful protest but think schools should be one place that is off limits. On key infrastructure like motorways I am undecided, possibly a time limit of an hour for a protest in those scenarios if that could be made to work.
Bollocks to that. These idiots on the motorways are risking lives. I’d have no problem whatsoever if the state went in and smashed a few skulls to get them out the way.
Forcibly removed I agree but "smashed a few skulls" - are you sure?
The protestors who have glued themselves to the road should be pulled off and if they need a skin graft that's self-inflicted.
Please see my comments yesterday on what we should do to anti vaxxers going into school. Sometimes you have to take a deep breath before punching them.
I am pretty liberal on most forms of peaceful protest but think schools should be one place that is off limits. On key infrastructure like motorways I am undecided, possibly a time limit of an hour for a protest in those scenarios if that could be made to work.
Peaceful protest is not legal. It is not legal to block the highway. Why should their protest disrupt ordinary working people going about their daily lives.
Still they are making complete fools of the party of law and order.
The protestors who have glued themselves to the road should be pulled off and if they need a skin graft that's self-inflicted.
Please see my comments yesterday on what we should do to anti vaxxers going into school. Sometimes you have to take a deep breath before punching them.
I am pretty liberal on most forms of peaceful protest but think schools should be one place that is off limits. On key infrastructure like motorways I am undecided, possibly a time limit of an hour for a protest in those scenarios if that could be made to work.
It is difficult isn't it because it is coloured by your own view. From my point of view the anti vaxxers, particularly those filmed serving stupid documents on schools and hospitals, come into the complete nutter category. Those gluing themselves to the road have a point, but I know, I just know, that a 1 minute conversation with any of them would also ensure they went into my complete nutter bucket also.
Yet I was happy to go on the one and only demonstration I have been on, as a Remainer, in the certain knowledge I was doing the right thing.
The protestors who have glued themselves to the road should be pulled off and if they need a skin graft that's self-inflicted.
Please see my comments yesterday on what we should do to anti vaxxers going into school. Sometimes you have to take a deep breath before punching them.
I am pretty liberal on most forms of peaceful protest but think schools should be one place that is off limits. On key infrastructure like motorways I am undecided, possibly a time limit of an hour for a protest in those scenarios if that could be made to work.
Peaceful protest is not legal. It is not legal to block the highway. Why should their protest disrupt ordinary working people going about their daily lives.
Still they are making complete fools of the party of law and order.
The Conservative Party is not the party of law and order anymore. It is the Party (and extended ego) of Boris Johnson. Nothing more nothing less.
Sunak is another Dave Cameron. Very well presented, not much there. Hopefully, if he does get the top job he will not do as much damage as Cameron did.
Don't agree about Cameron. I think he was a good PM and the Coalition government in particular was one of our better governments who eased us out of a very difficult situation with surprisingly little pain. As for Sunak he is clearly very bright. My slight concern is that his meteoric rise has given him very little experience of governing or politics outside his comfort zone of finance. I'd like to see him spread his wings a bit but his boss probably wouldn't.
I am not so sure history will be as kind as you are! Cameron's legacy is what we are living through now: a deeply divided country that is poorer than it should be, less relevant internationally and whose citizens have lost an unprecedented amount of freedom, with more on the way. Mistaking well-spoken verbal fluency for intelligence is the perennial British problem.
Well quite, Camerons time as PM ended in an abject failure, That is demonstrably obvious. Unlike other PMs he was not a victim of ‘events’, he carefully crafted the conditions of his own failure. He played with fire for short term political expediency and destroyed himself. History will judge him a tragic figure and one of our worst PMs.
His time as PM ended up as such an "abject failure" that having been behind in almost every poll in the 2010-15 Parliament, and having surprisingly won quite a narrow majority in 2015 . . . he managed to set his party up for another two General Elections and still be strong favourites for the next election too.
He exorcised the issue that has bedevilled the country and the Party for generations. Real generations, not Scottish ones.
EDIT: Its funny how your post is getting plenty of "likes" from people who probably don't want and don't vote for a series of Conservative governments that are Cameron's legacy.
Cameron hasn’t exorcised anything, We’re more divided than before, The difference is your preferred side is in the ascendancy, which leads you to the conclusion job done. Our relationship with Europe will always be an issue. It always has been , long before the EU.
