Peters set out his proposals for a CCER in a speech in February 2016, in which he said he hoped the UK would leave the EU to “heal a rift” with NZ that occurred when the UK joined the EEC. He noted that Boris Johnson had backed a migration agreement between the UK, NZ, Australia and Canada, suggesting that a future migration agreement between these four countries could be based on the current Transtasman Travel Agreement (the agreement between Australia and NZ that allows an automatic right to live and work).
When will MPs learn how Staines plays these things. He never fires all his bullets at once.
If they were smart enough to realise that... then they would be smart enough not to say those comments in the 1st place...
Not to defend the twunt, but I am sure we all have things we said or did when we were 19 that we would prefer not to emerge now.
I am very intrigued as to how a 2002 message board was found and the links established. Quite some detective work!
True, but calling someone - with little provocation - an "ugly bitch" a few months ago is pretty awful. And illuminating as to his character.
I've said some embarrassing things in my youth (and indeed shameful, if I'm being honest), but I don't recall ever insulting a woman in such an nasty fashion.
Indeed - and it is his most recent conduct that is at the centre of the real story here.
We are going to have to accept that our politicians will have a more easily searchable past - and they are going to have to get out ahead of anything nasty.
Do you feel the need to apologise for any of your own offensive posts?
I'm thinking of the bile you directed at Gerald Kaufman - on PB - before his body was even cold.
Peters set out his proposals for a CCER in a speech in February 2016, in which he said he hoped the UK would leave the EU to “heal a rift” with NZ that occurred when the UK joined the EEC. He noted that Boris Johnson had backed a migration agreement between the UK, NZ, Australia and Canada, suggesting that a future migration agreement between these four countries could be based on the current Transtasman Travel Agreement (the agreement between Australia and NZ that allows an automatic right to live and work).
'Cos they're mostly white and speak English? That would make it better?
Much better. We voted to leave the EU to cut down on the number of immigrants who change the nature of our neighbourhoods and don't integrate and cover their faces half the time.
Can't tell if you're serious or sarcastic but Islam is the religion of 1.8% of the EU and 2.6% of Australia so again no that's not it.
Peters set out his proposals for a CCER in a speech in February 2016, in which he said he hoped the UK would leave the EU to “heal a rift” with NZ that occurred when the UK joined the EEC. He noted that Boris Johnson had backed a migration agreement between the UK, NZ, Australia and Canada, suggesting that a future migration agreement between these four countries could be based on the current Transtasman Travel Agreement (the agreement between Australia and NZ that allows an automatic right to live and work).
'Cos they're mostly white and speak English? That would make it better?
Much better. We voted to leave the EU to cut down on the number of immigrants who change the nature of our neighbourhoods and don't integrate and cover their faces half the time.
Can't tell if you're serious or sarcastic but Islam is the religion of 1.8% of the EU and 2.6% of Australia so again no that's not it.
Could it be that our new free travel area is more diverse than the old one? Titters....
Peters set out his proposals for a CCER in a speech in February 2016, in which he said he hoped the UK would leave the EU to “heal a rift” with NZ that occurred when the UK joined the EEC. He noted that Boris Johnson had backed a migration agreement between the UK, NZ, Australia and Canada, suggesting that a future migration agreement between these four countries could be based on the current Transtasman Travel Agreement (the agreement between Australia and NZ that allows an automatic right to live and work).
When will MPs learn how Staines plays these things. He never fires all his bullets at once.
If they were smart enough to realise that... then they would be smart enough not to say those comments in the 1st place...
Not to defend the twunt, but I am sure we all have things we said or did when we were 19 that we would prefer not to emerge now.
I am very intrigued as to how a 2002 message board was found and the links established. Quite some detective work!
True, but calling someone - with little provocation - an "ugly bitch" a few months ago is pretty awful. And illuminating as to his character.
I've said some embarrassing things in my youth (and indeed shameful, if I'm being honest), but I don't recall ever insulting a woman in such an nasty fashion.
Indeed - and it is his most recent conduct that is at the centre of the real story here.
We are going to have to accept that our politicians will have a more easily searchable past - and they are going to have to get out ahead of anything nasty.
Do you feel the need to apologise for any of your own offensive posts?
I'm thinking of the bile you directed at Gerald Kaufman - on PB - before his body was even cold.
That could be said for a lot of us on this site. I’ve probably said something terrible in the past as well.
Re the ongoing discussion about immigration: it reminds me of a discussion about immigration I saw between akala and Frankie Boyle two years ago. Think it was on one of Boyle’s post election shows.
Peters set out his proposals for a CCER in a speech in February 2016, in which he said he hoped the UK would leave the EU to “heal a rift” with NZ that occurred when the UK joined the EEC. He noted that Boris Johnson had backed a migration agreement between the UK, NZ, Australia and Canada, suggesting that a future migration agreement between these four countries could be based on the current Transtasman Travel Agreement (the agreement between Australia and NZ that allows an automatic right to live and work).
