Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Midsized powers - as we will be - benefit from a rules based international environment. We want a strong World Trade Organisation to police trade. We do not benefit from being treated as the plaything of the US: where we can only avoid steel tariffs if we do what we're told.
His big chance came at the EU Ref when, despite clearly being a leaver, he supported Remain because he thought they would win and it would be better for his career.
Perhaps it was the reverse? Maybe he was never a leaver but thought pretending to be would be good for his career. After all, that's the more common pretence for a Tory politician.
Well in that case why is he now straight back on the leaver bandwagon? But I am sure he will change again as soon as the wind turns. That is the problem with politicians like Javid (and May of course).
I am now thinking May will be gone by the end of May anyway. The Brexit betrayal carcrash is about to unfold - are the leavers really going to let her get away with BRINO?
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Whilst I understand your motivation (and JRM is so utterly unsuitable to be PM I can scarcely believe sensible Conservatives support him), I fail to believe your membership of Labour does anything other than aid Corbyn and the far left. That is despite your excellent threader and comments.
I don't want my son growing up in an environment of bigotry and hate that JRM or Corbyn promises the country. The way to do that is to counter their views - and of those like them - robustly. It is hard to do that from within the Labour tent, for the reasons Woodcock and others are finding.
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Midsized powers - as we will be - benefit from a rules based international environment. We want a strong World Trade Organisation to police trade. We do not benefit from being treated as the plaything of the US: where we can only avoid steel tariffs if we do what we're told.
I can’t make Rees Mogg out. He’s either profoundly thick or deeply dishonest. I tend towards the latter, but can’t rule out the former. What I know for sure is that I do not want him, Johnson and their mates deciding the future for my children and their children. That’s why there’s no alternative but to get back into the cesspool to use the votes my Labour membership gives me to do all I can to reduce the hold the far left currently has on the party.
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Midsized powers - as we will be - benefit from a rules based international environment. We want a strong World Trade Organisation to police trade. We do not benefit from being treated as the plaything of the US: where we can only avoid steel tariffs if we do what we're told.
I can’t make Rees Mogg out. He’s either profoundly thick or deeply dishonest. I tend towards the latter, but can’t rule out the former. What I know for sure is that I do not want him, Johnson and their mates deciding the future for my children and their children. That’s why there’s no alternative but to get back into the cesspool to use the votes my Labour membership gives me to do all I can to reduce the hold the far left currently has on the party.
So you want Corbyn and his mates deciding the future for your children and their children? Because that is exactly what you are aiding by being in the Labour party.
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Midsized powers - as we will be - benefit from a rules based international environment. We want a strong World Trade Organisation to police trade. We do not benefit from being treated as the plaything of the US: where we can only avoid steel tariffs if we do what we're told.
I can’t make Rees Mogg out. He’s either profoundly thick or deeply dishonest. I tend towards the latter, but can’t rule out the former. What I know for sure is that I do not want him, Johnson and their mates deciding the future for my children and their children. That’s why there’s no alternative but to get back into the cesspool to use the votes my Labour membership gives me to do all I can to reduce the hold the far left currently has on the party.
So you want Corbyn and his mates deciding the future for your children and their children? Because that is exactly what you are aiding by being in the Labour party.
No, it’s not. Inside the Labour party I get a vote to stop the far left and to create a party capable of winning elections. Iutside I just have to accept that the Tories will be in power for years to come.
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Midsized powers - as we will be - benefit from a rules based international environment. We want a strong World Trade Organisation to police trade. We do not benefit from being treated as the plaything of the US: where we can only avoid steel tariffs if we do what we're told.
I can’t make Rees Mogg out. He’s either profoundly thick or deeply dishonest. I tend towards the latter, but can’t rule out the former. What I know for sure is that I do not want him, Johnson and their mates deciding the future for my children and their children. That’s why there’s no alternative but to get back into the cesspool to use the votes my Labour membership gives me to do all I can to reduce the hold the far left currently has on the party.
