Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Ipsos: 57% say MPs should be able to accuse each other of lying – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited May 3 in General
imageIpsos: 57% say MPs should be able to accuse each other of lying – politicalbetting.com

One of the things that has come to a head during the current parliament is the rule that MPs are not allowed to call each other liars in the House of Commons. This has been driven largely by what his opponents see as the prime minister’s approach to the truth.

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,246
    Test
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 1,707

    Allow this however, and the HoC would just descend into a bun-fight.

    Many issues and statements can be spinned multiple ways, especially on statistics.

    Agreed. There is (in recent history) very little lying to the house. And lots of deliberate dissembling, spin, and inappropriate application of half facts.

    If "lying" became a default, lazy accusation without real consequence, it would mask the incidence and importance of actual lies.

    Like the difference between using the F word as punctuation in normal discourse, and using the F word in CBeebies bedtime stories.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 16,889

    The person who runs this account claims to be an ex-spook who’s now an ‘ethical leaker’. Certainly very anti the current government. Also claims to have contacts in No. 10.

    How true all that is, I don’t know. But I have my doubts.

    But, if this turns out to be accurate, maybe I’ll have to accept they are who they say they are:


    The idea that Raab, or indeed anyone, would deliberately watch pornography in the Commons chamber simply doesn't pass the sniff test. Why would anyone do that?

    What might have happened is someone texted/WhatsApped something NSFW and they opened the message before realising what it was.
    Maybe he was the Mail on Sunday's mole? He fantasised that the star in his movie was Angela Rayner!

  • There is nothing wrong with the parliamentary conventions. We just need to get back to choosing Prime Ministers of integrity.

    I'm 39 and I can only think of 1-2 PMs of integrity that were chosen in my lifetime (Thatcher I'd include but she was already in office, plus Cameron).

    People should be free to say what they want in the Commons, and accuse others of whatever they want, and if the voters aren't happy the voters should be able to vote how they want.

    "Lying" is an irregular verb, or a bit like the old saying about terrorism, one person's lie is another's spin etc
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 24,113
    edited April 27
    Roger said:

    The person who runs this account claims to be an ex-spook who’s now an ‘ethical leaker’. Certainly very anti the current government. Also claims to have contacts in No. 10.

    How true all that is, I don’t know. But I have my doubts.

    But, if this turns out to be accurate, maybe I’ll have to accept they are who they say they are:


    The idea that Raab, or indeed anyone, would deliberately watch pornography in the Commons chamber simply doesn't pass the sniff test. Why would anyone do that?

    What might have happened is someone texted/WhatsApped something NSFW and they opened the message before realising what it was.
    Maybe he was the Mail on Sunday's mole? He fantasised that the star in his movie was Angela Rayner!

    I wonder if one of the other MPs filmed the errant male member (whomsoever that might have been)?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 52,814
    Carnyx said:

    Roger said:

    The person who runs this account claims to be an ex-spook who’s now an ‘ethical leaker’. Certainly very anti the current government. Also claims to have contacts in No. 10.

    How true all that is, I don’t know. But I have my doubts.

    But, if this turns out to be accurate, maybe I’ll have to accept they are who they say they are:


    The idea that Raab, or indeed anyone, would deliberately watch pornography in the Commons chamber simply doesn't pass the sniff test. Why would anyone do that?

    What might have happened is someone texted/WhatsApped something NSFW and they opened the message before realising what it was.
    Maybe he was the Mail on Sunday's mole? He fantasised that the star in his movie was Angela Rayner!

    I wonder if one of the other MPs filmed the errant male member (whomsoever that might have been)?
    Apparently he was watching it while sitting next to a female colleague

    However, I do not think speculative naming of individuals should happen before the person is named, not least because of the legal implications to the site owners
  • JACK_WJACK_W Posts: 584
    edited April 27
    @algarkirk and others :

    Stamford was featured in Alec Clifton-Taylor's excellent 1978 TV series and book - Six English Towns :

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGC7yC2iXa4
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 52,814

    There is nothing wrong with the parliamentary conventions. We just need to get back to choosing Prime Ministers of integrity.

    I'm 39 and I can only think of 1-2 PMs of integrity that were chosen in my lifetime (Thatcher I'd include but she was already in office, plus Cameron).

    People should be free to say what they want in the Commons, and accuse others of whatever they want, and if the voters aren't happy the voters should be able to vote how they want.

    "Lying" is an irregular verb, or a bit like the old saying about terrorism, one person's lie is another's spin etc
    I just realised you are half my age and suddenly wondered where all the years have gone
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 14,513

    There is nothing wrong with the parliamentary conventions. We just need to get back to choosing Prime Ministers of integrity.

    I'm 39 and I can only think of 1-2 PMs of integrity that were chosen in my lifetime (Thatcher I'd include but she was already in office, plus Cameron).

    People should be free to say what they want in the Commons, and accuse others of whatever they want, and if the voters aren't happy the voters should be able to vote how they want.

    "Lying" is an irregular verb, or a bit like the old saying about terrorism, one person's lie is another's spin etc
    I just realised you are half my age and suddenly wondered where all the years have gone
    Half your age and about 5% your IQ, Big G.
  • JACK_WJACK_W Posts: 584

    Test

    Are you back to winning (here) ways Mike?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 52,814
    DJ Tim Westwood steps down from his show until further notice
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 14,513

    DJ Tim Westwood steps down from his show until further notice

    Why has this broken now.
    There have been rumours about Westwood for YEARS.

    Strange to think that his father was a Bishop.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 43,638
    I happened to be driving when PMQs was on today. Blimey, it was tedious. SKS is so dull. No doubt his repeat at the end of every question sounded powerful in his bedroom mirror this morning but there was no bite in it whatsoever.
    Boris just blusters away repeating the same half relevant statistics time and again without addressing the question. Blackford is utterly tedious and sanctimonious. Ed Davies didn't even bother to turn up which was a good call by him.

    Would this be any better if they were also calling each other liars? Probably not. It is undignifed and pointless already.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 52,814

    There is nothing wrong with the parliamentary conventions. We just need to get back to choosing Prime Ministers of integrity.

    I'm 39 and I can only think of 1-2 PMs of integrity that were chosen in my lifetime (Thatcher I'd include but she was already in office, plus Cameron).

    People should be free to say what they want in the Commons, and accuse others of whatever they want, and if the voters aren't happy the voters should be able to vote how they want.

    "Lying" is an irregular verb, or a bit like the old saying about terrorism, one person's lie is another's spin etc
    I just realised you are half my age and suddenly wondered where all the years have gone
    Half your age and about 5% your IQ, Big G.
    You do flatter me
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 24,113
    Roger said:

    The person who runs this account claims to be an ex-spook who’s now an ‘ethical leaker’. Certainly very anti the current government. Also claims to have contacts in No. 10.

    How true all that is, I don’t know. But I have my doubts.

    But, if this turns out to be accurate, maybe I’ll have to accept they are who they say they are:


    The idea that Raab, or indeed anyone, would deliberately watch pornography in the Commons chamber simply doesn't pass the sniff test. Why would anyone do that?

    What might have happened is someone texted/WhatsApped something NSFW and they opened the message before realising what it was.
    Maybe he was the Mail on Sunday's mole? He fantasised that the star in his movie was Angela Rayner!

    On the dodgy email/Whatsapp suggestion - seems a bit less likely now. Graun feed reports "The MP who raised the issue did not name the male MP but there are reports that he was seen watching porn in both the chamber and a committee meeting."
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 52,814
    DavidL said:

    I happened to be driving when PMQs was on today. Blimey, it was tedious. SKS is so dull. No doubt his repeat at the end of every question sounded powerful in his bedroom mirror this morning but there was no bite in it whatsoever.
    Boris just blusters away repeating the same half relevant statistics time and again without addressing the question. Blackford is utterly tedious and sanctimonious. Ed Davies didn't even bother to turn up which was a good call by him.

    Would this be any better if they were also calling each other liars? Probably not. It is undignifed and pointless already.

    Listening to PMQs today made you want to sack the lot and start again with decent honest and sensible politicians

    It is so depressing
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 8,731

    DJ Tim Westwood steps down from his show until further notice

    Why has this broken now.
    There have been rumours about Westwood for YEARS.

