Howdy, Stranger!

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

Betting opens on Rutherglen & Hamilton even though there’s no vacancy – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,138
edited April 2023 in General
Betting opens on Rutherglen & Hamilton even though there’s no vacancy – politicalbetting.com

A possible by-election in the offing? The seat of Rutherglen and Hamilton was an SNP gain from LAB at GE2019. My money would be on Labour winning it back https://t.co/Sgjssb6Gyf

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,429
    First like Labour....
  • WestieWestie Posts: 426

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sean_F said:

    Leon said:

    Emerald said:

    The great Humza Yousaf

    After having an affair Yousef blamed his wife for not being a good enough Muslim. When there was no place at a nursery for his daughter, he arranged a sting operation that attempted to prove that the nursery was racist. "What sort of person does this?"

    https://twitter.com/HousewifePolish/status/1641034656165289987?s=20

    He might actually be worse than Truss
    Agent Yousaf will be great for the pro-Union cause.
    But not so great for a Scotland already groaning from years of mismanagement, procrastination and gimmicks instead of solutions.
    Having lived most of my life in England it is no different down there. Different mismanagement and gimmicks. Our problem isn't that the SNP have won the last 4 elections. Our problem is much wider than that.

    Labour will win the General Election having rightly identified what is wrong with the country and rightly pinned the blame on the Tories. But they won't be able to fix any of those issues because they are structural and modern politics only allows for gimmicks. Same with whomever eventually replaces the SNP in Holyrood.
    Is it being so cheerful that keeps you going?

    I actually agree. Modern governments have remarkably small windows for action and otherwise get dragged along by international bureaucracies and unaccountable administrations. They therefore shout loud about the few things that they can actually change trying to make themselves sound relevant and significant.
    I think that's nonsense, though.

    At various times in the last two decades it would have been possible to make decisions much earlier on (for example) nuclear; tidal energy; HS2; house building; etc, which would likely have continued well beyond the lifetime of any particular government.

    Instead, procrastination and gimmicks.
    Here is the problem - weaponised ignorance. Historically most voters don't know how stuff works. They trust that the government knows and vote for a choice of programme - whichever your political choice you knew that all of them had the interests of the country at heart.

    In the 1970s we had the battle of shit. Communist unions trying to destroy the system, mendaciously incompetent industrial leaders trying to destroy their own companies. Now we had a battle of systems going on, where each side no longer trusted the other side to have the interests of the country at heart. After a few periods of relative truce we are back there, worse than ever.

    We can't make any decisions that last longer than the current parliament because the other lot are traitors / crooks who can't be trusted. So we end up with crayon solutions and "keep changing it" infrastructure projects which largely don't get built or end up hugely over budget due to meddling.

    Unless we reach a national consensus about our future direction, this is the best we can hope for. Voters who are as clueless as ever about how stuff works who have had their ignorance weaponised by the elite. You can't expect voters to make choices on things like migration because their understanding of the subject is both small and corrupted. Or on windfall taxes. Or on a host of other things - Yousless has fixed the Scottish transport mess by abolishing the cabinet post.

    We're only one step away from wrapping their ignorance and our decline up into "aren't we the greatest country on earth" propaganda. And then we truly are lost, like the US.
    Those infrastructure projects are always all right for advisers and financiers in the City. Funny that.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,385
    edited March 2023
    The 2015 SNP cohort has some really roasters in them.

    That’s what 2/3 ended up in jail/criminal records.

    At least one is a pervert.

    Some fecked off to other parties.

    There’s some that make Richard Burgon look like Einstein.
  • The SNP might hold the seat if Boris Johnson receives a lenient sentence compared to Ferrier.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,226

    The 2015 SNP cohort has some really roasters in them.

    That’s what 2/3 ended up in jail/criminal records.

    At least one is a pervert.

    Some fecked off to other parties.

    There’s some that make Richard Burgon look like Einstein.

    Hang on a minute - that's going waaaaaay too far!
  • FishingFishing Posts: 4,984
    The real excitement in this race is surely whether the Conservative share is recorded as 0% or not. I wonder if there is a market for them getting less than 0.49% of the vote?
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860
    Give it a short while and I suspect the value will be in the SNP.
  • ydoethur said:

    The 2015 SNP cohort has some really roasters in them.

    That’s what 2/3 ended up in jail/criminal records.

    At least one is a pervert.

    Some fecked off to other parties.

    There’s some that make Richard Burgon look like Einstein.

    Hang on a minute - that's going waaaaaay too far!
    I’ve heard some Nats talk about how the Bank of England will do whatever an independent Scotland tells it today.

    Then you’ve got the thickos about the currency.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,226
    edited March 2023

    ydoethur said:

    The 2015 SNP cohort has some really roasters in them.

    That’s what 2/3 ended up in jail/criminal records.

    At least one is a pervert.

    Some fecked off to other parties.

    There’s some that make Richard Burgon look like Einstein.

    Hang on a minute - that's going waaaaaay too far!
    I’ve heard some Nats talk about how the Bank of England will do whatever an independent Scotland tells it today.

    Then you’ve got the thickos about the currency.
    I don't think that's stupidity, just dishonesty.

    Edit - besides, even if it *is* stupidity, that doesn't elevate Burgon to Einstein level. Dawkins, possibly.

    But the only way Burgon would look like Einstein is if his hairdresser had had a few.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,424

    The 2015 SNP cohort has some really roasters in them.

    That’s what 2/3 ended up in jail/criminal records.

    At least one is a pervert.

    Some fecked off to other parties.

    There’s some that make Richard Burgon look like Einstein.

    None of them quite as bad as your MP from 2017 though. Step forward one Jared O’Mara, perhaps the worst MP in living memory.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,429
    edited March 2023
    The Central Bank of Russia reported a record loss of 722 billion roubles.

    Although, that might just be Putin empying a few of his accounts.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,424

    The Central Bank of #Russia reported a record loss of 722 billion rubles.

    Although, that might just be Putin empying a few of his accounts.

    That’s only about $10,000 at the unofficial exchange rate.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,226

    The SNP might hold the seat if Boris Johnson receives a lenient sentence compared to Ferrier.

    If Johnson isn't kicked out, Ferrier might hold the seat...
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,256

    ydoethur said:

    The 2015 SNP cohort has some really roasters in them.

    That’s what 2/3 ended up in jail/criminal records.

    At least one is a pervert.

    Some fecked off to other parties.

    There’s some that make Richard Burgon look like Einstein.

    Hang on a minute - that's going waaaaaay too far!
    I’ve heard some Nats talk about how the Bank of England will do whatever an independent Scotland tells it today.

    Then you’ve got the thickos about the currency.
    You must mix with some real crackers
  • Sandpit said:

    The 2015 SNP cohort has some really roasters in them.

    That’s what 2/3 ended up in jail/criminal records.

    At least one is a pervert.

    Some fecked off to other parties.

    There’s some that make Richard Burgon look like Einstein.

    None of them quite as bad as your MP from 2017 though. Step forward one Jared O’Mara, perhaps the worst MP in living memory.
    To be fair he was off his tits on cocaine most of the time.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,852

    The 2015 SNP cohort has some really roasters in them.

    That’s what 2/3 ended up in jail/criminal records.

    At least one is a pervert.

    Some fecked off to other parties.

    There’s some that make Richard Burgon look like Einstein.

    2/3 of the 2015 SNP cohort ended up in jail/with criminal records? That seems rather a lot.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,666
    edited March 2023
    Westie said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sean_F said:

    Leon said:

    Emerald said:

    The great Humza Yousaf

    After having an affair Yousef blamed his wife for not being a good enough Muslim. When there was no place at a nursery for his daughter, he arranged a sting operation that attempted to prove that the nursery was racist. "What sort of person does this?"

    https://twitter.com/HousewifePolish/status/1641034656165289987?s=20

    He might actually be worse than Truss
    Agent Yousaf will be great for the pro-Union cause.
    But not so great for a Scotland already groaning from years of mismanagement, procrastination and gimmicks instead of solutions.
    Having lived most of my life in England it is no different down there. Different mismanagement and gimmicks. Our problem isn't that the SNP have won the last 4 elections. Our problem is much wider than that.

    Labour will win the General Election having rightly identified what is wrong with the country and rightly pinned the blame on the Tories. But they won't be able to fix any of those issues because they are structural and modern politics only allows for gimmicks. Same with whomever eventually replaces the SNP in Holyrood.
    Is it being so cheerful that keeps you going?

    I actually agree. Modern governments have remarkably small windows for action and otherwise get dragged along by international bureaucracies and unaccountable administrations. They therefore shout loud about the few things that they can actually change trying to make themselves sound relevant and significant.
    I think that's nonsense, though.

    At various times in the last two decades it would have been possible to make decisions much earlier on (for example) nuclear; tidal energy; HS2; house building; etc, which would likely have continued well beyond the lifetime of any particular government.

    Instead, procrastination and gimmicks.
    Here is the problem - weaponised ignorance. Historically most voters don't know how stuff works. They trust that the government knows and vote for a choice of programme - whichever your political choice you knew that all of them had the interests of the country at heart.

    In the 1970s we had the battle of shit. Communist unions trying to destroy the system, mendaciously incompetent industrial leaders trying to destroy their own companies. Now we had a battle of systems going on, where each side no longer trusted the other side to have the interests of the country at heart. After a few periods of relative truce we are back there, worse than ever.

    We can't make any decisions that last longer than the current parliament because the other lot are traitors / crooks who can't be trusted. So we end up with crayon solutions and "keep changing it" infrastructure projects which largely don't get built or end up hugely over budget due to meddling.