So you want Corbyn and his mates deciding the future for your children and their children? Because that is exactly what you are aiding by being in the Labour party.
There are plenty of us who are appalled by the thought of either alternative.
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
This was an interesting aside in the BBC story on Javid* - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43957020 As housing secretary he pushed hard, ultimately unsuccessfully, to make bolder moves than Number 10 and 11 would accept. Already today he has made plain that he's ready to junk existing policy...
His apparent efforts on housing suggest he has at least the right political instincts in one area. As Home Secretary appointed in these particular circumstances, he will have rather more power to argue his corner than he did in his previous job. It will be at least interesting to see what he does next.
*autocorrect suggested Jarvis..... needs cultural re-education.
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
This was an interesting aside in the BBC story on Javid* - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43957020 As housing secretary he pushed hard, ultimately unsuccessfully, to make bolder moves than Number 10 and 11 would accept. Already today he has made plain that he's ready to junk existing policy...
His apparent efforts on housing suggest he has at least the right political instincts in one area. As Home Secretary appointed in these particular circumstances, he will have rather more power to argue his corner than he did in his previous job. It will be at least interesting to see what he does next.
*autocorrect suggested Jarvis..... needs cultural re-education.
Also interesting because May's words on entering office appeared to suggest that she *got* the magnitude of the problems we face and knew things had to change. The lack of more radical action then being down to some combination of lack of imagination to identify workable solutions and lack of political capital to push them through against the inertia and vested interests of the Tory party. Whereas this suggests that no.10 is itself blocking more radical action; not at all what we were promised.
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Midsized powers - as we will be - benefit from a rules based international environment. We want a strong World Trade Organisation to police trade. We do not benefit from being treated as the plaything of the US: where we can only avoid steel tariffs if we do what we're told.
I can’t make Rees Mogg out. He’s either profoundly thick or deeply dishonest. I tend towards the latter, but can’t rule out the former. What I know for sure is that I do not want him, Johnson and their mates deciding the future for my children and their children. That’s why there’s no alternative but to get back into the cesspool to use the votes my Labour membership gives me to do all I can to reduce the hold the far left currently has on the party.
Why the 'either'?
Probably, he is blinkered rather than thick, having led an existence and with views that give him little understanding of the modern world.
This was an interesting aside in the BBC story on Javid* - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43957020 As housing secretary he pushed hard, ultimately unsuccessfully, to make bolder moves than Number 10 and 11 would accept. Already today he has made plain that he's ready to junk existing policy...
His apparent efforts on housing suggest he has at least the right political instincts in one area. As Home Secretary appointed in these particular circumstances, he will have rather more power to argue his corner than he did in his previous job. It will be at least interesting to see what he does next.
*autocorrect suggested Jarvis..... needs cultural re-education.
Also interesting because May's words on entering office appeared to suggest that she *got* the magnitude of the problems we face and knew things had to change. The lack of more radical action then being down to some combination of lack of imagination to identify workable solutions and lack of political capital to push them through against the inertia and vested interests of the Tory party. Whereas this suggests that no.10 is itself blocking more radical action; not at all what we were promised.
Windrush excepted, Javid will be tougher on "illegal" immigration than even May seemed to be.
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Midsized powers - as we will be - benefit from a rules based international environment. We want a strong World Trade Organisation to police trade. We do not benefit from being treated as the plaything of the US: where we can only avoid steel tariffs if we do what we're told.
I can’t make Rees Mogg out. He’s either profoundly thick or deeply dishonest. I tend towards the latter, but can’t rule out the former. What I know for sure is that I do not want him, Johnson and their mates deciding the future for my children and their children. That’s why there’s no alternative but to get back into the cesspool to use the votes my Labour membership gives me to do all I can to reduce the hold the far left currently has on the party.
So you want Corbyn and his mates deciding the future for your children and their children? Because that is exactly what you are aiding by being in the Labour party.