    Strange to think that his father was a Bishop.
    Why? The church(es) have been no stranger to sexual misdeeds.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 3,525
    edited April 27

    Parliamentary proceedings are based on the assumption of mutual respect. In argument an MP should address another member's statement as fact, rather than question its veracity. That is why one found to have lied must pay a harsh penalty. It isn't the size of the untruth that matters, it's the corrosive effect on the respectful exchange of ideas.

    Linking the fact that you cannot accuse each other of lying with the fact that deliberately misleading the house is a resigning offence. That linkage hadn't explicitly crossed my.mind, but if not calling out liar is the price for then expecting liars to resign, I'll take that.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 14,513
    edited April 27

    DJ Tim Westwood steps down from his show until further notice

    Why has this broken now.
    There have been rumours about Westwood for YEARS.

    Strange to think that his father was a Bishop.
    Why? The church(es) have been no stranger to sexual misdeeds.
    True.

    But I like to assume that sons and daughters of the manse are brought up with a more solid sense of right and wrong.

    Gordon Brown and Theresa May both had/have a sense of duty and morality, whatever you think of their politics (not much in my case).
  • If this was allowed every word out of Starmer's mouth would be liar
  • ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379
    DavidL said:

    I happened to be driving when PMQs was on today. Blimey, it was tedious. SKS is so dull. No doubt his repeat at the end of every question sounded powerful in his bedroom mirror this morning but there was no bite in it whatsoever.
    Boris just blusters away repeating the same half relevant statistics time and again without addressing the question. Blackford is utterly tedious and sanctimonious. Ed Davies didn't even bother to turn up which was a good call by him.

    Would this be any better if they were also calling each other liars? Probably not. It is undignifed and pointless already.

    I think as leader of the fourth party, Davey doesn't get a question every week?
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 8,731

    DJ Tim Westwood steps down from his show until further notice

    Why has this broken now.
    There have been rumours about Westwood for YEARS.

    Strange to think that his father was a Bishop.
    Why? The church(es) have been no stranger to sexual misdeeds.
    True.

    But I like to assume that sons and daughters of the manse are brought up with a more solid sense of right and wrong.

    Gordon Brown and Theresa May both had/have a sense of duty and morality, whatever you think of their politics (not much in my case).
    Always challenge assumptions! That Theresa May was a right tearaway. The number of fields of wheat that she destroyed in her youth...
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 17,417

    DJ Tim Westwood steps down from his show until further notice

    Why has this broken now.
    There have been rumours about Westwood for YEARS.

    Strange to think that his father was a Bishop.
    Why? The church(es) have been no stranger to sexual misdeeds.
    Not more tiresome bashing of Bishops on PB.
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 2,812

    There is nothing wrong with the parliamentary conventions. We just need to get back to choosing Prime Ministers of integrity.

    I'm 39 and I can only think of 1-2 PMs of integrity that were chosen in my lifetime (Thatcher I'd include but she was already in office, plus Cameron).

    People should be free to say what they want in the Commons, and accuse others of whatever they want, and if the voters aren't happy the voters should be able to vote how they want.

    "Lying" is an irregular verb, or a bit like the old saying about terrorism, one person's lie is another's spin etc
    Cameron!! The Cameron who promised to trigger Article 50 the next day if Leave won the Brexit vote?
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 3,839
    I don't support MPs calling each other liars.

    I would however have Full Fact-like investigation team to whom statements can be referred and if they find untruths then they can apply a range of sanctions, including the person being referred to as "the dishonourable member" or, if a privy councillor, "the wrong dishonourable member" for a period of time matching the judged severity of the offence.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 8,731

    If this was allowed every word out of Starmer's mouth would be liar

    The problem is that most MP's and PM's genuinely try hard not to lie in the house/in interviews. The classic Michael Howard interview with Paxman, excruciating as it is, is actually Howard trying really hard not to lie.
    Now we have one who seems able to lie as easily as he breathes, has seemingly no conscience and is degrading the office he holds. He needs to be gone, but the ones with the power to remove him have not, yet, summoned the gumption to do it.
    Clock is ticking. One way or another Johnson will not be PM in 2025. For the countries sakes, it needs to be 2022.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 8,731

    DJ Tim Westwood steps down from his show until further notice

    Why has this broken now.
    There have been rumours about Westwood for YEARS.

    Strange to think that his father was a Bishop.
    Why? The church(es) have been no stranger to sexual misdeeds.
    Not more tiresome bashing of Bishops on PB.
    I'm not, in either sense, just challenging why someone would be surprised that a bishop may have raised a wrong 'un.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 22,721

    DJ Tim Westwood steps down from his show until further notice

    Why has this broken now.
    There have been rumours about Westwood for YEARS.

    Strange to think that his father was a Bishop.
    The one thing which surprised me about this story, was that he's 64!
    Only 14 years younger than @Big_G_NorthWales.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 3,839
    rcs1000 said:

    The person who runs this account claims to be an ex-spook who’s now an ‘ethical leaker’. Certainly very anti the current government. Also claims to have contacts in No. 10.

    How true all that is, I don’t know. But I have my doubts.

    But, if this turns out to be accurate, maybe I’ll have to accept they are who they say they are:


    The idea that Raab, or indeed anyone, would deliberately watch pornography in the Commons chamber simply doesn't pass the sniff test. Why would anyone do that?

    What might have happened is someone texted/WhatsApped something NSFW and they opened the message before realising what it was.
    I was on a plane once, and a gentleman a few rows ahead of me got his laptop out.

    As he opened it, it came out of sleep mode, and continued playing the video be had been watching in his hotel room the previous evening. Unfortunately for him, the volume was loud, and the panting and moaning was heard by the entire plane.

    He slammed the laptop shut and went a very bright red.
    A "gentleman a few rows ahead"? :wink:

    The only suitable action in that circumstance is (if the airline has phone/VOIP service) to call a randomly named subordinate and very publicly fire them for watching porn on your laptop which they borrowed last night.
  • Hey @turbotubbs nice to see you again.

    Just back from a run, perfect running temperature in SW London today
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 24,113

    Carnyx said:

    Roger said:

    The person who runs this account claims to be an ex-spook who’s now an ‘ethical leaker’. Certainly very anti the current government. Also claims to have contacts in No. 10.

    How true all that is, I don’t know. But I have my doubts.

    But, if this turns out to be accurate, maybe I’ll have to accept they are who they say they are:


    The idea that Raab, or indeed anyone, would deliberately watch pornography in the Commons chamber simply doesn't pass the sniff test. Why would anyone do that?

    What might have happened is someone texted/WhatsApped something NSFW and they opened the message before realising what it was.
    Maybe he was the Mail on Sunday's mole? He fantasised that the star in his movie was Angela Rayner!

    I wonder if one of the other MPs filmed the errant male member (whomsoever that might have been)?
    You may wish to rephrase 'errant male member'.

    Anyway, I have it on good authority that the MP in question wasn't actually watching porn, but was watching a scene from a film called Basic Instinct so that he felt better informed about a story in the MoS.
    Oops, yes! Too late now.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 14,615
    Selebian said:

    I don't support MPs calling each other liars.

    I would however have Full Fact-like investigation team to whom statements can be referred and if they find untruths then they can apply a range of sanctions, including the person being referred to as "the dishonourable member" or, if a privy councillor, "the wrong dishonourable member" for a period of time matching the judged severity of the offence.

    Like it. Send it up to VAR.

    Accusation clearly proven = Ban for liar
    Accusation unclear, untrue, or even likely true but not clearcut = Ban for accuser
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,595

    There is nothing wrong with the parliamentary conventions. We just need to get back to choosing Prime Ministers of integrity.

    I'm 39 and I can only think of 1-2 PMs of integrity that were chosen in my lifetime (Thatcher I'd include but she was already in office, plus Cameron).

    People should be free to say what they want in the Commons, and accuse others of whatever they want, and if the voters aren't happy the voters should be able to vote how they want.

