Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

Bottler Sunak? – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,686
edited January 1 in General
Bottler Sunak? – politicalbetting.com

Tories need to rule out May election soon if they don’t intend to call one or Labour’s “bottled it” narrative will dominate.

Read the full story here

«134

Comments

  • Options
    What a hubristic article that Labour MP Sion Simon wrote in 2007 that is mentioned in the thread header, has it ever been mentioned on PB before?
  • Options
    Anyone else suffering from waking up at their usual time these holidays despite being on holiday?

    My holiday started the 20th of December and doesn't end until the 8th of January, and every bloody morning I wake up at 5ish.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,266

    Anyone else suffering from waking up at their usual time these holidays despite being on holiday?

    My holiday started the 20th of December and doesn't end until the 8th of January, and every bloody morning I wake up at 5ish.

    Undoubtedly.

    With Sunak, the question is, is he a pint sized bottler or a 75cl bottler?
  • Options
    Some PBers didn't cover themselves in glory when they live commentated on the 2022 Champions League final.

    The attitude of the French police to British fans contributed heavily to the chaos and “disgraceful treatment” of Liverpool fans at the 2022 Champions League final in Paris, a report by MPs has found.

    The report by the culture, media and sport select committee calls on the government to step up British police collaboration with overseas forces to reduce the risk of trouble at football matches.

    The arrangements to handle English and Scottish supporters are set to be under the microscope when Germany hosts Uefa’s Euro 2024 tournament in the summer.

    The committee’s report states: “The treatment of Liverpool fans by French authorities at the 2022 Champions League final was disgraceful and worsened by attempts of the authorities and Uefa to blame the supporters. The attitude of foreign police forces to UK football fans heavily contributed to the chaos.

    “The government should work to foster improved relationships with other governments on policing sporting events in order to bolster the role of British police travelling with UK teams and their collaboration with local forces.”

    The report states there is some “institutional resistance” to co-operation with some overseas forces, and at one Champions League match Chief Constable Mark Roberts testified he “was thrown out of the control room because I was asking questions about the way the fans were being dealt with”.

    The report also backs a private member’s bill by the Cardiff West MP and committee member Kevin Brennan to make tailgating — where a ticketless person follows someone with a ticket through a turnstile — a criminal offence.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/french-police-paris-champions-league-final-chaos-mps-g2khlcjf7
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,806

    What a hubristic article that Labour MP Sion Simon wrote in 2007 that is mentioned in the thread header, has it ever been mentioned on PB before?

    No. That article has never been mentioned before and in fact does not exist.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,806

    Anyone else suffering from waking up at their usual time these holidays despite being on holiday?

    My holiday started the 20th of December and doesn't end until the 8th of January, and every bloody morning I wake up at 5ish.

    Yes. Although it's caused by a nasty tendency to go ill on holiday. The cliche that one never goes on holiday is unfortunately compensated by illness forcing a holiday. Given that and the fact that Xmas entails long travel to see and stay with relatives who either do not have spare beds or ones with sagging mattresses, something always breaks down over Xmas, with deleritous results.
  • Options
    I don't know why but I really fancy a Maine lobster today.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,477
    edited December 2023

    I don't know why but I really fancy a Maine lobster today.

    Full ruling here, including the part where some joker tries to get Trump disqualified on the grounds that he says he won both the last two elections and you can only be elected twice.

    https://www.maine.gov/sos/news/2023/Decision in Challenge to Trump Presidential Primary Petitions.pdf
    Now that's the amicus brief I would write.
  • Options
    A May election was never on the cards. The reason Labour are ramping it - knowing full well it won't happen - is precisely so they can run a "bottled" it narrative.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631
    viewcode said:

    What a hubristic article that Labour MP Sion Simon wrote in 2007 that is mentioned in the thread header, has it ever been mentioned on PB before?

    No. That article has never been mentioned before and in fact does not exist.
    A controversial assertion.
    What's undeniable either way is that it is legendary.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,266
    Nigelb said:

    viewcode said:

    What a hubristic article that Labour MP Sion Simon wrote in 2007 that is mentioned in the thread header, has it ever been mentioned on PB before?

    No. That article has never been mentioned before and in fact does not exist.
    A controversial assertion.
    What's undeniable either way is that it is legendary.
    But once you’ve Sion it of the myth, what’s left?
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,429
    Nigelb said:

    viewcode said:

    What a hubristic article that Labour MP Sion Simon wrote in 2007 that is mentioned in the thread header, has it ever been mentioned on PB before?

    No. That article has never been mentioned before and in fact does not exist.
    A controversial assertion.
    What's undeniable either way is that it is legendary.
    I thought the only things that were legendary around here were -

    1) @TSE’s modesty
    2) @TSE’s shoe collection

    ?
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631
    Sunak might also preempt Labour's charge by holding a May election.

    Hanging on to the bitter end will attract plenty of attacks other than 'bottler'.

    The only upside I can see for the Tories would be if Labour prematurely publish their manifesto and they nick some if its ideas.

    Would that be particularly likely, or helpful to them ?
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631

    Nigelb said:

    viewcode said:

    What a hubristic article that Labour MP Sion Simon wrote in 2007 that is mentioned in the thread header, has it ever been mentioned on PB before?

    No. That article has never been mentioned before and in fact does not exist.
    A controversial assertion.
    What's undeniable either way is that it is legendary.
    I thought the only things that were legendary around here were -

    1) @TSE’s modesty
    2) @TSE’s shoe collection

    ?
    This is PB, Sir. When the legend becomes fact, print the legend.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,001
    viewcode said:

    What a hubristic article that Labour MP Sion Simon wrote in 2007 that is mentioned in the thread header, has it ever been mentioned on PB before?

    No. That article has never been mentioned before and in fact does not exist.
    Wherever I run into Sion at a party, I always start the conversation with that line:.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,266
    Nigelb said:
    That's actually a more serious misstep in some ways than her chopping logic on slavery. All other considerations aside, she can't actually pardon him for the two cases that matter - Georgia and New York.

    (One interesting point on the North's attitude to slavery that got overlooked on the previous thread - in 1861 the Northern Congressional delegates put forward a draft 13th Amendment that would have guaranteed slavery where it existed, in order to buy off southern secessionists. Had they accepted that, it would then have made it much more difficult to later abolish slavery. However, the rebellion continued and in 1865 the actual 13th Amendment abolished slavery.)
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Poor old Sunak, he really is in trouble if he so easily loses control of the election timing narrative.
  • Options

    Nigelb said:

    viewcode said:

    What a hubristic article that Labour MP Sion Simon wrote in 2007 that is mentioned in the thread header, has it ever been mentioned on PB before?

    No. That article has never been mentioned before and in fact does not exist.
    A controversial assertion.
    What's undeniable either way is that it is legendary.
    I thought the only things that were legendary around here were -

    1) @TSE’s modesty
    2) @TSE’s shoe collection

    ?
    3) Nick Palmer's private life.
    4) Casino Royale's blue tinted specs?
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631
    edited December 2023
    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..
  • Options
    MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,203
    edited December 2023
    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
  • Options
    Jonathan said:

    Poor old Sunak, he really is in trouble if he so easily loses control of the election timing narrative.

    I said it was a mistake to repeal the Fixed-term Parliaments Act.

    Another Boris blunder.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631
    Blair did provide something of a template for the current Tory shower.

    Alastair Campbell proposed legal threat to BBC amid Iraq war coverage row, files reveal

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/alastair-campbell-proposed-legal-threat-to-bbc-amid-iraq-war-coverage-row-files-reveal
    ...“The No 10 press office has lost all credibility as a reliable, truthful, objective operation. Even respectable journalists treat it with caution – part of a relentless politically-dominated spin machine,” he wrote.

    “Although we all know this is monstrous (
    LOL ), it has become the settled view of the entire British media and political establishment. This is disastrous for the authority of your own office.”..
  • Options
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/dec/29/were-out-of-step-how-post-brexit-uk-is-drifting-from-eu-standards

    More Pointless Brexit red tape adding costs for consumers and damaging our economy. The gift that keeps on giving.
  • Options
    darkagedarkage Posts: 4,796
    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    I don't understand why the ECHR is such an 'all or nothing' issue. If 'activist judges' are stopping the west deal with its problems and nearly all governments agree about this then just find a way to sideline/disregard them. Why do they have such a grip? How has this gone on and on with no conclusion for 20 years?
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,125
    Nigelb said:
    Quite politically astute. He is off the ballot, going to jail - but Haley will soften the blow.

    Except for the New York civil cases where his personal and corporate wealth bleed away - and the Georgia criminal cases, where he is staying put in the orange jump suit for the rest of his days. As befits somebody who tried very hard to steal an election.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,266
    darkage said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    I don't understand why the ECHR is such an 'all or nothing' issue. If 'activist judges' are stopping the west deal with its problems and nearly all governments agree about this then just find a way to sideline/disregard them. Why do they have such a grip? How has this gone on and on with no conclusion for 20 years?
    Why do judges have a grip on the law?