No, it’s not. Inside the Labour party I get a vote to stop the far left and to create a party capable of winning elections. Iutside I just have to accept that the Tories will be in power for years to come.
Why not have a voting system where voters get to make such choices, rather than their being exclusive to people who pay to get inside the tent?
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Midsized powers - as we will be - benefit from a rules based international environment. We want a strong World Trade Organisation to police trade. We do not benefit from being treated as the plaything of the US: where we can only avoid steel tariffs if we do what we're told.
I can’t make Rees Mogg out. He’s either profoundly thick or deeply dishonest. I tend towards the latter, but can’t rule out the former. What I know for sure is that I do not want him, Johnson and their mates deciding the future for my children and their children. That’s why there’s no alternative but to get back into the cesspool to use the votes my Labour membership gives me to do all I can to reduce the hold the far left currently has on the party.
So you want Corbyn and his mates deciding the future for your children and their children? Because that is exactly what you are aiding by being in the Labour party.
There are plenty of us who are appalled by the thought of either alternative.
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Midsized powers - as we will be - benefit from a rules based international environment. We want a strong World Trade Organisation to police trade. We do not benefit from being treated as the plaything of the US: where we can only avoid steel tariffs if we do what we're told.
I can’t make Rees Mogg out. He’s either profoundly thick or deeply dishonest. I tend towards the latter, but can’t rule out the former. What I know for sure is that I do not want him, Johnson and their mates deciding the future for my children and their children. That’s why there’s no alternative but to get back into the cesspool to use the votes my Labour membership gives me to do all I can to reduce the hold the far left currently has on the party.
So you want Corbyn and his mates deciding the future for your children and their children? Because that is exactly what you are aiding by being in the Labour party.
No, it’s not. Inside the Labour party I get a vote to stop the far left and to create a party capable of winning elections. Iutside I just have to accept that the Tories will be in power for years to come.
You get one vote, but your membership will be used to show how the party is broad and inclusive, even whilst being interior and bigoted. "Look! We have a million members! Corbyn is great!"
You are not a fool, but you will be used as a useful fool by the Corbynite followers.
I'd understand if there was any likelihood of a non-Corbynite leader within Labour. But there isn't, and the faithful are ruining the chances of anyone doing so.
Sajid Javid....as I said earlier,. he is one of the very few Tories that could turn my head....I don't understand why he has never been mentioned as a runner and rider in the leadership debate.....
A couple of years ago he was getting a similar build up, potential CoE etc, then he had some really dodgy media outings and quickly got shuffled off to a more minor role.
In fairness I think a fair bit of that had to do with the precipitous fall of his patron (Osborne) and having to win back favour with the new regime. By political standards he was pretty loyal.
But he didn't achieve a lot when at Business in terms of "cutting red tape". Pretty much uncle Vince levels of activity. And he hasn't been exactly prominent in building new housing either. OTOH facing up to Abbott would make most people look good.
I've always talked him up as a potential Tory leader. He has a great backstory and had been positioned by Osborne as supporter. He was an investment banker and was linked to a fraud on bonuses. Anyone know anything more about it
It’s not fair to call it a “fraud” on bonuses. Some too-clever tax planner thought he’d come up with a whizzo scheme. Some employees participated. The HMRC ruled against them and made them pay back the tax owed.
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Midsized powers - as we will be - benefit from a rules based international environment. We want a strong World Trade Organisation to police trade. We do not benefit from being treated as the plaything of the US: where we can only avoid steel tariffs if we do what we're told.
I can’t make Rees Mogg out. He’s either profoundly thick or deeply dishonest. I tend towards the latter, but can’t rule out the former. What I know for sure is that I do not want him, Johnson and their mates deciding the future for my children and their children. That’s why there’s no alternative but to get back into the cesspool to use the votes my Labour membership gives me to do all I can to reduce the hold the far left currently has on the party.