    Unless we reach a national consensus about our future direction, this is the best we can hope for. Voters who are as clueless as ever about how stuff works who have had their ignorance weaponised by the elite. You can't expect voters to make choices on things like migration because their understanding of the subject is both small and corrupted. Or on windfall taxes. Or on a host of other things - Yousless has fixed the Scottish transport mess by abolishing the cabinet post.

    We're only one step away from wrapping their ignorance and our decline up into "aren't we the greatest country on earth" propaganda. And then we truly are lost, like the US.
    Those infrastructure projects are always all right for advisers and financiers in the City. Funny that.
    I'm not sure I agree. On HS2, the level of agreement between politicians and political parties seems relatively high - certainly higher than that among the public at large, or even between government departments.

    I've watched some of the select committee hearings on HS2. So far, the level of engagement with issues seems fairly high, and the level of political point scoring seems low.

    That's not to say my faith that it will get built is high. There is a strong chance that the mood of the treasury will prevail and the whole thing be deemed too expensive. But I don't necessarily lay the blame for that with our political model.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,424

    Sandpit said:

    The 2015 SNP cohort has some really roasters in them.

    That’s what 2/3 ended up in jail/criminal records.

    At least one is a pervert.

    Some fecked off to other parties.

    There’s some that make Richard Burgon look like Einstein.

    None of them quite as bad as your MP from 2017 though. Step forward one Jared O’Mara, perhaps the worst MP in living memory.
    To be fair he was off his tits on cocaine most of the time.
    Didn’t Hansard show him as present only a handful of times, in more than two years?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,852
    edited March 2023
    Ghedebrav said:

    Give it a short while and I suspect the value will be in the SNP.

    I think SLab are the favourites at the moment but I wouldn’t be betting anything till I see the first post Humza Scottish poll.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,429

    The SNP might hold the seat if Boris Johnson receives a lenient sentence compared to Ferrier.

    Good reason then for the non-Tory majority on that Committee to vote him 30 days too...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,429

    Sandpit said:

    The 2015 SNP cohort has some really roasters in them.

    That’s what 2/3 ended up in jail/criminal records.

    At least one is a pervert.

    Some fecked off to other parties.

    There’s some that make Richard Burgon look like Einstein.

    None of them quite as bad as your MP from 2017 though. Step forward one Jared O’Mara, perhaps the worst MP in living memory.
    To be fair he was off his tits on cocaine most of the time.
    You think he's the only MP that was?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,385
    edited March 2023

    The 2015 SNP cohort has some really roasters in them.

    That’s what 2/3 ended up in jail/criminal records.

    At least one is a pervert.

    Some fecked off to other parties.

    There’s some that make Richard Burgon look like Einstein.

    2/3 of the 2015 SNP cohort ended up in jail/with criminal records? That seems rather a lot.
    I meant 2 or 3.

    Natalie McGarry for embezzlement, Ferrier for Covid-19.

  • RandallFlaggRandallFlagg Posts: 1,285
    I don't think this is a done deal for Labour, but I expect they'll win because of differential turnout. I think a lot of SNP voters won't be bothered to go to the polling station for Useless, whereas Labour voters will be motivated to show the party is on course to make gains in Scotland.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,509
    A couple of relevant thoughts:

    * Recall isn't automatic, as the header (and the Guardian) says - it opens the possibility of a petition getting 10% of local voters demanding a by-election. I'm sure that Labour can do that and it will offer a tasty campaigning opportunity ahead of the by-election, but it'll take some months, I suppose

    * Labour doesn't have a candidate yet, though they are in the process of picking one, so they may want the process to take a few months

    * Ferrier could decide to resign, shortt-circuiting the process, or at the other extreme could decide to fight as an independent

  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,402
    Fishing said:

    The real excitement in this race is surely whether the Conservative share is recorded as 0% or not. I wonder if there is a market for them getting less than 0.49% of the vote?

    How the Tory vote (over 8000 last time) would be interesting, in what would be the most interesting by election since the last one. Quite a bit at stake for Labour and SNP, who may discover that their new leader loses more votes than he gains.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,821

    The 2015 SNP cohort has some really roasters in them.

    That’s what 2/3 ended up in jail/criminal records.

    At least one is a pervert.

    Some fecked off to other parties.

    There’s some that make Richard Burgon look like Einstein.

    2/3 of the 2015 SNP cohort ended up in jail/with criminal records? That seems rather a lot.
    I presume it as meant as 2 or 3.

    Just in terms of who was elected in 2019, we’ve had:

    Margaret Ferrier
    Neale Hanvey: suspended for antisemitism, re-admitted, defected to Alba
    Kenny MacAskill: defected to Alba
    Patrick Grady: suspended for sexual harassment, re-admitted



  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,852

    The 2015 SNP cohort has some really roasters in them.

    That’s what 2/3 ended up in jail/criminal records.

    At least one is a pervert.

    Some fecked off to other parties.

    There’s some that make Richard Burgon look like Einstein.

    2/3 of the 2015 SNP cohort ended up in jail/with criminal records? That seems rather a lot.
    Natalie McGarry for embezzlement, Ferrier for Covid-19.

    Oh, you meant 2-3.
    Bit sloppy when ascribing criminality, particularly for a lawyer. Who’s the third man/woman?
  • RandallFlaggRandallFlagg Posts: 1,285

    Ghedebrav said:

    Give it a short while and I suspect the value will be in the SNP.

    I think SLab are the favourites at the moment but I wouldn’t be betting anything till I see the first post Humza Scottish poll.
    I agree, but I should add that Labour would take Rutherglen and Hamilton West even on the most favourable GE Scotland poll released since Sturgeon's resignation (probably the recent YouGov one which had SLAB on 29%).
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,226

    The 2015 SNP cohort has some really roasters in them.

    That’s what 2/3 ended up in jail/criminal records.

    At least one is a pervert.

    Some fecked off to other parties.

    There’s some that make Richard Burgon look like Einstein.

    2/3 of the 2015 SNP cohort ended up in jail/with criminal records? That seems rather a lot.
    Natalie McGarry for embezzlement, Ferrier for Covid-19.

    Oh, you meant 2-3.
    Bit sloppy when ascribing criminality, particularly for a lawyer. Who’s the third man/woman?
    Orson Welles/Harry Lime.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,821

    A couple of relevant thoughts:

    * Recall isn't automatic, as the header (and the Guardian) says - it opens the possibility of a petition getting 10% of local voters demanding a by-election. I'm sure that Labour can do that and it will offer a tasty campaigning opportunity ahead of the by-election, but it'll take some months, I suppose

    There have been 3 prior petitions. 2 reached the threshold; the third was off by 0.6% of the electorate.

    In the most recent case, Chris Davies was sentenced in late April. The Speaker triggered the recall petition process on 24 April. It opened on 9 May and ran until 20 June. The by-election was 1 August. So, quicker than I thought, but, yes, all takes a few months, and a month is a long time in politics.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 4,904
    ydoethur said:

    The SNP might hold the seat if Boris Johnson receives a lenient sentence compared to Ferrier.

    If Johnson isn't kicked out, Ferrier might hold the seat...
    I don't see how that happens now.

    Although in purely spreading-the-virus terms what Ferrier did is far worse than anything Boris did, he was PM and gets held to a higher standard.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,226
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    The 2015 SNP cohort has some really roasters in them.

    That’s what 2/3 ended up in jail/criminal records.

    At least one is a pervert.

    Some fecked off to other parties.

    There’s some that make Richard Burgon look like Einstein.

    None of them quite as bad as your MP from 2017 though. Step forward one Jared O’Mara, perhaps the worst MP in living memory.
    To be fair he was off his tits on cocaine most of the time.
    Didn’t Hansard show him as present only a handful of times, in more than two years?
    Daniel Gooch was MP for Cricklade from 1865-85. He never once spoke a word. He just used it as, in his words, 'a pleasant club.'

    He added dryly that the country would be better governed if more members were like him!
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,821

    The 2015 SNP cohort has some really roasters in them.

    That’s what 2/3 ended up in jail/criminal records.

    At least one is a pervert.

    Some fecked off to other parties.

    There’s some that make Richard Burgon look like Einstein.

    2/3 of the 2015 SNP cohort ended up in jail/with criminal records? That seems rather a lot.
    Natalie McGarry for embezzlement, Ferrier for Covid-19.

    Oh, you meant 2-3.
    Bit sloppy when ascribing criminality, particularly for a lawyer. Who’s the third man/woman?
    Probably misremembering Michelle Thomson, who was investigated by the police, but the investigation was dropped and there were no charges. She’s now an MSP (endorsed Forbes).
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,424
    I actually know this area, as my Granny was from Rutherglen. A curious mix of housing, from council blocks to some quite nice detached houses within a mile or two. If it were in most of England, it would be a classic Lab/Con marginal seat.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,226
    Driver said:

    ydoethur said:

    The SNP might hold the seat if Boris Johnson receives a lenient sentence compared to Ferrier.

    If Johnson isn't kicked out, Ferrier might hold the seat...
    I don't see how that happens now.

    Although in purely spreading-the-virus terms what Ferrier did is far worse than anything Boris did, he was PM and gets held to a higher standard.
    Just to remind people, this isn't about Covid regulations. If it were, Sunak and Gibb would be out too.

    It's about Johnson lying to Parliament.

    Which should be a very serious matter.
  • PhilPhil Posts: 2,249
    Cookie said:

    Westie said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sean_F said:

    Leon said:

    Emerald said:

    The great Humza Yousaf

    After having an affair Yousef blamed his wife for not being a good enough Muslim. When there was no place at a nursery for his daughter, he arranged a sting operation that attempted to prove that the nursery was racist. "What sort of person does this?"

    https://twitter.com/HousewifePolish/status/1641034656165289987?s=20

    He might actually be worse than Truss
    Agent Yousaf will be great for the pro-Union cause.
    But not so great for a Scotland already groaning from years of mismanagement, procrastination and gimmicks instead of solutions.
    Having lived most of my life in England it is no different down there. Different mismanagement and gimmicks. Our problem isn't that the SNP have won the last 4 elections. Our problem is much wider than that.