    "Lying" is an irregular verb, or a bit like the old saying about terrorism, one person's lie is another's spin etc
    Cameron!! The Cameron who promised to trigger Article 50 the next day if Leave won the Brexit vote?
    This is an attack that gets brought out against various people from time to time (Corbyn is the other usual target) and it's pretty misguided: Cameron was just promising to respect the result and kick off the process, but in fact he (as the rest of us) simply had no idea how the process would really work if it came down to it. If the EU's process hadn't been such a colossal mess that required a nine month lead-in, Cameron probably would have been able to just trigger Article 50 right away.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 41,174
    @donaldtuskEPP
    I’ve heard that not only Hungary but also Austria and Germany are ready to pay for the Russian gas in rubles. Are they still in eurozone or in rublezone?


    https://twitter.com/donaldtuskEPP/status/1519293166968619015
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 23,620

    There is nothing wrong with the parliamentary conventions. We just need to get back to choosing Prime Ministers of integrity.

    If parliamentary conventions don't prevent us from ending up with a PM who lacks integrity, they need to be updated
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 72,062
    edited April 27
    dixiedean said:

    DJ Tim Westwood steps down from his show until further notice

    Why has this broken now.
    There have been rumours about Westwood for YEARS.

    Strange to think that his father was a Bishop.
    The one thing which surprised me about this story, was that he's 64!
    Only 14 years younger than @Big_G_NorthWales.
    He was really peak when I was a student, and I always thought it was very weird that a white guy who was already in his 40s and a clearly fake accent was the down wit da kidz DJ of urban music. It is why his replacement Charlie Sloth lies about his age, because he is similarly far too old to be cool.
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 2,801

    DavidL said:

    I happened to be driving when PMQs was on today. Blimey, it was tedious. SKS is so dull. No doubt his repeat at the end of every question sounded powerful in his bedroom mirror this morning but there was no bite in it whatsoever.
    Boris just blusters away repeating the same half relevant statistics time and again without addressing the question. Blackford is utterly tedious and sanctimonious. Ed Davies didn't even bother to turn up which was a good call by him.

    Would this be any better if they were also calling each other liars? Probably not. It is undignifed and pointless already.

    Listening to PMQs today made you want to sack the lot and start again with decent honest and sensible politicians

    It is so depressing
    The problem is what capable person would want to be a politician these days with the restrictions and spotlight on your life for little reward
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 8,012
    dixiedean said:

    DJ Tim Westwood steps down from his show until further notice

    Why has this broken now.
    There have been rumours about Westwood for YEARS.

    Strange to think that his father was a Bishop.
    The one thing which surprised me about this story, was that he's 64!
    Only 14 years younger than @Big_G_NorthWales.

    DJ Tim Westwood steps down from his show until further notice

    Why has this broken now.
    There have been rumours about Westwood for YEARS.

    Strange to think that his father was a Bishop.
    I'd never heard of him. Was that a major knowledge gap on my part?
  • ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379

    Selebian said:

    I don't support MPs calling each other liars.

    I would however have Full Fact-like investigation team to whom statements can be referred and if they find untruths then they can apply a range of sanctions, including the person being referred to as "the dishonourable member" or, if a privy councillor, "the wrong dishonourable member" for a period of time matching the judged severity of the offence.

    Like it. Send it up to VAR.

    Accusation clearly proven = Ban for liar
    Accusation unclear, untrue, or even likely true but not clearcut = Ban for accuser
    Other than the obvious difficulty of finding "fact checkers" who can actually be neutral, the bar of proving that someone lied is incredibly high, because it relies on knowing their state of mind. Even if someone should have known that what they were saying is false, how do you prove that they did know what they should have known? (e.g. Blair - WMD - 45 minutes)
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 30,748

    Hey @turbotubbs nice to see you again.

    Just back from a run, perfect running temperature in SW London today

    Not running much atm; some new shoes hurt my bad ankle during our trip to London. Blooming annoying, and must be the first time in ~10 years I've had trouble with it. :(

    Trying to walk/run through the discomfort (that sometimes works), but not much luck so far...
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 14,513

    Hey @turbotubbs nice to see you again.

    Just back from a run, perfect running temperature in SW London today

    One thing I do like about New York is the bright and vigorous arrival of spring.

    Central Park is an absolute riot of colour right now.
  • ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379
    Endillion said:

    There is nothing wrong with the parliamentary conventions. We just need to get back to choosing Prime Ministers of integrity.

    I'm 39 and I can only think of 1-2 PMs of integrity that were chosen in my lifetime (Thatcher I'd include but she was already in office, plus Cameron).

    People should be free to say what they want in the Commons, and accuse others of whatever they want, and if the voters aren't happy the voters should be able to vote how they want.

    "Lying" is an irregular verb, or a bit like the old saying about terrorism, one person's lie is another's spin etc
    Cameron!! The Cameron who promised to trigger Article 50 the next day if Leave won the Brexit vote?
    This is an attack that gets brought out against various people from time to time (Corbyn is the other usual target) and it's pretty misguided: Cameron was just promising to respect the result and kick off the process, but in fact he (as the rest of us) simply had no idea how the process would really work if it came down to it. If the EU's process hadn't been such a colossal mess that required a nine month lead-in, Cameron probably would have been able to just trigger Article 50 right away.
    Whatever the process was, step one shouldn't have been storming off in a huff.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 14,513
    edited April 27

    @donaldtuskEPP
    I’ve heard that not only Hungary but also Austria and Germany are ready to pay for the Russian gas in rubles. Are they still in eurozone or in rublezone?


    https://twitter.com/donaldtuskEPP/status/1519293166968619015

    And this is Tusk.
    He’s right. Germany have a fucking nerve.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,146
    edited April 27

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:



    Uprating by 8% instead of 4% increases the compound rate in future years,

    No it doesn't. You return to whatever the price index (not the increase in the index) is next year.
    How does that make sense, the welfare budget is £100bn, you're uprating by 4% so it increases to £104bn, next year you uprate by 5% so it becomes £109.2bn, alternatively you uprate by 8% this year so it increases to £108bn, next year you uprate by 5% as before so it becomes £113.4bn, using 8%, even as a one off, will have a huge lasting effect on the benefits bill.

    It's not cost free and it's not a one off and you still have no way to pay for it other than begging the bond markets for money.
    You don't uprate it by 5% next year. All you are doing is paying some of next year's increase early, so the uprate next year is less (in your example, you increase the total bill next year by £1.2bn).
    Richard that's horrifically naive of you. Inflation at 5% in September "Nasty Tories uprate benefits by just 1% attacking the poorest".

    All that happens is you create a new baseline at the higher rate, it's like tax, once they're introduced it's extremely difficult to get rid of them. That Osborne managed to get rid of the damaging 50% rate was a minor miracle, if only he'd also dumped the completely counter productive £100-125k allowance withdrawal band.

    There's simply no way that the government could uprate benefits by just 1% with inflation at over 5%, even if there was a bringing forwards of the next rise. Honestly, I'm surprised you've fallen for Johnstone's idea, he's been an incredibly disappointing IFS head and he'd be the first person calling the following 1% rise unfair.
  • JACK_WJACK_W Posts: 584

    @donaldtuskEPP
    I’ve heard that not only Hungary but also Austria and Germany are ready to pay for the Russian gas in rubles. Are they still in eurozone or in rublezone?


    https://twitter.com/donaldtuskEPP/status/1519293166968619015

    Pay into the "rublezone" for the Ukraine rubblezone
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 14,615
    Applicant said:

    Selebian said:

    I don't support MPs calling each other liars.

    I would however have Full Fact-like investigation team to whom statements can be referred and if they find untruths then they can apply a range of sanctions, including the person being referred to as "the dishonourable member" or, if a privy councillor, "the wrong dishonourable member" for a period of time matching the judged severity of the offence.

    Like it. Send it up to VAR.

    Accusation clearly proven = Ban for liar
    Accusation unclear, untrue, or even likely true but not clearcut = Ban for accuser
    Other than the obvious difficulty of finding "fact checkers" who can actually be neutral, the bar of proving that someone lied is incredibly high, because it relies on knowing their state of mind. Even if someone should have known that what they were saying is false, how do you prove that they did know what they should have known? (e.g. Blair - WMD - 45 minutes)
    In that instance it would be a ban for the accuser imo. Generally it would be that way around, so accusations would still be very rare. But allowed when they are really, really necessary.