So you want Corbyn and his mates deciding the future for your children and their children? Because that is exactly what you are aiding by being in the Labour party.
There are plenty of us who are appalled by the thought of either alternative.
What I object to is the forced choice element: either accept the suzerainty of the EU or of the US.
We chose to rely on ourselves. And, you know what, sometimes that will be difficult. But swapping the EU for the US (and a slightly capricious US right now, at that) is merely choosing Atlanticism over Europeanism. (Now, there's nothing wrong with that - and I'm an Atlanticist at heart - but it is fundamentally dishonest to say that it's about "regaining control", if it's merely a question of changing masters.)
This was an interesting aside in the BBC story on Javid* - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43957020 As housing secretary he pushed hard, ultimately unsuccessfully, to make bolder moves than Number 10 and 11 would accept. Already today he has made plain that he's ready to junk existing policy...
His apparent efforts on housing suggest he has at least the right political instincts in one area. As Home Secretary appointed in these particular circumstances, he will have rather more power to argue his corner than he did in his previous job. It will be at least interesting to see what he does next.
*autocorrect suggested Jarvis..... needs cultural re-education.
Also interesting because May's words on entering office appeared to suggest that she *got* the magnitude of the problems we face and knew things had to change. The lack of more radical action then being down to some combination of lack of imagination to identify workable solutions and lack of political capital to push them through against the inertia and vested interests of the Tory party. Whereas this suggests that no.10 is itself blocking more radical action; not at all what we were promised.
Windrush excepted, Javid will be tougher on "illegal" immigration than even May seemed to be.
Let's see. The first problem for Javid is to clearly differentiate the two groups, and avoid giving any anxiety (or reason to vote Labour) for those who are properly settled, without tying them up in a Kafkaesque nightmare. He might even suggest an amnesty, as the Foreign Secretary already has.
Another elephant trap Javid must skilfully negotiate is, as made plain by grandees from both parties yesterday, that this issue might be used as a front for the introduction of ID cards. After all, if we had a national database of all citizens, these injustices would not have arisen. Except of course, they would -- when the database was being set up.
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Midsized powers - as we will be - benefit from a rules based international environment. We want a strong World Trade Organisation to police trade. We do not benefit from being treated as the plaything of the US: where we can only avoid steel tariffs if we do what we're told.
I can’t make Rees Mogg out. He’s either profoundly thick or deeply dishonest. I tend towards the latter, but can’t rule out the former. What I know for sure is that I do not want him, Johnson and their mates deciding the future for my children and their children. That’s why there’s no alternative but to get back into the cesspool to use the votes my Labour membership gives me to do all I can to reduce the hold the far left currently has on the party.
So you want Corbyn and his mates deciding the future for your children and their children? Because that is exactly what you are aiding by being in the Labour party.
There are plenty of us who are appalled by the thought of either alternative.
What I object to is the forced choice element: either accept the suzerainty of the EU or of the US.
We chose to rely on ourselves. And, you know what, sometimes that will be difficult. But swapping the EU for the US (and a slightly capricious US right now, at that) is merely choosing Atlanticism over Europeanism. (Now, there's nothing wrong with that - and I'm an Atlanticist at heart - but it is fundamentally dishonest to say that it's about "regaining control", if it's merely a question of changing masters.)
It was always going to be thus. The Tories were most unlikely ever to try and carve out a new more non-aligned role on the world stage, akin to Norway or Switzerland. Ironically Corbyn is one of the few politicians who would favour taking us down such a route; the rest have watched way too many war films.
This was an interesting aside in the BBC story on Javid* - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43957020 As housing secretary he pushed hard, ultimately unsuccessfully, to make bolder moves than Number 10 and 11 would accept. Already today he has made plain that he's ready to junk existing policy...
His apparent efforts on housing suggest he has at least the right political instincts in one area. As Home Secretary appointed in these particular circumstances, he will have rather more power to argue his corner than he did in his previous job. It will be at least interesting to see what he does next.