'Cos they're mostly white and speak English? That would make it better?
Much better. We voted to leave the EU to cut down on the number of immigrants who change the nature of our neighbourhoods and don't integrate and cover their faces half the time.
Can't tell if you're serious or sarcastic but Islam is the religion of 1.8% of the EU and 2.6% of Australia so again no that's not it.
No indeed that's not it. But I'm pretty sure plenty of people voted to Leave the EU because they wanted to reduce non-EU immigration.
Peters set out his proposals for a CCER in a speech in February 2016, in which he said he hoped the UK would leave the EU to “heal a rift” with NZ that occurred when the UK joined the EEC. He noted that Boris Johnson had backed a migration agreement between the UK, NZ, Australia and Canada, suggesting that a future migration agreement between these four countries could be based on the current Transtasman Travel Agreement (the agreement between Australia and NZ that allows an automatic right to live and work).
That said, I imagine the whip will be taken off him and he will be sent to the naughty step for six months but 20s for a by-election is still good value imo.
She seems to be implying that she’s happy to sit alongside him because he’s ‘changed his views’ which clearly is not the case. I don’t know why she has mentioned meeting many people with misogynistic, homophobic and racist views - as if ‘many’ people having those views makes them okay views. All it tells us is that there is still more work to be done in challenging misogyny, homophobia, and racism.
Seems more like an opportunistic stunt to try and get mandatory reselection onto the agenda.
Which is ironic as mandatory reselection is likely to lead to more O'Maras not less [as newly selected candidates will by nature be less vetted than long-standing ones].
Peters set out his proposals for a CCER in a speech in February 2016, in which he said he hoped the UK would leave the EU to “heal a rift” with NZ that occurred when the UK joined the EEC. He noted that Boris Johnson had backed a migration agreement between the UK, NZ, Australia and Canada, suggesting that a future migration agreement between these four countries could be based on the current Transtasman Travel Agreement (the agreement between Australia and NZ that allows an automatic right to live and work).
'Cos they're mostly white and speak English? That would make it better?
Much better. We voted to leave the EU to cut down on the number of immigrants who change the nature of our neighbourhoods and don't integrate and cover their faces half the time.
Can't tell if you're serious or sarcastic but Islam is the religion of 1.8% of the EU and 2.6% of Australia so again no that's not it.
Wiki has the number of Muslims in the EU at 3.8% in 2010, so must be getting on for 5% now.
No idea where you're getting your 1.8% figure from.
William, what’s your stance on Trump now? IIRC you supported him last year.
I thought he would win from mid-way through the primaries so I was more of a backer in the betting sense than a supporter, although I did like his willingness to slaughter some of the GOP's sacred cows such as the Iraq war. Also I enjoyed the discomfort of Brexiteers who didn't like the idea that their victory was part of the same movement and I felt that Trump would help bring Europe together (which has proven to be somewhat true)...
Even with that said I think he's been terrible as President and the job has brought out the worst of his character and personality flaws.
I really can't see why academics are so upset that a politician might enquire politely about what they are doing on a particular topic of massive public interest.
She seems to be implying that she’s happy to sit alongside him because he’s ‘changed his views’ which clearly is not the case. I don’t know why she has mentioned meeting many people with misogynistic, homophobic and racist views - as if ‘many’ people having those views makes them okay views. All it tells us is that there is still more work to be done in challenging misogyny, homophobia, and racism.
Nice thoughts but I'm not sure you can read too much into her "winning" her seat which is one of the safest Labour seats that has been held with double-digit majorities since the seat was created in 1950.
Seems more like an opportunistic stunt to try and get mandatory reselection onto the agenda.
Which is ironic as mandatory reselection is likely to lead to more O'Maras not less [as newly selected candidates will by nature be less vetted than long-standing ones].
But O'Mara had been a council candidate on three previous occasions - 2004, 2015 and 2016 - plenty of time to do a basic background check. Admittedly council candidates don't have to undergo such rigorous scrutiny - but some of his comments date from 2002-4 - so it wouldn't have been difficult to find them at that time. All you had to do then was Ask Jeeves...
I really can't see why academics are so upset that a politician might enquire politely about what they are doing on a particular topic of massive public interest.
Because it's none of their fucking business. Is why.
Peters set out his proposals for a CCER in a speech in February 2016, in which he said he hoped the UK would leave the EU to “heal a rift” with NZ that occurred when the UK joined the EEC. He noted that Boris Johnson had backed a migration agreement between the UK, NZ, Australia and Canada, suggesting that a future migration agreement between these four countries could be based on the current Transtasman Travel Agreement (the agreement between Australia and NZ that allows an automatic right to live and work).
'Cos they're mostly white and speak English? That would make it better?
Much better. We voted to leave the EU to cut down on the number of immigrants who change the nature of our neighbourhoods and don't integrate and cover their faces half the time.
Can't tell if you're serious or sarcastic but Islam is the religion of 1.8% of the EU and 2.6% of Australia so again no that's not it.