But either way, Cameron failed. It was not his objective to lose the referendum, see his policy collapse and hand over to May. If you watch the Cameron documentary you see his hubris played an almighty part in his downfall. As I say, he’s a tragic figure.
I hate to do a HYUFD but as a former and habitual Tory voter you may be more divided than ever before, "we" are not.
Instead of the division being on the right of British politics, that division has now been closed and the division has been moved to a much more palatable position. Well done Cameron.
Absolutely - party before country every single time for the Tories.
You mean Labour are the opposite.?🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Labours interst has always been for anyone but their own Country Wilson ...Blair....Brown too stupid to know one way or another.
Some people put party before country, but I don't think most do, although they might tend to think who they support is always right and their opponents always wrong.
I also don't think for a moment that could be said for Wilson, Blair or Brown and certainly none of them could be called stupid. I think they all came over as very bright, although I think Brown in particular was very ill suited for the job.
You seem to lack any objectivity when it comes to Labour. You never come on here ad objectively dismantle them. It just seems to be a hatred and you seem to think we are all in cahoots on a plot with Labour to rubbish the Tories (even though a significant number of us don't even support Labour).
Blair was for the USA, Wilson was rumoured to love Mother Russia. Both to be despised in equal.measure. Brown was an idiot, clever idiot maybe, who thought that he saved the world. He completely fucked the UK economy with his arrogance. I respected Callaghan,j ust about the only one who was worth praise. Labour are in opposition because they can't find a credible leader. The Tories are in.power because Labour are and have been useless. They never learn.
I don't need to deconstruct Labour, they are very able at doing it themselves.
People vote against Parties now not for them, that why the Tories are in power.
Adelaide United player Josh Cavallo has come out as gay, becoming the only current male professional footballer in the world to do so.
That (bit in bold) is nuts. I'm all for respecting private lives and it's all players' own choices, but there must surely be a hell of a lot of gay players out there. It would be much healthier if this was common knowledge and no big deal, as in politics (my perception, at least), women's football (true? I'm vaguely aware of there being some openly gay women footballers, I think). It's sad that a male pro footballer being gay is news, in other areas - e.g. politics - there have been many people I've only realised are gay when I see something about ther partners mentioned in passing, which is how it should be, no big deal.
Completely off topic, but interesting trend from our university, wondering whether it's been repeated elsewhere in public or private sector.
The University, since the start of the pandemic - also coinciding with a newish VC - has been dishing out extra paid leave days. We got two extra Easter 2020, 4 extra Christmas 2020 and are getting two extra Christmas 2021. Those fall in three different leave years, so it was two extra in 2019/20, four in 2020/21 and two (so far) in 2021/22.* Ostensibly to give staff extra downtime due to challenges of Covid, homeworking with kids around etc etc.
My tech-sector employer has been giving extra paid leave days, as fixed dates about once a quarter announced usually a few months in advance, with about the same kind of self-care/covid/avoid-overworking reasoning you mention. I get the impression that other tech firms are doing similarly.
The protestors who have glued themselves to the road should be pulled off and if they need a skin graft that's self-inflicted.
Please see my comments yesterday on what we should do to anti vaxxers going into school. Sometimes you have to take a deep breath before punching them.
I am pretty liberal on most forms of peaceful protest but think schools should be one place that is off limits. On key infrastructure like motorways I am undecided, possibly a time limit of an hour for a protest in those scenarios if that could be made to work.
It is difficult isn't it because it is coloured by your own view. From my point of view the anti vaxxers, particularly those filmed serving stupid documents on schools and hospitals, come into the complete nutter category. Those gluing themselves to the road have a point, but I know, I just know, that a 1 minute conversation with any of them would also ensure they went into my complete nutter bucket also.
Yet I was happy to go on the one and only demonstration I have been on, as a Remainer, in the certain knowledge I was doing the right thing.
Am I a hypocrite?
Nothing wrong with going on demonstrations in themselves, and we should protect the right to do so fiercely, regardless of whether we believe in a particular cause.
However why the need to target schools? That is all about intimidation of children, not about legitimate protest, imo.
The protestors who have glued themselves to the road should be pulled off and if they need a skin graft that's self-inflicted.
Please see my comments yesterday on what we should do to anti vaxxers going into school. Sometimes you have to take a deep breath before punching them.
I am pretty liberal on most forms of peaceful protest but think schools should be one place that is off limits. On key infrastructure like motorways I am undecided, possibly a time limit of an hour for a protest in those scenarios if that could be made to work.
