'These people are very angry that Chi Onwurah MP has condemned Hamas. So they went to her office to bang on the door and shout for terrorists.
They first targeted her surgery. She cancelled it.
If you don’t stand up to the enemies of democracy, it will only get worse'
WTF Who doesn't condemn Hamas ?
The pro Palestine mob. It's clear that MPs are increasingly having to consider the intimidation they face when deciding how to vote in parliament. You'd think some people would be concerned by this.
Perhaps you can direct us to your posts making this point when MPs were threatened by extreme Brexiteers in the 2017-19 Parliament.
I know a few who were told they would be Jo Cox'd if they didn't vote to Leave with no deal.
In both instances it is wrong but you're lumping anyone who is concerned about the events in Palestine as the pro Palestine Mob is shameful.
Look at all the public demonstrations we have seen supporting Palestine. Where have been the criticisms of Hamas? Perhaps among the people on the streets week after week there are people who don't support Hamas. They just stay silent probably because they know they are walking among Hamas supporters.
It's fair enough of you mention the period 2017-19 but I'd guess things are far worse now. I don't remember you ever proposing a single answer to how we deal with the Islamism problem in the UK or lack of integration of muslims more generally. Just attempts at deflection.
Instead of looking like a divided party, it looks united and the Conservatives now look split and divided on the issue.
...and the SNP now appear to be colluding with the Tories. Perfect day for Starmer.
A quiet few beers and perhaps a cheeky korma for SKS and team this evening
I seem to remember someone on this very site loudly berating KS for being useless and vacillating and weak on this issue. And yet, at the end of the day, the Labour amendment (that *someone* was briefing against to the press - a line swallowed by all and sundry) passes. Funny old world.
SKS fans - please don't gloat.
Too much.
I am not sure what I think about SKS but he manages to surprise me on the upside at least as often as on the downside.
The downsides are usually when he's speaking to a journalist.
Meanwhile, the minister concerned, Lee Waters (whom I keep confusing with Lee Anderson) bleats that people saying he should have actually done more consulting and given more thought to the issues a blanket 20mph would cause is being unfair because reasons.
the 20mph rule cannot even be claimed to be "green" given it uses more fuel at that speed than at 30mph for the same distance.
Nonsense. 20mph is more efficient simply because it reduces the amount of acceleration and deacceleration required during normal driving conditions.
And that's without taking into account the additional time you have to anticipate junctions, pedestrians, sheep etc
And double parking bottlenecks. Makes for much smoother driving around me. Like zen for cars. I’m a convert.
It's very linked in with national decline isn't it? Reduced brain capacity. Common sense. Willingness to drive around like a fart in a trance and reach one's destination at some indeterminate point in time. God forbid Putin takes a shine to our rainy haven - we won't even have the willpower to fire a well-crafted insult at him.
Instead of looking like a divided party, it looks united and the Conservatives now look split and divided on the issue.
...and the SNP now appear to be colluding with the Tories. Perfect day for Starmer.
A quiet few beers and perhaps a cheeky korma for SKS and team this evening
I seem to remember someone on this very site loudly berating KS for being useless and vacillating and weak on this issue. And yet, at the end of the day, the Labour amendment (that *someone* was briefing against to the press - a line swallowed by all and sundry) passes. Funny old world.
SKS fans - please don't gloat.
Too much.
Nobody comes out of today with any credit whatsoever
Collectively they have debased parliament and democracy
Today is a shameful day in our political history when you consider what was at stake
Well, the point was, and this is why it descended into farce, absolutely nothing was at stake. Despite the seriousness of the underlying issue.
The SNP put forward a motion calling for a ceasefire whose text was deliberately designed to make it difficult for Labour or the government to support, leaving out obligations on Hamas to make it happen.
Safe in the knowledge that even if it were adopted it was an entirely empty gesture with no consequences because neither Hamas nor Netanyahu give a fig.
Labour saw the trap coming a mile off, so put forward its own amendment create a wording they could support - though still ultimately with no bearing on what happens in Gaza.
The Tories, not wanting Labour to escape embarrassment, tabled their own - as procedure would ordinary rule out the Labour one from being considered, and put Labour back in the SNP trap.
The speaker then rendered it moot by calling both, which had the lucky (or neat if you're cynical) side effect of helping Labour out of the jam.
The reason there was so much gameplaying from all is precisely because nothing was at stake other than what each party could shout at each other when campaigning. Hence why you ended up with three motions saying close to the same thing (a ceasefire would be great please), but each semantically designed to be awkward to the other parties.
If lots had actually been at stake - say we were voting on whether to send direct military assistance or being part of a peacekeeping force - then there would have been no mucking about as each would have a clear rather than a semantic choice to make over something that was actually going to happen, and whose results you'd be judged on.
Probably a wider truth as well;
Don't know how much it was a factor today but there is an issue that nothing real is happening in politics. There is barely any legislation going through the Commons; no policies being announced; everyone has to say stuff they know isn't true because of the election. There's just an enormous amount of sublimated frustration around at the moment looking for some way to express itself.
The truth is, even if locals adhere to it the odds are English visitors, who must make up half of drivers, will very probably not follow it rigidly because they will simply forget what the limit is.
If they wanted to go down this route, it would have been better to abolish a default speed limit in urban areas and put signs all through showing what's been decided on.
We’ve had universal 20mph in north London for a while now. You get used to it, and come to prefer it.
Wales is not a City and to compare it with it is a total misunderstanding of our Country
Does Wales have different laws of physics/reaction times to the rest of the country?
It has very different road conditions and much fewer cyclists
Anyway, it is being reviewed and hopefully the limits adjusted as needed
It's much more likely to be raining - is that what you mean? Stopping distances are more than double in the wet.
The truth is, even if locals adhere to it the odds are English visitors, who must make up half of drivers, will very probably not follow it rigidly because they will simply forget what the limit is.
If they wanted to go down this route, it would have been better to abolish a default speed limit in urban areas and put signs all through showing what's been decided on.
We’ve had universal 20mph in north London for a while now. You get used to it, and come to prefer it.
Wales is not a City and to compare it with it is a total misunderstanding of our Country
Does Wales have different laws of physics/reaction times to the rest of the country?
It has very different road conditions and much fewer cyclists
Anyway, it is being reviewed and hopefully the limits adjusted as needed
It's much more likely to be raining - is that what you mean? Stopping distances are more than double in the wet.
No point in arguing with a closed mind
Fortunately the Welsh government and local authorities are not of a closed mind and as I have repeatedly said the limits are under review
The silly thing about this is that I do agree 20mph zones are sensible in some locations but it is clear a blanket Iill thought out reduction from 30 to 20 was not the way to win over the public
Edinburgh did a review too and ended up expanding the 20mph zone That's the problem with evidence-based policy.