  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 72,062
    edited April 27
    Sandpit said:

    No, Parliamentary language rules exist for good reason.

    Members refering to each other as honourable people from the place that elected them, and refraining from direct accusations of dishourable behaviour, may seem arcane but make for a much higher quality of debate.

    Without such rules, Parliament would be like some of the worst days on Twitter, where everyone is a liar, and anything they do is purely for base political motives.

    Don't forget everybody you don't agree with is a Nazi....Elon Musk, now a billionaire evil fascist dictator, who is totally unsuitable to own the town square (or something like that).
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 1,707

    DJ Tim Westwood steps down from his show until further notice

    Why has this broken now.
    There have been rumours about Westwood for YEARS.

    Strange to think that his father was a Bishop.
    Why? The church(es) have been no stranger to sexual misdeeds.
    True.

    But I like to assume that sons and daughters of the manse are brought up with a more solid sense of right and wrong.

    Gordon Brown and Theresa May both had/have a sense of duty and morality, whatever you think of their politics (not much in my case).
    Always challenge assumptions! That Theresa May was a right tearaway. The number of fields of wheat that she destroyed in her youth...
    1 (One).
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 3,839
    edited April 27

    dixiedean said:

    DJ Tim Westwood steps down from his show until further notice

    Why has this broken now.
    There have been rumours about Westwood for YEARS.

    Strange to think that his father was a Bishop.
    The one thing which surprised me about this story, was that he's 64!
    Only 14 years younger than @Big_G_NorthWales.
    I'd never heard of him. Was that a major knowledge gap on my part?
    When I was at uni, there were halls of residence named after him (or so the - likely apocryphal - story went). I guess they will have to renamed now... :cry:
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 1,883
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:



    Uprating by 8% instead of 4% increases the compound rate in future years,

    No it doesn't. You return to whatever the price index (not the increase in the index) is next year.
    How does that make sense, the welfare budget is £100bn, you're uprating by 4% so it increases to £104bn, next year you uprate by 5% so it becomes £109.2bn, alternatively you uprate by 8% this year so it increases to £108bn, next year you uprate by 5% as before so it becomes £113.4bn, using 8%, even as a one off, will have a huge lasting effect on the benefits bill.

    It's not cost free and it's not a one off and you still have no way to pay for it other than begging the bond markets for money.
    You don't uprate it by 5% next year. All you are doing is paying some of next year's increase early, so the uprate next year is less (in your example, you increase the total bill next year by £1.2bn).
    Richard that's horrifically naive of you. Inflation at 5% in September "Nasty Tories uprate benefits by just 1% attacking the poorest".

    All that happens is you create a new baseline at the higher rate, it's like tax, once they're introduced it's extremely difficult to get rid of them. That Osborne managed to get rid of the damaging 50% rate was a minor miracle, if only he'd also dumped the completely counter productive £100-125k tax free withdrawal band.

    There's simply no way that the government could uprate benefits by just 1% with inflation at over 5%, even if there was a bringing forwards of the next rise. Honestly, I'm surprised you've fallen for Johnstone's idea, he's been an incredibly disappointing IFS head and he'd be the first person calling the following 1% rise unfair.
    Richard is right on the detail.

    Max is possibly right on the politics.

    The problem is that benefits are uprated on out-of-date CPI stats, so when we get a massive surge in inflation the rates take 12 months to catch up.

    2022-23 rates - based on the 12 months to September 2021
    2023-24 rates - based on the 12 months to September 2022

    I think the rates should use the most recent 12 months. Or perhaps be adjusted every 6 or 3 months. It's really unfair to ask claimants to wait for a whole year for their benefits to catch up with inflation.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 40,206

    DJ Tim Westwood steps down from his show until further notice

    Why has this broken now.
    There have been rumours about Westwood for YEARS.

    Strange to think that his father was a Bishop.
    He’s no longer working for the BBC now, that’s why it has just come out.

    BBC DJs, like MPs, are assumed to be honourable people.
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 1,707
    edited April 27
    Selebian said:

    I don't support MPs calling each other liars.

    I would however have Full Fact-like investigation team to whom statements can be referred and if they find untruths then they can apply a range of sanctions, including the person being referred to as "the dishonourable member" or, if a privy councillor, "the wrong dishonourable member" for a period of time matching the judged severity of the offence.

    It would be very interesting if a team from the ONS was required to evaluate facts/stats in statements from the house, to verify their accuracy and whether sufficient (and relevant) context was given for their application, with speakers required to offer corrections in writing (or in person if sufficiently inaccurate).

    They service should also be offered to any member in advance of making a statement such that they could avoid the embarrassment of misstatements completely.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 1,883
    edited April 27
    Eabhal said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:



    Uprating by 8% instead of 4% increases the compound rate in future years,

    No it doesn't. You return to whatever the price index (not the increase in the index) is next year.
    How does that make sense, the welfare budget is £100bn, you're uprating by 4% so it increases to £104bn, next year you uprate by 5% so it becomes £109.2bn, alternatively you uprate by 8% this year so it increases to £108bn, next year you uprate by 5% as before so it becomes £113.4bn, using 8%, even as a one off, will have a huge lasting effect on the benefits bill.

    It's not cost free and it's not a one off and you still have no way to pay for it other than begging the bond markets for money.
    You don't uprate it by 5% next year. All you are doing is paying some of next year's increase early, so the uprate next year is less (in your example, you increase the total bill next year by £1.2bn).
    Richard that's horrifically naive of you. Inflation at 5% in September "Nasty Tories uprate benefits by just 1% attacking the poorest".

    All that happens is you create a new baseline at the higher rate, it's like tax, once they're introduced it's extremely difficult to get rid of them. That Osborne managed to get rid of the damaging 50% rate was a minor miracle, if only he'd also dumped the completely counter productive £100-125k tax free withdrawal band.

    There's simply no way that the government could uprate benefits by just 1% with inflation at over 5%, even if there was a bringing forwards of the next rise. Honestly, I'm surprised you've fallen for Johnstone's idea, he's been an incredibly disappointing IFS head and he'd be the first person calling the following 1% rise unfair.
    Richard is right on the detail.

    Max is possibly right on the politics.

    The problem is that benefits are uprated on out-of-date CPI stats, so when we get a massive surge in inflation the rates take 12 months to catch up.

    2022-23 rates - based on the 12 months to September 2021
    2023-24 rates - based on the 12 months to September 2022

    I think the rates should use the most recent 12 months. Or perhaps be adjusted every 6 or 3 months. It's really unfair to ask claimants to wait for a whole year for their benefits to catch up with inflation.
    As I suggested on the last thread, I reckon the Treasury will freeze them again anyway. Stealth cut.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 40,206
    mwadams said:

    Selebian said:

    I don't support MPs calling each other liars.

    I would however have Full Fact-like investigation team to whom statements can be referred and if they find untruths then they can apply a range of sanctions, including the person being referred to as "the dishonourable member" or, if a privy councillor, "the wrong dishonourable member" for a period of time matching the judged severity of the offence.

    It would be very interesting if a team from the ONS was required to evaluate facts/stats in statements from the house, to verify their accuracy and whether sufficient (and relevant) context was given for their application, with speakers required to offer corrections in writing (or in person if sufficiently inaccurate).

    They service should also be offered to any member in advance of making a statement such that they could avoid the embarrassment of misstatements in advance.
    To be fair to them, the ONS team do read Hansard, and are quick to point out when the political spin crosses the line into misleading error. There’s a few ministers in recent years that have been called back to the House to restate their figures.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 52,814
    dixiedean said:

    DJ Tim Westwood steps down from his show until further notice

    Why has this broken now.
    There have been rumours about Westwood for YEARS.

    Strange to think that his father was a Bishop.
    The one thing which surprised me about this story, was that he's 64!
    Only 14 years younger than @Big_G_NorthWales.
    Why connect me to this DJ ?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,146
    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:



    Uprating by 8% instead of 4% increases the compound rate in future years,

    No it doesn't. You return to whatever the price index (not the increase in the index) is next year.
    How does that make sense, the welfare budget is £100bn, you're uprating by 4% so it increases to £104bn, next year you uprate by 5% so it becomes £109.2bn, alternatively you uprate by 8% this year so it increases to £108bn, next year you uprate by 5% as before so it becomes £113.4bn, using 8%, even as a one off, will have a huge lasting effect on the benefits bill.