    Hmmm...

    More seriously, it's a requirement of EU and Council of Europe membership that we honour the ECHR. Now we've left the EU the former doesn't apply, but unless we want to have the same level of personal freedom as Russia or Belarus with their famous vistas through wide open windows, we wouldn't want to get rid of the second.

    It is worth pointing out that we don't always, as a country, accept rulings on this point. Votes for prisoners springs to mind. But our governments are obliged to follow their laws and treaty obligations and however exasperating that can be at times the alternative is a great deal worse.
  • Options

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/dec/29/were-out-of-step-how-post-brexit-uk-is-drifting-from-eu-standards

    More Pointless Brexit red tape adding costs for consumers and damaging our economy. The gift that keeps on giving.

    The Good News is that Plan A is and remains 2nd May. Sunak may prove frit, but he won't move to rule out the date which the entire Treasury machine is now revolving around.

    That means we can get a change of government and demolish some of this post-Brexit stupidity. What the Tories never understood is that outside of the EEA the UK is a small market, which makes it deeply unattractive if we set ourselves up where Uk standards are slightly off-set from the EEA ones because thats what 17.4m people voted for.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,031
    The Russians being suitably Russian this morning.

    Shame on those who openly or tacitly support Putin's fascistic, imperialist state.
  • Options

    Nigelb said:

    Lincoln waiting to sign & publish the (First) Emancipation Proclamation until AFTER the Army of the Potomoc turned back Lee's invasion of Maryland at Battle of Antietam (Sharpsburg) in Sept 1862.

    He was a masterful politician, particularly with respect to timing.

    Hard to think of anyone better in that department.

    One of my few political heroes.
    A politician of great principle who also was a calculating bastard when he needed to be.
    Yes, Lincoln is my favourite politician. A truly great man, a far more attractive figure to me than the founding fathers, especially the hypocritical Virginians. When I'm in DC I always try to find some quiet time at his memorial.
    To think of the kind of absolute scum who now run under his party's banner, it's quite incredible.
    The fact that the party of Lincoln now contains many who think the wrong side won the Civil War is an utter tragedy.

    A bit like those who consider themselves "patriots" who use the symbolism of our (and their) enemy in WWII.

    Its insanity and idiocy.
  • Options

    A May election was never on the cards. The reason Labour are ramping it - knowing full well it won't happen - is precisely so they can run a "bottled" it narrative.

    You think they're that smart, CR?

    Kind of encouraging if they are, but somehow I doubt it.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631
    edited December 2023

    Nigelb said:
    Quite politically astute. He is off the ballot, going to jail - but Haley will soften the blow.

    Except for the New York civil cases where his personal and corporate wealth bleed away - and the Georgia criminal cases, where he is staying put in the orange jump suit for the rest of his days. As befits somebody who tried very hard to steal an election.
    Nice little jab saying wouldn't want the spectacle of an 80 year old rotting in jail.

    Or it would be if that weren't the reality for a lot of less notorious convicts.
    https://publichealth.wustl.edu/the-aging-prison-population-a-rapidly-growing-issue/
  • Options

    A May election was never on the cards. The reason Labour are ramping it - knowing full well it won't happen - is precisely so they can run a "bottled" it narrative.

    A May election is clearly on the cards. With plenty of significant evidence reinforcing that hypothesis.

    The Tories will likely lose the election badly. But its also their best chance of avoiding losing the election catastrophically later in the year...
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    I don't understand why the ECHR is such an 'all or nothing' issue. If 'activist judges' are stopping the west deal with its problems and nearly all governments agree about this then just find a way to sideline/disregard them. Why do they have such a grip? How has this gone on and on with no conclusion for 20 years?
    Why do judges have a grip on the law?

    Hmmm...

    More seriously, it's a requirement of EU and Council of Europe membership that we honour the ECHR. Now we've left the EU the former doesn't apply, but unless we want to have the same level of personal freedom as Russia or Belarus with their famous vistas through wide open windows, we wouldn't want to get rid of the second.

    It is worth pointing out that we don't always, as a country, accept rulings on this point. Votes for prisoners springs to mind. But our governments are obliged to follow their laws and treaty obligations and however exasperating that can be at times the alternative is a great deal worse.
    Except that Russia was a member of the Council of Europe and the ECHR as recently as 2021.

    It left because of the [latest] invasion of Ukraine, not because of the fact its a one-party dictatorship which murders or imprisons its political opponents, with no rule of law, or media pluralism.

    How about we have the same level of personal freedom as Australia, New Zealand, Canada etc none of which are in this failed institution?
  • Options

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/dec/29/were-out-of-step-how-post-brexit-uk-is-drifting-from-eu-standards

    More Pointless Brexit red tape adding costs for consumers and damaging our economy. The gift that keeps on giving.

    The Good News is that Plan A is and remains 2nd May. Sunak may prove frit, but he won't move to rule out the date which the entire Treasury machine is now revolving around.

    That means we can get a change of government and demolish some of this post-Brexit stupidity. What the Tories never understood is that outside of the EEA the UK is a small market, which makes it deeply unattractive if we set ourselves up where Uk standards are slightly off-set from the EEA ones because thats what 17.4m people voted for.
    I hope so. Given the centrality of the poor supply of new housing in this country to all our problems, the fact that the government is loading a whole new set of costs on the construction sector in the name of some meaningless concept of sovereignty is quite incredible. Brexit seems to have made us mad.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,266
    edited December 2023

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/dec/29/were-out-of-step-how-post-brexit-uk-is-drifting-from-eu-standards

    More Pointless Brexit red tape adding costs for consumers and damaging our economy. The gift that keeps on giving.

    The Good News is that Plan A is and remains 2nd May. Sunak may prove frit, but he won't move to rule out the date which the entire Treasury machine is now revolving around.

    That means we can get a change of government and demolish some of this post-Brexit stupidity. What the Tories never understood is that outside of the EEA the UK is a small market, which makes it deeply unattractive if we set ourselves up where Uk standards are slightly off-set from the EEA ones because thats what 17.4m people voted for.
    I hope so. Given the centrality of the poor supply of new housing in this country to all our problems, the fact that the government is loading a whole new set of costs on the construction sector in the name of some meaningless concept of sovereignty is quite incredible. Brexit seems to have made us mad.
    Could be worse. We could be the USA, where Trump seems to have driven them mad.

    As we saw, rather brutally, on the previous thread.

    At least the EU has some virtues.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631

    Nigelb said:

    Lincoln waiting to sign & publish the (First) Emancipation Proclamation until AFTER the Army of the Potomoc turned back Lee's invasion of Maryland at Battle of Antietam (Sharpsburg) in Sept 1862.

    He was a masterful politician, particularly with respect to timing.

    Hard to think of anyone better in that department.

    One of my few political heroes.
    A politician of great principle who also was a calculating bastard when he needed to be.
    Yes, Lincoln is my favourite politician. A truly great man, a far more attractive figure to me than the founding fathers, especially the hypocritical Virginians. When I'm in DC I always try to find some quiet time at his memorial.
    To think of the kind of absolute scum who now run under his party's banner, it's quite incredible.
    The fact that the party of Lincoln now contains many who think the wrong side won the Civil War is an utter tragedy.

    A bit like those who consider themselves "patriots" who use the symbolism of our (and their) enemy in WWII.

    Its insanity and idiocy.
    The Republicans and Democrats swapped a large chunk of their electoral support, and the social attitudes accompanying it, around half a century back.

    It hasn't been the 'party of Lincoln' for a very long time now.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,266
    edited December 2023

    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    I don't understand why the ECHR is such an 'all or nothing' issue. If 'activist judges' are stopping the west deal with its problems and nearly all governments agree about this then just find a way to sideline/disregard them. Why do they have such a grip? How has this gone on and on with no conclusion for 20 years?
    Why do judges have a grip on the law?

    Hmmm...

    More seriously, it's a requirement of EU and Council of Europe membership that we honour the ECHR. Now we've left the EU the former doesn't apply, but unless we want to have the same level of personal freedom as Russia or Belarus with their famous vistas through wide open windows, we wouldn't want to get rid of the second.

    It is worth pointing out that we don't always, as a country, accept rulings on this point. Votes for prisoners springs to mind. But our governments are obliged to follow their laws and treaty obligations and however exasperating that can be at times the alternative is a great deal worse.
    Except that Russia was a member of the Council of Europe and the ECHR as recently as 2021.

    It left because of the [latest] invasion of Ukraine, not because of the fact its a one-party dictatorship which murders or imprisons its political opponents, with no rule of law, or media pluralism.