Another important element is clarity and simplicity - from what I can see online, one major issue is that the speed limits in Wales chop around from 60 - 40 - 20 - 40 - 60, etc. A blanket 20mph in urban areas would be cheaper to implement and fairer on motorists.
We will never agree on this and certainly in Wales the only discussion is raising the limit in some areas to 30mph
Meanwhile out in real world Gaza is still on fire, Putin is on the march, Trump is circling the White House and our strategic defence Trident appears to be less reliable than a 1990s Montego.
Meanwhile out in real world Gaza is still on fire, Putin is on the march, Trump is circling the White House and our strategic defence Trident appears to be less reliable than a 1990s Montego.
Will the real statesmen please stand up.
The last of which is the one thing we can (or even should) try to do anything about - and coincidentally the one you'll probably hear next to no debate about, because casting doubt on the infallibility of Trident and the wisdom of paying America squillions for a white elephant is to undermine the West and give succour to [you know the rest]
Instead of looking like a divided party, it looks united and the Conservatives now look split and divided on the issue.
...and the SNP now appear to be colluding with the Tories. Perfect day for Starmer.
A quiet few beers and perhaps a cheeky korma for SKS and team this evening
I seem to remember someone on this very site loudly berating KS for being useless and vacillating and weak on this issue. And yet, at the end of the day, the Labour amendment (that *someone* was briefing against to the press - a line swallowed by all and sundry) passes. Funny old world.
SKS fans - please don't gloat.
Too much.
Nobody comes out of today with any credit whatsoever
Collectively they have debased parliament and democracy
Today is a shameful day in our political history when you consider what was at stake
Parliament debased by allowing MPs to vote on an amendment.
Isn't that democracy in action?
You clearly did not watch the debate and aftermath live on tv
No. As I said downthread I was in the pub.
I suggest that it was SNP and Conservative members throwing their toys out of the pram that have caused any debasing, rather than Mr Speaker allowing a vote.
It is possible that the SNP, Tories, and the Speaker have all caused the debasing.
The letter from the Clerk of the Commons was damning for the Speaker.
It might possibly not have dawned on you that the SNP were upset at not being permitted to follow the rules in the first place.
You know what really pissed me off today.
Stephen Flynn saying the SNP were victims today.
No, the real victims are the thousands of people who have died in Israel and Palestine these past few months.
Meanwhile out in real world Gaza is still on fire, Putin is on the march, Trump is circling the White House and our strategic defence Trident appears to be less reliable than a 1990s Montego.
Will the real statesmen please stand up.
The last of which is the one thing we can (or even should) try to do anything about - and coincidentally the one you'll probably hear next to no debate about, because casting doubt on the infallibility of Trident and the wisdom of paying America squillions for a white elephant is to undermine the West and give succour to [you know the rest]
They obviously need to demonstrate it working asap. No fuss, just moving pictures of a big rocket going up.
'These people are very angry that Chi Onwurah MP has condemned Hamas. So they went to her office to bang on the door and shout for terrorists.
They first targeted her surgery. She cancelled it.
If you don’t stand up to the enemies of democracy, it will only get worse'
WTF Who doesn't condemn Hamas ?
The pro Palestine mob. It's clear that MPs are increasingly having to consider the intimidation they face when deciding how to vote in parliament. You'd think some people would be concerned by this.
Perhaps you can direct us to your posts making this point when MPs were threatened by extreme Brexiteers in the 2017-19 Parliament.
I know a few who were told they would be Jo Cox'd if they didn't vote to Leave with no deal.
In both instances it is wrong but you're lumping anyone who is concerned about the events in Palestine as the pro Palestine Mob is shameful.
Look at all the public demonstrations we have seen supporting Palestine. Where have been the criticisms of Hamas? Perhaps among the people on the streets week after week there are people who don't support Hamas. They just stay silent probably because they know they are walking among Hamas supporters.
It's fair enough of you mention the period 2017-19 but I'd guess things are far worse now. I don't remember you ever proposing a single answer to how we deal with the Islamism problem in the UK or lack of integration of muslims more generally. Just attempts at deflection.
You missed all the big demonstrations at Westminster in that Parliament?
I've often talked about integration on here and elsewhere and the best solutions to it.
I am a one man melting pot of integration and multiculturalism I have often encouraged others to follow my lead. It starts with education and aiming for being something better than a taxi driver.
I'll dig out the PB post I made at time, but here's a précis of what I wrote back in 2018.
To any Muslim enjoying the current anti-Semitism aimed towards our Jewish brothers and sisters, all I will say is that a country that is anti-Semitic is not a country that will [be] ultimately great for Muslims to live in
Instead of looking like a divided party, it looks united and the Conservatives now look split and divided on the issue.
...and the SNP now appear to be colluding with the Tories. Perfect day for Starmer.
A quiet few beers and perhaps a cheeky korma for SKS and team this evening
I seem to remember someone on this very site loudly berating KS for being useless and vacillating and weak on this issue. And yet, at the end of the day, the Labour amendment (that *someone* was briefing against to the press - a line swallowed by all and sundry) passes. Funny old world.
SKS fans - please don't gloat.
Too much.
Nobody comes out of today with any credit whatsoever
Collectively they have debased parliament and democracy
Today is a shameful day in our political history when you consider what was at stake
Parliament debased by allowing MPs to vote on an amendment.
Isn't that democracy in action?
You clearly did not watch the debate and aftermath live on tv
No. As I said downthread I was in the pub.
I suggest that it was SNP and Conservative members throwing their toys out of the pram that have caused any debasing, rather than Mr Speaker allowing a vote.
It is possible that the SNP, Tories, and the Speaker have all caused the debasing.
The letter from the Clerk of the Commons was damning for the Speaker.
It might possibly not have dawned on you that the SNP were upset at not being permitted to follow the rules in the first place.
You know what really pissed me off today.
Stephen Flynn saying the SNP were victims today.
No, the real victims are the thousands of people who have died in Israel and Palestine these past few months.
SNP and all their previous incarnations have been perpetuating a "victim" narrative since 1707?
Wonder if that will get me a blast from Malc in the morning? 😂
Instead of looking like a divided party, it looks united and the Conservatives now look split and divided on the issue.
...and the SNP now appear to be colluding with the Tories. Perfect day for Starmer.
A quiet few beers and perhaps a cheeky korma for SKS and team this evening
I seem to remember someone on this very site loudly berating KS for being useless and vacillating and weak on this issue. And yet, at the end of the day, the Labour amendment (that *someone* was briefing against to the press - a line swallowed by all and sundry) passes. Funny old world.
SKS fans - please don't gloat.
Too much.