    It's not cost free and it's not a one off and you still have no way to pay for it other than begging the bond markets for money.
    You don't uprate it by 5% next year. All you are doing is paying some of next year's increase early, so the uprate next year is less (in your example, you increase the total bill next year by £1.2bn).
    Richard that's horrifically naive of you. Inflation at 5% in September "Nasty Tories uprate benefits by just 1% attacking the poorest".

    All that happens is you create a new baseline at the higher rate, it's like tax, once they're introduced it's extremely difficult to get rid of them. That Osborne managed to get rid of the damaging 50% rate was a minor miracle, if only he'd also dumped the completely counter productive £100-125k tax free withdrawal band.

    There's simply no way that the government could uprate benefits by just 1% with inflation at over 5%, even if there was a bringing forwards of the next rise. Honestly, I'm surprised you've fallen for Johnstone's idea, he's been an incredibly disappointing IFS head and he'd be the first person calling the following 1% rise unfair.
    Richard is right on the detail.

    Max is possibly right on the politics.

    The problem is that benefits are uprated on out-of-date CPI stats, so when we get a massive surge in inflation the rates take 12 months to catch up.

    2022-23 rates - based on the 12 months to September 2021
    2023-24 rates - based on the 12 months to September 2022

    I think the rates should use the most recent 12 months. Or perhaps be adjusted every 6 or 3 months. It's really unfair to ask claimants to wait for a whole year for their benefits to catch up with inflation.
    As I suggested on the last thread, I reckon the Treasury will freeze them again anyway. Stealth cut.
    As they should, along with the state pension. The deficit is alarming and there's no way out. We've got a ~4.4% structural deficit and we're borrowing money to pay for our debt servicing costs. The UK is quickly running out of road and we need to balance the budget in the very near future or have market discipline enforced on us because the cost of borrowing new money will become untenable and with inflation running hot the BoE can't simply make the pain go away with monetary easing.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 72,062
    edited April 27
    Sandpit said:

    DJ Tim Westwood steps down from his show until further notice

    Why has this broken now.
    There have been rumours about Westwood for YEARS.

    Strange to think that his father was a Bishop.
    He’s no longer working for the BBC now, that’s why it has just come out.

    BBC DJs, like MPs, are assumed to be honourable people.
    I am surprised after Jimmy Savile and Me Too, that a eye wasn't turned towards him. I went to one of his student gigs back in the day and they were combination of cringe of a guy far too old (even at the time) and massively sexist / exploitative. Even if the specific claims about him aren't true (and it was well known that he was very interested in young black girls for groupie type behaviour), the sort of gigs he ran were definitely cancellable in todays world.

    But of course the BBC won't have known anything about this, never heard a peep, during his 20 years when he worked there.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 3,839
    Applicant said:

    Selebian said:

    I don't support MPs calling each other liars.

    I would however have Full Fact-like investigation team to whom statements can be referred and if they find untruths then they can apply a range of sanctions, including the person being referred to as "the dishonourable member" or, if a privy councillor, "the wrong dishonourable member" for a period of time matching the judged severity of the offence.

    Like it. Send it up to VAR.

    Accusation clearly proven = Ban for liar
    Accusation unclear, untrue, or even likely true but not clearcut = Ban for accuser
    Other than the obvious difficulty of finding "fact checkers" who can actually be neutral, the bar of proving that someone lied is incredibly high, because it relies on knowing their state of mind. Even if someone should have known that what they were saying is false, how do you prove that they did know what they should have known? (e.g. Blair - WMD - 45 minutes)
    In my (not serious) proposal, simply being wrong would get you the label for a period of time, much easier to prove :smile: Banning outright liars is already possible, is it not? Just very hard to prove as the intent is not often crystal clear.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 14,615
    Proper good news addiction story.....

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-61241436
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 40,206
    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:



    Uprating by 8% instead of 4% increases the compound rate in future years,

    No it doesn't. You return to whatever the price index (not the increase in the index) is next year.
    How does that make sense, the welfare budget is £100bn, you're uprating by 4% so it increases to £104bn, next year you uprate by 5% so it becomes £109.2bn, alternatively you uprate by 8% this year so it increases to £108bn, next year you uprate by 5% as before so it becomes £113.4bn, using 8%, even as a one off, will have a huge lasting effect on the benefits bill.

    It's not cost free and it's not a one off and you still have no way to pay for it other than begging the bond markets for money.
    You don't uprate it by 5% next year. All you are doing is paying some of next year's increase early, so the uprate next year is less (in your example, you increase the total bill next year by £1.2bn).
    Richard that's horrifically naive of you. Inflation at 5% in September "Nasty Tories uprate benefits by just 1% attacking the poorest".

    All that happens is you create a new baseline at the higher rate, it's like tax, once they're introduced it's extremely difficult to get rid of them. That Osborne managed to get rid of the damaging 50% rate was a minor miracle, if only he'd also dumped the completely counter productive £100-125k tax free withdrawal band.

    There's simply no way that the government could uprate benefits by just 1% with inflation at over 5%, even if there was a bringing forwards of the next rise. Honestly, I'm surprised you've fallen for Johnstone's idea, he's been an incredibly disappointing IFS head and he'd be the first person calling the following 1% rise unfair.
    Richard is right on the detail.

    Max is possibly right on the politics.

    The problem is that benefits are uprated on out-of-date CPI stats, so when we get a massive surge in inflation the rates take 12 months to catch up.

    2022-23 rates - based on the 12 months to September 2021
    2023-24 rates - based on the 12 months to September 2022

    I think the rates should use the most recent 12 months. Or perhaps be adjusted every 6 or 3 months. It's really unfair to ask claimants to wait for a whole year for their benefits to catch up with inflation.
    As I suggested on the last thread, I reckon the Treasury will freeze them again anyway. Stealth cut.
    There’s definitely no chance of the 40% tax bracket rising by anything close to either inflation or earnings. That’s a massive fiscal drag for the Chancellor, alongside the £100k shenanigans and the 45% additional rate.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,146

    DJ Tim Westwood steps down from his show until further notice

    Why has this broken now.
    There have been rumours about Westwood for YEARS.

    Strange to think that his father was a Bishop.
    Yeah, when he did a couple of DJ nights at the SU in Cardiff there were complaints made by first years, the SU decided not to ask him back afterwards and apparently he got really uppity with them. He also hit on one of my friends and she told him to get fucked as he was "an old c***" but I'm pretty sure he tried it on with all the female students that night.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 22,721

    dixiedean said:

    DJ Tim Westwood steps down from his show until further notice

    Why has this broken now.
    There have been rumours about Westwood for YEARS.

    Strange to think that his father was a Bishop.
    The one thing which surprised me about this story, was that he's 64!
    Only 14 years younger than @Big_G_NorthWales.
    Why connect me to this DJ ?
    No offence intended. Sorry if taken.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 18,315
    FPT

    Andy_JS said:

    Scott_xP said:

    EXCLUSIVE: Labour has built up a 27-point lead over the Tories in London ahead of the town hall elections on May 5, a new poll reveals on Wednesday. https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/london-elections-may-2022-labour-lead-conservatives-poll-b996500.html https://twitter.com/nicholascecil/status/1519208249622507521/photo/1

    That's a 5% swing since 2018 I think.
    A 6% swing. I don't think Labour will do quite that well. Realistically I think they should be looking to achieve a 4% swing. Something like Lab 48% Con 25%.

    I can't see the Tories getting less than 25%.
    Also I can see Labour losing a lot of votes to the Greens in many of their safe councils, so they may end up with closer to 45% on the day.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 72,062
    edited April 27
    MaxPB said:

    DJ Tim Westwood steps down from his show until further notice

    Why has this broken now.
    There have been rumours about Westwood for YEARS.