    How about we have the same level of personal freedom as Australia, New Zealand, Canada etc none of which are in this failed institution?
    What, the United Kingdom?

    Edited - and it's not just the membership, it's the enforcement. That was my point, really.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,266
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Lincoln waiting to sign & publish the (First) Emancipation Proclamation until AFTER the Army of the Potomoc turned back Lee's invasion of Maryland at Battle of Antietam (Sharpsburg) in Sept 1862.

    He was a masterful politician, particularly with respect to timing.

    Hard to think of anyone better in that department.

    One of my few political heroes.
    A politician of great principle who also was a calculating bastard when he needed to be.
    Yes, Lincoln is my favourite politician. A truly great man, a far more attractive figure to me than the founding fathers, especially the hypocritical Virginians. When I'm in DC I always try to find some quiet time at his memorial.
    To think of the kind of absolute scum who now run under his party's banner, it's quite incredible.
    The fact that the party of Lincoln now contains many who think the wrong side won the Civil War is an utter tragedy.

    A bit like those who consider themselves "patriots" who use the symbolism of our (and their) enemy in WWII.

    Its insanity and idiocy.
    The Republicans and Democrats swapped a large chunk of their electoral support, and the social attitudes accompanying it, around half a century back.

    It hasn't been the 'party of Lincoln' for a very long time now.
    1972, to be exact, with Nixon's 'Southern Strategy.'

    Ironically of course demographic change means the South is now slowly drifting back towards the Democrats.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631

    Nigelb said:

    viewcode said:

    What a hubristic article that Labour MP Sion Simon wrote in 2007 that is mentioned in the thread header, has it ever been mentioned on PB before?

    No. That article has never been mentioned before and in fact does not exist.
    A controversial assertion.
    What's undeniable either way is that it is legendary.
    I thought the only things that were legendary around here were -

    1) @TSE’s modesty
    2) @TSE’s shoe collection

    ?
    3) Nick Palmer's private life.
    4) Casino Royale's blue tinted specs?
    Ydoethur's puns.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,266
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    viewcode said:

    What a hubristic article that Labour MP Sion Simon wrote in 2007 that is mentioned in the thread header, has it ever been mentioned on PB before?

    No. That article has never been mentioned before and in fact does not exist.
    A controversial assertion.
    What's undeniable either way is that it is legendary.
    I thought the only things that were legendary around here were -

    1) @TSE’s modesty
    2) @TSE’s shoe collection

    ?
    3) Nick Palmer's private life.
    4) Casino Royale's blue tinted specs?
    Ydoethur's puns.
    Why thank you :blush:

    I can live for two months on a good compliment.
  • Options
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Lincoln waiting to sign & publish the (First) Emancipation Proclamation until AFTER the Army of the Potomoc turned back Lee's invasion of Maryland at Battle of Antietam (Sharpsburg) in Sept 1862.

    He was a masterful politician, particularly with respect to timing.

    Hard to think of anyone better in that department.

    One of my few political heroes.
    A politician of great principle who also was a calculating bastard when he needed to be.
    Yes, Lincoln is my favourite politician. A truly great man, a far more attractive figure to me than the founding fathers, especially the hypocritical Virginians. When I'm in DC I always try to find some quiet time at his memorial.
    To think of the kind of absolute scum who now run under his party's banner, it's quite incredible.
    The fact that the party of Lincoln now contains many who think the wrong side won the Civil War is an utter tragedy.

    A bit like those who consider themselves "patriots" who use the symbolism of our (and their) enemy in WWII.

    Its insanity and idiocy.
    The Republicans and Democrats swapped a large chunk of their electoral support, and the social attitudes accompanying it, around half a century back.

    It hasn't been the 'party of Lincoln' for a very long time now.
    They swapped on some views, but contrast Trump pandering to Russia and calling Putin a genius with Reagan calling for the wall to be pulled down.

    Its not just Lincoln, but Reagan too, who should be turning in his grave to see what's happened to his party.

    The Dixiecrats going to the Republicans happened long before I was born, but within my lifetime the GOP has gone downhill massively straight into the swamp.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,266

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Lincoln waiting to sign & publish the (First) Emancipation Proclamation until AFTER the Army of the Potomoc turned back Lee's invasion of Maryland at Battle of Antietam (Sharpsburg) in Sept 1862.

    He was a masterful politician, particularly with respect to timing.

    Hard to think of anyone better in that department.

    One of my few political heroes.
    A politician of great principle who also was a calculating bastard when he needed to be.
    Yes, Lincoln is my favourite politician. A truly great man, a far more attractive figure to me than the founding fathers, especially the hypocritical Virginians. When I'm in DC I always try to find some quiet time at his memorial.
    To think of the kind of absolute scum who now run under his party's banner, it's quite incredible.
    The fact that the party of Lincoln now contains many who think the wrong side won the Civil War is an utter tragedy.

    A bit like those who consider themselves "patriots" who use the symbolism of our (and their) enemy in WWII.

    Its insanity and idiocy.
    The Republicans and Democrats swapped a large chunk of their electoral support, and the social attitudes accompanying it, around half a century back.

    It hasn't been the 'party of Lincoln' for a very long time now.
    They swapped on some views, but contrast Trump pandering to Russia and calling Putin a genius with Reagan calling for the wall to be pulled down.

    Its not just Lincoln, but Reagan too, who should be turning in his grave to see what's happened to his party.

    The Dixiecrats going to the Republicans happened long before I was born, but within my lifetime the GOP has gone downhill massively straight into the swamp.
    Who was it who commented Trump didn't so much drain the swamp as swamp the drain?
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,983
    Nigelb said:

    Sunak might also preempt Labour's charge by holding a May election.

    Hanging on to the bitter end will attract plenty of attacks other than 'bottler'.

    The only upside I can see for the Tories would be if Labour prematurely publish their manifesto and they nick some if its ideas.

    Would that be particularly likely, or helpful to them ?

    They may nick the ideas but the next attack point would be vote Labour to see then enacted because the Tory party has a habit of cancelling agreed things (HS2) or continually promising things but never getting round to implementing them (rental reform, leasehold changes)...

    Yes both examples relate to housing because they were just the first that came to mind continually talked about by Gove but never quite getting into a Parliamentary Act...
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    I don't understand why the ECHR is such an 'all or nothing' issue. If 'activist judges' are stopping the west deal with its problems and nearly all governments agree about this then just find a way to sideline/disregard them. Why do they have such a grip? How has this gone on and on with no conclusion for 20 years?
    Why do judges have a grip on the law?

    Hmmm...

    More seriously, it's a requirement of EU and Council of Europe membership that we honour the ECHR. Now we've left the EU the former doesn't apply, but unless we want to have the same level of personal freedom as Russia or Belarus with their famous vistas through wide open windows, we wouldn't want to get rid of the second.

    It is worth pointing out that we don't always, as a country, accept rulings on this point. Votes for prisoners springs to mind. But our governments are obliged to follow their laws and treaty obligations and however exasperating that can be at times the alternative is a great deal worse.
    Except that Russia was a member of the Council of Europe and the ECHR as recently as 2021.

    It left because of the [latest] invasion of Ukraine, not because of the fact its a one-party dictatorship which murders or imprisons its political opponents, with no rule of law, or media pluralism.

    How about we have the same level of personal freedom as Australia, New Zealand, Canada etc none of which are in this failed institution?
    What, the United Kingdom?

    Edited - and it's not just the membership, it's the enforcement. That was my point, really.
    What's the point?

    The ECHR can't enforce anything, the Council of Europe didn't even have Putin's Russia sanctioned prior to the latest invasion of Ukraine for being a dictatorship with no rule of law, no media pluralism, no free and fair elections.

    The ECHR's rules are only enforced if our own courts enforce them, which rather makes the ECHR as much use as teaching abstinence to teenagers as the sole method of avoiding STDs and teenage pregnancies.

    If we leave the ECHR its not the end of the world and will make us like our fellow Common Law nations like Australia, New Zealand and Canada not Putin's Russia or Belarus. There's a very naïve parochialism which seeks to only compare us to European nations, there is a big wide world outside our tiny continent.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,125
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
    They could have sent them somewhere even more Barra-n.

    I'm sure they'd get Uist to it.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,125
    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Lincoln waiting to sign & publish the (First) Emancipation Proclamation until AFTER the Army of the Potomoc turned back Lee's invasion of Maryland at Battle of Antietam (Sharpsburg) in Sept 1862.

    He was a masterful politician, particularly with respect to timing.

    Hard to think of anyone better in that department.