Nobody comes out of today with any credit whatsoever
Collectively they have debased parliament and democracy
Today is a shameful day in our political history when you consider what was at stake
Well, the point was, and this is why it descended into farce, absolutely nothing was at stake. Despite the seriousness of the underlying issue.
The SNP put forward a motion calling for a ceasefire whose text was deliberately designed to make it difficult for Labour or the government to support, leaving out obligations on Hamas to make it happen.
Safe in the knowledge that even if it were adopted it was an entirely empty gesture with no consequences because neither Hamas nor Netanyahu give a fig.
Labour saw the trap coming a mile off, so put forward its own amendment create a wording they could support - though still ultimately with no bearing on what happens in Gaza.
The Tories, not wanting Labour to escape embarrassment, tabled their own - as procedure would ordinary rule out the Labour one from being considered, and put Labour back in the SNP trap.
The speaker then rendered it moot by calling both, which had the lucky (or neat if you're cynical) side effect of helping Labour out of the jam.
The reason there was so much gameplaying from all is precisely because nothing was at stake other than what each party could shout at each other when campaigning. Hence why you ended up with three motions saying close to the same thing (a ceasefire would be great please), but each semantically designed to be awkward to the other parties.
If lots had actually been at stake - say we were voting on whether to send direct military assistance or being part of a peacekeeping force - then there would have been no mucking about as each would have a clear rather than a semantic choice to make over something that was actually going to happen, and whose results you'd be judged on.
Probably a wider truth as well;
Don't know how much it was a factor today but there is an issue that nothing real is happening in politics. There is barely any legislation going through the Commons; no policies being announced; everyone has to say stuff they know isn't true because of the election. There's just an enormous amount of sublimated frustration around at the moment looking for some way to express itself.
Definitely. There's also the fact of displacement activity. The country is in a bad state and it will take some pretty tough and smart decision-making to change that. Of course certain MPs would rather get on their high horse about something that allows them to preen over virtue without doing any of the usual hard work of doing much about it.
I think it's also to do with the general complexity of the situation and impotence over horrible events. The reason it causes Labour such anguish is that it's a party that likes to see its motivations as moral stances.
Yet here, thanks to the awful actors involved, there really isn't a good or moral outcome to plant your flag on, if you are honest about the reality and consequences of supporting x or y. And due to that and our place in the world now, no chance of material influence.
So people (and thus, MPs who have to deal with protesters) work themselves into a frenzy telling politicians to stop the horrible thing now in place of admitting the moral arc of the universe isn't bent towards justice or peace - and it might just be too much for anyone to solve.
I rather agree with Lord Danny the Fink on this one: if the Speaker ignored precedent because MPs were being threatened with violence if they didn't vote a particular way, it's a 'democratic crisis'. Brings back bad memories of far-right mobs threatening Anna Soubry et al in the 2017-19 parliament.
I would much prefer if the reason was the one briefed to Nick Watt - that Labour allegedly threatened they would 'bring him down' after the next election. It would be sordid, of course, but a little more familiar in Westminster terms, and still better than bending to threats of violence.
Natasha Clark @NatashaC · 2h Multiple Tory MPs say Penny Mordaunt pulled tonight's amendment because govt did not have votes to support Israel 'humanitarian pause' motion.
Rumour is that too many Tories had told Whips they were minded to back the Labour motion in favour of full fat ceasefire...
'These people are very angry that Chi Onwurah MP has condemned Hamas. So they went to her office to bang on the door and shout for terrorists.
They first targeted her surgery. She cancelled it.
If you don’t stand up to the enemies of democracy, it will only get worse'
WTF Who doesn't condemn Hamas ?
The pro Palestine mob. It's clear that MPs are increasingly having to consider the intimidation they face when deciding how to vote in parliament. You'd think some people would be concerned by this.
They will discover concern.
When a play upset Sikhs, and the performance was pulled because of threats of violence, some actually applauded. Then, later they realised their mistake. Or not.
The incident was one of the reasons behind the founding of the EDL - to use the threat of “disorder” to get things *they* didn’t like cancelled.
The truth is, even if locals adhere to it the odds are English visitors, who must make up half of drivers, will very probably not follow it rigidly because they will simply forget what the limit is.
If they wanted to go down this route, it would have been better to abolish a default speed limit in urban areas and put signs all through showing what's been decided on.
We’ve had universal 20mph in north London for a while now. You get used to it, and come to prefer it.
Is that because it's much safer if you've been drinking?
I'm amazed that the none of the consultations Labour said they were having with the SNP over their amendment didn't bear sensible fruit. There were consultations, right?
They agreed on the amendment that Labour put forward, which was then carried. I noticed that News at Ten didn't mention that at all.
Instead of looking like a divided party, it looks united and the Conservatives now look split and divided on the issue.
...and the SNP now appear to be colluding with the Tories. Perfect day for Starmer.
A quiet few beers and perhaps a cheeky korma for SKS and team this evening
I seem to remember someone on this very site loudly berating KS for being useless and vacillating and weak on this issue. And yet, at the end of the day, the Labour amendment (that *someone* was briefing against to the press - a line swallowed by all and sundry) passes. Funny old world.
SKS fans - please don't gloat.
Too much.
Nobody comes out of today with any credit whatsoever
Collectively they have debased parliament and democracy
Today is a shameful day in our political history when you consider what was at stake
Well, the point was, and this is why it descended into farce, absolutely nothing was at stake. Despite the seriousness of the underlying issue.
The SNP put forward a motion calling for a ceasefire whose text was deliberately designed to make it difficult for Labour or the government to support, leaving out obligations on Hamas to make it happen.
Safe in the knowledge that even if it were adopted it was an entirely empty gesture with no consequences because neither Hamas nor Netanyahu give a fig.
Labour saw the trap coming a mile off, so put forward its own amendment create a wording they could support - though still ultimately with no bearing on what happens in Gaza.
The Tories, not wanting Labour to escape embarrassment, tabled their own - as procedure would ordinary rule out the Labour one from being considered, and put Labour back in the SNP trap.
The speaker then rendered it moot by calling both, which had the lucky (or neat if you're cynical) side effect of helping Labour out of the jam.
The reason there was so much gameplaying from all is precisely because nothing was at stake other than what each party could shout at each other when campaigning. Hence why you ended up with three motions saying close to the same thing (a ceasefire would be great please), but each semantically designed to be awkward to the other parties.
If lots had actually been at stake - say we were voting on whether to send direct military assistance or being part of a peacekeeping force - then there would have been no mucking about as each would have a clear rather than a semantic choice to make over something that was actually going to happen, and whose results you'd be judged on.