Wiki has the number of Muslims in the EU at 3.8% in 2010, so must be getting on for 5% now.
No idea where you're getting your 1.8% figure from.
Peters set out his proposals for a CCER in a speech in February 2016, in which he said he hoped the UK would leave the EU to “heal a rift” with NZ that occurred when the UK joined the EEC. He noted that Boris Johnson had backed a migration agreement between the UK, NZ, Australia and Canada, suggesting that a future migration agreement between these four countries could be based on the current Transtasman Travel Agreement (the agreement between Australia and NZ that allows an automatic right to live and work).
'Cos they're mostly white and speak English? That would make it better?
Much better. We voted to leave the EU to cut down on the number of immigrants who change the nature of our neighbourhoods and don't integrate and cover their faces half the time.
Can't tell if you're serious or sarcastic but Islam is the religion of 1.8% of the EU and 2.6% of Australia so again no that's not it.
Wiki has the number of Muslims in the EU at 3.8% in 2010, so must be getting on for 5% now.
No idea where you're getting your 1.8% figure from.
I really can't see why academics are so upset that a politician might enquire politely about what they are doing on a particular topic of massive public interest.
Because it's none of their fucking business. Is why.
Tertiary education is generally thought of as a matter of public interest worthy of debate in the House of Commons. So I have to disagree with you: this is some of his fucking business.
William, what’s your stance on Trump now? IIRC you supported him last year.
I thought he would win from mid-way through the primaries so I was more of a backer in the betting sense than a supporter, although I did like his willingness to slaughter some of the GOP's sacred cows such as the Iraq war. Also I enjoyed the discomfort of Brexiteers who didn't like the idea that their victory was part of the same movement and I felt that Trump would help bring Europe together (which has proven to be somewhat true)...
Even with that said I think he's been terrible as President and the job has brought out the worst of his character and personality flaws.
Thanks for the reply.
So RobD was on the money re you being a backer rather than necessarily a supporter. I apologise for my error.
I agree with you that he’s been a pretty terrible President.
Peters set out his proposals for a CCER in a speech in February 2016, in which he said he hoped the UK would leave the EU to “heal a rift” with NZ that occurred when the UK joined the EEC. He noted that Boris Johnson had backed a migration agreement between the UK, NZ, Australia and Canada, suggesting that a future migration agreement between these four countries could be based on the current Transtasman Travel Agreement (the agreement between Australia and NZ that allows an automatic right to live and work).
'Cos they're mostly white and speak English? That would make it better?
Much better. We voted to leave the EU to cut down on the number of immigrants who change the nature of our neighbourhoods and don't integrate and cover their faces half the time.
Can't tell if you're serious or sarcastic but Islam is the religion of 1.8% of the EU and 2.6% of Australia so again no that's not it.
Wiki has the number of Muslims in the EU at 3.8% in 2010, so must be getting on for 5% now.
No idea where you're getting your 1.8% figure from.
Bloody wikipedia! Looks like the larger figure is from projections from earlier census data (2001-2010), whereas the smaller figure is from the EU Barometer polling series from 2015
William, what’s your stance on Trump now? IIRC you supported him last year.
I thought he would win from mid-way through the primaries so I was more of a backer in the betting sense than a supporter, although I did like his willingness to slaughter some of the GOP's sacred cows such as the Iraq war. Also I enjoyed the discomfort of Brexiteers who didn't like the idea that their victory was part of the same movement and I felt that Trump would help bring Europe together (which has proven to be somewhat true)...
Even with that said I think he's been terrible as President and the job has brought out the worst of his character and personality flaws.
Thanks for the reply.
So RobD was on the money re you being a backer rather than necessarily a supporter. I apologise for my error.
I agree with you that he’s been a pretty terrible President.
You know what they say about PB Tories... they are always right, and they always learn.... at least I think that is how it went.
I really can't see why academics are so upset that a politician might enquire politely about what they are doing on a particular topic of massive public interest.
Because it's none of their fucking business. Is why.
I don't think there is any issue with a polite request from an elected Member of Parliament asking for details of courses run by publicly funded universities.
He isn't in a position to interfere with their ability to run whatever courses are offered (assuming they meet the necessary standards) - but he is at liberty to investigate the content of such courses and to comment on any bias/lack of even-handedness that he might just possibly discover.
Universities are there to educate not indoctrinate - for any side.
I really can't see why academics are so upset that a politician might enquire politely about what they are doing on a particular topic of massive public interest.
Because it's none of their fucking business. Is why.
Of course its their business. If Heaton-Harris wants to collect the data so he can make an informed statement about the state of tertiary education concerning Brexit then he is perfectly entitled to do so.
Makes a change from most MPs commenting in ignorance on such matters.
When will MPs learn how Staines plays these things. He never fires all his bullets at once.
If they were smart enough to realise that... then they would be smart enough not to say those comments in the 1st place...
Not to defend the twunt, but I am sure we all have things we said or did when we were 19 that we would prefer not to emerge now.