    One of my few political heroes.
    A politician of great principle who also was a calculating bastard when he needed to be.
    Yes, Lincoln is my favourite politician. A truly great man, a far more attractive figure to me than the founding fathers, especially the hypocritical Virginians. When I'm in DC I always try to find some quiet time at his memorial.
    To think of the kind of absolute scum who now run under his party's banner, it's quite incredible.
    The fact that the party of Lincoln now contains many who think the wrong side won the Civil War is an utter tragedy.

    A bit like those who consider themselves "patriots" who use the symbolism of our (and their) enemy in WWII.

    Its insanity and idiocy.
    The Republicans and Democrats swapped a large chunk of their electoral support, and the social attitudes accompanying it, around half a century back.

    It hasn't been the 'party of Lincoln' for a very long time now.
    1972, to be exact, with Nixon's 'Southern Strategy.'

    Ironically of course demographic change means the South is now slowly drifting back towards the Democrats.
    Texas moving to the Democratic Party column would profoundly change US Presidential elections.
  • Options

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
    They could have sent them somewhere even more Barra-n.

    I'm sure they'd get Uist to it.
    Don't egg him on
  • Options

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Lincoln waiting to sign & publish the (First) Emancipation Proclamation until AFTER the Army of the Potomoc turned back Lee's invasion of Maryland at Battle of Antietam (Sharpsburg) in Sept 1862.

    He was a masterful politician, particularly with respect to timing.

    Hard to think of anyone better in that department.

    One of my few political heroes.
    A politician of great principle who also was a calculating bastard when he needed to be.
    Yes, Lincoln is my favourite politician. A truly great man, a far more attractive figure to me than the founding fathers, especially the hypocritical Virginians. When I'm in DC I always try to find some quiet time at his memorial.
    To think of the kind of absolute scum who now run under his party's banner, it's quite incredible.
    The fact that the party of Lincoln now contains many who think the wrong side won the Civil War is an utter tragedy.

    A bit like those who consider themselves "patriots" who use the symbolism of our (and their) enemy in WWII.

    Its insanity and idiocy.
    The Republicans and Democrats swapped a large chunk of their electoral support, and the social attitudes accompanying it, around half a century back.

    It hasn't been the 'party of Lincoln' for a very long time now.
    They swapped on some views, but contrast Trump pandering to Russia and calling Putin a genius with Reagan calling for the wall to be pulled down.

    Its not just Lincoln, but Reagan too, who should be turning in his grave to see what's happened to his party.

    The Dixiecrats going to the Republicans happened long before I was born, but within my lifetime the GOP has gone downhill massively straight into the swamp.
    The GOP have been heading down insanity alley for a good while now. The tea party movement, that lunatic in Alaska, and then Trump. It would appear that the "populist" right wing media commentators who have whipped paranoia and conspiracy theories up have a lot to answer for.

    I know that @TheKitchenCabinet is a Trumper and I'm appreciative he is here because it is fascinating and horrifying to watch. Open support for fascism in the supposed bastion of the free world. If Trump makes it onto the ballot and if Trump wins / claims the election and does what he says he will do, we are into uncharted waters.

    I cannot see how sane Americans (and that isn't partisan - Republicans are as horrified albeit in smaller numbers) will stand for the republic being abruptly turned into a theocracy. Or that the various military and law enforcement bodies will accept the orders given. America just held on in the 60s when Federal and State officials squared off against each other in the south. Will they be as lucky this time?
  • Options

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
    They could have sent them somewhere even more Barra-n.

    I'm sure they'd get Uist to it.
    Don't egg him on
    The kintyre lot of them are idiots.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,429
    A

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    I don't understand why the ECHR is such an 'all or nothing' issue. If 'activist judges' are stopping the west deal with its problems and nearly all governments agree about this then just find a way to sideline/disregard them. Why do they have such a grip? How has this gone on and on with no conclusion for 20 years?
    Why do judges have a grip on the law?

    Hmmm...

    More seriously, it's a requirement of EU and Council of Europe membership that we honour the ECHR. Now we've left the EU the former doesn't apply, but unless we want to have the same level of personal freedom as Russia or Belarus with their famous vistas through wide open windows, we wouldn't want to get rid of the second.

    It is worth pointing out that we don't always, as a country, accept rulings on this point. Votes for prisoners springs to mind. But our governments are obliged to follow their laws and treaty obligations and however exasperating that can be at times the alternative is a great deal worse.
    Except that Russia was a member of the Council of Europe and the ECHR as recently as 2021.

    It left because of the [latest] invasion of Ukraine, not because of the fact its a one-party dictatorship which murders or imprisons its political opponents, with no rule of law, or media pluralism.

    How about we have the same level of personal freedom as Australia, New Zealand, Canada etc none of which are in this failed institution?
    What, the United Kingdom?

    Edited - and it's not just the membership, it's the enforcement. That was my point, really.
    What's the point?

    The ECHR can't enforce anything, the Council of Europe didn't even have Putin's Russia sanctioned prior to the latest invasion of Ukraine for being a dictatorship with no rule of law, no media pluralism, no free and fair elections.

    The ECHR's rules are only enforced if our own courts enforce them, which rather makes the ECHR as much use as teaching abstinence to teenagers as the sole method of avoiding STDs and teenage pregnancies.

    If we leave the ECHR its not the end of the world and will make us like our fellow Common Law nations like Australia, New Zealand and Canada not Putin's Russia or Belarus. There's a very naïve parochialism which seeks to only compare us to European nations, there is a big wide world outside our tiny continent.
    Indeed

    During the Cold War, Ultra Tankies used to point out that the USSR constitution and laws were full to the brim with human rights stuff.

    Which it was.

    One of the things that kept Hong Kong free(ish) for so long after the handover was continuity of the judicial system. Patton did a good job there.

    “Keep the coinage and the courts. Let the rabble have the rest.”
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,639
    Nigelb said:
    To accept a pardon, one must acknowledge one was guilty. Trump might not like doing that.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,266

    Nigelb said:
    To accept a pardon, one must acknowledge one was guilty. Trump might not like doing that.
    He'd say that didn't apply to him, because he only accepted the pardon to ensure the RIGGED process led by WOKE UNAMERICANS out to get the ONLY TRUE PRESIDENT WHO WINS EVERY ELECTION was not ILLEGALLY LOCKED UP BECAUSE THEY FEAR THE TRUTH AND KNOW HE WILL HAVE HIS REVENGE!

    (Sorry I couldn't put it all in caps, my keyboard froze.)
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
    They could have sent them somewhere even more Barra-n.

    I'm sure they'd get Uist to it.
    That's pretty well the discussion they had over the policy, is my guess.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,429
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
    M. Howard commented that, in response to any crisis, the civil servants at the Home Office would produce a pile of policy proposals they had in various cupboards.

    And that it was the duty of a Home Sec. to say no to each and every one.

    The description of the meeting after the Brighton Bombing - Thatcher said no to a range of measures that ranged from insane to Donald Trump++
  • Options

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
    They could have sent them somewhere even more Barra-n.

    I'm sure they'd get Uist to it.
    Don't egg him on
    The kintyre lot of them are idiots.
    Indeed, not an Iona of intelligence between them, barely have their mind in Gigha, and almost certain to Muck things up, come what May.
  • Options

    Anyone else suffering from waking up at their usual time these holidays despite being on holiday?

    My holiday started the 20th of December and doesn't end until the 8th of January, and every bloody morning I wake up at 5ish.

    Yes, but that's not helped in my case by having young children.

    The other irritation is this cold I've had since 4th December and seemingly can't shake off.
  • Options

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
    M. Howard commented that, in response to any crisis, the civil servants at the Home Office would produce a pile of policy proposals they had in various cupboards.

    And that it was the duty of a Home Sec. to say no to each and every one.

    The description of the meeting after the Brighton Bombing - Thatcher said no to a range of measures that ranged from insane to Donald Trump++
    Compare and contrast with now:

    THEN: Home Office propose a range of policy ideas from the deranged to the totally batshit. Home Secretary says no
    NOW: Home Secretary proposes a range of policy ideas from the deranged to the totally batshit. Home Office says no
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,266

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
    M. Howard commented that, in response to any crisis, the civil servants at the Home Office would produce a pile of policy proposals they had in various cupboards.

    And that it was the duty of a Home Sec. to say no to each and every one.

    The description of the meeting after the Brighton Bombing - Thatcher said no to a range of measures that ranged from insane to Donald Trump++
    Compare and contrast with now:

    THEN: Home Office propose a range of policy ideas from the deranged to the totally batshit. Home Secretary says no
    NOW: Home Secretary proposes a range of policy ideas from the deranged to the totally batshit. Home Office says no
    The problem is the Home Office says 'yes.'
  • Options

    A May election was never on the cards. The reason Labour are ramping it - knowing full well it won't happen - is precisely so they can run a "bottled" it narrative.

    A May election is clearly on the cards. With plenty of significant evidence reinforcing that hypothesis.