Peaceful protest is not legal. It is not legal to block the highway. Why should their protest disrupt ordinary working people going about their daily lives.
Still they are making complete fools of the party of law and order.
The Conservative Party is not the party of law and order anymore. It is the Party (and extended ego) of Boris Johnson. Nothing more nothing less.
Yup, it is currently a vanity project for Boris Johnson and his acolytes.
OT Emma Raducanu cruelly throws the Romanian television interpreter onto the dole queue in this short post-victory interview yesterday. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4EyW_CA9AE
Sportingindex are up with their spreads - not sure why "madam Deputy Speaker" is quoted so high? Do Chancellors normally refer to the chair that much?
Yes. Everything is addressed to the chair, so whenever they start a new train of thought they tend to address the chair again. EDIT: Also whenever they want to emphasise a point, which is quite often!
The protestors who have glued themselves to the road should be pulled off and if they need a skin graft that's self-inflicted.
Please see my comments yesterday on what we should do to anti vaxxers going into school. Sometimes you have to take a deep breath before punching them.
I am pretty liberal on most forms of peaceful protest but think schools should be one place that is off limits. On key infrastructure like motorways I am undecided, possibly a time limit of an hour for a protest in those scenarios if that could be made to work.
Generally speaking I am very pro the right of people to protest, and I think there are many unreasonable limitations to this right on the statute book.
However, pedestrians are banned from motorways for good reason and a protest is no grounds to make an exception to that law. And, in any case, for protests like this being arrested is almost the whole point of it, as it gains more attention than a rally in an out of the way public park that inconveniences no-one.
OT Emma Raducanu cruelly throws the Romanian television interpreter onto the dole queue in this short post-victory interview yesterday. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4EyW_CA9AE
Because all this humongous spending has to be paid for, one way or another.
I'm waiting with trepidation, because I am hosting a budget reaction event this afternoon and a client seminar on Friday, and so far there is really not much of interest to talk about, good or bad, on taxes. Particularly for corporates. The whole thing seemingly being pre-announced makes the job of presenting something interesting rather harder too (whatever others imply, this is much more heavily pre-briefed than any budget in recent history).
There is reasonable good news on public finances since March which means Sunak does have some flexibility not to raise taxes significantly. Remember there have already been 2 big tax raising announcements this year already: the CT rate rise to 25% and the health & social care levy.
Expect less and less money to local government though. The instinct of this government since 2010 has repeatedly been to cut money to councils where possible. They were already running on vapour and will soon be on their knees. That plus general neglect of the education budget is not good news if you are a LA trying to run primary schools while keeping the bin collections and road repairs going.
Most public services are showing strain in one way or another. The trouble with the kind of soft eco-socialism that this government practices is that you pretty quickly run out of other people's money. You hit the economy with high taxes and eco-regulations and spend like a drunken sailor and then are surprised when the "green jobs" you promise never appear and the productive sector shrinks.
NOM. Con 18 short on current boundaries, 7 short on 2023 boundaries.
It wouldn't need a lot of tactical voting to finish Johnson off.
I hadn't realised the symbol for the Green Party is an adaptation of the one for recycled trash. Socialism recycled. Very apt.
It isn't, but there isn't an emoji for their symbol so the writer of the tweet choose something that was close enough. See also the "winning here" diamond used for the Lib Dems instead of their bird.
The protestors who have glued themselves to the road should be pulled off and if they need a skin graft that's self-inflicted.
Please see my comments yesterday on what we should do to anti vaxxers going into school. Sometimes you have to take a deep breath before punching them.
I am pretty liberal on most forms of peaceful protest but think schools should be one place that is off limits. On key infrastructure like motorways I am undecided, possibly a time limit of an hour for a protest in those scenarios if that could be made to work.
Generally speaking I am very pro the right of people to protest, and I think there are many unreasonable limitations to this right on the statute book.
However, pedestrians are banned from motorways for good reason and a protest is no grounds to make an exception to that law. And, in any case, for protests like this being arrested is almost the whole point of it, as it gains more attention than a rally in an out of the way public park that inconveniences no-one.
I've never understood the line of thought that protest is a magic code word that makes everything acceptable.
Everyone should have a right to free speech and to spread their views and try to gain support for them. Simply trying to annoy others in to grudging acquiesence is not a natural right and should be stamped out.