    Labour will win the General Election having rightly identified what is wrong with the country and rightly pinned the blame on the Tories. But they won't be able to fix any of those issues because they are structural and modern politics only allows for gimmicks. Same with whomever eventually replaces the SNP in Holyrood.
    Is it being so cheerful that keeps you going?

    I actually agree. Modern governments have remarkably small windows for action and otherwise get dragged along by international bureaucracies and unaccountable administrations. They therefore shout loud about the few things that they can actually change trying to make themselves sound relevant and significant.
    I think that's nonsense, though.

    At various times in the last two decades it would have been possible to make decisions much earlier on (for example) nuclear; tidal energy; HS2; house building; etc, which would likely have continued well beyond the lifetime of any particular government.

    Instead, procrastination and gimmicks.
    Here is the problem - weaponised ignorance. Historically most voters don't know how stuff works. They trust that the government knows and vote for a choice of programme - whichever your political choice you knew that all of them had the interests of the country at heart.

    In the 1970s we had the battle of shit. Communist unions trying to destroy the system, mendaciously incompetent industrial leaders trying to destroy their own companies. Now we had a battle of systems going on, where each side no longer trusted the other side to have the interests of the country at heart. After a few periods of relative truce we are back there, worse than ever.

    We can't make any decisions that last longer than the current parliament because the other lot are traitors / crooks who can't be trusted. So we end up with crayon solutions and "keep changing it" infrastructure projects which largely don't get built or end up hugely over budget due to meddling.

    Unless we reach a national consensus about our future direction, this is the best we can hope for. Voters who are as clueless as ever about how stuff works who have had their ignorance weaponised by the elite. You can't expect voters to make choices on things like migration because their understanding of the subject is both small and corrupted. Or on windfall taxes. Or on a host of other things - Yousless has fixed the Scottish transport mess by abolishing the cabinet post.

    We're only one step away from wrapping their ignorance and our decline up into "aren't we the greatest country on earth" propaganda. And then we truly are lost, like the US.
    Those infrastructure projects are always all right for advisers and financiers in the City. Funny that.
    I'm not sure I agree. On HS2, the level of agreement between politicians and political parties seems relatively high - certainly higher than that among the public at large, or even between government departments.

    I've watched some of the select committee hearings on HS2. So far, the level of engagement with issues seems fairly high, and the level of political point scoring seems low.

    That's not to say my faith that it will get built is high. There is a strong chance that the mood of the treasury will prevail and the whole thing be deemed too expensive. But I don't necessarily lay the blame for that with our political model.
    The great irony being, inevitably, that it’s mostly the Treasury’s fault that HS2 is so expensive in the first place. They create the very problem they complain about & then use that expense as a reason to shut down development altogether.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,821
    Driver said:

    ydoethur said:

    The SNP might hold the seat if Boris Johnson receives a lenient sentence compared to Ferrier.

    If Johnson isn't kicked out, Ferrier might hold the seat...
    I don't see how that happens now.

    Although in purely spreading-the-virus terms what Ferrier did is far worse than anything Boris did, he was PM and gets held to a higher standard.
    In terms of what Johnson did, i.e. where he was and what he did in No. 10, you’re probably correct. In terms of all the gatherings that happened in No. 10 under Johnson’s leadership, the drinking culture and the multiple parties, possibly not.

    In terms of the political decisions Johnson took, e.g. being slow to call the second lockdown, definitely not!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,719
    Interesting, on topic interview.

    https://twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/1641193520433119232
    The former Parliamentary Standards Commissioner who ruled against both Boris Johnson and Owen Paterson, says she was warned by a "doughty Conservative woman MP" that "you need to watch yourself. The knives are out for you. You just watch your back."
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,666

    Driver said:

    ydoethur said:

    The SNP might hold the seat if Boris Johnson receives a lenient sentence compared to Ferrier.

    If Johnson isn't kicked out, Ferrier might hold the seat...
    I don't see how that happens now.

    Although in purely spreading-the-virus terms what Ferrier did is far worse than anything Boris did, he was PM and gets held to a higher standard.
    In terms of what Johnson did, i.e. where he was and what he did in No. 10, you’re probably correct. In terms of all the gatherings that happened in No. 10 under Johnson’s leadership, the drinking culture and the multiple parties, possibly not.

    In terms of the political decisions Johnson took, e.g. being slow to call the second lockdown, definitely not!
    Long term, second lockdown will cause far more deaths than it saved.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,719
    The disastrous state of public trust in the UK press. Here is the latest World Values Study from King's College London. 3,056 UK people were asked how much confidence they have in the press. How did their responses compare with other countries?
    https://twitter.com/BrianCathcart/status/1641389285046730752
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,821
    Cookie said:

    Driver said:

    ydoethur said:

    The SNP might hold the seat if Boris Johnson receives a lenient sentence compared to Ferrier.

    If Johnson isn't kicked out, Ferrier might hold the seat...
    I don't see how that happens now.

    Although in purely spreading-the-virus terms what Ferrier did is far worse than anything Boris did, he was PM and gets held to a higher standard.
    In terms of what Johnson did, i.e. where he was and what he did in No. 10, you’re probably correct. In terms of all the gatherings that happened in No. 10 under Johnson’s leadership, the drinking culture and the multiple parties, possibly not.

    In terms of the political decisions Johnson took, e.g. being slow to call the second lockdown, definitely not!
    Long term, second lockdown will cause far more deaths than it saved.
    Would you like to provide some evidence, or indeed a rationale, for that statement?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,267
    Driver said:

    ydoethur said:

    The SNP might hold the seat if Boris Johnson receives a lenient sentence compared to Ferrier.

    If Johnson isn't kicked out, Ferrier might hold the seat...
    I don't see how that happens now.

    Although in purely spreading-the-virus terms what Ferrier did is far worse than anything Boris did, he was PM and gets held to a higher standard.
    As I have said earlier, Johnson is not being scrutinised for his Covid breaches. If he is sanctioned it will be for wilfully misleading Parliament which is a very serious offence. His defence however is compelling. Johnson claims to be such an absolute and utter monstrous moron, which is why, although he misled Parliament it was accidental, and no sanction should be applied. Two questions resolve the issue; "did you deliberately lie to Parliament?" Answer "no". Second question; " in that case are you a 24 carat gold cretin?" Answer "yes". Not guilty M'Lud.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,512
    Nigelb said:

    The disastrous state of public trust in the UK press. Here is the latest World Values Study from King's College London. 3,056 UK people were asked how much confidence they have in the press. How did their responses compare with other countries?
    https://twitter.com/BrianCathcart/status/1641389285046730752

    Perhaps our press are worse, or maybe we just see through them. Probably a combination.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,719
    Nigelb said:

    The disastrous state of public trust in the UK press. Here is the latest World Values Study from King's College London. 3,056 UK people were asked how much confidence they have in the press. How did their responses compare with other countries?
    https://twitter.com/BrianCathcart/status/1641389285046730752

    That's from this larger survey.
    The UK is close to the bottom among democracies for public trust in institutions - with large declines in recent years.

    Trust in trouble? UK and international confidence in institutions
    https://www.kcl.ac.uk/policy-institute/assets/confidence-in-institutions.pdf
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,226
    edited March 2023

    Driver said:

    ydoethur said:

    The SNP might hold the seat if Boris Johnson receives a lenient sentence compared to Ferrier.

    If Johnson isn't kicked out, Ferrier might hold the seat...
    I don't see how that happens now.

    Although in purely spreading-the-virus terms what Ferrier did is far worse than anything Boris did, he was PM and gets held to a higher standard.
    As I have said earlier, Johnson is not being scrutinised for his Covid breaches. If he is sanctioned it will be for wilfully misleading Parliament which is a very serious offence. His defence however is compelling. Johnson claims to be such an absolute and utter monstrous moron, which is why, although he misled Parliament it was accidental, and no sanction should be applied. Two questions resolve the issue; "did you deliberately lie to Parliament?" Answer "no". Second question; " in that case are you a 24 carat gold cretin?" Answer "yes". Not guilty M'Lud.
    The irony is, that might be a plausible defence. After all, he's clearly not the sharpest and does seem to have a habit of speaking without thinking.

    But, given he has lied so often before...and indeed, was sacked just a few weeks later for lying to his cabinet...
  • eekeek Posts: 28,136
    ydoethur said:

    Driver said:

    ydoethur said:

    The SNP might hold the seat if Boris Johnson receives a lenient sentence compared to Ferrier.

    If Johnson isn't kicked out, Ferrier might hold the seat...
    I don't see how that happens now.

    Although in purely spreading-the-virus terms what Ferrier did is far worse than anything Boris did, he was PM and gets held to a higher standard.
    As I have said earlier, Johnson is not being scrutinised for his Covid breaches. If he is sanctioned it will be for wilfully misleading Parliament which is a very serious offence. His defence however is compelling. Johnson claims to be such an absolute and utter monstrous moron, which is why, although he misled Parliament it was accidental, and no sanction should be applied. Two questions resolve the issue; "did you deliberately lie to Parliament?" Answer "no". Second question; " in that case are you a 24 carat gold cretin?" Answer "yes". Not guilty M'Lud.
    The irony is, that might be a plausible defence. After all, he's clearly not the sharpest and does seem to have a habit of speaking without thinking.

    But, given he has lied so often before...
    Are you saying that every Tory MP who supported his candidacy should be regarded as an accomplice and given the same sentence?