    The Tories will likely lose the election badly. But its also their best chance of avoiding losing the election catastrophically later in the year...
    It's not clearly on the cards.

    Look up what confirmation bias means.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,266

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
    They could have sent them somewhere even more Barra-n.

    I'm sure they'd get Uist to it.
    Don't egg him on
    The kintyre lot of them are idiots.
    Indeed, not an Iona of intelligence between them, barely have their mind in Gigha, and almost certain to Muck things up, come what May.
    You want to give them the Bute?
  • Options

    A May election was never on the cards. The reason Labour are ramping it - knowing full well it won't happen - is precisely so they can run a "bottled" it narrative.

    You think they're that smart, CR?

    Kind of encouraging if they are, but somehow I doubt it.
    I do, actually.

    I think this Labour shadow cabinet are putting almost all their efforts into the campaign, and being well-advised at that.

    It's the governing part that worries me.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,125

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
    They could have sent them somewhere even more Barra-n.

    I'm sure they'd get Uist to it.
    Don't egg him on
    The kintyre lot of them are idiots.
    Indeed, not an Iona of intelligence between them, barely have their mind in Gigha, and almost certain to Muck things up, come what May.
    Vatersay?
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,429

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
    M. Howard commented that, in response to any crisis, the civil servants at the Home Office would produce a pile of policy proposals they had in various cupboards.

    And that it was the duty of a Home Sec. to say no to each and every one.

    The description of the meeting after the Brighton Bombing - Thatcher said no to a range of measures that ranged from insane to Donald Trump++
    Compare and contrast with now:

    THEN: Home Office propose a range of policy ideas from the deranged to the totally batshit. Home Secretary says no
    NOW: Home Secretary proposes a range of policy ideas from the deranged to the totally batshit. Home Office says no
    NOW: Home Secretary proposes a range of policy ideas from the deranged to the totally batshit, proposed by part of the Home Office. Other parts of the Home Office say no.

    The Blair/Rwanda thing is unsurprising in that there was a policy file on the idea.

    I will bet that it has been around a long, long time.
  • Options
    I still think it will be 2 May
  • Options

    A May election was never on the cards. The reason Labour are ramping it - knowing full well it won't happen - is precisely so they can run a "bottled" it narrative.

    A May election is clearly on the cards. With plenty of significant evidence reinforcing that hypothesis.

    The Tories will likely lose the election badly. But its also their best chance of avoiding losing the election catastrophically later in the year...
    It's not clearly on the cards.

    Look up what confirmation bias means.
    Is there a guarantee that it will happen? No. Are they planning for it to happen? Yes.

    Look, I was one of the people speculating that Sunak would cling on as long as possible, so it surprised me when he pivoted to May. But he *did* pivot. The emergency legislation after the Autumn statement. The early budget with sweeties already being talked up. The hiring of staff.

    We are getting a myriad of sources from across Westminster all hearing the same thing - its on. It may well be postponed back to the Autumn. But here and now its clear to practically everyone involved in politics that a May election is the plan.

    Perhaps you have a different definition of "on the cards".
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,429

    A May election was never on the cards. The reason Labour are ramping it - knowing full well it won't happen - is precisely so they can run a "bottled" it narrative.

    A May election is clearly on the cards. With plenty of significant evidence reinforcing that hypothesis.

    The Tories will likely lose the election badly. But its also their best chance of avoiding losing the election catastrophically later in the year...
    That's their dilemma.

    The best date for the Conservative Party, considering all of time and in all parts of the country, is May. Boosting turnout will help councillors up next year, running in May will probably save more MPs, more of the unexploded bombs will go off during Labour's term and the long countdown to the next Conservative government will have begun.

    The best date for the current Conservative leadership is probably January 2025, certainly as late as they can get away with. If they are going to lose, it's game over for pretty much all ministers and a large chunk of the parliamentary party. Some of them will be opposition frontbenchers, but where's the fun in that? In the last few cycles, the next Conservative PM is probably currently a nobody, possibly not even a parliamentary candidate this time.

    Actually, put like that, a really late election means "maximise current enjoyment, any problems can be dumped on the future". And that's very on-brand for the blue team right now.
    The case for putting off the election - “Who knows, the horse might learn to sing”
  • Options

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
    They could have sent them somewhere even more Barra-n.

    I'm sure they'd get Uist to it.
    Don't egg him on
    The kintyre lot of them are idiots.
    Indeed, not an Iona of intelligence between them, barely have their mind in Gigha, and almost certain to Muck things up, come what May.
    Vatersay?
    Connected to Barra by a causeway. Not remote enough. Why not somewhere properly remote and disconnected. Like Skegness.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631
    Under appreciated on PB, too.

    https://twitter.com/AhmedBaba_/status/1740364619078885610
    Homicide numbers are poised to hit a record decline nationwide. But most Americans think violent crime is on the rise.

    There’s a stark disconnect between how a lot of Americans feel and what’s actually happening. Disinformation is distorting our perception of reality...

    ...More data to add to this point: Crime overall is down year-over-year, including violent crime.

    Q3 2023 vs Q3 2022, violent crime dropped 8%, while property crime fell 6.3%—its lowest level since 1961

    But 77% of Americans think crime is up over last year.
  • Options
    darkagedarkage Posts: 4,796

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    I don't understand why the ECHR is such an 'all or nothing' issue. If 'activist judges' are stopping the west deal with its problems and nearly all governments agree about this then just find a way to sideline/disregard them. Why do they have such a grip? How has this gone on and on with no conclusion for 20 years?
    Why do judges have a grip on the law?

    Hmmm...

    More seriously, it's a requirement of EU and Council of Europe membership that we honour the ECHR. Now we've left the EU the former doesn't apply, but unless we want to have the same level of personal freedom as Russia or Belarus with their famous vistas through wide open windows, we wouldn't want to get rid of the second.

    It is worth pointing out that we don't always, as a country, accept rulings on this point. Votes for prisoners springs to mind. But our governments are obliged to follow their laws and treaty obligations and however exasperating that can be at times the alternative is a great deal worse.
    Except that Russia was a member of the Council of Europe and the ECHR as recently as 2021.

    It left because of the [latest] invasion of Ukraine, not because of the fact its a one-party dictatorship which murders or imprisons its political opponents, with no rule of law, or media pluralism.

    How about we have the same level of personal freedom as Australia, New Zealand, Canada etc none of which are in this failed institution?
    What, the United Kingdom?

    Edited - and it's not just the membership, it's the enforcement. That was my point, really.
    What's the point?

    The ECHR can't enforce anything, the Council of Europe didn't even have Putin's Russia sanctioned prior to the latest invasion of Ukraine for being a dictatorship with no rule of law, no media pluralism, no free and fair elections.

    The ECHR's rules are only enforced if our own courts enforce them, which rather makes the ECHR as much use as teaching abstinence to teenagers as the sole method of avoiding STDs and teenage pregnancies.

    If we leave the ECHR its not the end of the world and will make us like our fellow Common Law nations like Australia, New Zealand and Canada not Putin's Russia or Belarus. There's a very naïve parochialism which seeks to only compare us to European nations, there is a big wide world outside our tiny continent.
    Another view is that we should keep the ECHR just do what Blair originally thought back in 2003, put in some 'reservations' about matters of essential national interest, like stopping illegal immigration. It would be better to do that than just ignore its rulings. Why the UK decide to follow and enforce all its rulings despite disagreeing with them, when others do not, is all quite confusing. Rather than going all in or all out, it could alternatively just let the court drift off in to irrelevance, through unilaterally imposing temporary carve outs on its influence due to 'overriding concerns of essential national interest'.

    Going back to @ydoethur comments above, the problem is judicial activism and the expansion of influence that is quite political in nature and goes far beyond the original intentions in creating the court.
  • Options
    I do not see how a May election is better for the Tories than an autumn one. There are huge tax cuts coming in the budget, these will need time to work through and be felt. Interest rate cuts are likely in the second half of the year. What Sunak needs is a change of narrative, things he can point to and people can feel. That’s far more likely in October/November than May.

    Combine improving and perceptible improvements in incomes with some easing of cost of living pressures with some flights to Rwanda or, even better, no flights because of the HoL, and there’s a tale to tell: “things are getting better, we want to do more, don’t let woke Labour ruin it all.” Will it win a GE? Unlikely. Could it stop a Labour majority and keep the Tories in the game? Absolutely.

    I think the Tories would be mad to go before the summer. Sunak is bad at politics, but he surely can’t be *that* bad.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
    M. Howard commented that, in response to any crisis, the civil servants at the Home Office would produce a pile of policy proposals they had in various cupboards.

    And that it was the duty of a Home Sec. to say no to each and every one.

    The description of the meeting after the Brighton Bombing - Thatcher said no to a range of measures that ranged from insane to Donald Trump++
    No matter what the problem or event, the HO answer is ID cards backed with a massive database of everyone.