NOM. Con 18 short on current boundaries, 7 short on 2023 boundaries.
It wouldn't need a lot of tactical voting to finish Johnson off.
Just think we could have the DUP back giving confidence and supply to the Tories.
As has been pointed out ad nauseam on here there is little likelihood of the DUP giving either confidence and supply or comfort and support to a Johnsonite Tory party.
The protestors who have glued themselves to the road should be pulled off and if they need a skin graft that's self-inflicted.
Please see my comments yesterday on what we should do to anti vaxxers going into school. Sometimes you have to take a deep breath before punching them.
I am pretty liberal on most forms of peaceful protest but think schools should be one place that is off limits. On key infrastructure like motorways I am undecided, possibly a time limit of an hour for a protest in those scenarios if that could be made to work.
It is difficult isn't it because it is coloured by your own view. From my point of view the anti vaxxers, particularly those filmed serving stupid documents on schools and hospitals, come into the complete nutter category. Those gluing themselves to the road have a point, but I know, I just know, that a 1 minute conversation with any of them would also ensure they went into my complete nutter bucket also.
Yet I was happy to go on the one and only demonstration I have been on, as a Remainer, in the certain knowledge I was doing the right thing.
Am I a hypocrite?
No, not at all. Protest is absolutely part of our (relatively) democratic system. Self righteous knobs breaking injunctions and deliberately disrupting law abiding people going to work is simple law breaking. They should be jailed.
The protestors who have glued themselves to the road should be pulled off and if they need a skin graft that's self-inflicted.
Please see my comments yesterday on what we should do to anti vaxxers going into school. Sometimes you have to take a deep breath before punching them.
I am pretty liberal on most forms of peaceful protest but think schools should be one place that is off limits. On key infrastructure like motorways I am undecided, possibly a time limit of an hour for a protest in those scenarios if that could be made to work.
Peaceful protest is not legal. It is not legal to block the highway. Why should their protest disrupt ordinary working people going about their daily lives.
Still they are making complete fools of the party of law and order.
On the other hand, media and politicians are talking about Britain's woeful levels of insulation now. So they've achieved their aim.
Same could be said of a number of highly irritating disruptions held by political movements or interest groups. Take the late Bob Crow: regularly infuriated the hell out of already long suffering commuters, but certainly got a fantastic series of deals for tube drivers as a result.
NOM. Con 18 short on current boundaries, 7 short on 2023 boundaries.
It wouldn't need a lot of tactical voting to finish Johnson off.
Just think we could have the DUP back giving confidence and supply to the Tories.
As has been pointed out ad nauseam on here there is little likelihood of the DUP giving either confidence and supply or comfort and support to a Johnsonite Tory party.
The protestors who have glued themselves to the road should be pulled off and if they need a skin graft that's self-inflicted.
Please see my comments yesterday on what we should do to anti vaxxers going into school. Sometimes you have to take a deep breath before punching them.
I am pretty liberal on most forms of peaceful protest but think schools should be one place that is off limits. On key infrastructure like motorways I am undecided, possibly a time limit of an hour for a protest in those scenarios if that could be made to work.
It is difficult isn't it because it is coloured by your own view. From my point of view the anti vaxxers, particularly those filmed serving stupid documents on schools and hospitals, come into the complete nutter category. Those gluing themselves to the road have a point, but I know, I just know, that a 1 minute conversation with any of them would also ensure they went into my complete nutter bucket also.
Yet I was happy to go on the one and only demonstration I have been on, as a Remainer, in the certain knowledge I was doing the right thing.
Am I a hypocrite?
Nothing wrong with going on demonstrations in themselves, and we should protect the right to do so fiercely, regardless of whether we believe in a particular cause.
However why the need to target schools? That is all about intimidation of children, not about legitimate protest, imo.
They are Devout Believers In The True Faith
So anything that furthers their cause Is Blessed.
In this case, they believe that the function of theirs protests is to cause maximum disruption. Causing a school to close would be massive, massive disruption. Therefore blockading a school is a Blessed Action.
Once you see that quite a few non-religious people have transferred the fundamentalist religious mindset to the causes they *really* believe in, it all makes sense.
The protestors who have glued themselves to the road should be pulled off and if they need a skin graft that's self-inflicted.
Please see my comments yesterday on what we should do to anti vaxxers going into school. Sometimes you have to take a deep breath before punching them.