*autocorrect suggested Jarvis..... needs cultural re-education.
Also interesting because May's words on entering office appeared to suggest that she *got* the magnitude of the problems we face and knew things had to change. The lack of more radical action then being down to some combination of lack of imagination to identify workable solutions and lack of political capital to push them through against the inertia and vested interests of the Tory party. Whereas this suggests that no.10 is itself blocking more radical action; not at all what we were promised.
Windrush excepted, Javid will be tougher on "illegal" immigration than even May seemed to be.
Let's see. The first problem for Javid is to clearly differentiate the two groups, and avoid giving any anxiety (or reason to vote Labour) for those who are properly settled, without tying them up in a Kafkaesque nightmare. He might even suggest an amnesty, as the Foreign Secretary already has.
Another elephant trap Javid must skilfully negotiate is, as made plain by grandees from both parties yesterday, that this issue might be used as a front for the introduction of ID cards. After all, if we had a national database of all citizens, these injustices would not have arisen. Except of course, they would -- when the database was being set up.
While I was originally against ID cards on principle I’m coming round to the idea they might not be such a bad thing after all.
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Midsized powers - as we will be - benefit from a rules based international environment. We want a strong World Trade Organisation to police trade. We do not benefit from being treated as the plaything of the US: where we can only avoid steel tariffs if we do what we're told.
I can’t make Rees Mogg out. He’s either profoundly thick or deeply dishonest. I tend towards the latter, but can’t rule out the former. What I know for sure is that I do not want him, Johnson and their mates deciding the future for my children and their children. That’s why there’s no alternative but to get back into the cesspool to use the votes my Labour membership gives me to do all I can to reduce the hold the far left currently has on the party.
So you want Corbyn and his mates deciding the future for your children and their children? Because that is exactly what you are aiding by being in the Labour party.
No, it’s not. Inside the Labour party I get a vote to stop the far left and to create a party capable of winning elections. Iutside I just have to accept that the Tories will be in power for years to come.
Which argument would be valid if it wasn't for the fact that non-members can vote on payment of a registration fee.
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Midsized powers - as we will be - benefit from a rules based international environment. We want a strong World Trade Organisation to police trade. We do not benefit from being treated as the plaything of the US: where we can only avoid steel tariffs if we do what we're told.
I can’t make Rees Mogg out. He’s either profoundly thick or deeply dishonest. I tend towards the latter, but can’t rule out the former. What I know for sure is that I do not want him, Johnson and their mates deciding the future for my children and their children. That’s why there’s no alternative but to get back into the cesspool to use the votes my Labour membership gives me to do all I can to reduce the hold the far left currently has on the party.
So you want Corbyn and his mates deciding the future for your children and their children? Because that is exactly what you are aiding by being in the Labour party.
No, it’s not. Inside the Labour party I get a vote to stop the far left and to create a party capable of winning elections. Iutside I just have to accept that the Tories will be in power for years to come.
Which argument would be valid if it wasn't for the fact that non-members can vote on payment of a registration fee.
Which was a damn fool idea from day 1. What other serious (I know, I know) organisation lets a member vote on important matters the day after joining? Or for a nominal fee?
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Midsized powers - as we will be - benefit from a rules based international environment. We want a strong World Trade Organisation to police trade. We do not benefit from being treated as the plaything of the US: where we can only avoid steel tariffs if we do what we're told.
I can’t make Rees Mogg out. He’s either profoundly thick or deeply dishonest. I tend towards the latter, but can’t rule out the former. What I know for sure is that I do not want him, Johnson and their mates deciding the future for my children and their children. That’s why there’s no alternative but to get back into the cesspool to use the votes my Labour membership gives me to do all I can to reduce the hold the far left currently has on the party.
So you want Corbyn and his mates deciding the future for your children and their children? Because that is exactly what you are aiding by being in the Labour party.