    Strange to think that his father was a Bishop.
    Yeah, when he did a couple of DJ nights at the SU in Cardiff there were complaints made by first years, the SU decided not to ask him back afterwards and apparently he got really uppity with them. He also hit on one of my friends and she told him to get fucked as he was "an old c***" but I'm pretty sure he tried it on with all the female students that night.
    I think you were probably at uni around the same time as me, where Loaded / Nuts / Lads Mag culture was much more prevalent, but even by those standards I remember him over the line and this was from the guy who was at the time one of biggest stars on BBC radio (not some nobody) that you presumed would want to project a cleanish image.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 18,315
    Sandpit said:

    No, Parliamentary language rules exist for good reason.

    Members refering to each other as honourable people from the place that elected them, and refraining from direct accusations of dishourable behaviour, may seem arcane but make for a much higher quality of debate.

    Without such rules, Parliament would be like some of the worst days on Twitter, where everyone is a liar, and anything they do is purely for base political motives.

    I agree. There's a lot of wisdom in these rules, no matter how old-fashioned they may seem at first.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 6,398

    Carnyx said:

    Roger said:

    The person who runs this account claims to be an ex-spook who’s now an ‘ethical leaker’. Certainly very anti the current government. Also claims to have contacts in No. 10.

    How true all that is, I don’t know. But I have my doubts.

    But, if this turns out to be accurate, maybe I’ll have to accept they are who they say they are:


    The idea that Raab, or indeed anyone, would deliberately watch pornography in the Commons chamber simply doesn't pass the sniff test. Why would anyone do that?

    What might have happened is someone texted/WhatsApped something NSFW and they opened the message before realising what it was.
    Maybe he was the Mail on Sunday's mole? He fantasised that the star in his movie was Angela Rayner!

    I wonder if one of the other MPs filmed the errant male member (whomsoever that might have been)?
    You may wish to rephrase 'errant male member'.

    Anyway, I have it on good authority that the MP in question wasn't actually watching porn, but was watching a scene from a film called Basic Instinct so that he felt better informed about a story in the MoS.
    Why instantly presume it’s a man?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 24,113

    Carnyx said:

    Roger said:

    The person who runs this account claims to be an ex-spook who’s now an ‘ethical leaker’. Certainly very anti the current government. Also claims to have contacts in No. 10.

    How true all that is, I don’t know. But I have my doubts.

    But, if this turns out to be accurate, maybe I’ll have to accept they are who they say they are:


    The idea that Raab, or indeed anyone, would deliberately watch pornography in the Commons chamber simply doesn't pass the sniff test. Why would anyone do that?

    What might have happened is someone texted/WhatsApped something NSFW and they opened the message before realising what it was.
    Maybe he was the Mail on Sunday's mole? He fantasised that the star in his movie was Angela Rayner!

    I wonder if one of the other MPs filmed the errant male member (whomsoever that might have been)?
    You may wish to rephrase 'errant male member'.

    Anyway, I have it on good authority that the MP in question wasn't actually watching porn, but was watching a scene from a film called Basic Instinct so that he felt better informed about a story in the MoS.
    Why instantly presume it’s a man?
    I wondered about that too but checked earlier and that is the way it is being reported.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,146
    edited April 27
    I remember in 2008/9 Mervyn King was quoted as saying that the next government who wins would have to impose such huge and eyewatering cuts to spending that they'd be out of power for a generation (which happily turned out to be wrong). I think it what applies to the next government coming in. Weak governor, inflation running wild, sterling tanking, deficit at 6.5% of GDP, economy stalling, COVID rally running out of steam, growth engine suffocated with a huge tax burden and borrowing power quickly running out.

    I wouldn't be shocked if we get a few ratings downgrades in the next year or two, our gilt prices already trade below our current average rating.

    I'm normally pretty bullish on the UK economy but the last few weeks have been a chastening experience, all of the warning signs are flashing and both Bailey and Rishi are sitting around twiddling their thumbs talking about £50 off an MOT.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 2,637
    Off Topic: Mail on Sunday editor refusing to meet with Speaker.

    I thought anyone told to come to the bar of the House of Commons was effectively subpoened, and to refuse was tantamount to contempt of Court?
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 1,707
    Sandpit said:

    mwadams said:

    Selebian said:

    I don't support MPs calling each other liars.

    I would however have Full Fact-like investigation team to whom statements can be referred and if they find untruths then they can apply a range of sanctions, including the person being referred to as "the dishonourable member" or, if a privy councillor, "the wrong dishonourable member" for a period of time matching the judged severity of the offence.

    It would be very interesting if a team from the ONS was required to evaluate facts/stats in statements from the house, to verify their accuracy and whether sufficient (and relevant) context was given for their application, with speakers required to offer corrections in writing (or in person if sufficiently inaccurate).

    They service should also be offered to any member in advance of making a statement such that they could avoid the embarrassment of misstatements in advance.
    To be fair to them, the ONS team do read Hansard, and are quick to point out when the political spin crosses the line into misleading error. There’s a few ministers in recent years that have been called back to the House to restate their figures.
    I was thinking of a "red tractor" scheme. 'The ONS says these figures support this interpretation (amongst others)'
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 6,259
    The gas contract states paying in Euros or Dollars I thought? The German people won't tolerate that surely? It would be bordering on national humiliation.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 72,062
    edited April 27
    MaxPB said:

    I remember in 2008/9 Mervyn King was quoted as saying that the next government who wins would have to impose such huge and eyewatering cuts to spending that they'd be out of power for a generation (which happily turned out to be wrong). I think it what applies to the next government coming in. Weak governor, inflation running wild, sterling tanking, deficit at 6.5% of GDP, economy stalling, COVID rally running out of steam, growth engine suffocated with a huge tax burden and borrowing power quickly running out.

    I wouldn't be shocked if we get a few ratings downgrades in the next year or two, our gilt prices already trade below our current average rating.

    You think Team Starmer will impose huge cuts.....brave prediction.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 40,206
    edited April 27

    DavidL said:

    I happened to be driving when PMQs was on today. Blimey, it was tedious. SKS is so dull. No doubt his repeat at the end of every question sounded powerful in his bedroom mirror this morning but there was no bite in it whatsoever.
    Boris just blusters away repeating the same half relevant statistics time and again without addressing the question. Blackford is utterly tedious and sanctimonious. Ed Davies didn't even bother to turn up which was a good call by him.

    Would this be any better if they were also calling each other liars? Probably not. It is undignifed and pointless already.

    Listening to PMQs today made you want to sack the lot and start again with decent honest and sensible politicians

    It is so depressing
    The problem is what capable person would want to be a politician these days with the restrictions and spotlight on your life for little reward
    That’s already a big problem in the age of social media, and likely to become even more so in the future.

    We already saw a couple of weeks ago, that the personal finances of an MP’s spouse are now fair game for the front pages. That story alone, likely put off dozens of decent people from standing for political office.

    People aged 30 now, have been on social media and carrying digital cameras everywhere since they were 17, probably behaving like teenagers did. Their friends from years back will all have photos and videos of all sorts of things that are now considered problematic.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 18,315
    "Labour 'could struggle to make gains' at local elections despite Boris's Partygate woes as experts say Starmer faces tough task to beat 2018 performance

    Keir Starmer is warned Labour will struggle to make gains at the local elections
    Most of the council seats being fought for next week were last contested in 2018
    The results 4 years ago were a high water mark of Labour’s recent performance
    Election gurus suggest Sir Keir will do well to avoid an 'underwhelming' result"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10759629/Labour-struggle-make-gains-local-elections-despite-Boris-Johnsons-Partygate-woes.html
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 14,513
    MaxPB said:

    I remember in 2008/9 Mervyn King was quoted as saying that the next government who wins would have to impose such huge and eyewatering cuts to spending that they'd be out of power for a generation (which happily turned out to be wrong). I think it what applies to the next government coming in. Weak governor, inflation running wild, sterling tanking, deficit at 6.5% of GDP, economy stalling, COVID rally running out of steam, growth engine suffocated with a huge tax burden and borrowing power quickly running out.

    I wouldn't be shocked if we get a few ratings downgrades in the next year or two, our gilt prices already trade below our current average rating.

    Thankfully we are still two years away from the next election, so the current government has the chance to fully own this shitshow - as they should.