    Seems fair
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,267
    ydoethur said:

    Driver said:

    ydoethur said:

    The SNP might hold the seat if Boris Johnson receives a lenient sentence compared to Ferrier.

    If Johnson isn't kicked out, Ferrier might hold the seat...
    I don't see how that happens now.

    Although in purely spreading-the-virus terms what Ferrier did is far worse than anything Boris did, he was PM and gets held to a higher standard.
    As I have said earlier, Johnson is not being scrutinised for his Covid breaches. If he is sanctioned it will be for wilfully misleading Parliament which is a very serious offence. His defence however is compelling. Johnson claims to be such an absolute and utter monstrous moron, which is why, although he misled Parliament it was accidental, and no sanction should be applied. Two questions resolve the issue; "did you deliberately lie to Parliament?" Answer "no". Second question; " in that case are you a 24 carat gold cretin?" Answer "yes". Not guilty M'Lud.
    The irony is, that might be a plausible defence. After all, he's clearly not the sharpest and does seem to have a habit of speaking without thinking.

    But, given he has lied so often before...and indeed, was sacked just a few weeks later for lying to his cabinet...
    Aren't specific cases taken in isolation? Although previous convictions can be taken into account at sentencing. so...
  • The 2015 SNP cohort has some really roasters in them.

    That’s what 2/3 ended up in jail/criminal records.

    At least one is a pervert.

    Some fecked off to other parties.

    There’s some that make Richard Burgon look like Einstein.

    2/3 of the 2015 SNP cohort ended up in jail/with criminal records? That seems rather a lot.
    Natalie McGarry for embezzlement, Ferrier for Covid-19.

    Oh, you meant 2-3.
    Bit sloppy when ascribing criminality, particularly for a lawyer. Who’s the third man/woman?
    Probably misremembering Michelle Thomson, who was investigated by the police, but the investigation was dropped and there were no charges. She’s now an MSP (endorsed Forbes).
    That's the one, I couldn't remember the name.

    I knew she was forced to stand down as an MP.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,719
    carnforth said:

    Nigelb said:

    The disastrous state of public trust in the UK press. Here is the latest World Values Study from King's College London. 3,056 UK people were asked how much confidence they have in the press. How did their responses compare with other countries?
    https://twitter.com/BrianCathcart/status/1641389285046730752

    Perhaps our press are worse, or maybe we just see through them. Probably a combination.
    No, the distrust in institutions is far wider than just the press.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,226

    ydoethur said:

    Driver said:

    ydoethur said:

    The SNP might hold the seat if Boris Johnson receives a lenient sentence compared to Ferrier.

    If Johnson isn't kicked out, Ferrier might hold the seat...
    I don't see how that happens now.

    Although in purely spreading-the-virus terms what Ferrier did is far worse than anything Boris did, he was PM and gets held to a higher standard.
    As I have said earlier, Johnson is not being scrutinised for his Covid breaches. If he is sanctioned it will be for wilfully misleading Parliament which is a very serious offence. His defence however is compelling. Johnson claims to be such an absolute and utter monstrous moron, which is why, although he misled Parliament it was accidental, and no sanction should be applied. Two questions resolve the issue; "did you deliberately lie to Parliament?" Answer "no". Second question; " in that case are you a 24 carat gold cretin?" Answer "yes". Not guilty M'Lud.
    The irony is, that might be a plausible defence. After all, he's clearly not the sharpest and does seem to have a habit of speaking without thinking.

    But, given he has lied so often before...and indeed, was sacked just a few weeks later for lying to his cabinet...
    Aren't specific cases taken in isolation? Although previous convictions can be taken into account at sentencing. so...
    Is this a criminal trial?
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,666
    edited March 2023

    Cookie said:

    Driver said:

    ydoethur said:

    The SNP might hold the seat if Boris Johnson receives a lenient sentence compared to Ferrier.

    If Johnson isn't kicked out, Ferrier might hold the seat...
    I don't see how that happens now.

    Although in purely spreading-the-virus terms what Ferrier did is far worse than anything Boris did, he was PM and gets held to a higher standard.
    In terms of what Johnson did, i.e. where he was and what he did in No. 10, you’re probably correct. In terms of all the gatherings that happened in No. 10 under Johnson’s leadership, the drinking culture and the multiple parties, possibly not.

    In terms of the political decisions Johnson took, e.g. being slow to call the second lockdown, definitely not!
    Long term, second lockdown will cause far more deaths than it saved.
    Would you like to provide some evidence, or indeed a rationale, for that statement?
    Short(ish) answer: Several reasons, but two stand out:
    1) My personal hobbyhorse: the catastrophic effect lockdown has had on children, particularly those who were very young in 2020. The number of children in years 1/2/3 with special educational needs is absolutely off the charts.
    2) The disastrous effect of lockdown on the economy, which will make many individuals poorer and the state considerably poorer. Leaving less money to be spent on health.

    Taken together, the number of life years lost as a result of lockdown will, in my view, considerably outweigh the number of life years which were saved as a result of lockdown. We don't know what this would be. We have models, but we also know from the models given for the Dec 2021 lockdown which didn't happen, and other instances, that the models were vastly, vastly overstated.

    I'm not arguing that nothing should have been done. Lockdown was on a scale, rather than on/off. But my view is that the optimum solution was considerably less lockdown than actually happened.



  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,208
    Nigelb said:

    The disastrous state of public trust in the UK press. Here is the latest World Values Study from King's College London. 3,056 UK people were asked how much confidence they have in the press. How did their responses compare with other countries?
    https://twitter.com/BrianCathcart/status/1641389285046730752

    The key point, beyond the headline that the EU we're no longer a member of is more trusted than our own government, is that same government has absolutely trashed our institutions. We're not in a good place thanks to them.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    FF43 said:

    There seems to be basic unfairness, and maybe sexism too.

    Margaret Ferrier gets a four week sanction for a foolish, but not dishonest, breach of the COVID rules. Boris Johnson who instituted systematic breaches and lied about it continuously including to parliament gets the best lawyer our taxpayer money can buy and so far has resisted any sanction. Another woman, Allegra Stratton, who had a bit part at most, is the only person to have resigned over these breaches.

    I agree Margaret Ferrier has been treated very harshly ... and may end up losing her job.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,719
    FF43 said:

    There seems to be basic unfairness, and maybe sexism too.

    Margaret Ferrier gets a four week sanction for a foolish, but not dishonest, breach of the COVID rules. Boris Johnson who instituted systematic breaches and lied about it continuously including to parliament gets the best lawyer our taxpayer money can buy and so far has resisted any sanction. Another woman, Allegra Stratton, who had a bit part at most, is the only person to have resigned over these breaches.

    Johnson's comments at the time over Stratton, expressing what was a clearly confected "outrage", are where the lying to Parliament started.

  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,821
    Cookie said:

    Cookie said:

    Driver said:

    ydoethur said:

    The SNP might hold the seat if Boris Johnson receives a lenient sentence compared to Ferrier.

    If Johnson isn't kicked out, Ferrier might hold the seat...
    I don't see how that happens now.

    Although in purely spreading-the-virus terms what Ferrier did is far worse than anything Boris did, he was PM and gets held to a higher standard.
    In terms of what Johnson did, i.e. where he was and what he did in No. 10, you’re probably correct. In terms of all the gatherings that happened in No. 10 under Johnson’s leadership, the drinking culture and the multiple parties, possibly not.

    In terms of the political decisions Johnson took, e.g. being slow to call the second lockdown, definitely not!
    Long term, second lockdown will cause far more deaths than it saved.
    Would you like to provide some evidence, or indeed a rationale, for that statement?
    Short(ish) answer: Several reasons, but two stand out:
    1) My personal hobbyhorse: the catastrophic effect lockdown has had on children, particularly those who were very young in 2020. The number of children in years 1/2/3 with special educational needs is absolutely off the charts.
    2) The disastrous effect of lockdown on the economy, which will make many individuals poorer and the state considerably poorer. Leaving less money to be spent on health.

    Taken together, the number of life years lost as a result of lockdown will, in my view, considerably outweigh the number of life years which were saved as a result of lockdown. We don't know what this would be. We have models, but we also know from the models given for the Dec 2021 lockdown which didn't happen, and other instances, that the models were vastly, vastly overstated.

    I'm not arguing that nothing should have been done. Lockdown was on a scale, rather than on/off. But the optimum solution was considerably less lockdown than actually happened.
    Thanks.

    We can quibble over what the negative effects of lockdown are, but I agree a shorter lockdown would obviously have reduced those negative effects.

    Had Johnson called the first and second lockdowns sooner, they would have been more effective at cutting cases and could have been shorter in duration. So, it doesn't matter whether we agree or not on the precise costs of lockdown, we can agree that Johnson being slow to call lockdowns had a negative impact in terms of virus spread, in terms of deaths from COVID-19 and in terms of the various costs associated with lockdown.

  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,267
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Driver said:

    ydoethur said:

    The SNP might hold the seat if Boris Johnson receives a lenient sentence compared to Ferrier.

    If Johnson isn't kicked out, Ferrier might hold the seat...
    I don't see how that happens now.

    Although in purely spreading-the-virus terms what Ferrier did is far worse than anything Boris did, he was PM and gets held to a higher standard.
    As I have said earlier, Johnson is not being scrutinised for his Covid breaches. If he is sanctioned it will be for wilfully misleading Parliament which is a very serious offence. His defence however is compelling. Johnson claims to be such an absolute and utter monstrous moron, which is why, although he misled Parliament it was accidental, and no sanction should be applied. Two questions resolve the issue; "did you deliberately lie to Parliament?" Answer "no". Second question; " in that case are you a 24 carat gold cretin?" Answer "yes". Not guilty M'Lud.
    The irony is, that might be a plausible defence. After all, he's clearly not the sharpest and does seem to have a habit of speaking without thinking.