Probably a wider truth as well;
Don't know how much it was a factor today but there is an issue that nothing real is happening in politics. There is barely any legislation going through the Commons; no policies being announced; everyone has to say stuff they know isn't true because of the election. There's just an enormous amount of sublimated frustration around at the moment looking for some way to express itself.
Definitely. There's also the fact of displacement activity. The country is in a bad state and it will take some pretty tough and smart decision-making to change that. Of course certain MPs would rather get on their high horse about something that allows them to preen over virtue without doing any of the usual hard work of doing much about it.
I think it's also to do with the general complexity of the situation and impotence over horrible events. The reason it causes Labour such anguish is that it's a party that likes to see its motivations as moral stances.
Yet here, thanks to the awful actors involved, there really isn't a good or moral outcome to plant your flag on, if you are honest about the reality and consequences of supporting x or y. And due to that and our place in the world now, no chance of material influence.
So people (and thus, MPs who have to deal with protesters) work themselves into a frenzy telling politicians to stop the horrible thing now in place of admitting the moral arc of the universe isn't bent towards justice or peace - and it might just be too much for anyone to solve.
It's not even just that (though there is a chunk of impotence) as much as the deliberate dicking around for partisan advantage. If they all want to relive the fun of Debating Soc, that's lovely, but can't they find somewhere private to do it?
Instead of looking like a divided party, it looks united and the Conservatives now look split and divided on the issue.
...and the SNP now appear to be colluding with the Tories. Perfect day for Starmer.
A quiet few beers and perhaps a cheeky korma for SKS and team this evening
I seem to remember someone on this very site loudly berating KS for being useless and vacillating and weak on this issue. And yet, at the end of the day, the Labour amendment (that *someone* was briefing against to the press - a line swallowed by all and sundry) passes. Funny old world.
SKS fans - please don't gloat.
Too much.
Nobody comes out of today with any credit whatsoever
Collectively they have debased parliament and democracy
Today is a shameful day in our political history when you consider what was at stake
Well, the point was, and this is why it descended into farce, absolutely nothing was at stake. Despite the seriousness of the underlying issue.
The SNP put forward a motion calling for a ceasefire whose text was deliberately designed to make it difficult for Labour or the government to support, leaving out obligations on Hamas to make it happen.
Safe in the knowledge that even if it were adopted it was an entirely empty gesture with no consequences because neither Hamas nor Netanyahu give a fig.
Labour saw the trap coming a mile off, so put forward its own amendment create a wording they could support - though still ultimately with no bearing on what happens in Gaza.
The Tories, not wanting Labour to escape embarrassment, tabled their own - as procedure would ordinary rule out the Labour one from being considered, and put Labour back in the SNP trap.
The speaker then rendered it moot by calling both, which had the lucky (or neat if you're cynical) side effect of helping Labour out of the jam.
The reason there was so much gameplaying from all is precisely because nothing was at stake other than what each party could shout at each other when campaigning. Hence why you ended up with three motions saying close to the same thing (a ceasefire would be great please), but each semantically designed to be awkward to the other parties.
If lots had actually been at stake - say we were voting on whether to send direct military assistance or being part of a peacekeeping force - then there would have been no mucking about as each would have a clear rather than a semantic choice to make over something that was actually going to happen, and whose results you'd be judged on.
Instead of looking like a divided party, it looks united and the Conservatives now look split and divided on the issue.
...and the SNP now appear to be colluding with the Tories. Perfect day for Starmer.
A quiet few beers and perhaps a cheeky korma for SKS and team this evening
I seem to remember someone on this very site loudly berating KS for being useless and vacillating and weak on this issue. And yet, at the end of the day, the Labour amendment (that *someone* was briefing against to the press - a line swallowed by all and sundry) passes. Funny old world.
SKS fans - please don't gloat.
Too much.
Nobody comes out of today with any credit whatsoever
Collectively they have debased parliament and democracy
Today is a shameful day in our political history when you consider what was at stake
Well, the point was, and this is why it descended into farce, absolutely nothing was at stake. Despite the seriousness of the underlying issue.
The SNP put forward a motion calling for a ceasefire whose text was deliberately designed to make it difficult for Labour or the government to support, leaving out obligations on Hamas to make it happen.
Safe in the knowledge that even if it were adopted it was an entirely empty gesture with no consequences because neither Hamas nor Netanyahu give a fig.
Labour saw the trap coming a mile off, so put forward its own amendment create a wording they could support - though still ultimately with no bearing on what happens in Gaza.
The Tories, not wanting Labour to escape embarrassment, tabled their own - as procedure would ordinary rule out the Labour one from being considered, and put Labour back in the SNP trap.
The speaker then rendered it moot by calling both, which had the lucky (or neat if you're cynical) side effect of helping Labour out of the jam.
The reason there was so much gameplaying from all is precisely because nothing was at stake other than what each party could shout at each other when campaigning. Hence why you ended up with three motions saying close to the same thing (a ceasefire would be great please), but each semantically designed to be awkward to the other parties.
If lots had actually been at stake - say we were voting on whether to send direct military assistance or being part of a peacekeeping force - then there would have been no mucking about as each would have a clear rather than a semantic choice to make over something that was actually going to happen, and whose results you'd be judged on.
Probably a wider truth as well;
Don't know how much it was a factor today but there is an issue that nothing real is happening in politics. There is barely any legislation going through the Commons; no policies being announced; everyone has to say stuff they know isn't true because of the election. There's just an enormous amount of sublimated frustration around at the moment looking for some way to express itself.
I agree with the above. I get that folk play politics in politics. It is all part of the rough and tumble.
But I am not sure that the speaker should simply let an opposition day debate be about putting the squeeze on another opposition party. Which if we are being frank that is all the SNP were trying to do - and that is what happened back in November. So I have a lot of sympathy with what, I think, the speaker originally tried to do. It didn’t work because of the febrile nature of party politics.
To be honest, like the shenanigans about the humble address during the Brexit debates, and how the Government likes to boycott opposition day debates, I do think MPs should have a long hard look at themselves. Is this pantomime - the day after another MP got put on the “by-election to come list - really what our leaders should do? I disagree strongly.
'These people are very angry that Chi Onwurah MP has condemned Hamas. So they went to her office to bang on the door and shout for terrorists.
They first targeted her surgery. She cancelled it.
If you don’t stand up to the enemies of democracy, it will only get worse'
WTF Who doesn't condemn Hamas ?
The pro Palestine mob. It's clear that MPs are increasingly having to consider the intimidation they face when deciding how to vote in parliament. You'd think some people would be concerned by this.
Perhaps you can direct us to your posts making this point when MPs were threatened by extreme Brexiteers in the 2017-19 Parliament.
I know a few who were told they would be Jo Cox'd if they didn't vote to Leave with no deal.