I am pretty liberal on most forms of peaceful protest but think schools should be one place that is off limits. On key infrastructure like motorways I am undecided, possibly a time limit of an hour for a protest in those scenarios if that could be made to work.
Peaceful protest is not legal. It is not legal to block the highway. Why should their protest disrupt ordinary working people going about their daily lives.
Still they are making complete fools of the party of law and order.
On the other hand, media and politicians are talking about Britain's woeful levels of insulation now. So they've achieved their aim.
Same could be said of a number of highly irritating disruptions held by political movements or interest groups. Take the late Bob Crow: regularly infuriated the hell out of already long suffering commuters, but certainly got a fantastic series of deals for tube drivers as a result.
The protestors who have glued themselves to the road should be pulled off and if they need a skin graft that's self-inflicted.
Please see my comments yesterday on what we should do to anti vaxxers going into school. Sometimes you have to take a deep breath before punching them.
I am pretty liberal on most forms of peaceful protest but think schools should be one place that is off limits. On key infrastructure like motorways I am undecided, possibly a time limit of an hour for a protest in those scenarios if that could be made to work.
It is difficult isn't it because it is coloured by your own view. From my point of view the anti vaxxers, particularly those filmed serving stupid documents on schools and hospitals, come into the complete nutter category. Those gluing themselves to the road have a point, but I know, I just know, that a 1 minute conversation with any of them would also ensure they went into my complete nutter bucket also.
Yet I was happy to go on the one and only demonstration I have been on, as a Remainer, in the certain knowledge I was doing the right thing.
Am I a hypocrite?
No. You didn't pollute the River Thames with noise and dead fish, for instance.
Sunak is another Dave Cameron. Very well presented, not much there. Hopefully, if he does get the top job he will not do as much damage as Cameron did.
Don't agree about Cameron. I think he was a good PM and the Coalition government in particular was one of our better governments who eased us out of a very difficult situation with surprisingly little pain. As for Sunak he is clearly very bright. My slight concern is that his meteoric rise has given him very little experience of governing or politics outside his comfort zone of finance. I'd like to see him spread his wings a bit but his boss probably wouldn't.
I am not so sure history will be as kind as you are! Cameron's legacy is what we are living through now: a deeply divided country that is poorer than it should be, less relevant internationally and whose citizens have lost an unprecedented amount of freedom, with more on the way. Mistaking well-spoken verbal fluency for intelligence is the perennial British problem.
Well quite, Camerons time as PM ended in an abject failure, That is demonstrably obvious. Unlike other PMs he was not a victim of ‘events’, he carefully crafted the conditions of his own failure. He played with fire for short term political expediency and destroyed himself. History will judge him a tragic figure and one of our worst PMs.
His time as PM ended up as such an "abject failure" that having been behind in almost every poll in the 2010-15 Parliament, and having surprisingly won quite a narrow majority in 2015 . . . he managed to set his party up for another two General Elections and still be strong favourites for the next election too.
He exorcised the issue that has bedevilled the country and the Party for generations. Real generations, not Scottish ones.
EDIT: Its funny how your post is getting plenty of "likes" from people who probably don't want and don't vote for a series of Conservative governments that are Cameron's legacy.
Cameron hasn’t exorcised anything, We’re more divided than before, The difference is your preferred side is in the ascendancy, which leads you to the conclusion job done. Our relationship with Europe will always be an issue. It always has been , long before the EU.
But either way, Cameron failed. It was not his objective to lose the referendum, see his policy collapse and hand over to May. If you watch the Cameron documentary you see his hubris played an almighty part in his downfall. As I say, he’s a tragic figure.
I hate to do a HYUFD but as a former and habitual Tory voter you may be more divided than ever before, "we" are not.
Instead of the division being on the right of British politics, that division has now been closed and the division has been moved to a much more palatable position. Well done Cameron.
Absolutely - party before country every single time for the Tories.
You mean Labour are the opposite.?🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Labours interst has always been for anyone but their own Country Wilson ...Blair....Brown too stupid to know one way or another.
Some people put party before country, but I don't think most do, although they might tend to think who they support is always right and their opponents always wrong.
I also don't think for a moment that could be said for Wilson, Blair or Brown and certainly none of them could be called stupid. I think they all came over as very bright, although I think Brown in particular was very ill suited for the job.