I am very intrigued as to how a 2002 message board was found and the links established. Quite some detective work!
... but you are defending him. I suspect that he still has those opinions.
I think there are two slightly separate issues here. Disavowing comments you made, a relatively long time back, and before becoming an MP, is one thing. Trying to excuse and/or apologise for more recent comments - particularly when you are doing so only in response to negative publicity - is quite another.
I really can't see why academics are so upset that a politician might enquire politely about what they are doing on a particular topic of massive public interest.
As a former Chairman of the ERG he's just collecting raw material to go into their anti-EU propaganda. He's like a tabloid journalist masquerading as a senior MP in the whips office and using public resources to conduct his campaign. You can imagine them sifting through this kind of thing to find nuggets to go into anti-intellectual tirades in the Mail against the 'enemies of the people' in academia.
Also quite striking that people think everyone is doing a bad job, but especially Hammond (net -26) and Boris (net -26). Davis (-18) and May (-16) are fairly bad while Corbyn (net -6) is the least bad of those tested.
Seems more like an opportunistic stunt to try and get mandatory reselection onto the agenda.
Which is ironic as mandatory reselection is likely to lead to more O'Maras not less [as newly selected candidates will by nature be less vetted than long-standing ones].
But O'Mara had been a council candidate on three previous occasions - 2004, 2015 and 2016 - plenty of time to do a basic background check. Admittedly council candidates don't have to undergo such rigorous scrutiny - but some of his comments date from 2002-4 - so it wouldn't have been difficult to find them at that time. All you had to do then was Ask Jeeves...
What vetting is done by the main political parties, in regard to people standing for Parliament ?
Peters set out his proposals for a CCER in a speech in February 2016, in which he said he hoped the UK would leave the EU to “heal a rift” with NZ that occurred when the UK joined the EEC. He noted that Boris Johnson had backed a migration agreement between the UK, NZ, Australia and Canada, suggesting that a future migration agreement between these four countries could be based on the current Transtasman Travel Agreement (the agreement between Australia and NZ that allows an automatic right to live and work).
'Cos they're mostly white and speak English? That would make it better?
Much better. We voted to leave the EU to cut down on the number of immigrants who change the nature of our neighbourhoods and don't integrate and cover their faces half the time.
Can't tell if you're serious or sarcastic but Islam is the religion of 1.8% of the EU and 2.6% of Australia so again no that's not it.
Wiki has the number of Muslims in the EU at 3.8% in 2010, so must be getting on for 5% now.
No idea where you're getting your 1.8% figure from.
I really can't see why academics are so upset that a politician might enquire politely about what they are doing on a particular topic of massive public interest.
Can't agree with you here. This is not simply a polite enquiry, but the actions of a man looking for material to manufacture a grievance.
Politicians should keep their beaks out of university curricula. End of.
I really can't see why academics are so upset that a politician might enquire politely about what they are doing on a particular topic of massive public interest.
Because it's none of their fucking business. Is why.
Of course its their business. If Heaton-Harris wants to collect the data so he can make an informed statement about the state of tertiary education concerning Brexit then he is perfectly entitled to do so.
Makes a change from most MPs commenting in ignorance on such matters.
Quite. Can you IMAGINE the hysteria if he had made a statement about Brexit being presented in a particular manner in universities without supporting evidence?
I really can't see why academics are so upset that a politician might enquire politely about what they are doing on a particular topic of massive public interest.
As a former Chairman of the ERG he's just collecting raw material to go into their anti-EU propaganda. He's like a tabloid journalist masquerading as a senior MP in the whips office and using public resources to conduct his campaign. You can imagine them sifting through this kind of thing to find nuggets to go into anti-intellectual tirades in the Mail against the 'enemies of the people' in academia.
Provided he doesn't distort the raw material, he can present it as he wishes. That is called public debate.
Also quite striking that people think everyone is doing a bad job, but especially Hammond (net -26) and Boris (net -26). Davis (-18) and May (-16) are fairly bad while Corbyn (net -6) is the least bad of those tested.
Don't Chancellor's (especially Tory ones that are trying to keep a tight grip on the purse strings) traditionally always net a poor score? Goes with the job that the person who announces cuts and/or taxes gets a bad rap.
I really can't see why academics are so upset that a politician might enquire politely about what they are doing on a particular topic of massive public interest.
Perhaps because they fear they are being set up for an 'expose' - and decided to pre-empt it ? Why would this be the particular concern of a government whip ?
I really can't see why academics are so upset that a politician might enquire politely about what they are doing on a particular topic of massive public interest.
Perhaps because they fear they are being set up for an 'expose' - and decided to pre-empt it ? Why would this be the particular concern of a government whip ?
But yes, it's all a bit storm in a teacupish.
A government whip might be concerned that the intellectual climate is preventing a balanced discussion of Brexit.
Personally, obviously, I disagree completely. But I would prefer anyone so concerned to be doing so by reference to hard data rather than airy prejudice.