In both instances it is wrong but you're lumping anyone who is concerned about the events in Palestine as the pro Palestine Mob is shameful.
Look at all the public demonstrations we have seen supporting Palestine. Where have been the criticisms of Hamas? Perhaps among the people on the streets week after week there are people who don't support Hamas. They just stay silent probably because they know they are walking among Hamas supporters.
It's fair enough of you mention the period 2017-19 but I'd guess things are far worse now. I don't remember you ever proposing a single answer to how we deal with the Islamism problem in the UK or lack of integration of muslims more generally. Just attempts at deflection.
Is it true that the IDF have murdered more people in the last 4 MONTHS than Hamas did in the last 15 YEARS?
I'm amazed that the none of the consultations Labour said they were having with the SNP over their amendment didn't bear sensible fruit. There were consultations, right?
They agreed on the amendment that Labour put forward, which was then carried. I noticed that News at Ten didn't mention that at all.
Strange that what was mentioned was that the SNP 'walked out' with the Tories. Poor old SLab must be feeling a bit embarassed*, what with the motion passed at their conference that did mention the collective punishment of the Gazans.
Heading home from seeing Zara Larsson at the Roundhouse. That's two visits to Camden in the last week... Thank God Leon is off bothering ladyboys somewhere.
I have a particular dislike for books / articles / campaigns / slogans that go:
[very short amount of time] to save [something important]
The cover is also not great, not much spent on design or Photoshop there - but hey, it shows she is more fiscally responsible than many have given her credit for.
This is arguably the biggest, most important news of the past 18 hours: An FBI informant allegedly gave Kremlin anti-Biden propaganda to top Republicans who built a fake impeachment case on it. It has Putin's fingerprints all over it.
That article also says that separately the Guardian has been leaked a recording of remarks made by the Post Office Deputy, CEO, Owen Woodley at a monthly town hall meeting for staff on Wednesday
In the recording Woodley referred to Staunton's claims in his interview with the Sunday Times as 'just wrong' and said that 'he should have resigned if he was told to delay compensation payments ' because that would have been outrageous
Woodley told post office staff 'many of the things that Staunton was talking about in that interview and the way he was putting things across, was wrong, its just wrong, and I don't not know why he chose to do that but that is what he did and he will account for why he chose to do that
He added ' none of us are aware of a single moment when we were asked to slow down compensation to post office operators, not once. There is no evidence of that at all
It’s certainly true that the Post Office didn’t really need telling to do anything slowly.
Nevertheless, Staunton is clearly an intelligent and experienced business guy, clued up enough to file memos to self about the conversations he had with government, and he couldn’t have known the circumstances in which he might need them. I’d expect he’s slanted his recollections to suit his current position, but would be very surprised if he had made the whole thing up.
If he is like many politicians he probably wrote several emails so whatever happened he could produce on to cover his butt
1/6 There was once this republic that lasted for more than 200 years. 2/6 This republic had a minority faction in parliament that supported Russia. 3/6 This republic also had antique procedural rules that allowed one person to halt a vote. 4/6 Some legislators from this republic used procedural rules to support Russian imperialism... https://twitter.com/TimothyDSnyder/status/1760431872775958743
I rather agree with Lord Danny the Fink on this one: if the Speaker ignored precedent because MPs were being threatened with violence if they didn't vote a particular way, it's a 'democratic crisis'. Brings back bad memories of far-right mobs threatening Anna Soubry et al in the 2017-19 parliament.
I would much prefer if the reason was the one briefed to Nick Watt - that Labour allegedly threatened they would 'bring him down' after the next election. It would be sordid, of course, but a little more familiar in Westminster terms, and still better than bending to threats of violence.
It’s everywhere. Yesterday’s Oxfordshire County Council budget meeting had a public address from an ex-squaddie who was boasting about tracking down the Cabinet member for highways (a mild-mannered choir director) and confronting him outside his house. By all accounts there was some physical confrontation. It hasn’t been reported anywhere. This is just the norm now
Good on Starmer. He has been a bit rubbish since Hamas invaded Israel (or however you want to define what happened on 7 October - I am not going to get into that discussion). But MPs shouldn’t face death threats - from any side. I was particularly disheartened when the brand new Kingswood MP disclosed that he and his family had already had such threats.
SNP were, rather cannily, trying to put Labour MPs in a difficult situation. I can see why they did that. They want to keep their own seats north of the border and put Labour in an awkward position. But not sure they should be proud of the way they are trying to do that.
It also says something about the state of UK politics when an opposition day debate isn’t at all focused on landing a punch on the Government of today. Simply about making life hard for the Government of tomorrow(?).
The Speaker of the Commons has announced that he ignored precedent & selected motions because of MP’s concerns of violent retribution if presented with the usual alternatives. This is not a Westminster issue, it’s a democratic crisis if it’s true. So we need to find out if it is."
That really does not surprise me given how much this is coming down to semantic arguments about wording, and that if the Tories were confident of the votes why go the route they did?
The Speaker of the Commons has announced that he ignored precedent & selected motions because of MP’s concerns of violent retribution if presented with the usual alternatives. This is not a Westminster issue, it’s a democratic crisis if it’s true. So we need to find out if it is."
Right decision or not in those circumstances it would at least be a defendable reason for making the call, in the sense of an extraordinary situation. Which makes the 'Labour say they forced his hand, oh wait now apparently that was untrue' stuff all the more baffling.
'These people are very angry that Chi Onwurah MP has condemned Hamas. So they went to her office to bang on the door and shout for terrorists.
They first targeted her surgery. She cancelled it.
If you don’t stand up to the enemies of democracy, it will only get worse'
WTF Who doesn't condemn Hamas ?
The pro Palestine mob. It's clear that MPs are increasingly having to consider the intimidation they face when deciding how to vote in parliament. You'd think some people would be concerned by this.
Perhaps you can direct us to your posts making this point when MPs were threatened by extreme Brexiteers in the 2017-19 Parliament.
I know a few who were told they would be Jo Cox'd if they didn't vote to Leave with no deal.
In both instances it is wrong but you're lumping anyone who is concerned about the events in Palestine as the pro Palestine Mob is shameful.
Look at all the public demonstrations we have seen supporting Palestine. Where have been the criticisms of Hamas? Perhaps among the people on the streets week after week there are people who don't support Hamas. They just stay silent probably because they know they are walking among Hamas supporters.
It's fair enough of you mention the period 2017-19 but I'd guess things are far worse now. I don't remember you ever proposing a single answer to how we deal with the Islamism problem in the UK or lack of integration of muslims more generally. Just attempts at deflection.
Is it true that the IDF have murdered more people in the last 4 MONTHS than Hamas did in the last 15 YEARS?