    But, given he has lied so often before...and indeed, was sacked just a few weeks later for lying to his cabinet...
    Aren't specific cases taken in isolation? Although previous convictions can be taken into account at sentencing. so...
    Is this a criminal trial?
    Yeah, but surely at least in the first instance the rule applies, although you could argue in Johnson's case the investigation is into the alleged multiple occasions he misled Parliament. I hope consecutive, rather than concurrent sentencing is applied.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,429

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Driver said:

    ydoethur said:

    The SNP might hold the seat if Boris Johnson receives a lenient sentence compared to Ferrier.

    If Johnson isn't kicked out, Ferrier might hold the seat...
    I don't see how that happens now.

    Although in purely spreading-the-virus terms what Ferrier did is far worse than anything Boris did, he was PM and gets held to a higher standard.
    As I have said earlier, Johnson is not being scrutinised for his Covid breaches. If he is sanctioned it will be for wilfully misleading Parliament which is a very serious offence. His defence however is compelling. Johnson claims to be such an absolute and utter monstrous moron, which is why, although he misled Parliament it was accidental, and no sanction should be applied. Two questions resolve the issue; "did you deliberately lie to Parliament?" Answer "no". Second question; " in that case are you a 24 carat gold cretin?" Answer "yes". Not guilty M'Lud.
    The irony is, that might be a plausible defence. After all, he's clearly not the sharpest and does seem to have a habit of speaking without thinking.

    But, given he has lied so often before...and indeed, was sacked just a few weeks later for lying to his cabinet...
    Aren't specific cases taken in isolation? Although previous convictions can be taken into account at sentencing. so...
    Is this a criminal trial?
    Yeah, but surely at least in the first instance the rule applies, although you could argue in Johnson's case the investigation is into the alleged multiple occasions he misled Parliament. I hope consecutive, rather than concurrent sentencing is applied.
    If it is 1 day a lie....he'll be in his 90's before he's back!
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,429
    edited March 2023

    FF43 said:

    There seems to be basic unfairness, and maybe sexism too.

    Margaret Ferrier gets a four week sanction for a foolish, but not dishonest, breach of the COVID rules. Boris Johnson who instituted systematic breaches and lied about it continuously including to parliament gets the best lawyer our taxpayer money can buy and so far has resisted any sanction. Another woman, Allegra Stratton, who had a bit part at most, is the only person to have resigned over these breaches.

    I agree Margaret Ferrier has been treated very harshly ... and may end up losing her job.
    If you caught Covid off her on her train journey from Scotland to London and back, you might not think she was treated harshly.

    Especially if you then died of it.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,185
    edited March 2023
    FF43 said:

    There seems to be basic unfairness, and maybe sexism too.

    Margaret Ferrier gets a four week sanction for a foolish, but not dishonest, breach of the COVID rules. Boris Johnson who instituted systematic breaches and lied about it continuously including to parliament gets the best lawyer our taxpayer money can buy and so far has resisted any sanction. Another woman, Allegra Stratton, who had a bit part at most, is the only person to have resigned over these breaches.

    Didn't Ferrier know that she was infected, and therefore was putting other people at risk of infection, while we cannot be sure whether anyone was ever infected while at any of the many parties that happened in Number Ten, and so the risk created was somewhat more theoretical or notional.

    I'd happily see Johnson suspended from Parliament for longer for lying to the place though. Given people normally get slung in jail for lying in Court I'd happily see a Bill of Attainder used to give Johnson some prison time too.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,821
    FF43 said:

    There seems to be basic unfairness, and maybe sexism too.

    Margaret Ferrier gets a four week sanction for a foolish, but not dishonest, breach of the COVID rules. Boris Johnson who instituted systematic breaches and lied about it continuously including to parliament gets the best lawyer our taxpayer money can buy and so far has resisted any sanction. Another woman, Allegra Stratton, who had a bit part at most, is the only person to have resigned over these breaches.

    To be picky, Ferrier hasn't yet received any sanction. That's up to the Commons to vote on.

    Her breach of COVID rules was foolish. It was also deliberate. It was dishonest: she was effectively lying to the people on the train with her. I think Johnson's conduct has been worse, but I don't feel we should be forgiving of Ferrier.

    It is ridiculous that Stratton resigned over Partygate while Johnson still tries to bluster his way out of it. I don't know that it's accurate to say she's the only person to have resigned, however. Shaun Bailey resigned various roles. Ultimately, Johnson did resign as PM/Tory leader, albeit at gunpoint, and that was in part because of Partygate.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,226

    FF43 said:

    There seems to be basic unfairness, and maybe sexism too.

    Margaret Ferrier gets a four week sanction for a foolish, but not dishonest, breach of the COVID rules. Boris Johnson who instituted systematic breaches and lied about it continuously including to parliament gets the best lawyer our taxpayer money can buy and so far has resisted any sanction. Another woman, Allegra Stratton, who had a bit part at most, is the only person to have resigned over these breaches.

    I agree Margaret Ferrier has been treated very harshly ... and may end up losing her job.
    If you caught Covid off her on her train journey from Scotland to London and back, you might not think she was treated harshly.

    Especially if you then died of it.
    If you had died of it, you wouldn't be thinking anything.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,725
    Mr. Password, worth also remembering that nobody can hear you lie when you're hurtling through the cold air above the North Sea having been flung from a trebuchet.

    Further evidence, were it needed, of the excellence of a trebuchet-based justice system.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,821

    FF43 said:

    There seems to be basic unfairness, and maybe sexism too.

    Margaret Ferrier gets a four week sanction for a foolish, but not dishonest, breach of the COVID rules. Boris Johnson who instituted systematic breaches and lied about it continuously including to parliament gets the best lawyer our taxpayer money can buy and so far has resisted any sanction. Another woman, Allegra Stratton, who had a bit part at most, is the only person to have resigned over these breaches.

    I agree Margaret Ferrier has been treated very harshly ... and may end up losing her job.
    Given she's not going to be the SNP candidate at the next general election and has no chance of winning as an independent, even with a by-election, she's already effectively lost her job, albeit with a long notice period.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,429
    I think what will do for Boris is his lack of remorse and his stubborn adherence to the lies.

    He was given a chance by the Committee. Harman specifically gave him that chance before it retired.

    He didn't take it.

    I expect it to cost him his seat.

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,429
    ydoethur said:

    FF43 said:

    There seems to be basic unfairness, and maybe sexism too.

    Margaret Ferrier gets a four week sanction for a foolish, but not dishonest, breach of the COVID rules. Boris Johnson who instituted systematic breaches and lied about it continuously including to parliament gets the best lawyer our taxpayer money can buy and so far has resisted any sanction. Another woman, Allegra Stratton, who had a bit part at most, is the only person to have resigned over these breaches.

    I agree Margaret Ferrier has been treated very harshly ... and may end up losing her job.
    If you caught Covid off her on her train journey from Scotland to London and back, you might not think she was treated harshly.

    Especially if you then died of it.
    If you had died of it, you wouldn't be thinking anything.
    Your malevolent ghost will.

    Banquo in the Scottish play? Piling on guilt is his forte....
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,256

    The 2015 SNP cohort has some really roasters in them.

    That’s what 2/3 ended up in jail/criminal records.

    At least one is a pervert.

    Some fecked off to other parties.

    There’s some that make Richard Burgon look like Einstein.

    2/3 of the 2015 SNP cohort ended up in jail/with criminal records? That seems rather a lot.
    Yes I thought they had more than 1.5
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541

    I think what will do for Boris is his lack of remorse and his stubborn adherence to the lies.

    He was given a chance by the Committee. Harman specifically gave him that chance before it retired.

    He didn't take it.

    I expect it to cost him his seat.

    If he had stood up in Parliament and said something along the lines of "We were exhausted, we're sorry, we had heavy responsibilities, that does not excuse what happened" then he would still be PM IMHO. He certainly wouldn't be in the current bother. It's the cover up that kills you.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,226

    ydoethur said:

    FF43 said:

    There seems to be basic unfairness, and maybe sexism too.

    Margaret Ferrier gets a four week sanction for a foolish, but not dishonest, breach of the COVID rules. Boris Johnson who instituted systematic breaches and lied about it continuously including to parliament gets the best lawyer our taxpayer money can buy and so far has resisted any sanction. Another woman, Allegra Stratton, who had a bit part at most, is the only person to have resigned over these breaches.

    I agree Margaret Ferrier has been treated very harshly ... and may end up losing her job.
    If you caught Covid off her on her train journey from Scotland to London and back, you might not think she was treated harshly.

    Especially if you then died of it.
    If you had died of it, you wouldn't be thinking anything.
    Your malevolent ghost will.

    Banquo in the Scottish play? Piling on guilt is his forte....
    Witch is worse?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,256

    The 2015 SNP cohort has some really roasters in them.

    That’s what 2/3 ended up in jail/criminal records.

    At least one is a pervert.

    Some fecked off to other parties.

    There’s some that make Richard Burgon look like Einstein.

    2/3 of the 2015 SNP cohort ended up in jail/with criminal records? That seems rather a lot.
    Natalie McGarry for embezzlement, Ferrier for Covid-19.

    Oh, you meant 2-3.
    Bit sloppy when ascribing criminality, particularly for a lawyer. Who’s the third man/woman?
    Usual bag of lies on anything Scottish.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,256

    The 2015 SNP cohort has some really roasters in them.

    That’s what 2/3 ended up in jail/criminal records.

    At least one is a pervert.

    Some fecked off to other parties.

    There’s some that make Richard Burgon look like Einstein.

    2/3 of the 2015 SNP cohort ended up in jail/with criminal records? That seems rather a lot.
    I presume it as meant as 2 or 3.