Also quite striking that people think everyone is doing a bad job, but especially Hammond (net -26) and Boris (net -26). Davis (-18) and May (-16) are fairly bad while Corbyn (net -6) is the least bad of those tested.
Don't Chancellor's (especially Tory ones that are trying to keep a tight grip on the purse strings) traditionally always net a poor score? Goes with the job that the person who announces cuts and/or taxes gets a bad rap.
Not really. Ken Clarke, Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling as Chancellors all regularly outpolled their PMs.
The last two Chancellors have just been particularly bad politicians, and taken particularly bad and unpopular decisions.
Also quite striking that people think everyone is doing a bad job, but especially Hammond (net -26) and Boris (net -26). Davis (-18) and May (-16) are fairly bad while Corbyn (net -6) is the least bad of those tested.
Is it particularly striking that those in government poll worse than those in opposition ?
I really can't see why academics are so upset that a politician might enquire politely about what they are doing on a particular topic of massive public interest.
Perhaps because they fear they are being set up for an 'expose' - and decided to pre-empt it ? Why would this be the particular concern of a government whip ?
But yes, it's all a bit storm in a teacupish.
A government whip might be concerned that the intellectual climate is preventing a balanced discussion of Brexit.
Personally, obviously, I disagree completely. But I would prefer anyone so concerned to be doing so by reference to hard data rather than airy prejudice.
Which universities are quite entitled to decline to supply - though comparing him to McCarthy is a little hyperbolic.. That a government whip doesn't have better things to occupy himself with is the most notable part of the affair.
I really can't see why academics are so upset that a politician might enquire politely about what they are doing on a particular topic of massive public interest.
Perhaps because they fear they are being set up for an 'expose' - and decided to pre-empt it ? Why would this be the particular concern of a government whip ?
But yes, it's all a bit storm in a teacupish.
A government whip might be concerned that the intellectual climate is preventing a balanced discussion of Brexit.
Personally, obviously, I disagree completely. But I would prefer anyone so concerned to be doing so by reference to hard data rather than airy prejudice.
Which universities are quite entitled to decline to supply - though comparing him to McCarthy is a little hyperbolic.. That a government whip doesn't have better things to occupy himself with is the most notable part of the affair.
The House UnEuropean Activities Committee does have a ring to it, mind.
I really can't see why academics are so upset that a politician might enquire politely about what they are doing on a particular topic of massive public interest.
Perhaps because they fear they are being set up for an 'expose' - and decided to pre-empt it ? Why would this be the particular concern of a government whip ?
But yes, it's all a bit storm in a teacupish.
A government whip might be concerned that the intellectual climate is preventing a balanced discussion of Brexit.
Personally, obviously, I disagree completely. But I would prefer anyone so concerned to be doing so by reference to hard data rather than airy prejudice.
Which universities are quite entitled to decline to supply - though comparing him to McCarthy is a little hyperbolic.. That a government whip doesn't have better things to occupy himself with is the most notable part of the affair.
The House UnEuropean Activities Committee does have a ring to it, mind.
It strikes me that, as with his time as Justice Minister, Gove has decided that he needs to adopt a radical but informed agenda for his brief. He also does not strike me as someone who is in hoc to the big Agri-businesses and so is more willing to look at the real issues rather than just going along with the status quo.
It strikes me that, as with his time as Justice Minister, Gove has decided that he needs to adopt a radical but informed agenda for his brief. He also does not strike me as someone who is in hoc to the big Agri-businesses and so is more willing to look at the real issues rather than just going along with the status quo.
Despite my misgivings about his role as a lead Brexiteer, and his shocking behaviour around his abortive leadership bid, I think Gove has done good things - and what he believes to be the right things - as a minister.
Given the impact of altitude, it would be interesting to see the cars race in a vacuum. Apart from having to carry an O2 tank, they could discard every part of the aero package. Would look very odd.
Given the economy was one of the planks of the Tory majority in 2015 Mrs May made such a huge blunder by not focussing on it and Corbyn’s plans.
All because she wanted to sack Phil Hammond.
She’s beneath contempt.
CCHQ did not want to focus on the economy because there were expected to be unannounced tax rises -- based on the last budget and the NI rise and U-turn -- the pension triple lock was dropped and because to everyone's surprise, Labour's manifesto was costed and the Conservative one was not.
May like John Major is a managerial figure, decent but dull who does not inspire much passion either way but can win if there are significant votes against their opponent, as there were against Kinnock in 1992 and Corbyn in 2017.
I really can't see why academics are so upset that a politician might enquire politely about what they are doing on a particular topic of massive public interest.
I think the reaction is some silly people broadly in the Remain constituency believing the guff they told themselves, and now going into Henny-Penny mode. Again. And some of them playing politics. Not really very much to see.
Perhaps Chris HH should be looking at a wider reform of our Universities, given that this has been the reaction? Or he could FOI them for most of the information.
It strikes me that, as with his time as Justice Minister, Gove has decided that he needs to adopt a radical but informed agenda for his brief. He also does not strike me as someone who is in hoc to the big Agri-businesses and so is more willing to look at the real issues rather than just going along with the status quo.