No. It isn’t
The IDF have murdered zero people (to my knowledge) in the last 4 months.
More likely, 'Ten Weeks to Build Liz Truss' Bank Balance.'
That is a title and captions designed to appeal to rich, small state, low tax conservative Americans
Well, there are grubbier ways of earning money for former PMs than selling a book. So long as she doesn't pivot to being effectively a pundit to the right wing 'news' networks out there she can still retain some dignity.
I have a particular dislike for books / articles / campaigns / slogans that go:
[very short amount of time] to save [something important]
The cover is also not great, not much spent on design or Photoshop there - but hey, it shows she is more fiscally responsible than many have given her credit for.
Aren't US book covers reknowned for being pretty bad anyway?
The UK will leave the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) after the failure of efforts to align it with net zero, the government has announced today (Thursday 22 February).
There is one downside to this: the UK government is implicitly backing the clearing of Euro-based derivatives contracts in the UK. Should a large counterparty fail, we - rather than the ECB and the EU - will be on the hook.
Some interesting crosstabs on the Quinnipiac poll. They have Trump winning a relatively healthy 19% of Black voters, and he's ahead of Biden among white and Hispanic voters.
Haley does much worse than Trump among Hispanic voters, but is beating Biden by 14 points among white voters.
The New Yorker publishes, as almost all of you know, cartoons, regularly. I have four of their yearly collections, published since 9/11 (2010, 2011, 2015, 2016), more than a 1000 cartoons, all together. All four of the collections include cartoons mocking Judaism and Christianity. (Some of those are even funny.)
How many cartoons in those four collection mock Islam?
Now I don't particularly blame the New Yorker, or individual cartoonists, for avoiding that subject, consdering what has happened to a few who didn't -- but I won't pretend that intimidation hasn't worked.
Britain’s ‘deep state’ thwarted my plans, Liz Truss tells US hard-right summit ... Truss was interrupted and asked to explain the meaning of “quango”. She replied: “A quango is a quasi non-governmental organisation. In America you call it the administrative state or the deep state. But we have more than 500 of these quangos in Britain and they run everything.”
She went on to list the Environment Agency, Office for Budget Responsibility, Bank of England and Judicial Appointments Commission. “There’s a whole bunch of people – and I describe them as the economic establishment – who fundamentally don’t want the status quo to change because they’re doing quite fine out of it. They don’t really care about the prospects of the average person in Britain and they didn’t want things to change and they didn’t want that power taken away.”
An advert for Truss’s book, Ten Years to Save the West, was prominently displayed at the CPAC venue, the Gaylord National Resort & Convention Center, along with a volume by Tucker Carlson, a former Fox News host who recently conducted a fawning interview with Russia autocrat Vladimir Putin.
Speaking of Sir Gaylord Ponceyboots, news of David Cameron's holiday diplomacy in the southern hemisphere.
On Tuesday morning, Lord Cameron began his day with a swim in the cold South Atlantic before seeing some of the Falkland Islands’ penguins.
On a walk around Gypsy Cove, the Foreign Secretary saw a small group of Magellanic penguins in the dunes and a pod of dolphins swimming in the waters below the windswept footpath.
He chatted to children involved in a local conservation group, who persuaded him to try a piece of edible grass growing along the coast.
After a mad couple of days at work, the last thing I expected to read in the news this morning was that there was pressure on the Speaker to resign.
(Although I have noted in recent weeks, that just about the only thing that might save Sunak at the election is a massive Labour civil war over the Middle East conflict, that completely turns off floating voters).
More likely, 'Ten Weeks to Build Liz Truss' Bank Balance.'
That is a title and captions designed to appeal to rich, small state, low tax conservative Americans
Well, there are grubbier ways of earning money for former PMs than selling a book. So long as she doesn't pivot to being effectively a pundit to the right wing 'news' networks out there she can still retain some dignity.
Liz Truss, the former British prime minister, spoke at a far-right conference in America on Wednesday, styling herself as a populist who took on America’s equivalent of the “deep state” in her own country.
Truss was among the headline speakers at this week’s Conservative Political Action Conference at the National Harbor in Maryland. CPAC is billed as the biggest annual gathering of conservatives in the US but has in recent years embraced Donald Trump’s brand of nativist-populism.
In Wednesday’s opening session, an “international summit”, the ex-PM sat side by side with Nigel Farage, former leader of the Brexit party, both with small union flags on the table in front of them.
Other speakers included Steve Bannon, a former White House chief strategist associated with global far-right nationalist movements, and Richard Grenell, a former acting director of national intelligence under Trump. Officials from countries including Australia, Hungary and Japan also took part.
Truss said: “What has happened in Britain over the past 30 years is power that used to be in the hands of politicians has been moved to quangos and bureaucrats and lawyers so what you find is a democratically elected government actually unable to enact policies.”
More likely, 'Ten Weeks to Build Liz Truss' Bank Balance.'
That is a title and captions designed to appeal to rich, small state, low tax conservative Americans
Well, there are grubbier ways of earning money for former PMs than selling a book. So long as she doesn't pivot to being effectively a pundit to the right wing 'news' networks out there she can still retain some dignity.
Liz Truss, the former British prime minister, spoke at a far-right conference in America on Wednesday, styling herself as a populist who took on America’s equivalent of the “deep state” in her own country.
Truss was among the headline speakers at this week’s Conservative Political Action Conference at the National Harbor in Maryland. CPAC is billed as the biggest annual gathering of conservatives in the US but has in recent years embraced Donald Trump’s brand of nativist-populism.
In Wednesday’s opening session, an “international summit”, the ex-PM sat side by side with Nigel Farage, former leader of the Brexit party, both with small union flags on the table in front of them.
Other speakers included Steve Bannon, a former White House chief strategist associated with global far-right nationalist movements, and Richard Grenell, a former acting director of national intelligence under Trump. Officials from countries including Australia, Hungary and Japan also took part.
Truss said: “What has happened in Britain over the past 30 years is power that used to be in the hands of politicians has been moved to quangos and bureaucrats and lawyers so what you find is a democratically elected government actually unable to enact policies.”
Her whole problem was that she *did* enact her policies.
Here's an excellent video from the NTSB about how failure to clear drains led to corrosion and a collapse. I'm in no way using it as a metaphor for the current government.
More likely, 'Ten Weeks to Build Liz Truss' Bank Balance.'
That is a title and captions designed to appeal to rich, small state, low tax conservative Americans
Well, there are grubbier ways of earning money for former PMs than selling a book. So long as she doesn't pivot to being effectively a pundit to the right wing 'news' networks out there she can still retain some dignity.
Liz Truss, the former British prime minister, spoke at a far-right conference in America on Wednesday, styling herself as a populist who took on America’s equivalent of the “deep state” in her own country.