    The mandarins have been proposing the same thing now for several decades, in response to every terrorist attack, mass-casualty event, or natural disaster. Thankfully, the dozens of ministers who have been in the HO in the last half century, have kept telling them to go swing.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,983
    edited December 2023

    I do not see how a May election is better for the Tories than an autumn one. There are huge tax cuts coming in the budget, these will need time to work through and be felt. Interest rate cuts are likely in the second half of the year. What Sunak needs is a change of narrative, things he can point to and people can feel. That’s far more likely in October/November than May.

    Combine improving and perceptible improvements in incomes with some easing of cost of living pressures with some flights to Rwanda or, even better, no flights because of the HoL, and there’s a tale to tell: “things are getting better, we want to do more, don’t let woke Labour ruin it all.” Will it win a GE? Unlikely. Could it stop a Labour majority and keep the Tories in the game? Absolutely.

    I think the Tories would be mad to go before the summer. Sunak is bad at politics, but he surely can’t be *that* bad.

    On May 2nd everyone will have got their April pay with the new rates in it.

    And it's probably better that people see the extra £30 before they realize how little they can get with it.

    May 2nd would be the perfect time frame, because come the end of May they'll no longer care...
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898
    Nigelb said:

    Under appreciated on PB, too.

    https://twitter.com/AhmedBaba_/status/1740364619078885610
    Homicide numbers are poised to hit a record decline nationwide. But most Americans think violent crime is on the rise.

    There’s a stark disconnect between how a lot of Americans feel and what’s actually happening. Disinformation is distorting our perception of reality...

    ...More data to add to this point: Crime overall is down year-over-year, including violent crime.

    Q3 2023 vs Q3 2022, violent crime dropped 8%, while property crime fell 6.3%—its lowest level since 1961

    But 77% of Americans think crime is up over last year.

    The issue in the US is mostly of media and politicians, resulting in a very polarised society that values ‘lived experience’ over national statistics.

    As we are going to see demonstrated vividly in the next 12 months.
  • Options
    eek said:

    I do not see how a May election is better for the Tories than an autumn one. There are huge tax cuts coming in the budget, these will need time to work through and be felt. Interest rate cuts are likely in the second half of the year. What Sunak needs is a change of narrative, things he can point to and people can feel. That’s far more likely in October/November than May.

    Combine improving and perceptible improvements in incomes with some easing of cost of living pressures with some flights to Rwanda or, even better, no flights because of the HoL, and there’s a tale to tell: “things are getting better, we want to do more, don’t let woke Labour ruin it all.” Will it win a GE? Unlikely. Could it stop a Labour majority and keep the Tories in the game? Absolutely.

    I think the Tories would be mad to go before the summer. Sunak is bad at politics, but he surely can’t be *that* bad.

    On May 2nd everyone will have got their April pay with the new rates in it.

    And it's probably better that people see the extra £30 before they realize how little they can get with it.

    May 2nd would be the perfect time frame, because come the end of May they'll no longer care...
    Overall, taxes won't really be going down much, just not going up as much as planned before. And because of fixed rate mortgages, the pain is going to continue spreading for a while yet.

    Conservatives are going to be better off selling the sizzle, rather than the cocktail chipolata, when it comes to the economy. That points to announcing something in March, making noise about it in April payslips and hoping it works in May.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,670
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
    M. Howard commented that, in response to any crisis, the civil servants at the Home Office would produce a pile of policy proposals they had in various cupboards.

    And that it was the duty of a Home Sec. to say no to each and every one.

    The description of the meeting after the Brighton Bombing - Thatcher said no to a range of measures that ranged from insane to Donald Trump++
    No matter what the problem or event, the HO answer is ID cards backed with a massive database of everyone.

    The mandarins have been proposing the same thing now for several decades, in response to every terrorist attack, mass-casualty event, or natural disaster. Thankfully, the dozens of ministers who have been in the HO in the last half century, have kept telling them to go swing.
    Not that I am particularly keen, but national ID cards isn't a completely daft solution to illegal immigration etc.
  • Options

    I do not see how a May election is better for the Tories than an autumn one. There are huge tax cuts coming in the budget, these will need time to work through and be felt. Interest rate cuts are likely in the second half of the year. What Sunak needs is a change of narrative, things he can point to and people can feel. That’s far more likely in October/November than May.

    Combine improving and perceptible improvements in incomes with some easing of cost of living pressures with some flights to Rwanda or, even better, no flights because of the HoL, and there’s a tale to tell: “things are getting better, we want to do more, don’t let woke Labour ruin it all.” Will it win a GE? Unlikely. Could it stop a Labour majority and keep the Tories in the game? Absolutely.

    I think the Tories would be mad to go before the summer. Sunak is bad at politics, but he surely can’t be *that* bad.

    All true. But the wildcard remains that the parliamentary Conservative Party is Utterly Fucking Crazy.

    There are unlikely to be many improvements in living standards etc over the summer, and plenty of opportunities for the crazies to say and do utterly stupid things and make more trouble.

    Alternately, announce a big tax increase disguised as a cut, announce that a further tax cut is weeks away, impose discipline on the crazies because "this is your best chance of survival" and try to build positive momentum. Even the Tory Party can hold it together for a few months. Longer than that? No chance.
  • Options
    MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,203
    edited December 2023

    I do not see how a May election is better for the Tories than an autumn one. There are huge tax cuts coming in the budget, these will need time to work through and be felt. Interest rate cuts are likely in the second half of the year. What Sunak needs is a change of narrative, things he can point to and people can feel. That’s far more likely in October/November than May.

    Combine improving and perceptible improvements in incomes with some easing of cost of living pressures with some flights to Rwanda or, even better, no flights because of the HoL, and there’s a tale to tell: “things are getting better, we want to do more, don’t let woke Labour ruin it all.” Will it win a GE? Unlikely. Could it stop a Labour majority and keep the Tories in the game? Absolutely.

    I think the Tories would be mad to go before the summer. Sunak is bad at politics, but he surely can’t be *that* bad.

    People vote on mood as much as fundamentals. The mood is that the Tories are outstaying their welcome (this will not change) and on the fundamentals the people are not so daft as to know that the few extra quid they may be bribed with in the pocket will not compensate for the failure of this Government to adequately support the services they need every day. Which will only be exacerbated by handing out tax cuts the country can’t afford.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,670

    I do not see how a May election is better for the Tories than an autumn one. There are huge tax cuts coming in the budget, these will need time to work through and be felt. Interest rate cuts are likely in the second half of the year. What Sunak needs is a change of narrative, things he can point to and people can feel. That’s far more likely in October/November than May.

    Combine improving and perceptible improvements in incomes with some easing of cost of living pressures with some flights to Rwanda or, even better, no flights because of the HoL, and there’s a tale to tell: “things are getting better, we want to do more, don’t let woke Labour ruin it all.” Will it win a GE? Unlikely. Could it stop a Labour majority and keep the Tories in the game? Absolutely.

    I think the Tories would be mad to go before the summer. Sunak is bad at politics, but he surely can’t be *that* bad.

    All true. But the wildcard remains that the parliamentary Conservative Party is Utterly Fucking Crazy.

    There are unlikely to be many improvements in living standards etc over the summer, and plenty of opportunities for the crazies to say and do utterly stupid things and make more trouble.

    Alternately, announce a big tax increase disguised as a cut, announce that a further tax cut is weeks away, impose discipline on the crazies because "this is your best chance of survival" and try to build positive momentum. Even the Tory Party can hold it together for a few months. Longer than that? No chance.
    Not least the risk of a Sunak defenestration, or attempt at one.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,429
    A
    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
    M. Howard commented that, in response to any crisis, the civil servants at the Home Office would produce a pile of policy proposals they had in various cupboards.

    And that it was the duty of a Home Sec. to say no to each and every one.

    The description of the meeting after the Brighton Bombing - Thatcher said no to a range of measures that ranged from insane to Donald Trump++
    No matter what the problem or event, the HO answer is ID cards backed with a massive database of everyone.

    The mandarins have been proposing the same thing now for several decades, in response to every terrorist attack, mass-casualty event, or natural disaster. Thankfully, the dozens of ministers who have been in the HO in the last half century, have kept telling them to go swing.
    Not that I am particularly keen, but national ID cards isn't a completely daft solution to illegal immigration etc.
    The daftness is in the insane proposals to link it to a mega database of everything about everyone.

    And give access to everyone (Important People were to have their data on a separate, slavery secure system).

    And which gets attached to every U.K. ID card proposal.

    And which was just starting implantation when the Coalition cancelled the last attempt at ID cards.