This is why Michael Gove is a great minister. Trouble is he takes his eye off the day job so does not even notice the shortfalls in school places, and the shortfall in prison places. If true to form, Gove will introduce ecologically sound soil guidelines while supermarket shelves are bare and food is left to rot in post-Brexit customs warehouses.
I disagree with you lot. What other topic has been the subject of such scrutiny? Which MP has asked to examine the contents of the UEA History of Art course to see if the right message is being taught on abstract expressionists?
How widespread is this enquiry into academic loyalties and content?
Brexit is a political issue; how widespread is the enquiry into the teaching of, say, the Enlightenment?
If Labour and the Tories are still on 42% that means the Tories would likely again win most seats with 304 seats to 284 for Labour, though Labour could form a minority government with SNP and PC and LD confidence and supply. http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
It strikes me that, as with his time as Justice Minister, Gove has decided that he needs to adopt a radical but informed agenda for his brief. He also does not strike me as someone who is in hoc to the big Agri-businesses and so is more willing to look at the real issues rather than just going along with the status quo.
It strikes me that, as with his time as Justice Minister, Gove has decided that he needs to adopt a radical but informed agenda for his brief. He also does not strike me as someone who is in hoc to the big Agri-businesses and so is more willing to look at the real issues rather than just going along with the status quo.
I'm in the Gove fan club too. I had half an hour with him yesterday for an animal welfare charity and I couldn't have asked for a more constructive attitude. I think he's really trying to do a good job with his brief, rather than using it as a basis for career advancement or whatever. It's very refreshing.
May like John Major is a managerial figure, decent but dull who does not inspire much passion either way but can win if there are significant votes against their opponent, as there were against Kinnock in 1992 and Corbyn in 2017.
May is not like Major. Just one example: Major was prepared to stop the campaign bus and debate with who happened to be there. Sure his Soap Box campaigning was somewhat staged managed, but TM was doing exactly the opposite in her campaign, trying to keep away from meeting the public and awkward journalists.
People look back on Major's premiership as a shambles, but it was the Conservative MPs who were a shambles, and the "rebel MPs" took advantage of the thin Majority. Major worked hard hold the whole thing together. This time arounbd both May and the Conservative MPs are a shambles.
It strikes me that, as with his time as Justice Minister, Gove has decided that he needs to adopt a radical but informed agenda for his brief. He also does not strike me as someone who is in hoc to the big Agri-businesses and so is more willing to look at the real issues rather than just going along with the status quo.
Despite my misgivings about his role as a lead Brexiteer, and his shocking behaviour around his abortive leadership bid, I think Gove has done good things - and what he believes to be the right things - as a minister.
Gove is good at getting things done. He's willing to be unpopular. He's able to maintain enthusiasm for what must be an exhausting fight (taking on the intransigent might of the civil service). And he does it with cheery good manners.
I know he isn't popular and I don't think he would be any good as a party leader (just too geeky and nerdy - see Ed Miliband) but I do think he has his merits.
It strikes me that, as with his time as Justice Minister, Gove has decided that he needs to adopt a radical but informed agenda for his brief. He also does not strike me as someone who is in hoc to the big Agri-businesses and so is more willing to look at the real issues rather than just going along with the status quo.
I'm in the Gove fan club too. I had half an hour with him yesterday for an animal welfare charity and I couldn't have asked for a more constructive attitude. I think he's really trying to do a good job with his brief, rather than using it as a basis for career advancement or whatever. It's very refreshing.
May like John Major is a managerial figure, decent but dull who does not inspire much passion either way but can win if there are significant votes against their opponent, as there were against Kinnock in 1992 and Corbyn in 2017.
May is not like Major. Just one example: Major was prepared to stop the campaign bus and debate with who happened to be there. Sure his Soap Box campaigning was somewhat staged managed, but TM was doing exactly the opposite in her campaign, trying to keep away from meeting the public and awkward journalists.
People look back on Major's premiership as a shambles, but it was the Conservative MPs who were a shambles, and the "rebel MPs" took advantage of the thin Majority. Major worked hard hold the whole thing together. This time arounbd both May and the Conservative MPs are a shambles.
Apart from the soap box campaigning the Major and May premierships are now quite similar (both got about 42% anyway though Major got a majority with it). Lamont said Major was 'in office but not in power' and the same could apply to May. Major, like May, was also hampered by Eurosceptic backbenchers in terms of getting a deal with the EU.
There was also a more charismatic but divisive blonde lurking in the background for both, for Heseltine read Boris.
I really can't see why academics are so upset that a politician might enquire politely about what they are doing on a particular topic of massive public interest.
I can see why they might be upset, but if academics will forgive me, they don't tend to help themselves by overreacting to a lot of things. A colleague told me a tale of when they were at uni in 2010, and Gove renamed DCFS to just DfE, and their lecturer (admittedly on an education related topic, threw out their notes for the lecture topic and decided to rant about what that change meant and how bad it was for the entire lecture instead. Yes, that's pure, unfiltered anecdote, and some things need reacting to strongly, but academics who get their headlines tend to be the ones who are the most willing to say something very over the top.