No, it’s not. Inside the Labour party I get a vote to stop the far left and to create a party capable of winning elections. Iutside I just have to accept that the Tories will be in power for years to come.
Which argument would be valid if it wasn't for the fact that non-members can vote on payment of a registration fee.
SO is also interested in all the local and other internal positions - not just votes for leader.
Fact is, the Labour Party remains the biggest obstacle to getting a decent government in this country. Waiting for the second coming of Tony Blair is fool's gold (and even he was only decent for the first term).
While I was originally against ID cards on principle I’m coming round to the idea they might not be such a bad thing after all.
I would be willing to consider ID cards with three very important caveats:
1) They should only be used to access government services (e.g. Health, benefits, to vote) and police should not be able to demand they be produced at all times;
2) They must be issued for no fee;
3) I must be permitted full access to the database behind it, including seeing who else has accessed that data and why, with permission to sue named individuals who gain unauthorised or unnecessary access.
As (3) will certainly never happen and (1) and (2) are so improbable as to be dismissed, I remain opposed to them.
This was an interesting aside in the BBC story on Javid* - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43957020 As housing secretary he pushed hard, ultimately unsuccessfully, to make bolder moves than Number 10 and 11 would accept. Already today he has made plain that he's ready to junk existing policy...
His apparent efforts on housing suggest he has at least the right political instincts in one area. As Home Secretary appointed in these particular circumstances, he will have rather more power to argue his corner than he did in his previous job. It will be at least interesting to see what he does next.
*autocorrect suggested Jarvis..... needs cultural re-education.
Also interesting because May's words on entering office appeared to suggest that she *got* the magnitude of the problems we face and knew things had to change. The lack of more radical action then being down to some combination of lack of imagination to identify workable solutions and lack of political capital to push them through against the inertia and vested interests of the Tory party. Whereas this suggests that no.10 is itself blocking more radical action; not at all what we were promised.
Windrush excepted, Javid will be tougher on "illegal" immigration than even May seemed to be.
Let's see. The first problem for Javid is to clearly differentiate the two groups, and avoid giving any anxiety (or reason to vote Labour) for those who are properly settled, without tying them up in a Kafkaesque nightmare. He might even suggest an amnesty, as the Foreign Secretary already has.
Another elephant trap Javid must skilfully negotiate is, as made plain by grandees from both parties yesterday, that this issue might be used as a front for the introduction of ID cards. After all, if we had a national database of all citizens, these injustices would not have arisen. Except of course, they would -- when the database was being set up.
While I was originally against ID cards on principle I’m coming round to the idea they might not be such a bad thing after all.
Even granted ID cards are a good thing, how do you build a national ID database without walking slap into the same problem of needing the Windrush generation to establish who they are and how they got here? You could doubtless handle it a lot more sensitively and give people the benefit of the doubt but the underlying issue is the same.
This was an interesting aside in the BBC story on Javid* - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43957020 As housing secretary he pushed hard, ultimately unsuccessfully, to make bolder moves than Number 10 and 11 would accept. Already today he has made plain that he's ready to junk existing policy...
His apparent efforts on housing suggest he has at least the right political instincts in one area. As Home Secretary appointed in these particular circumstances, he will have rather more power to argue his corner than he did in his previous job. It will be at least interesting to see what he does next.
*autocorrect suggested Jarvis..... needs cultural re-education.
Also interesting because May's words on entering office appeared to suggest that she *got* the magnitude of the problems we face and knew things had to change. The lack of more radical action then being down to some combination of lack of imagination to identify workable solutions and lack of political capital to push them through against the inertia and vested interests of the Tory party. Whereas this suggests that no.10 is itself blocking more radical action; not at all what we were promised.
Windrush excepted, Javid will be tougher on "illegal" immigration than even May seemed to be.
Let's see. The first problem for Javid is to clearly differentiate the two groups, and avoid giving any anxiety (or reason to vote Labour) for those who are properly settled, without tying them up in a Kafkaesque nightmare. He might even suggest an amnesty, as the Foreign Secretary already has.