    Which would break a host of European data protection requirements, incidentally.
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,639
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Under appreciated on PB, too.

    https://twitter.com/AhmedBaba_/status/1740364619078885610
    Homicide numbers are poised to hit a record decline nationwide. But most Americans think violent crime is on the rise.

    There’s a stark disconnect between how a lot of Americans feel and what’s actually happening. Disinformation is distorting our perception of reality...

    ...More data to add to this point: Crime overall is down year-over-year, including violent crime.

    Q3 2023 vs Q3 2022, violent crime dropped 8%, while property crime fell 6.3%—its lowest level since 1961

    But 77% of Americans think crime is up over last year.

    The issue in the US is mostly of media and politicians, resulting in a very polarised society that values ‘lived experience’ over national statistics.

    As we are going to see demonstrated vividly in the next 12 months.
    I don’t think the problem is valuing “lived experience”. Whatever you call it, the media have always preferred real people’s stories to abstract statistics. And a mismatch between actual crime rates and what the public thinks is common to many places and times.

    But there is a problem with US media and politicians, which is misinformation. The right-wing media, and right-wing politicians on social media, just lie on an industrial scale. It is exemplified by the Big Lie of (outcome determinative) 2020 electoral fraud, but it goes beyond that.
  • Options

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
    They could have sent them somewhere even more Barra-n.

    I'm sure they'd get Uist to it.
    Don't egg him on
    The kintyre lot of them are idiots.
    Indeed, not an Iona of intelligence between them, barely have their mind in Gigha, and almost certain to Muck things up, come what May.
    Vatersay?
    Connected to Barra by a causeway. Not remote enough. Why not somewhere properly remote and disconnected. Like Skegness.
    Have you ever been to SkegVegas in winter? I'd choose Rwanda!
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,670

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Under appreciated on PB, too.

    https://twitter.com/AhmedBaba_/status/1740364619078885610
    Homicide numbers are poised to hit a record decline nationwide. But most Americans think violent crime is on the rise.

    There’s a stark disconnect between how a lot of Americans feel and what’s actually happening. Disinformation is distorting our perception of reality...

    ...More data to add to this point: Crime overall is down year-over-year, including violent crime.

    Q3 2023 vs Q3 2022, violent crime dropped 8%, while property crime fell 6.3%—its lowest level since 1961

    But 77% of Americans think crime is up over last year.

    The issue in the US is mostly of media and politicians, resulting in a very polarised society that values ‘lived experience’ over national statistics.

    As we are going to see demonstrated vividly in the next 12 months.
    I don’t think the problem is valuing “lived experience”. Whatever you call it, the media have always preferred real people’s stories to abstract statistics. And a mismatch between actual crime rates and what the public thinks is common to many places and times.

    But there is a problem with US media and politicians, which is misinformation. The right-wing media, and right-wing politicians on social media, just lie on an industrial scale. It is exemplified by the Big Lie of (outcome determinative) 2020 electoral fraud, but it goes beyond that.
    One characteristic of right wing media, both in the USA and here, is how negative it is. Always banging on about how the country is being ruined, the immigrants overrunning everything, crime out of control, economy stagnating, education rotten, civil service undermining everything etc. There is very little positivity about it, no hope no vision.

    So naturally it breeds mistrust of national statistics, and creates false panics over children identifying as cats etc.

  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,284
    An inside view of the 'election that never was' episode is available from Heywood's biography. I get the impression that Brown wasn't really focused on it very much at all; the speculation arose from others and Brown's failing was not getting round to making his decision until the speculation was all over the media. Once he made his decision, he stuck to it - the lesson, as per the lead, is that he should have acted more quickly and firmly.
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,639
    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
    M. Howard commented that, in response to any crisis, the civil servants at the Home Office would produce a pile of policy proposals they had in various cupboards.

    And that it was the duty of a Home Sec. to say no to each and every one.

    The description of the meeting after the Brighton Bombing - Thatcher said no to a range of measures that ranged from insane to Donald Trump++
    No matter what the problem or event, the HO answer is ID cards backed with a massive database of everyone.

    The mandarins have been proposing the same thing now for several decades, in response to every terrorist attack, mass-casualty event, or natural disaster. Thankfully, the dozens of ministers who have been in the HO in the last half century, have kept telling them to go swing.
    Not that I am particularly keen, but national ID cards isn't a completely daft solution to illegal immigration etc.
    The problem there for the Tories is that they misrepresent what illegal immigration is. They call people entering the UK through irregular means and then claiming asylum “illegal immigration”, but these people have gone through proper processes and declared themselves to the authorities. ID cards wouldn’t impact on them.

    ID cards would have an impact on the small number of people who come over on boats, but then don’t declare themselves to the authorities and enter the black economy. We don’t know precisely how many such people there are, but, IIRC, government estimates put them in the hundreds per year, so a very small number.

    The main area of illegality is overstayers, people who remain in the country after their visas have run out. ID cards might have an impact there. But the Conservatives haven’t spent decades demonising this group, so the PR impact of doing something about them will be limited.
  • Options
    spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,312

    A

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
    M. Howard commented that, in response to any crisis, the civil servants at the Home Office would produce a pile of policy proposals they had in various cupboards.

    And that it was the duty of a Home Sec. to say no to each and every one.

    The description of the meeting after the Brighton Bombing - Thatcher said no to a range of measures that ranged from insane to Donald Trump++
    No matter what the problem or event, the HO answer is ID cards backed with a massive database of everyone.

    The mandarins have been proposing the same thing now for several decades, in response to every terrorist attack, mass-casualty event, or natural disaster. Thankfully, the dozens of ministers who have been in the HO in the last half century, have kept telling them to go swing.
    Not that I am particularly keen, but national ID cards isn't a completely daft solution to illegal immigration etc.
    The daftness is in the insane proposals to link it to a mega database of everything about everyone.

    And give access to everyone (Important People were to have their data on a separate, slavery secure system).

    And which gets attached to every U.K. ID card proposal.

    And which was just starting implantation when the Coalition cancelled the last attempt at ID cards.

    Which would break a host of European data protection requirements, incidentally.
    ID cards have had a number of issues over the years.
    1) the database
    2) they were not mandatory to have
    3) they were not mandatory to carry
    4) if the police did have the powers to charge people for not presenting one they'd not bother because of the time and the paperwork
    5) generally people that will be most disadvantaged by the policy can't afford to get one
  • Options
    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
    M. Howard commented that, in response to any crisis, the civil servants at the Home Office would produce a pile of policy proposals they had in various cupboards.

    And that it was the duty of a Home Sec. to say no to each and every one.

    The description of the meeting after the Brighton Bombing - Thatcher said no to a range of measures that ranged from insane to Donald Trump++
    No matter what the problem or event, the HO answer is ID cards backed with a massive database of everyone.

    The mandarins have been proposing the same thing now for several decades, in response to every terrorist attack, mass-casualty event, or natural disaster. Thankfully, the dozens of ministers who have been in the HO in the last half century, have kept telling them to go swing.
    Not that I am particularly keen, but national ID cards isn't a completely daft solution to illegal immigration etc.
    Yes, it is.

    And the massive database they want to have associated with it is even worse.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,670

    A

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
    M. Howard commented that, in response to any crisis, the civil servants at the Home Office would produce a pile of policy proposals they had in various cupboards.

    And that it was the duty of a Home Sec. to say no to each and every one.

    The description of the meeting after the Brighton Bombing - Thatcher said no to a range of measures that ranged from insane to Donald Trump++
    No matter what the problem or event, the HO answer is ID cards backed with a massive database of everyone.

    The mandarins have been proposing the same thing now for several decades, in response to every terrorist attack, mass-casualty event, or natural disaster. Thankfully, the dozens of ministers who have been in the HO in the last half century, have kept telling them to go swing.
    Not that I am particularly keen, but national ID cards isn't a completely daft solution to illegal immigration etc.
    The daftness is in the insane proposals to link it to a mega database of everything about everyone.

    And give access to everyone (Important People were to have their data on a separate, slavery secure system).

    And which gets attached to every U.K. ID card proposal.

    And which was just starting implantation when the Coalition cancelled the last attempt at ID cards.

    Which would break a host of European data protection requirements, incidentally.
    Like I said, I am not keen, but the price of not having a National ID card scheme is that illegal immigration and other things are easier.

    We need to accept that the price of that freedom is difficulty enforcing borders etc.

  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,125

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
    They could have sent them somewhere even more Barra-n.

    I'm sure they'd get Uist to it.
    Don't egg him on
    The kintyre lot of them are idiots.
    Indeed, not an Iona of intelligence between them, barely have their mind in Gigha, and almost certain to Muck things up, come what May.
    Vatersay?
    Connected to Barra by a causeway. Not remote enough. Why not somewhere properly remote and disconnected. Like Skegness.
    Have you ever been to SkegVegas in winter? I'd choose Rwanda!
    Ditto spring and autumn.