Truss was among the headline speakers at this week’s Conservative Political Action Conference at the National Harbor in Maryland. CPAC is billed as the biggest annual gathering of conservatives in the US but has in recent years embraced Donald Trump’s brand of nativist-populism.
In Wednesday’s opening session, an “international summit”, the ex-PM sat side by side with Nigel Farage, former leader of the Brexit party, both with small union flags on the table in front of them.
Other speakers included Steve Bannon, a former White House chief strategist associated with global far-right nationalist movements, and Richard Grenell, a former acting director of national intelligence under Trump. Officials from countries including Australia, Hungary and Japan also took part.
Truss said: “What has happened in Britain over the past 30 years is power that used to be in the hands of politicians has been moved to quangos and bureaucrats and lawyers so what you find is a democratically elected government actually unable to enact policies.”
Her whole problem was that she *did* enact her policies.
The Speaker of the Commons has announced that he ignored precedent & selected motions because of MP’s concerns of violent retribution if presented with the usual alternatives. This is not a Westminster issue, it’s a democratic crisis if it’s true. So we need to find out if it is."
Right decision or not in those circumstances it would at least be a defendable reason for making the call, in the sense of an extraordinary situation. Which makes the 'Labour say they forced his hand, oh wait now apparently that was untrue' stuff all the more baffling.
I think "forced his hand" was over-emotional briefing that they had to row back from. I believe it is true that the decision came after rather urgent discussion between SKS and the speaker, as.per the FT article - and can see how that would be hyped up to "forced" from "persuaded" in that atmosphere.
The Speaker of the Commons has announced that he ignored precedent & selected motions because of MP’s concerns of violent retribution if presented with the usual alternatives. This is not a Westminster issue, it’s a democratic crisis if it’s true. So we need to find out if it is."
Right decision or not in those circumstances it would at least be a defendable reason for making the call, in the sense of an extraordinary situation. Which makes the 'Labour say they forced his hand, oh wait now apparently that was untrue' stuff all the more baffling.
I think "forced his hand" was over-emotional briefing that they had to row back from. I believe it is true that the decision came after rather urgent discussion between SKS and the speaker, as.per the FT article - and can see how that would be hyped up to "forced" from "persuaded" in that atmosphere.
If the situation was that, then the speaker should have discussed it with the other relevant partis as well and got their input.
More likely, 'Ten Weeks to Build Liz Truss' Bank Balance.'
That is a title and captions designed to appeal to rich, small state, low tax conservative Americans
Well, there are grubbier ways of earning money for former PMs than selling a book. So long as she doesn't pivot to being effectively a pundit to the right wing 'news' networks out there she can still retain some dignity.
Liz Truss, the former British prime minister, spoke at a far-right conference in America on Wednesday, styling herself as a populist who took on America’s equivalent of the “deep state” in her own country.
Truss was among the headline speakers at this week’s Conservative Political Action Conference at the National Harbor in Maryland. CPAC is billed as the biggest annual gathering of conservatives in the US but has in recent years embraced Donald Trump’s brand of nativist-populism.
In Wednesday’s opening session, an “international summit”, the ex-PM sat side by side with Nigel Farage, former leader of the Brexit party, both with small union flags on the table in front of them.
Other speakers included Steve Bannon, a former White House chief strategist associated with global far-right nationalist movements, and Richard Grenell, a former acting director of national intelligence under Trump. Officials from countries including Australia, Hungary and Japan also took part.
Truss said: “What has happened in Britain over the past 30 years is power that used to be in the hands of politicians has been moved to quangos and bureaucrats and lawyers so what you find is a democratically elected government actually unable to enact policies.”
No, her problem was that the people who fund the government thought she was nuts. This attempt to rewrite history just reveals her as the grifter that she is.
The speaker should have brought Flynn into his discussions. He's shown far too much deference to Starmer on an SNP oppo day and needs to go. Winterton too for nodding through two clearly divided votes.
1/6 There was once this republic that lasted for more than 200 years. 2/6 This republic had a minority faction in parliament that supported Russia. 3/6 This republic also had antique procedural rules that allowed one person to halt a vote. 4/6 Some legislators from this republic used procedural rules to support Russian imperialism... https://twitter.com/TimothyDSnyder/status/1760431872775958743
Comments
It's fair enough of you mention the period 2017-19 but I'd guess things are far worse now. I don't remember you ever proposing a single answer to how we deal with the Islamism problem in the UK or lack of integration of muslims more generally. Just attempts at deflection.
The downsides are usually when he's speaking to a journalist.
Don't know how much it was a factor today but there is an issue that nothing real is happening in politics. There is barely any legislation going through the Commons; no policies being announced; everyone has to say stuff they know isn't true because of the election.
There's just an enormous amount of sublimated frustration around at the moment looking for some way to express itself.
https://x.com/Samfr/status/1760422187058565235
Will the real statesmen please stand up.
Stephen Flynn saying the SNP were victims today.
No, the real victims are the thousands of people who have died in Israel and Palestine these past few months.
https://x.com/trussliz/status/1760424572170506376
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/pro-and-anti-brexit-protesters-clash_uk_5d73b3bae4b0fde50c271e98
I've often talked about integration on here and elsewhere and the best solutions to it.
I am a one man melting pot of integration and multiculturalism I have often encouraged others to follow my lead. It starts with education and aiming for being something better than a taxi driver.
I'll dig out the PB post I made at time, but here's a précis of what I wrote back in 2018.
To any Muslim enjoying the current anti-Semitism aimed towards our Jewish brothers and sisters, all I will say is that a country that is anti-Semitic is not a country that will [be] ultimately great for Muslims to live in
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1033036292353937408
Wonder if that will get me a blast from Malc in the morning? 😂
I think it's also to do with the general complexity of the situation and impotence over horrible events. The reason it causes Labour such anguish is that it's a party that likes to see its motivations as moral stances.
Yet here, thanks to the awful actors involved, there really isn't a good or moral outcome to plant your flag on, if you are honest about the reality and consequences of supporting x or y. And due to that and our place in the world now, no chance of material influence.
So people (and thus, MPs who have to deal with protesters) work themselves into a frenzy telling politicians to stop the horrible thing now in place of admitting the moral arc of the universe isn't bent towards justice or peace - and it might just be too much for anyone to solve.
I would much prefer if the reason was the one briefed to Nick Watt - that Labour allegedly threatened they would 'bring him down' after the next election. It would be sordid, of course, but a little more familiar in Westminster terms, and still better than bending to threats of violence.
Natasha Clark
@NatashaC
·
2h
Multiple Tory MPs say Penny Mordaunt pulled tonight's amendment because govt did not have votes to support Israel 'humanitarian pause' motion.