    I’m truth there is little they can do, but they could start by *not* focusing the pain on a) the least well-off; b) the productive economy.
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 1,707

    Off Topic: Mail on Sunday editor refusing to meet with Speaker.

    I thought anyone told to come to the bar of the House of Commons was effectively subpoened, and to refuse was tantamount to contempt of Court?

    I think this was a more informal invitation and he's got on his journalistic independence high horse to bluster his way out of the gutter.
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 1,707
    Andy_JS said:

    "Labour 'could struggle to make gains' at local elections despite Boris's Partygate woes as experts say Starmer faces tough task to beat 2018 performance

    Keir Starmer is warned Labour will struggle to make gains at the local elections
    Most of the council seats being fought for next week were last contested in 2018
    The results 4 years ago were a high water mark of Labour’s recent performance
    Election gurus suggest Sir Keir will do well to avoid an 'underwhelming' result"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10759629/Labour-struggle-make-gains-local-elections-despite-Boris-Johnsons-Partygate-woes.html

    The pendulum of expectations management swings back.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 14,513
    edited April 27
    @MaxPB, as you say you are “normally bullish” but FFS the evidence was there about Johnson, Rishi and even the BoE governor quite early on.

    (In the same way, we can already tell that the next government - ie Labour - won’t do anything much).
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 52,814
    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    DJ Tim Westwood steps down from his show until further notice

    Why has this broken now.
    There have been rumours about Westwood for YEARS.

    Strange to think that his father was a Bishop.
    The one thing which surprised me about this story, was that he's 64!
    Only 14 years younger than @Big_G_NorthWales.
    Why connect me to this DJ ?
    No offence intended. Sorry if taken.
    Thanks but the accusations against him are appalling and everything I stand against

    I pride myself that I have always treated women with respect, and not least those who worked for me during the 40 years I ran my business and even today are personal friends

    I am disgusted with the behaviour of some mps and it seems, according to todays report, it is cross party with 3 cabinet ministers and 2 shadow cabinet ministers under investigation

    What is wrong with these people ?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,146

    MaxPB said:

    I remember in 2008/9 Mervyn King was quoted as saying that the next government who wins would have to impose such huge and eyewatering cuts to spending that they'd be out of power for a generation (which happily turned out to be wrong). I think it what applies to the next government coming in. Weak governor, inflation running wild, sterling tanking, deficit at 6.5% of GDP, economy stalling, COVID rally running out of steam, growth engine suffocated with a huge tax burden and borrowing power quickly running out.

    I wouldn't be shocked if we get a few ratings downgrades in the next year or two, our gilt prices already trade below our current average rating.

    You think Team Starmer will impose huge cuts.....brave prediction.
    I don't think he'll have a choice. There will be market enforced discipline, bond buyers will go on strike and suddenly yields will rise to over 5% on medium dated debt and over 4% on shorter term paper. The state simply can't afford to rollover it's existing debt stock at those rates as well as take on £100bn in new borrowing per year. He's simply got no choice, neither will the Tories. Dave and George presented a credible plan to bring the deficit under control, had reasonable headwinds and won the trust of the markets to enforce discipline on spending so the money kept flowing.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 72,062
    edited April 27
    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    I happened to be driving when PMQs was on today. Blimey, it was tedious. SKS is so dull. No doubt his repeat at the end of every question sounded powerful in his bedroom mirror this morning but there was no bite in it whatsoever.
    Boris just blusters away repeating the same half relevant statistics time and again without addressing the question. Blackford is utterly tedious and sanctimonious. Ed Davies didn't even bother to turn up which was a good call by him.

    Would this be any better if they were also calling each other liars? Probably not. It is undignifed and pointless already.

    Listening to PMQs today made you want to sack the lot and start again with decent honest and sensible politicians

    It is so depressing
    The problem is what capable person would want to be a politician these days with the restrictions and spotlight on your life for little reward
    That’s already a big problem in the age of social media, and likely to become even more so in the future.

    We already saw a couple of weeks ago, that the personal finances of an MP’s spouse are now fair game for the front pages. That story alone, likely put off dozens of decent people from standing for political office.

    People aged 30 now, have been on social media and carrying digital cameras everywhere since they were 17, probably behaving like teenagers did. Their friends from years back will all have photos and videos of all sorts of things that are now considered problematic.
    Combine this with improvements in AI for deep fakes etc, where things can be tweaked.
  • ChelyabinskChelyabinsk Posts: 437
    edited April 27
    MPs are able to accuse each other of lying. They're just expected to treat it as a serious issue, and not a debating tactic.

    Accusations of deliberate falsehood, if seriously alleged, would be a matter of privilege and could be made only on a substantive motion secured by writing privately to the Speaker to obtain permission to raise a matter of privilege. Any such accusation made in the course of other proceedings would be disorderly and must be withdrawn.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,146

    MaxPB said:

    I remember in 2008/9 Mervyn King was quoted as saying that the next government who wins would have to impose such huge and eyewatering cuts to spending that they'd be out of power for a generation (which happily turned out to be wrong). I think it what applies to the next government coming in. Weak governor, inflation running wild, sterling tanking, deficit at 6.5% of GDP, economy stalling, COVID rally running out of steam, growth engine suffocated with a huge tax burden and borrowing power quickly running out.

    I wouldn't be shocked if we get a few ratings downgrades in the next year or two, our gilt prices already trade below our current average rating.

    Thankfully we are still two years away from the next election, so the current government has the chance to fully own this shitshow - as they should.

    I’m truth there is little they can do, but they could start by *not* focusing the pain on a) the least well-off; b) the productive economy.
    Even if they own the shitshow, it's Labour that owns the cuts. Boris will make sure of it and that is going to create a huge long term problem for them. It honestly might be a good one to lose and in general I don't believe that's true. I can't see a credible path from £155bn borrowed this year to the budget being in balance within 5 years without truly eyewatering cuts, especially as debt interest will continue to grow as a proportion of spending.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 52,814

    Off Topic: Mail on Sunday editor refusing to meet with Speaker.

    I thought anyone told to come to the bar of the House of Commons was effectively subpoened, and to refuse was tantamount to contempt of Court?

    He was invited by the speaker for a chat and since when do we tell journalists, any journalists, to come to the bar of the HOC
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 2,637
    Andy_JS said:

    "Labour 'could struggle to make gains' at local elections despite Boris's Partygate woes as experts say Starmer faces tough task to beat 2018 performance

    Keir Starmer is warned Labour will struggle to make gains at the local elections
    Most of the council seats being fought for next week were last contested in 2018
    The results 4 years ago were a high water mark of Labour’s recent performance
    Election gurus suggest Sir Keir will do well to avoid an 'underwhelming' result"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10759629/Labour-struggle-make-gains-local-elections-despite-Boris-Johnsons-Partygate-woes.html

    I have to agree here. I've looked at the numbers for the councils involved, and there are a shedload of labour councillors already. There may be one or two tipping points throughout the country though. I suspect the Libdems and Greens between them will gain more seats then labour actually, especially in the rural areas of the south. I will vote labour in our area for 2 reasons, 1) There's no libdem standing, and 2) The labour man has the best potential to defeat the tory.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 14,513
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    I remember in 2008/9 Mervyn King was quoted as saying that the next government who wins would have to impose such huge and eyewatering cuts to spending that they'd be out of power for a generation (which happily turned out to be wrong). I think it what applies to the next government coming in. Weak governor, inflation running wild, sterling tanking, deficit at 6.5% of GDP, economy stalling, COVID rally running out of steam, growth engine suffocated with a huge tax burden and borrowing power quickly running out.

    I wouldn't be shocked if we get a few ratings downgrades in the next year or two, our gilt prices already trade below our current average rating.

    You think Team Starmer will impose huge cuts.....brave prediction.
    I don't think he'll have a choice. There will be market enforced discipline, bond buyers will go on strike and suddenly yields will rise to over 5% on medium dated debt and over 4% on shorter term paper. The state simply can't afford to rollover it's existing debt stock at those rates as well as take on £100bn in new borrowing per year. He's simply got no choice, neither will the Tories. Dave and George presented a credible plan to bring the deficit under control, had reasonable headwinds and won the trust of the markets to enforce discipline on spending so the money kept flowing.
    I disagree about a bond buyer strike.