    Just in terms of who was elected in 2019, we’ve had:

    Margaret Ferrier
    Neale Hanvey: suspended for antisemitism, re-admitted, defected to Alba
    Kenny MacAskill: defected to Alba
    Patrick Grady: suspended for sexual harassment, re-admitted



    So one community service for a minor offence, rest nothing criminal. Can you give us comparable English parties records or will that take you a few weeks to compile.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,666

    Cookie said:

    Cookie said:

    Driver said:

    ydoethur said:

    The SNP might hold the seat if Boris Johnson receives a lenient sentence compared to Ferrier.

    If Johnson isn't kicked out, Ferrier might hold the seat...
    I don't see how that happens now.

    Although in purely spreading-the-virus terms what Ferrier did is far worse than anything Boris did, he was PM and gets held to a higher standard.
    In terms of what Johnson did, i.e. where he was and what he did in No. 10, you’re probably correct. In terms of all the gatherings that happened in No. 10 under Johnson’s leadership, the drinking culture and the multiple parties, possibly not.

    In terms of the political decisions Johnson took, e.g. being slow to call the second lockdown, definitely not!
    Long term, second lockdown will cause far more deaths than it saved.
    Would you like to provide some evidence, or indeed a rationale, for that statement?
    Short(ish) answer: Several reasons, but two stand out:
    1) My personal hobbyhorse: the catastrophic effect lockdown has had on children, particularly those who were very young in 2020. The number of children in years 1/2/3 with special educational needs is absolutely off the charts.
    2) The disastrous effect of lockdown on the economy, which will make many individuals poorer and the state considerably poorer. Leaving less money to be spent on health.

    Taken together, the number of life years lost as a result of lockdown will, in my view, considerably outweigh the number of life years which were saved as a result of lockdown. We don't know what this would be. We have models, but we also know from the models given for the Dec 2021 lockdown which didn't happen, and other instances, that the models were vastly, vastly overstated.

    I'm not arguing that nothing should have been done. Lockdown was on a scale, rather than on/off. But the optimum solution was considerably less lockdown than actually happened.
    Thanks.

    We can quibble over what the negative effects of lockdown are, but I agree a shorter lockdown would obviously have reduced those negative effects.

    Had Johnson called the first and second lockdowns sooner, they would have been more effective at cutting cases and could have been shorter in duration. So, it doesn't matter whether we agree or not on the precise costs of lockdown, we can agree that Johnson being slow to call lockdowns had a negative impact in terms of virus spread, in terms of deaths from COVID-19 and in terms of the various costs associated with lockdown.

    Firstly, I've looked back at this exchange, and apologies for sounding a bit pompous - I didn't sound so in my head, but it can be difficult to do 'tone' on the internet!

    I can see the argument that you are making. I think I probably agree that being slow to call lockdown had a negative impact in terms of virus spread - though the relationship between rules imposed by government and spread of the virus was weak at best. What might the counterfactual have been? We might equally have had a shorter, briefer peak; we might have had no difference at all. In terms of deaths from covid? Perhaps, but the relationship here gets weaker still. I'm not convinced that an earlier lockdown could or would have led to a shorter lockdown though. In modelling terms, it would have flattened the curve (if it worked), slowing rather than stopping the spread - so wouldn't have reduced the period covid was around. And I don't think the political will to lift lockdown would have been any greater. From both a mathematical or a human reading of the situation I think we would have ended up with a longer lockdown (and therefore greater costs).

    And again, if all this sounds a bit pompous, I apologise. I'm sceptical about the benefits of most aspects of lockdown (in particular school closures - again, my particular hobbyhorse) - but I don't want to come across as angry man on the internet.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,729

    I think what will do for Boris is his lack of remorse and his stubborn adherence to the lies.

    He was given a chance by the Committee. Harman specifically gave him that chance before it retired.

    He didn't take it.

    I expect it to cost him his seat.

    For Boris Johnson, telling lies and having no remorse are just who he is. Like I have been saying since the dawn of time. Absolutely nothing that he has said or done should be a surprise to anyone. The Purnell biography is available from all good bookshops and it continues to surprise me that people are surprised when he reveals himself to be utterly without scruples, shame or morals. He is just not a normal human being guided and constrained by the same internal rules and boundaries as most of us.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,741
    FF43 said:

    There seems to be basic unfairness, and maybe sexism too.

    Margaret Ferrier gets a four week sanction for a foolish, but not dishonest, breach of the COVID rules. Boris Johnson who instituted systematic breaches and lied about it continuously including to parliament gets the best lawyer our taxpayer money can buy and so far has resisted any sanction. Another woman, Allegra Stratton, who had a bit part at most, is the only person to have resigned over these breaches.

    I said this morning that this seemed a bit harsh. Stupid certainly, irresponsible of course, but enough to trigger a recall? It seems OTT.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 22,824
    edited March 2023

    The 2015 SNP cohort has some really roasters in them.

    That’s what 2/3 ended up in jail/criminal records.

    At least one is a pervert.

    Some fecked off to other parties.

    There’s some that make Richard Burgon look like Einstein.

    2/3 of the 2015 SNP cohort ended up in jail/with criminal records? That seems rather a lot.
    Natalie McGarry for embezzlement, Ferrier for Covid-19.

    Oh, you meant 2-3.
    Bit sloppy when ascribing criminality, particularly for a lawyer. Who’s the third man/woman?
    Probably misremembering Michelle Thomson, who was investigated by the police, but the investigation was dropped and there were no charges. She’s now an MSP (endorsed Forbes).
    That's the one, I couldn't remember the name.

    I knew she was forced to stand down as an MP.
    There was also a police investigation into Patrick Grady, which was also dropped quite swiftly last year.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,741
    malcolmg said:

    The 2015 SNP cohort has some really roasters in them.

    That’s what 2/3 ended up in jail/criminal records.

    At least one is a pervert.

    Some fecked off to other parties.

    There’s some that make Richard Burgon look like Einstein.

    2/3 of the 2015 SNP cohort ended up in jail/with criminal records? That seems rather a lot.
    I presume it as meant as 2 or 3.

    Just in terms of who was elected in 2019, we’ve had:

    Margaret Ferrier
    Neale Hanvey: suspended for antisemitism, re-admitted, defected to Alba
    Kenny MacAskill: defected to Alba
    Patrick Grady: suspended for sexual harassment, re-admitted



    So one community service for a minor offence, rest nothing criminal. Can you give us comparable English parties records or will that take you a few weeks to compile.
    Natalie McGarry got a jail sentence.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,509
    Nigelb said:

    The disastrous state of public trust in the UK press. Here is the latest World Values Study from King's College London. 3,056 UK people were asked how much confidence they have in the press. How did their responses compare with other countries?
    https://twitter.com/BrianCathcart/status/1641389285046730752

    Truly remarkable. And well-deserved, though I'm not sure the (comparatively) ringing vote of confidence given to Russian and Chinese press is quite right either. Do our Japanese-reading contributors know if Japanese papers are that wonderful?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,226
    Another American kidnapped by Russians:

    Russia arrests US journalist Evan Gershkovich on spying charge
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65121885
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    DougSeal said:

    I think what will do for Boris is his lack of remorse and his stubborn adherence to the lies.

    He was given a chance by the Committee. Harman specifically gave him that chance before it retired.

    He didn't take it.

    I expect it to cost him his seat.

    If he had stood up in Parliament and said something along the lines of "We were exhausted, we're sorry, we had heavy responsibilities, that does not excuse what happened" then he would still be PM IMHO. He certainly wouldn't be in the current bother. It's the cover up that kills you.
    How quickly everyone forgets Chris Pincher.

    Johnson somehow rode out the worst of Partygate, at least the first time round. It was Pincher that did for him as PM.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,114
    edited March 2023

    FF43 said:

    There seems to be basic unfairness, and maybe sexism too.

    Margaret Ferrier gets a four week sanction for a foolish, but not dishonest, breach of the COVID rules. Boris Johnson who instituted systematic breaches and lied about it continuously including to parliament gets the best lawyer our taxpayer money can buy and so far has resisted any sanction. Another woman, Allegra Stratton, who had a bit part at most, is the only person to have resigned over these breaches.

    I agree Margaret Ferrier has been treated very harshly ... and may end up losing her job.
    If you caught Covid off her on her train journey from Scotland to London and back, you might not think she was treated harshly.

    Especially if you then died of it.
    One of my biggest bug bears of the entire Covid social madness was people 'blaming' others for catching covid.

    It was always 'in the supermarket' or 'from our careless neighbours'

    Not, as is most likely, from their own families.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,741
    Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh, another ex MP of the 2015 vintage, was also struck off as a solicitor for financial irregularities at her former firm.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,226
    Endillion said:

    DougSeal said:

    I think what will do for Boris is his lack of remorse and his stubborn adherence to the lies.

    He was given a chance by the Committee. Harman specifically gave him that chance before it retired.

    He didn't take it.

    I expect it to cost him his seat.

    If he had stood up in Parliament and said something along the lines of "We were exhausted, we're sorry, we had heavy responsibilities, that does not excuse what happened" then he would still be PM IMHO. He certainly wouldn't be in the current bother. It's the cover up that kills you.
    How quickly everyone forgets Chris Pincher.

    Johnson somehow rode out the worst of Partygate, at least the first time round. It was Pincher that did for him as PM.
    He is an eminently forgettable person.
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,738
    Labour really ought to win handily. Rutherglen is one of the six seats they gained fron SNP in 2017 only to lose in 2019. If they can win it under Corbyn it would be a significant failure if they can't under Starmer. Arguably this is a more important test for SLAB than SNP.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,741

    Labour really ought to win handily. Rutherglen is one of the six seats they gained fron SNP in 2017 only to lose in 2019. If they can win it under Corbyn it would be a significant failure if they can't under Starmer. Arguably this is a more important test for SLAB than SNP.