    And summer usually lasts all of 6 days.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,284
    edited December 2023

    A May election was never on the cards. The reason Labour are ramping it - knowing full well it won't happen - is precisely so they can run a "bottled" it narrative.

    I'm not so sure. If Sunak really thinks there's a chance he might be removed during 2024, inking in a May election makes this almost impossible. Plus the short term economic news looks like it might be positive, but with a serious risk of a wobble (or worse) later on. Making a cut-and-run after a snap budget a logical choice.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,983

    A

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
    M. Howard commented that, in response to any crisis, the civil servants at the Home Office would produce a pile of policy proposals they had in various cupboards.

    And that it was the duty of a Home Sec. to say no to each and every one.

    The description of the meeting after the Brighton Bombing - Thatcher said no to a range of measures that ranged from insane to Donald Trump++
    No matter what the problem or event, the HO answer is ID cards backed with a massive database of everyone.

    The mandarins have been proposing the same thing now for several decades, in response to every terrorist attack, mass-casualty event, or natural disaster. Thankfully, the dozens of ministers who have been in the HO in the last half century, have kept telling them to go swing.
    Not that I am particularly keen, but national ID cards isn't a completely daft solution to illegal immigration etc.
    The daftness is in the insane proposals to link it to a mega database of everything about everyone.

    And give access to everyone (Important People were to have their data on a separate, slavery secure system).

    And which gets attached to every U.K. ID card proposal.

    And which was just starting implantation when the Coalition cancelled the last attempt at ID cards.

    Which would break a host of European data protection requirements, incidentally.
    It's the combining of data together which was the issue.

    And the bit that makes little sense is they could have combined it all together without the ID card bit - all you need is to create a standard unique identifier and then attach that identifier to the appropriate records.

    The fact they can't do that tells you everything you need to know about the grand idea.

    But we do need ID cards to provide a simple means of checking eligibility to work (which is currently a complete nightmare if the person hasn't got a passport). with a passport it's 2 minutes work that the person does themselves, without it's an admin nightmare requiring HR to trust others which often means you skip the person without a passport and just employ the other person who had one.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,670
    spudgfsh said:

    A

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
    M. Howard commented that, in response to any crisis, the civil servants at the Home Office would produce a pile of policy proposals they had in various cupboards.

    And that it was the duty of a Home Sec. to say no to each and every one.

    The description of the meeting after the Brighton Bombing - Thatcher said no to a range of measures that ranged from insane to Donald Trump++
    No matter what the problem or event, the HO answer is ID cards backed with a massive database of everyone.

    The mandarins have been proposing the same thing now for several decades, in response to every terrorist attack, mass-casualty event, or natural disaster. Thankfully, the dozens of ministers who have been in the HO in the last half century, have kept telling them to go swing.
    Not that I am particularly keen, but national ID cards isn't a completely daft solution to illegal immigration etc.
    The daftness is in the insane proposals to link it to a mega database of everything about everyone.

    And give access to everyone (Important People were to have their data on a separate, slavery secure system).

    And which gets attached to every U.K. ID card proposal.

    And which was just starting implantation when the Coalition cancelled the last attempt at ID cards.

    Which would break a host of European data protection requirements, incidentally.
    ID cards have had a number of issues over the years.
    1) the database
    2) they were not mandatory to have
    3) they were not mandatory to carry
    4) if the police did have the powers to charge people for not presenting one they'd not bother because of the time and the paperwork
    5) generally people that will be most disadvantaged by the policy can't afford to get one
    Though other countries do make them mandatory to carry. Why can't we?

    The reason is that we prize the freedom not to, but that freedom comes at the price of difficulty enforcing borders.
  • Options
    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Under appreciated on PB, too.

    https://twitter.com/AhmedBaba_/status/1740364619078885610
    Homicide numbers are poised to hit a record decline nationwide. But most Americans think violent crime is on the rise.

    There’s a stark disconnect between how a lot of Americans feel and what’s actually happening. Disinformation is distorting our perception of reality...

    ...More data to add to this point: Crime overall is down year-over-year, including violent crime.

    Q3 2023 vs Q3 2022, violent crime dropped 8%, while property crime fell 6.3%—its lowest level since 1961

    But 77% of Americans think crime is up over last year.

    The issue in the US is mostly of media and politicians, resulting in a very polarised society that values ‘lived experience’ over national statistics.

    As we are going to see demonstrated vividly in the next 12 months.
    I don’t think the problem is valuing “lived experience”. Whatever you call it, the media have always preferred real people’s stories to abstract statistics. And a mismatch between actual crime rates and what the public thinks is common to many places and times.

    But there is a problem with US media and politicians, which is misinformation. The right-wing media, and right-wing politicians on social media, just lie on an industrial scale. It is exemplified by the Big Lie of (outcome determinative) 2020 electoral fraud, but it goes beyond that.
    One characteristic of right wing media, both in the USA and here, is how negative it is. Always banging on about how the country is being ruined ... There is very little positivity about it, no hope no vision.
    FTFY.

    Negativity sells unfortunately, whether it be the Guardian or Fox News doing it.

    The media loves to ramp everything up to eleven, whether it be migrants or climate change, woke or reactionary etc that is the target of its attacks.
  • Options
    Foxy said:

    spudgfsh said:

    A

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Latest government records release offers a few tidbits.

    Rwanda-style asylum plan was ‘nuclear option’ for Blair in 2003, records reveal
    Report set out ‘radical measures’ to reduce numbers arriving, including setting up holding camps on Scottish island of Mull
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/29/tony-blair-rwanda-style-asylum-plan-2003

    Turkey, South Africa and Kenya also proposed - as was legislation incompatible with the ECHR.

    Revealing of Blair's thought on the matter:
    ..Guidance from Home Office ministers was that such measures would breach the UN convention on refugees, with Blair scribbling on one document: “Just return them. This is precisely the point. We must not allow the ECHR to stop us dealing with it.”..

    Why Mull? Why not go the whole hog and stick them on St Kilda? Or Rockall?

    There seems to be something really weird in the British (or is it the Home Office?) psyche here.

    Just return them is fine. Assuming you know where they have come from, and can assure their safety. Which we often can’t.
    Someone in the Cabinet Office probably thought it would be amusing to Mull it over.
    M. Howard commented that, in response to any crisis, the civil servants at the Home Office would produce a pile of policy proposals they had in various cupboards.

    And that it was the duty of a Home Sec. to say no to each and every one.

    The description of the meeting after the Brighton Bombing - Thatcher said no to a range of measures that ranged from insane to Donald Trump++
    No matter what the problem or event, the HO answer is ID cards backed with a massive database of everyone.

    The mandarins have been proposing the same thing now for several decades, in response to every terrorist attack, mass-casualty event, or natural disaster. Thankfully, the dozens of ministers who have been in the HO in the last half century, have kept telling them to go swing.
    Not that I am particularly keen, but national ID cards isn't a completely daft solution to illegal immigration etc.
    The daftness is in the insane proposals to link it to a mega database of everything about everyone.

    And give access to everyone (Important People were to have their data on a separate, slavery secure system).

    And which gets attached to every U.K. ID card proposal.

    And which was just starting implantation when the Coalition cancelled the last attempt at ID cards.

    Which would break a host of European data protection requirements, incidentally.
    ID cards have had a number of issues over the years.
    1) the database
    2) they were not mandatory to have
    3) they were not mandatory to carry
    4) if the police did have the powers to charge people for not presenting one they'd not bother because of the time and the paperwork
    5) generally people that will be most disadvantaged by the policy can't afford to get one
    Though other countries do make them mandatory to carry. Why can't we?

    The reason is that we prize the freedom not to, but that freedom comes at the price of difficulty enforcing borders.
    Borders and cards have nothing to do with each other.

    Switzerland does well at controlling its borders and has only a voluntary ID card system, its border enforcement has nothing to do with those cards.
  • Options
    Nigelb said:

    Under appreciated on PB, too.

    https://twitter.com/AhmedBaba_/status/1740364619078885610
    Homicide numbers are poised to hit a record decline nationwide. But most Americans think violent crime is on the rise.

    There’s a stark disconnect between how a lot of Americans feel and what’s actually happening. Disinformation is distorting our perception of reality...

    ...More data to add to this point: Crime overall is down year-over-year, including violent crime.

    Q3 2023 vs Q3 2022, violent crime dropped 8%, while property crime fell 6.3%—its lowest level since 1961

    But 77% of Americans think crime is up over last year.

    People always think crime is rising because people become more sensitised to crime as they age. Behaviour that is considered to be just having a laugh when people are young is more likely to be thought of as antisocial by those same people as they get older. I'm sure those of us of more mature years can all think of stuff we did for fun when we were young that we'd frown about when youngsters do it now.
This discussion has been closed.