You seem to lack any objectivity when it comes to Labour. You never come on here ad objectively dismantle them. It just seems to be a hatred and you seem to think we are all in cahoots on a plot with Labour to rubbish the Tories (even though a significant number of us don't even support Labour).
Blair was for the USA, Wilson was rumoured to love Mother Russia. Both to be despised in equal.measure. Brown was an idiot, clever idiot maybe, who thought that he saved the world. He completely fucked the UK economy with his arrogance. I respected Callaghan,j ust about the only one who was worth praise. Labour are in opposition because they can't find a credible leader. The Tories are in.power because Labour are and have been useless. They never learn.
I don't need to deconstruct Labour, they are very able at doing it themselves.
People vote against Parties now not for them, that why the Tories are in power.
Post with content. Thank you. In reply, section by section:
I don't know about Blair and USA
Wilson and Russia I think was just a smear to try and discredit him
I don't think Wilson is despised
Blair is both despised and loved. He is marmite.
Brown I agree but I maybe would not use those words
Callaghan, interesting that you respect him. Would love to know more. Not disagreeing or agreeing just interested
Reason Tories are in power, I agree
Re deconstructing Labour, you make a valid point but why post then? I can come on here and say Boris is an idiot but what does it achieve? It is pointless unless I say why.
Labour has learnt in the past and with someone you hate and that is Blair. Even if you disagree with him Labour were very successful under him.
Re you last comment about people voting against parties, I agree. Sadly we are in a position with two very poor parties currently.
The protestors who have glued themselves to the road should be pulled off and if they need a skin graft that's self-inflicted.
Please see my comments yesterday on what we should do to anti vaxxers going into school. Sometimes you have to take a deep breath before punching them.
I am pretty liberal on most forms of peaceful protest but think schools should be one place that is off limits. On key infrastructure like motorways I am undecided, possibly a time limit of an hour for a protest in those scenarios if that could be made to work.
It is difficult isn't it because it is coloured by your own view. From my point of view the anti vaxxers, particularly those filmed serving stupid documents on schools and hospitals, come into the complete nutter category. Those gluing themselves to the road have a point, but I know, I just know, that a 1 minute conversation with any of them would also ensure they went into my complete nutter bucket also.
Yet I was happy to go on the one and only demonstration I have been on, as a Remainer, in the certain knowledge I was doing the right thing.
Am I a hypocrite?
No, not at all. Protest is absolutely part of our (relatively) democratic system. Self righteous knobs breaking injunctions and deliberately disrupting law abiding people going to work is simple law breaking. They should be jailed.
People can protest and break the law in protest if they think the issue is important enough.
But then the law-breakers have to face the consequences of their choices.
If people are prepared to go to prison for their beliefs then that can send a very powerful statement. But right now we seem to have lost sight of that and the word protest is a magic word that excuses any law breaking without consequences.
Comments
''Billion''
The 2021 Autumn Budget
SOLD @ 36 Stake: £5
Current spread: 34 - 37
Bet value: -£5
By the book. In direct contrast to the Treasury Bench.
I'd also add:
- Motivated reasoning (deciding what conclusion he wants and torturing the argument to fit)
- Perception that admitting being wrong is weakness and "losing"
- Perception that loyalty to a Party regardless of what they actually do is strength
This happens every single year. The Treasury leaks like a sieve, the Speaker acts all indignant. Its been going on so long even the Leader of the House himself was once a backbencher who was famous for being indignant before he became Leader of the House.
https://tinyurl.com/pstkztfv
Quinton de Kock withdrew from South Africa's T20 World Cup match against the West Indies after refusing to take a knee.
South Africa's players have been told to take a knee before the start of their remaining T20 World Cup matches after they were pictured taking varying stances before their defeat to Australia on Saturday.
The Cricket South Africa (CSA) Board unanimously agreed on Monday to "adopt a consistent and united stance against racism".
I heard Michael Atherton describe de Kock as "a pariah", which seems more over the top than the criticism the cricket pundits dished out to Ollie Robinson earlier in the year. Compare and contrast with football...
https://tinyurl.com/tzh35c46
Marcos Alonso: Chelsea defender to stop taking knee after claiming anti-racism gesture is 'losing strength'
The Spain left-back says he will instead point to the Premier League 'No Room for Racism' badge on his sleeve; players have been taking a knee since the summer of 2020 to show support for the movement for racial equality; Thomas Tuchel: "This is his decision, we accept it"
We elect them on their sales pitch of broad principles and obvious intelligence (just fallen off my seat laughing at that assumption also)
Pick an area where they wanted something that the Tories would not give (PR was out thanks to the cock-up with the AV referendum "compromise"). Possibly saying "We've looked at the effects of the student funding restructuring and x, y, z does not work. Accordingly, we wish to pass it into legislation that it will be officially a graduate tax rather than a loan and the rate will drop to however much percent with an aim of reducing it progressively as the finances improve.