    I agree. This is a must win for Scottish Labour. The SNP have plenty of excuses if they lose and would be ecstatic if they won.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,660
    Mortimer said:

    FF43 said:

    There seems to be basic unfairness, and maybe sexism too.

    Margaret Ferrier gets a four week sanction for a foolish, but not dishonest, breach of the COVID rules. Boris Johnson who instituted systematic breaches and lied about it continuously including to parliament gets the best lawyer our taxpayer money can buy and so far has resisted any sanction. Another woman, Allegra Stratton, who had a bit part at most, is the only person to have resigned over these breaches.

    I agree Margaret Ferrier has been treated very harshly ... and may end up losing her job.
    If you caught Covid off her on her train journey from Scotland to London and back, you might not think she was treated harshly.

    Especially if you then died of it.
    One of my biggest bug bears of the entire Covid social madness was people 'blaming' others for catching covid.

    It was always 'in the supermarket' or 'from our careless neighbours'

    Not, as is most likely, from their own families.
    Er, how did the families catch it? Not exactly spontaneously generated. And much of the time it would have been obvious (but not always, depending on the number of people in the family, in part.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,821
    malcolmg said:

    The 2015 SNP cohort has some really roasters in them.

    That’s what 2/3 ended up in jail/criminal records.

    At least one is a pervert.

    Some fecked off to other parties.

    There’s some that make Richard Burgon look like Einstein.

    2/3 of the 2015 SNP cohort ended up in jail/with criminal records? That seems rather a lot.
    I presume it as meant as 2 or 3.

    Just in terms of who was elected in 2019, we’ve had:

    Margaret Ferrier
    Neale Hanvey: suspended for antisemitism, re-admitted, defected to Alba
    Kenny MacAskill: defected to Alba
    Patrick Grady: suspended for sexual harassment, re-admitted
    So one community service for a minor offence, rest nothing criminal. Can you give us comparable English parties records or will that take you a few weeks to compile.
    In terms of MPs who got into some sort of trouble, the SNP MPs elected in 2019 have a proportionally high rate of difficulties, although not as high as Plaid Cymru. However, no, there's not a lot of criminality in those elected in 2019 cohort. Theuniondivvie's comments were about the 2015 cohort, I should note. I was just going off on a tangent.

    In terms of criminality among MPs elected to the 2019 Westminster Parliament...

    Imran Ahmad Khan (Con): 18 months
    Claudia Webbe (Lab): 10 weeks, suspended
    Ferrier (SNP): community service

    Jonathan Edwards (PC): accepted a caution
    Tom Tugendhat (Con): banned from driving

    Boris Johnson (Con): accepted a fine
    Rishi Sunak (Con): accepted a fine, accepted another fine
    Penny Mordaunt (Con): speeding ticket
    Mike Hill (Lab): paid compensation to employee following an employment tribunal
    Nadhim Zahawi (Con): tax penalty

    Anyone think of any others?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,314
    Mortimer said:

    FF43 said:

    There seems to be basic unfairness, and maybe sexism too.

    Margaret Ferrier gets a four week sanction for a foolish, but not dishonest, breach of the COVID rules. Boris Johnson who instituted systematic breaches and lied about it continuously including to parliament gets the best lawyer our taxpayer money can buy and so far has resisted any sanction. Another woman, Allegra Stratton, who had a bit part at most, is the only person to have resigned over these breaches.

    I agree Margaret Ferrier has been treated very harshly ... and may end up losing her job.
    If you caught Covid off her on her train journey from Scotland to London and back, you might not think she was treated harshly.

    Especially if you then died of it.
    One of my biggest bug bears of the entire Covid social madness was people 'blaming' others for catching covid.

    It was always 'in the supermarket' or 'from our careless neighbours'

    Not, as is most likely, from their own families.
    Many of my family and friends caught Covid. I haven't heard a single one 'blaming' anyone for catching it. It might be "Oh, he caught it in school," or "I think I might have got it at the hairdressers," which is a very different thing. People seemed to treat it more like something that just happens.

    And in the case of a friend: "One of our kids got it, probably from school, gave it to the other kid, then on to us. We're a sharing family." Which made me laugh.

    It's human to want to think about where you might have got it. That's very different from 'blaming' where you got it from.
  • pingping Posts: 3,805
    edited March 2023
    Mortimer said:

    FF43 said:

    There seems to be basic unfairness, and maybe sexism too.

    Margaret Ferrier gets a four week sanction for a foolish, but not dishonest, breach of the COVID rules. Boris Johnson who instituted systematic breaches and lied about it continuously including to parliament gets the best lawyer our taxpayer money can buy and so far has resisted any sanction. Another woman, Allegra Stratton, who had a bit part at most, is the only person to have resigned over these breaches.

    I agree Margaret Ferrier has been treated very harshly ... and may end up losing her job.
    If you caught Covid off her on her train journey from Scotland to London and back, you might not think she was treated harshly.

    Especially if you then died of it.
    One of my biggest bug bears of the entire Covid social madness was people 'blaming' others for catching covid.

    It was always 'in the supermarket' or 'from our careless neighbours'

    Not, as is most likely, from their own families.
    People need a narrative and are quick to blame. Whenever I heard people make those kind of claims, I’d always reply “its’s possible, but how can you know?” And then make a mental note to be sceptical of every other narrative that that person comes out with.

    I even heard a doctor blame himself for spreading it to his patients.

    Bonkers.

    As an ardent atheist, one of my oddest opinions is that, perhaps, we’ve lost an important thing that religion gave us: the ability to blame god for these unattributable risks.

    It was very psychologically and socially useful.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    DavidL said:

    Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh, another ex MP of the 2015 vintage, was also struck off as a solicitor for financial irregularities at her former firm.

    I thought she was just fined and censured?
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    Endillion said:

    DougSeal said:

    I think what will do for Boris is his lack of remorse and his stubborn adherence to the lies.

    He was given a chance by the Committee. Harman specifically gave him that chance before it retired.

    He didn't take it.

    I expect it to cost him his seat.

    If he had stood up in Parliament and said something along the lines of "We were exhausted, we're sorry, we had heavy responsibilities, that does not excuse what happened" then he would still be PM IMHO. He certainly wouldn't be in the current bother. It's the cover up that kills you.
    How quickly everyone forgets Chris Pincher.

    Johnson somehow rode out the worst of Partygate, at least the first time round. It was Pincher that did for him as PM.
    True. But he would, perhaps, have had more political capital to be able to ride out Pincher without the Partygate baggage.

  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,185
    I think that the arguments about "lockdown" are predicated on a false premise - that lockdown is the only means of controlling virus spread. I think it's important to remember - particularly for the next pandemic - that lockdown is a response to the failure of all the other methods of preventing virus spread - test, trace & isolate, improved hygiene, ventilation and filtration, etc.

    We should spend a lot more time talking about how to improve the other methods of controlling virus spread, and a lot less time discussing whether the government should impose a legal lockdown on top of the de facto self-lockdown most people imposed on themselves in response to a deadly virus that was clearly spreading out of control.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,821
    Cookie said:

    Cookie said:

    Cookie said:

    Driver said:

    ydoethur said:

    The SNP might hold the seat if Boris Johnson receives a lenient sentence compared to Ferrier.

    If Johnson isn't kicked out, Ferrier might hold the seat...
    I don't see how that happens now.

    Although in purely spreading-the-virus terms what Ferrier did is far worse than anything Boris did, he was PM and gets held to a higher standard.
    In terms of what Johnson did, i.e. where he was and what he did in No. 10, you’re probably correct. In terms of all the gatherings that happened in No. 10 under Johnson’s leadership, the drinking culture and the multiple parties, possibly not.

    In terms of the political decisions Johnson took, e.g. being slow to call the second lockdown, definitely not!
    Long term, second lockdown will cause far more deaths than it saved.
    Would you like to provide some evidence, or indeed a rationale, for that statement?
    Short(ish) answer: Several reasons, but two stand out:
    1) My personal hobbyhorse: the catastrophic effect lockdown has had on children, particularly those who were very young in 2020. The number of children in years 1/2/3 with special educational needs is absolutely off the charts.
    2) The disastrous effect of lockdown on the economy, which will make many individuals poorer and the state considerably poorer. Leaving less money to be spent on health.

    Taken together, the number of life years lost as a result of lockdown will, in my view, considerably outweigh the number of life years which were saved as a result of lockdown. We don't know what this would be. We have models, but we also know from the models given for the Dec 2021 lockdown which didn't happen, and other instances, that the models were vastly, vastly overstated.

    I'm not arguing that nothing should have been done. Lockdown was on a scale, rather than on/off. But the optimum solution was considerably less lockdown than actually happened.
    Thanks.

    We can quibble over what the negative effects of lockdown are, but I agree a shorter lockdown would obviously have reduced those negative effects.

    Had Johnson called the first and second lockdowns sooner, they would have been more effective at cutting cases and could have been shorter in duration. So, it doesn't matter whether we agree or not on the precise costs of lockdown, we can agree that Johnson being slow to call lockdowns had a negative impact in terms of virus spread, in terms of deaths from COVID-19 and in terms of the various costs associated with lockdown.

    Firstly, I've looked back at this exchange, and apologies for sounding a bit pompous - I didn't sound so in my head, but it can be difficult to do 'tone' on the internet!