Another elephant trap Javid must skilfully negotiate is, as made plain by grandees from both parties yesterday, that this issue might be used as a front for the introduction of ID cards. After all, if we had a national database of all citizens, these injustices would not have arisen. Except of course, they would -- when the database was being set up.
While I was originally against ID cards on principle I’m coming round to the idea they might not be such a bad thing after all.
Me too. Plenty of other countries have them without being police states.
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Midsized powers - as we will be - benefit from a rules based international environment. We want a strong World Trade Organisation to police trade. We do not benefit from being treated as the plaything of the US: where we can only avoid steel tariffs if we do what we're told.
I can’t make Rees Mogg out. He’s either profoundly thick or deeply dishonest. I tend towards the latter, but can’t rule out the former. What I know for sure is that I do not want him, Johnson and their mates deciding the future for my children and their children. That’s why there’s no alternative but to get back into the cesspool to use the votes my Labour membership gives me to do all I can to reduce the hold the far left currently has on the party.
So you want Corbyn and his mates deciding the future for your children and their children? Because that is exactly what you are aiding by being in the Labour party.
No, it’s not. Inside the Labour party I get a vote to stop the far left and to create a party capable of winning elections. Iutside I just have to accept that the Tories will be in power for years to come.
Which argument would be valid if it wasn't for the fact that non-members can vote on payment of a registration fee.
Something that can be traced back to a certain Eric Joyce being an alcoholic idiot back in 2012.
Windrush excepted, Javid will be tougher on "illegal" immigration than even May seemed to be.
Let's see. He's actually in quite a powerful position I think - virtually unsackable for the forseeable future. He might want to unwind quite a bit of the so-called hostile environment.
This was an interesting aside in the BBC story on Javid* - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43957020 As housing secretary he pushed hard, ultimately unsuccessfully, to make bolder moves than Number 10 and 11 would accept. Already today he has made plain that he's ready to junk existing policy...
His apparent efforts on housing suggest he has at least the right political instincts in one area. As Home Secretary appointed in these particular circumstances, he will have rather more power to argue his corner than he did in his previous job. It will be at least interesting to see what he does next.
*autocorrect suggested Jarvis..... needs cultural re-education.
Also interesting because May's words on entering office appeared to suggest that she *got* the magnitude of the problems we face and knew things had to change. The lack of more radical action then being down to some combination of lack of imagination to identify workable solutions and lack of political capital to push them through against the inertia and vested interests of the Tory party. Whereas this suggests that no.10 is itself blocking more radical action; not at all what we were promised.
Windrush excepted, Javid will be tougher on "illegal" immigration than even May seemed to be.
Let's see. The first problem for Javid is to clearly differentiate the two groups, and avoid giving any anxiety (or reason to vote Labour) for those who are properly settled, without tying them up in a Kafkaesque nightmare. He might even suggest an amnesty, as the Foreign Secretary already has.
Another elephant trap Javid must skilfully negotiate is, as made plain by grandees from both parties yesterday, that this issue might be used as a front for the introduction of ID cards. After all, if we had a national database of all citizens, these injustices would not have arisen. Except of course, they would -- when the database was being set up.
While I was originally against ID cards on principle I’m coming round to the idea they might not be such a bad thing after all.
Even granted ID cards are a good thing, how do you build a national ID database without walking slap into the same problem of needing the Windrush generation to establish who they are and how they got here? You could doubtless handle it a lot more sensitively and give people the benefit of the doubt but the underlying issue is the same.
You either declare an amnesty or work through all those cases, but that is going to need doing with or without ID cards.
Windrush excepted, Javid will be tougher on "illegal" immigration than even May seemed to be.
Let's see. The first problem for Javid is to clearly differentiate the two groups, and avoid giving any anxiety (or reason to vote Labour) for those who are properly settled, without tying them up in a Kafkaesque nightmare. He might even suggest an amnesty, as the Foreign Secretary already has.