    The problem is the lack of a coherent plan from Johnson/Rishi. As you say, Osborne put forward something credible and the market went for it.

    The next government needs a credible plan.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 14,513

    Off Topic: Mail on Sunday editor refusing to meet with Speaker.

    I thought anyone told to come to the bar of the House of Commons was effectively subpoened, and to refuse was tantamount to contempt of Court?

    He was invited by the speaker for a chat and since when do we tell journalists, any journalists, to come to the bar of the HOC
    The Speaker is being daft.

    I feel like this is misplaced dick-waving, since he’s failed to address Johnson’s serial deceits.

    The Mail on Sunday editor is beneath contempt.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,146

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    I remember in 2008/9 Mervyn King was quoted as saying that the next government who wins would have to impose such huge and eyewatering cuts to spending that they'd be out of power for a generation (which happily turned out to be wrong). I think it what applies to the next government coming in. Weak governor, inflation running wild, sterling tanking, deficit at 6.5% of GDP, economy stalling, COVID rally running out of steam, growth engine suffocated with a huge tax burden and borrowing power quickly running out.

    I wouldn't be shocked if we get a few ratings downgrades in the next year or two, our gilt prices already trade below our current average rating.

    You think Team Starmer will impose huge cuts.....brave prediction.
    I don't think he'll have a choice. There will be market enforced discipline, bond buyers will go on strike and suddenly yields will rise to over 5% on medium dated debt and over 4% on shorter term paper. The state simply can't afford to rollover it's existing debt stock at those rates as well as take on £100bn in new borrowing per year. He's simply got no choice, neither will the Tories. Dave and George presented a credible plan to bring the deficit under control, had reasonable headwinds and won the trust of the markets to enforce discipline on spending so the money kept flowing.
    I disagree about a bond buyer strike.

    The problem is the lack of a coherent plan from Johnson/Rishi. As you say, Osborne put forward something credible and the market went for it.

    The next government needs a credible plan.
    There is already something of a strike compared to expected demand at our credit rating, I expect it to get worse and if Labour are in power it could get really, really bad.

    One of the reasons I think Rishi is keeping quiet is that he's realised if he turns on the spending taps the big bond funds will go on strike as they see no credible plan that the UK will enforce fiscal discipline.
  • MISTYMISTY Posts: 1,163
    MaxPB said:

    I remember in 2008/9 Mervyn King was quoted as saying that the next government who wins would have to impose such huge and eyewatering cuts to spending that they'd be out of power for a generation (which happily turned out to be wrong). I think it what applies to the next government coming in. Weak governor, inflation running wild, sterling tanking, deficit at 6.5% of GDP, economy stalling, COVID rally running out of steam, growth engine suffocated with a huge tax burden and borrowing power quickly running out.

    I wouldn't be shocked if we get a few ratings downgrades in the next year or two, our gilt prices already trade below our current average rating.

    I'm normally pretty bullish on the UK economy but the last few weeks have been a chastening experience, all of the warning signs are flashing and both Bailey and Rishi are sitting around twiddling their thumbs talking about £50 off an MOT.

    I am amazed you are surprised. How could lockdown, furlough and almost endless money printing have resulted in anything else? The situation we have now is the inevitable outcome of these policies.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 9,077
    edited April 27
    Anabobazina said:
    » show previous quotes
    "The idea that Raab, or indeed anyone, would deliberately watch pornography in the Commons chamber simply doesn't pass the sniff test. Why would anyone do that?

    What might have happened is someone texted/WhatsApped something NSFW and they opened the message before realising what it was.

    Why would anyone deliberately watch pornography on the job?"

    SSI - Based on many documented cases, would appear it's because they are horny as horny-toads? AND think they can get away with it, because when they got caught was NOT the first time they'd done it, more like the umptenth.

    Here is just one recent example:
    https://metro.co.uk/2022/04/20/texas-teacher-watching-porn-on-laptop-shown-on-projector-gets-fired-16497426/

    And from Jolly Old Blighty:
    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/three-british-judges-fired-watching-porn-work-legal-officials-n324996
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 2,637

    Off Topic: Mail on Sunday editor refusing to meet with Speaker.

    I thought anyone told to come to the bar of the House of Commons was effectively subpoened, and to refuse was tantamount to contempt of Court?

    He was invited by the speaker for a chat and since when do we tell journalists, any journalists, to come to the bar of the HOC
    The Speaker is being daft.

    I feel like this is misplaced dick-waving, since he’s failed to address Johnson’s serial deceits.

    The Mail on Sunday editor is beneath contempt.
    https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/parliamentwork/offices-and-ceremonies/collections/serjeant-at-arms/hansard-entry-relating-to-the-arrest-of-john-junor/
  • Carnyx said:

    Roger said:

    The person who runs this account claims to be an ex-spook who’s now an ‘ethical leaker’. Certainly very anti the current government. Also claims to have contacts in No. 10.

    How true all that is, I don’t know. But I have my doubts.

    But, if this turns out to be accurate, maybe I’ll have to accept they are who they say they are:


    The idea that Raab, or indeed anyone, would deliberately watch pornography in the Commons chamber simply doesn't pass the sniff test. Why would anyone do that?

    What might have happened is someone texted/WhatsApped something NSFW and they opened the message before realising what it was.
    Maybe he was the Mail on Sunday's mole? He fantasised that the star in his movie was Angela Rayner!

    I wonder if one of the other MPs filmed the errant male member (whomsoever that might have been)?
    You may wish to rephrase 'errant male member'.

    Anyway, I have it on good authority that the MP in question wasn't actually watching porn, but was watching a scene from a film called Basic Instinct so that he felt better informed about a story in the MoS.
    Why instantly presume it’s a man?
    Because the allegation as reported in the newspapers is that it was a complaint from a female MP about a male MP.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 2,637

    Off Topic: Mail on Sunday editor refusing to meet with Speaker.

    I thought anyone told to come to the bar of the House of Commons was effectively subpoened, and to refuse was tantamount to contempt of Court?

    He was invited by the speaker for a chat and since when do we tell journalists, any journalists, to come to the bar of the HOC
    https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/parliamentwork/offices-and-ceremonies/collections/serjeant-at-arms/hansard-entry-relating-to-the-arrest-of-john-junor/
  • MISTYMISTY Posts: 1,163
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    I remember in 2008/9 Mervyn King was quoted as saying that the next government who wins would have to impose such huge and eyewatering cuts to spending that they'd be out of power for a generation (which happily turned out to be wrong). I think it what applies to the next government coming in. Weak governor, inflation running wild, sterling tanking, deficit at 6.5% of GDP, economy stalling, COVID rally running out of steam, growth engine suffocated with a huge tax burden and borrowing power quickly running out.

    I wouldn't be shocked if we get a few ratings downgrades in the next year or two, our gilt prices already trade below our current average rating.

    You think Team Starmer will impose huge cuts.....brave prediction.
    I don't think he'll have a choice. There will be market enforced discipline, bond buyers will go on strike and suddenly yields will rise to over 5% on medium dated debt and over 4% on shorter term paper. The state simply can't afford to rollover it's existing debt stock at those rates as well as take on £100bn in new borrowing per year. He's simply got no choice, neither will the Tories. Dave and George presented a credible plan to bring the deficit under control, had reasonable headwinds and won the trust of the markets to enforce discipline on spending so the money kept flowing.
    I disagree about a bond buyer strike.

    The problem is the lack of a coherent plan from Johnson/Rishi. As you say, Osborne put forward something credible and the market went for it.

    The next government needs a credible plan.
    There is already something of a strike compared to expected demand at our credit rating, I expect it to get worse and if Labour are in power it could get really, really bad.

    One of the reasons I think Rishi is keeping quiet is that he's realised if he turns on the spending taps the big bond funds will go on strike as they see no credible plan that the UK will enforce fiscal discipline.
    Given the policies imposed in the last two years, including the arbitrary restrictions on the freedoms of perfectly healthy people, this outcome was almost inevitable, surely.

    Why are you surprised?
This discussion has been closed.