    I can see the argument that you are making. I think I probably agree that being slow to call lockdown had a negative impact in terms of virus spread - though the relationship between rules imposed by government and spread of the virus was weak at best. What might the counterfactual have been? We might equally have had a shorter, briefer peak; we might have had no difference at all. In terms of deaths from covid? Perhaps, but the relationship here gets weaker still. I'm not convinced that an earlier lockdown could or would have led to a shorter lockdown though. In modelling terms, it would have flattened the curve (if it worked), slowing rather than stopping the spread - so wouldn't have reduced the period covid was around. And I don't think the political will to lift lockdown would have been any greater. From both a mathematical or a human reading of the situation I think we would have ended up with a longer lockdown (and therefore greater costs).

    And again, if all this sounds a bit pompous, I apologise. I'm sceptical about the benefits of most aspects of lockdown (in particular school closures - again, my particular hobbyhorse) - but I don't want to come across as angry man on the internet.
    COVID-19 cases were growing exponentially. Lockdown stops most spread. (I am unclear why you say the "relationship between rules imposed by government and spread of the virus was weak at best".) You can come out of lockdown when cases fall below a certain threshold. If you lockdown sooner, you lockdown when cases are lower and so it takes less time for cases to fall below your threshold. Generally, if you are going to need to lockdown, it makes sense to lockdown earlier. That way you spend less time in lockdown.

    Of course, you may not know that you're going to need to lockdown until later. That's the challenge!
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,987
    Mortimer said:

    FF43 said:

    There seems to be basic unfairness, and maybe sexism too.

    Margaret Ferrier gets a four week sanction for a foolish, but not dishonest, breach of the COVID rules. Boris Johnson who instituted systematic breaches and lied about it continuously including to parliament gets the best lawyer our taxpayer money can buy and so far has resisted any sanction. Another woman, Allegra Stratton, who had a bit part at most, is the only person to have resigned over these breaches.

    I agree Margaret Ferrier has been treated very harshly ... and may end up losing her job.
    If you caught Covid off her on her train journey from Scotland to London and back, you might not think she was treated harshly.

    Especially if you then died of it.
    One of my biggest bug bears of the entire Covid social madness was people 'blaming' others for catching covid.

    It was always 'in the supermarket' or 'from our careless neighbours'

    Not, as is most likely, from their own families.
    I don't think I've ever heard anyone, in real life, blame another for their case of Covid.

    (I guess there is one exception to this. A friend of mine blames going to a football match for his - rather serious - case of Covid. Or, technically, he blames his daughter for forcing him to spend 30 minutes in the shop after the game.)
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,821
    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    The 2015 SNP cohort has some really roasters in them.

    That’s what 2/3 ended up in jail/criminal records.

    At least one is a pervert.

    Some fecked off to other parties.

    There’s some that make Richard Burgon look like Einstein.

    2/3 of the 2015 SNP cohort ended up in jail/with criminal records? That seems rather a lot.
    I presume it as meant as 2 or 3.

    Just in terms of who was elected in 2019, we’ve had:

    Margaret Ferrier
    Neale Hanvey: suspended for antisemitism, re-admitted, defected to Alba
    Kenny MacAskill: defected to Alba
    Patrick Grady: suspended for sexual harassment, re-admitted
    So one community service for a minor offence, rest nothing criminal. Can you give us comparable English parties records or will that take you a few weeks to compile.
    Natalie McGarry got a jail sentence.
    Different cohort. We've jumped around a bit in the discussion. Theuniondivvie was talking about SNP MPs first elected in 2015, and I was talking about all SNP MPs elected in 2019.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,741
    DougSeal said:

    DavidL said:

    Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh, another ex MP of the 2015 vintage, was also struck off as a solicitor for financial irregularities at her former firm.

    I thought she was just fined and censured?
    She was up twice:
    According to Wiki
    On 15 January 2019, she was found guilty of professional misconduct by the Scottish Solicitors' Discipline Tribunal (SSDT) and fined £3,000.[9] The Tribunal found that Ahmed-Sheikh and fellow solicitor Alan Mickel had shown "disregard for the rules" in running a trust and had a conflict of interest when they borrowed money from it to help their ailing firm.[10] In addition to their fines, the pair also had to pay the expenses of the Law Society of Scotland, which had brought the case forward.[11]

    In September 2021, the SSDT found her guilty for a second time when she was ruled to have committed "recklessness by omission" during her tenure as the designated cashroom partner at Hamilton Burns, which went into administration in 2017. Ahmed-Sheikh admitted six other breaches of financial rules too but was cleared of any suggestion of dishonesty or a lack of integrity.[12]"

    The second time she was restricted in her practising certificate for 2 years if she ever applied to come back to practice but by then she had not had a practising certificate for 6 years. So yes, probably a slight overstatement to say she was struck off.
  • sladeslade Posts: 2,027

    Nigelb said:

    The disastrous state of public trust in the UK press. Here is the latest World Values Study from King's College London. 3,056 UK people were asked how much confidence they have in the press. How did their responses compare with other countries?
    https://twitter.com/BrianCathcart/status/1641389285046730752

    Truly remarkable. And well-deserved, though I'm not sure the (comparatively) ringing vote of confidence given to Russian and Chinese press is quite right either. Do our Japanese-reading contributors know if Japanese papers are that wonderful?
    It would be interesting to see how the responses were obtained in the like of Russia and China.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,987
    Cookie said:

    Cookie said:

    Cookie said:

    Driver said:

    ydoethur said:

    The SNP might hold the seat if Boris Johnson receives a lenient sentence compared to Ferrier.

    If Johnson isn't kicked out, Ferrier might hold the seat...
    I don't see how that happens now.

    Although in purely spreading-the-virus terms what Ferrier did is far worse than anything Boris did, he was PM and gets held to a higher standard.
    In terms of what Johnson did, i.e. where he was and what he did in No. 10, you’re probably correct. In terms of all the gatherings that happened in No. 10 under Johnson’s leadership, the drinking culture and the multiple parties, possibly not.

    In terms of the political decisions Johnson took, e.g. being slow to call the second lockdown, definitely not!
    Long term, second lockdown will cause far more deaths than it saved.
    Would you like to provide some evidence, or indeed a rationale, for that statement?
    Short(ish) answer: Several reasons, but two stand out:
    1) My personal hobbyhorse: the catastrophic effect lockdown has had on children, particularly those who were very young in 2020. The number of children in years 1/2/3 with special educational needs is absolutely off the charts.
    2) The disastrous effect of lockdown on the economy, which will make many individuals poorer and the state considerably poorer. Leaving less money to be spent on health.

    Taken together, the number of life years lost as a result of lockdown will, in my view, considerably outweigh the number of life years which were saved as a result of lockdown. We don't know what this would be. We have models, but we also know from the models given for the Dec 2021 lockdown which didn't happen, and other instances, that the models were vastly, vastly overstated.

    I'm not arguing that nothing should have been done. Lockdown was on a scale, rather than on/off. But the optimum solution was considerably less lockdown than actually happened.
    Thanks.

    We can quibble over what the negative effects of lockdown are, but I agree a shorter lockdown would obviously have reduced those negative effects.

    Had Johnson called the first and second lockdowns sooner, they would have been more effective at cutting cases and could have been shorter in duration. So, it doesn't matter whether we agree or not on the precise costs of lockdown, we can agree that Johnson being slow to call lockdowns had a negative impact in terms of virus spread, in terms of deaths from COVID-19 and in terms of the various costs associated with lockdown.

    Firstly, I've looked back at this exchange, and apologies for sounding a bit pompous - I didn't sound so in my head, but it can be difficult to do 'tone' on the internet!

    I can see the argument that you are making. I think I probably agree that being slow to call lockdown had a negative impact in terms of virus spread - though the relationship between rules imposed by government and spread of the virus was weak at best. What might the counterfactual have been? We might equally have had a shorter, briefer peak; we might have had no difference at all. In terms of deaths from covid? Perhaps, but the relationship here gets weaker still. I'm not convinced that an earlier lockdown could or would have led to a shorter lockdown though. In modelling terms, it would have flattened the curve (if it worked), slowing rather than stopping the spread - so wouldn't have reduced the period covid was around. And I don't think the political will to lift lockdown would have been any greater. From both a mathematical or a human reading of the situation I think we would have ended up with a longer lockdown (and therefore greater costs).

    And again, if all this sounds a bit pompous, I apologise. I'm sceptical about the benefits of most aspects of lockdown (in particular school closures - again, my particular hobbyhorse) - but I don't want to come across as angry man on the internet.
    I think it would have been better if the British government had imposed stricter restrictions* earlier, but also that that removed them a lot earlier. There were a subset of restrictions that made a great deal of difference, and imposed very little burden on freedom. And there were lots that has terrible costs for very few benefits.

    * I hate the lockdown word, and I would have stopped far, far short of the extreme lockdown the UK saw
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,376
    "Social media is taking a dangerous toll on teenage girls
    The evidence is now clear: smartphones are the major cause of the mental illness epidemic among young women.

    By Jonathan Haidt"

    https://www.newstatesman.com/technology/2023/03/jonathan-haidt-social-media-dangerous-teenage-girls-anxiety-depression
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,821

    I think that the arguments about "lockdown" are predicated on a false premise - that lockdown is the only means of controlling virus spread. I think it's important to remember - particularly for the next pandemic - that lockdown is a response to the failure of all the other methods of preventing virus spread - test, trace & isolate, improved hygiene, ventilation and filtration, etc.

    We should spend a lot more time talking about how to improve the other methods of controlling virus spread, and a lot less time discussing whether the government should impose a legal lockdown on top of the de facto self-lockdown most people imposed on themselves in response to a deadly virus that was clearly spreading out of control.

    I agree that the discussion too often becomes lockdown or not rather than considering these other measures. Lockdowns are sometimes needed in rare, extreme circumstances, but, yes, if we do those other things better, we can greatly reduce virus spread and the need for any lockdowns. We should, for example, have done more to support people isolating after a positive test or with symptoms.
This discussion has been closed.