If it's granted, it's an obvious Lib Dem win which helps to an extent with the famous betrayal. If it causes a split, then the Lib Dems can go into opposition and keep citing the good things that were done under the Coalition whilst criticising the Tory government since then.
Under FPTP, you need some separation, or why should people vote for you rather than the larger partner? Especially if they've won the PR war.
If de Kock's colleagues many of whom will have been subjected to racism have chosen to take a stand against racism and he fails to live up to it, that's his choice. And its his colleagues choice to no longer play with him then as a result.
📉Our LOWEST Con vote share since the last general election.
🌳Con 37 (-3)
🌹Lab 35 (=)
🔶LDM 8 (=)
♻️Grn 7 (+2)
🏴SNP 5 (+1)
⬜️Other 10 (+2)
22-24 Oct, 2,258 UK adults
(Changes from 15-17 Oct) https://twitter.com/SavantaComRes/status/1453282468199608327/photo/1
I absolutely think that SA's cricketers should expect to demonstrate their anti-racist credentials. Apartheid hadn't yet fully ended when de Kock was born; he is only 28.
The University, since the start of the pandemic - also coinciding with a newish VC - has been dishing out extra paid leave days. We got two extra Easter 2020, 4 extra Christmas 2020 and are getting two extra Christmas 2021. Those fall in three different leave years, so it was two extra in 2019/20, four in 2020/21 and two (so far) in 2021/22.* Ostensibly to give staff extra downtime due to challenges of Covid, homeworking with kids around etc etc.
Interesting tactic - I know when all the buildings were closed the university actually found it had an embarassment of riches, but that is no longer the case. Some onoging savings from fewer people in the office maybe... The cynic in me notes that while it is great for staff who can only work when present, for academics etc the workload does not change and so we'll still need to get as much done - for many of the university roles this doesn't actually cost anything in work per unit pay.
(For watchers of cushy academia, that took annual leave entitlement to 40, 42 and 40 days respectively, including bank holidays - so 32, 34 and 32 without)
Because all this humongous spending has to be paid for, one way or another.
Apart fom anything else, gestures that are enforced lose all meaning.
de Kock absolutely can do whatever he likes. He just can't wear a Cricket South Africa shirt while doing so if he's not following their policies.
https://tinyurl.com/h2wemhbu
Royal British Legion stands by James McClean’s right not to wear poppy
Armed forces charity condemns abuse suffered by Ireland international and his family
I wonder if Cameron regrets not pursuing that course. Announcing that he'd reluctantly concluded that meaningful reform within the EU was impossible and that therefore he recommended Britain leaving the EU, might have lead to Leave winning by a large margin, 60:40 or so. He could still be Prime Minister if he'd wanted to be.
Whether/how the LD's are ever going to recover I'm not sure
I think combatting racism is far, far more important to the players suffering racism than a poppy. So if they only wish to play with colleagues who are standing with them in that, then that's their choice.
I'm not in favour of either a ban or no ban, I'm content to let the players decide. But if all but one of the players decide they want to do this collectively and won't play with anyone who's not standing with them, then that's their choice. You either dump everyone else, or you dump the one who's not standing with them.
If he was younger then I could picture him like Truss now with the zeal of a convert pushing the benefits of Brexit.
Unlike in 2007/08 when Brown had already tanked the finances so we had a big deficit going into the recession and a ridiculous one years after coming out of it - this time we went into the recession with sound finances and are coming out with the deficit already closing.
We have a deficit due to the cycle. We need to fix it over the cycle.
Where it can just about work is if you have Parliament pass a new Act that contains within it a provision that the laws it contains only enter into force following a confirmatory vote in a referendum. Then you have a specific proposition to vote on, and Parliament is not compelled to take any further action to put the result of the referendum into effect, so there's no sense that the referendum directs the later votes of MPs.