Rumour is that too many Tories had told Whips they were minded to back the Labour motion in favour of full fat ceasefire...
When a play upset Sikhs, and the performance was pulled because of threats of violence, some actually applauded. Then, later they realised their mistake. Or not.
The incident was one of the reasons behind the founding of the EDL - to use the threat of “disorder” to get things *they* didn’t like cancelled.
[very short amount of time] to save [something important]
Liz Truss
Can you beat it? Has to be a sitting MP.
and someone who would love the job
Jacob Rees Mogg
But I am not sure that the speaker should simply let an opposition day debate be about putting the squeeze on another opposition party. Which if we are being frank that is all the SNP were trying to do - and that is what happened back in November. So I have a lot of sympathy with what, I think, the speaker originally tried to do. It didn’t work because of the febrile nature of party politics.
To be honest, like the shenanigans about the humble address during the Brexit debates, and how the Government likes to boycott opposition day debates, I do think MPs should have a long hard look at themselves. Is this pantomime - the day after another MP got put on the “by-election to come list - really what our leaders should do? I disagree strongly.
Mother (Mary). Queen (Elizabeth). Leader (Truss).
Poor old SLab must be feeling a bit embarassed*, what with the motion passed at their conference that did mention the collective punishment of the Gazans.
*only joking
Is my new bestseller.
The New York Times published it on page A16
https://twitter.com/davidbadash/status/1760388442415145190
That is a title and captions designed to appeal to rich, small state, low tax conservative Americans
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/02/21/biden-age-concerns-poll-00142481
It was Starmer himself, apparently.
1/6 There was once this republic that lasted for more than 200 years.
2/6 This republic had a minority faction in parliament that supported Russia.
3/6 This republic also had antique procedural rules that allowed one person to halt a vote.
4/6 Some legislators from this republic used procedural rules to support Russian imperialism...
https://twitter.com/TimothyDSnyder/status/1760431872775958743
SNP were, rather cannily, trying to put Labour MPs in a difficult situation. I can see why they did that. They want to keep their own seats north of the border and put Labour in an awkward position. But not sure they should be proud of the way they are trying to do that.
It also says something about the state of UK politics when an opposition day debate isn’t at all focused on landing a punch on the Government of today. Simply about making life hard for the Government of tomorrow(?).
@Dannythefink
The Speaker of the Commons has announced that he ignored precedent & selected motions because of MP’s concerns of violent retribution if presented with the usual alternatives. This is not a Westminster issue, it’s a democratic crisis if it’s true. So we need to find out if it is."
https://twitter.com/Dannythefink/status/1760429543918104995
The IDF have murdered zero people (to my knowledge) in the last 4 months.
https://www.politico.eu/article/france-helped-britain-keep-euro-clearing-london-brexit/
The UK will leave the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) after the failure of efforts to align it with net zero, the government has announced today (Thursday 22 February).
"Rolf Degen
@DegenRolf
Subsequent generations in the United States are less politically polarized than their predecessors. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11109-024-09917-x"
https://twitter.com/DegenRolf/status/1760304312989749384
https://www.thenational.scot/news/24135758.police-respond-claim-labour-glasgow-office-stormed/
Something happened in Scotland, or did not. Paul Sweeney is a Labour MSP.
Haley does much worse than Trump among Hispanic voters, but is beating Biden by 14 points among white voters.
https://poll.qu.edu/poll-release?releaseid=3890
How many cartoons in those four collection mock Islam?
One, a cartoon showing a woman covered from head to toe, at a beach, captioned: "TALIBAN DE SOLEIL".
https://condenaststore.com/featured/title-taliban-de-soleil-a-woman-sits-sunbathing-christopher-weyant.html?product=acrylic-print
Now I don't particularly blame the New Yorker, or individual cartoonists, for avoiding that subject, consdering what has happened to a few who didn't -- but I won't pretend that intimidation hasn't worked.
...
Truss was interrupted and asked to explain the meaning of “quango”. She replied: “A quango is a quasi non-governmental organisation. In America you call it the administrative state or the deep state. But we have more than 500 of these quangos in Britain and they run everything.”
She went on to list the Environment Agency, Office for Budget Responsibility, Bank of England and Judicial Appointments Commission. “There’s a whole bunch of people – and I describe them as the economic establishment – who fundamentally don’t want the status quo to change because they’re doing quite fine out of it. They don’t really care about the prospects of the average person in Britain and they didn’t want things to change and they didn’t want that power taken away.”
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/feb/21/liz-truss-deep-state-cpac-far-right
There is some tongue-in-cheek humour at the end:-
An advert for Truss’s book, Ten Years to Save the West, was prominently displayed at the CPAC venue, the Gaylord National Resort & Convention Center, along with a volume by Tucker Carlson, a former Fox News host who recently conducted a fawning interview with Russia autocrat Vladimir Putin.
holidaydiplomacy in the southern hemisphere.On Tuesday morning, Lord Cameron began his day with a swim in the cold South Atlantic before seeing some of the Falkland Islands’ penguins.
On a walk around Gypsy Cove, the Foreign Secretary saw a small group of Magellanic penguins in the dunes and a pod of dolphins swimming in the waters below the windswept footpath.
He chatted to children involved in a local conservation group, who persuaded him to try a piece of edible grass growing along the coast.
“It tastes like celery,” the Foreign Secretary said before offering the stem to the youngsters to try – they all declined.
https://www.irishnews.com/news/uk/lord-cameron-becomes-first-uk-foreign-secretary-to-visit-paraguay-N2RE5WFYXZKXBNZXEDSFGOD46U/
(Although I have noted in recent weeks, that just about the only thing that might save Sunak at the election is a massive Labour civil war over the Middle East conflict, that completely turns off floating voters).
Truss was among the headline speakers at this week’s Conservative Political Action Conference at the National Harbor in Maryland. CPAC is billed as the biggest annual gathering of conservatives in the US but has in recent years embraced Donald Trump’s brand of nativist-populism.
In Wednesday’s opening session, an “international summit”, the ex-PM sat side by side with Nigel Farage, former leader of the Brexit party, both with small union flags on the table in front of them.
Other speakers included Steve Bannon, a former White House chief strategist associated with global far-right nationalist movements, and Richard Grenell, a former acting director of national intelligence under Trump. Officials from countries including Australia, Hungary and Japan also took part.
Truss said: “What has happened in Britain over the past 30 years is power that used to be in the hands of politicians has been moved to quangos and bureaucrats and lawyers so what you find is a democratically elected government actually unable to enact policies.”
De Nile ain't just a river in Africa.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-VnWB4fiFk
The video from the bus of the collapse is rather spectacular.
NEW THREAD
Fake News