It strikes me that, as with his time as Justice Minister, Gove has decided that he needs to adopt a radical but informed agenda for his brief. He also does not strike me as someone who is in hoc to the big Agri-businesses and so is more willing to look at the real issues rather than just going along with the status quo.
I'm in the Gove fan club too. I had half an hour with him yesterday for an animal welfare charity and I couldn't have asked for a more constructive attitude. I think he's really trying to do a good job with his brief, rather than using it as a basis for career advancement or whatever. It's very refreshing.
Good to hear!
The kind of fellow who knows where Venezuela is on a map.
Yes, but Mrs May is busy implementing the Labour one anyway!
Shh. That has to be kept quiet, for one because it will upset Tories, but also it upsets Labour if they want to attack the government policies, even if they also wanted to do them.
It strikes me that, as with his time as Justice Minister, Gove has decided that he needs to adopt a radical but informed agenda for his brief. He also does not strike me as someone who is in hoc to the big Agri-businesses and so is more willing to look at the real issues rather than just going along with the status quo.
This is why Michael Gove is a great minister. Trouble is he takes his eye off the day job so does not even notice the shortfalls in school places, and the shortfall in prison places. If true to form, Gove will introduce ecologically sound soil guidelines while supermarket shelves are bare and food is left to rot in post-Brexit customs warehouses.
I hardly think that is fair given that one of his actions as Justice Secretary was to announce the building of 9 new prisons to house an extra 10,000 prisoners.
Yes one can always do more but a 12% increase in prison places is hardly a case of not noticing.
It strikes me that, as with his time as Justice Minister, Gove has decided that he needs to adopt a radical but informed agenda for his brief. He also does not strike me as someone who is in hoc to the big Agri-businesses and so is more willing to look at the real issues rather than just going along with the status quo.
This is why Michael Gove is a great minister. Trouble is he takes his eye off the day job so does not even notice the shortfalls in school places, and the shortfall in prison places. If true to form, Gove will introduce ecologically sound soil guidelines while supermarket shelves are bare and food is left to rot in post-Brexit customs warehouses.
I hardly think that is fair given that one of his actions as Justice Secretary was to announce the building of 9 new prisons to house an extra 10,000 prisoners.
Yes one can always do more but a 12% increase in prison places is hardly a case of not noticing.
The question should be why there should be a 12% increase in prison places if crime is falling.....
"possession of a record of terrorist information of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terror" is a ridiculous crime.
Rewrite the law, or else apply it fairly - and bring hundreds of thousands of people to court.
It strikes me that, as with his time as Justice Minister, Gove has decided that he needs to adopt a radical but informed agenda for his brief. He also does not strike me as someone who is in hoc to the big Agri-businesses and so is more willing to look at the real issues rather than just going along with the status quo.
This is why Michael Gove is a great minister. Trouble is he takes his eye off the day job so does not even notice the shortfalls in school places, and the shortfall in prison places. If true to form, Gove will introduce ecologically sound soil guidelines while supermarket shelves are bare and food is left to rot in post-Brexit customs warehouses.
I hardly think that is fair given that one of his actions as Justice Secretary was to announce the building of 9 new prisons to house an extra 10,000 prisoners.
Yes one can always do more but a 12% increase in prison places is hardly a case of not noticing.
The question should be why there should be a 12% increase in prison places if crime is falling.....
Rate of detection going up quicker than crime is going down?
It strikes me that, as with his time as Justice Minister, Gove has decided that he needs to adopt a radical but informed agenda for his brief. He also does not strike me as someone who is in hoc to the big Agri-businesses and so is more willing to look at the real issues rather than just going along with the status quo.
This is why Michael Gove is a great minister. Trouble is he takes his eye off the day job so does not even notice the shortfalls in school places, and the shortfall in prison places. If true to form, Gove will introduce ecologically sound soil guidelines while supermarket shelves are bare and food is left to rot in post-Brexit customs warehouses.
I hardly think that is fair given that one of his actions as Justice Secretary was to announce the building of 9 new prisons to house an extra 10,000 prisoners.
Yes one can always do more but a 12% increase in prison places is hardly a case of not noticing.
The question should be why there should be a 12% increase in prison places if crime is falling.....
Fewer crimes but more imprisonable offences being committed.
It strikes me that, as with his time as Justice Minister, Gove has decided that he needs to adopt a radical but informed agenda for his brief. He also does not strike me as someone who is in hoc to the big Agri-businesses and so is more willing to look at the real issues rather than just going along with the status quo.
This is why Michael Gove is a great minister. Trouble is he takes his eye off the day job so does not even notice the shortfalls in school places, and the shortfall in prison places. If true to form, Gove will introduce ecologically sound soil guidelines while supermarket shelves are bare and food is left to rot in post-Brexit customs warehouses.