I really do hope other protest groups follow suit like the anti-vaxxers
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-59061509
Adelaide United player Josh Cavallo has come out as gay, becoming the only current male professional footballer in the world to do so.
That (bit in bold) is nuts. I'm all for respecting private lives and it's all players' own choices, but there must surely be a hell of a lot of gay players out there. It would be much healthier if this was common knowledge and no big deal, as in politics (my perception, at least), women's football (true? I'm vaguely aware of there being some openly gay women footballers, I think). It's sad that a male pro footballer being gay is news, in other areas - e.g. politics - there have been many people I've only realised are gay when I see something about ther partners mentioned in passing, which is how it should be, no big deal.
Does that indicate that we might not get a booze bashing budget?
Johnson jumped the right way (for his future career) and is now supreme. It is easy to imagine Cameron being consumed by envy.
There is reasonable good news on public finances since March which means Sunak does have some flexibility not to raise taxes significantly. Remember there have already been 2 big tax raising announcements this year already: the CT rate rise to 25% and the health & social care levy.
Expect less and less money to local government though. The instinct of this government since 2010 has repeatedly been to cut money to councils where possible. They were already running on vapour and will soon be on their knees. That plus general neglect of the education budget is not good news if you are a LA trying to run primary schools while keeping the bin collections and road repairs going.
It wouldn't need a lot of tactical voting to finish Johnson off.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/face-masks-become-mandatory-in-the-commons-for-everyone-except-mps/ar-AAPZ2CB?ocid=entnewsntp
Still they are making complete fools of the party of law and order.
Yet I was happy to go on the one and only demonstration I have been on, as a Remainer, in the certain knowledge I was doing the right thing.
Am I a hypocrite?
I don't need to deconstruct Labour, they are very able at doing it themselves.
People vote against Parties now not for them, that why the Tories are in power.
TL;DR 45 openly gay or lesbian MPs.
However why the need to target schools? That is all about intimidation of children, not about legitimate protest, imo.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4EyW_CA9AE
However, pedestrians are banned from motorways for good reason and a protest is no grounds to make an exception to that law. And, in any case, for protests like this being arrested is almost the whole point of it, as it gains more attention than a rally in an out of the way public park that inconveniences no-one.
Paging @Philip_Thompson
Harry Cole
@MrHarryCole
·
7m
Busiest I’ve seen parliament in 18 months
Madam Deputy Speaker 35 times mentioned
https://www.ft.com/content/af12d4aa-0a3e-4758-83c4-0c4070b504fb
Everyone should have a right to free speech and to spread their views and try to gain support for them. Simply trying to annoy others in to grudging acquiesence is not a natural right and should be stamped out.
Is he just making mischief?
So Boris could stay PM but he would need confidence and supply from the DUP and NI Unionists
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=37&LAB=35&LIB=8&Reform=2&Green=7&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=22.3&SCOTLAB=18.3&SCOTLIB=6.3&SCOTReform=0.7&SCOTGreen=0.7&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=48.3&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019nbbase
Same could be said of a number of highly irritating disruptions held by political movements or interest groups. Take the late Bob Crow: regularly infuriated the hell out of already long suffering commuters, but certainly got a fantastic series of deals for tube drivers as a result.
So anything that furthers their cause Is Blessed.
In this case, they believe that the function of theirs protests is to cause maximum disruption. Causing a school to close would be massive, massive disruption. Therefore blockading a school is a Blessed Action.
Once you see that quite a few non-religious people have transferred the fundamentalist religious mindset to the causes they *really* believe in, it all makes sense.
I don't know about Blair and USA
Wilson and Russia I think was just a smear to try and discredit him
I don't think Wilson is despised
Blair is both despised and loved. He is marmite.
Brown I agree but I maybe would not use those words
Callaghan, interesting that you respect him. Would love to know more. Not disagreeing or agreeing just interested
Reason Tories are in power, I agree
Re deconstructing Labour, you make a valid point but why post then? I can come on here and say Boris is an idiot but what does it achieve? It is pointless unless I say why.
Labour has learnt in the past and with someone you hate and that is Blair. Even if you disagree with him Labour were very successful under him.
Re you last comment about people voting against parties, I agree. Sadly we are in a position with two very poor parties currently.
But then the law-breakers have to face the consequences of their choices.
If people are prepared to go to prison for their beliefs then that can send a very powerful statement. But right now we seem to have lost sight of that and the word protest is a magic word that excuses any law breaking without consequences.