I hardly think that is fair given that one of his actions as Justice Secretary was to announce the building of 9 new prisons to house an extra 10,000 prisoners.
Yes one can always do more but a 12% increase in prison places is hardly a case of not noticing.
The question should be why there should be a 12% increase in prison places if crime is falling.....
Comments
I'm thinking of the bile you directed at Gerald Kaufman - on PB - before his body was even cold.
Re the ongoing discussion about immigration: it reminds me of a discussion about immigration I saw between akala and Frankie Boyle two years ago. Think it was on one of Boyle’s post election shows.
I know, crazy, huh.
https://twitter.com/paulmasonnews/status/922833766728466432
The mask has slipped, dear boy.
That said, I imagine the whip will be taken off him and he will be sent to the naughty step for six months but 20s for a by-election is still good value imo.
A shame, because I liked Rayner.
Pidcock’s not popular here, but I did like when she said this: https://www.google.co.uk/amp/m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_59ca5baee4b06ddf45fb4c0f/amp
Which is ironic as mandatory reselection is likely to lead to more O'Maras not less [as newly selected candidates will by nature be less vetted than long-standing ones].
No idea where you're getting your 1.8% figure from.
Even with that said I think he's been terrible as President and the job has brought out the worst of his character and personality flaws.
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/922842456856678400
I really can't see why academics are so upset that a politician might enquire politely about what they are doing on a particular topic of massive public interest.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_European_Union
Which gets its numbers from here:
http://www.pewforum.org/2011/01/27/future-of-the-global-muslim-population-regional-europe/
So RobD was on the money re you being a backer rather than necessarily a supporter. I apologise for my error.
I agree with you that he’s been a pretty terrible President.
He isn't in a position to interfere with their ability to run whatever courses are offered (assuming they meet the necessary standards) - but he is at liberty to investigate the content of such courses and to comment on any bias/lack of even-handedness that he might just possibly discover.
Universities are there to educate not indoctrinate - for any side.
Makes a change from most MPs commenting in ignorance on such matters.
Disavowing comments you made, a relatively long time back, and before becoming an MP, is one thing.
Trying to excuse and/or apologise for more recent comments - particularly when you are doing so only in response to negative publicity - is quite another.
Politicians should keep their beaks out of university curricula. End of.
Why would this be the particular concern of a government whip ?
But yes, it's all a bit storm in a teacupish.
Personally, obviously, I disagree completely. But I would prefer anyone so concerned to be doing so by reference to hard data rather than airy prejudice.
The last two Chancellors have just been particularly bad politicians, and taken particularly bad and unpopular decisions.
Given the economy was one of the planks of the Tory majority in 2015 Mrs May made such a huge blunder by not focussing on it and Corbyn’s plans.
All because she wanted to sack Phil Hammond.
She’s beneath contempt.
https://twitter.com/GeorgeMonbiot/status/922845169380151297
That a government whip doesn't have better things to occupy himself with is the most notable part of the affair.
Hmm.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-41733250
Edit: ah, not a minister, just a lowly MP. Still... prepare the trebuchet.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/41717384
After that she could not credibly attack Corbyn for putting ideology before economic prudence.
Perhaps Chris HH should be looking at a wider reform of our Universities, given that this has been the reaction? Or he could FOI them for most of the information.
Why has he still got the whip?
How widespread is this enquiry into academic loyalties and content?
Brexit is a political issue; how widespread is the enquiry into the teaching of, say, the Enlightenment?
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
People look back on Major's premiership as a shambles, but it was the Conservative MPs who were a shambles, and the "rebel MPs" took advantage of the thin Majority. Major worked hard hold the whole thing together. This time arounbd both May and the Conservative MPs are a shambles.
https://twitter.com/krishgm/status/922855011935285248
Does it matter what their manifesto said? They lost
I know he isn't popular and I don't think he would be any good as a party leader (just too geeky and nerdy - see Ed Miliband) but I do think he has his merits.
There was also a more charismatic but divisive blonde lurking in the background for both, for Heseltine read Boris.
Yes, but Mrs May is busy implementing the Labour one anyway!
That cannot be right, I've seen it written many times that they won. Well we thought she was decent but dull, anyway. I can see why they might be upset, but if academics will forgive me, they don't tend to help themselves by overreacting to a lot of things. A colleague told me a tale of when they were at uni in 2010, and Gove renamed DCFS to just DfE, and their lecturer (admittedly on an education related topic, threw out their notes for the lecture topic and decided to rant about what that change meant and how bad it was for the entire lecture instead. Yes, that's pure, unfiltered anecdote, and some things need reacting to strongly, but academics who get their headlines tend to be the ones who are the most willing to say something very over the top.
Yes one can always do more but a 12% increase in prison places is hardly a case of not noticing.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-41732729
"possession of a record of terrorist information of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terror" is a ridiculous crime.
Rewrite the law, or else apply it fairly - and bring hundreds of thousands of people to court.