Another elephant trap Javid must skilfully negotiate is, as made plain by grandees from both parties yesterday, that this issue might be used as a front for the introduction of ID cards. After all, if we had a national database of all citizens, these injustices would not have arisen. Except of course, they would -- when the database was being set up.
While I was originally against ID cards on principle I’m coming round to the idea they might not be such a bad thing after all.
I don't want compulsory ID cards. But I would be open to the idea of having an optional one that people who want or need to regularise and document their position can easily apply for.
Such a document could have wider effect than a passport because it would also be available to those who are not (yet) entitled to UK citizenship but are nevertheless entitled to be here, rent a house, open a bank account, have a driving licence, be employed etc. I would have thought such a document is going to be essential for EU citizens after any transitional period of Brexit.
We must be more creative with this. British traditional hostility to form filling and dealing with bureaucrats combined with our current laws on immigration have proved a truly toxic mix.
Windrush excepted, Javid will be tougher on "illegal" immigration than even May seemed to be.
Let's see. The first problem for Javid is to clearly differentiate the two groups, and avoid giving any anxiety (or reason to vote Labour) for those who are properly settled, without tying them up in a Kafkaesque nightmare. He might even suggest an amnesty, as the Foreign Secretary already has.
Another elephant trap Javid must skilfully negotiate is, as made plain by grandees from both parties yesterday, that this issue might be used as a front for the introduction of ID cards. After all, if we had a national database of all citizens, these injustices would not have arisen. Except of course, they would -- when the database was being set up.
While I was originally against ID cards on principle I’m coming round to the idea they might not be such a bad thing after all.
I don't want compulsory ID cards. But I would be open to the idea of having an optional one that people who want or need to regularise and document their position can easily apply for.
Such a document could have wider effect than a passport because it would also be available to those who are not (yet) entitled to UK citizenship but are nevertheless entitled to be here, rent a house, open a bank account, have a driving licence, be employed etc. I would have thought such a document is going to be essential for EU citizens after any transitional period of Brexit.
We must be more creative with this. British traditional hostility to form filling and dealing with bureaucrats combined with our current laws on immigration have proved a truly toxic mix.
An ID card that you need to access almost-essential things is in effect a compulsory one. One that you needed just for government payments like benefits is in effect an ID card for poor people only.
As someone said downthread, the current crisis doesn't so much make the case for an ID card as to indicate that if we introduce one there will be people whose entitlement to one will be very difficult to verify.
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Midsized powers - as we will be - benefit from a rules based international environment. We want a strong World Trade Organisation to police trade. We do not benefit from being treated as the plaything of the US: where we can only avoid steel tariffs if we do what we're told.
I can’t make Rees Mogg out. He’s either profoundly thick or deeply dishonest. I tend towards the latter, but can’t rule out the former. What I know for sure is that I do not want him, Johnson and their mates deciding the future for my children and their children. That’s why there’s no alternative but to get back into the cesspool to use the votes my Labour membership gives me to do all I can to reduce the hold the far left currently has on the party.
So you want Corbyn and his mates deciding the future for your children and their children? Because that is exactly what you are aiding by being in the Labour party.
There are plenty of us who are appalled by the thought of either alternative.
What I object to is the forced choice element: either accept the suzerainty of the EU or of the US.
We chose to rely on ourselves. And, you know what, sometimes that will be difficult. But swapping the EU for the US (and a slightly capricious US right now, at that) is merely choosing Atlanticism over Europeanism. (Now, there's nothing wrong with that - and I'm an Atlanticist at heart - but it is fundamentally dishonest to say that it's about "regaining control", if it's merely a question of changing masters.)
Sajid Javid....as I said earlier,. he is one of the very few Tories that could turn my head....I don't understand why he has never been mentioned as a runner and rider in the leadership debate.....
You are making the mistake of equating media image with talent. So far, Javid has not shown that he has any particular political philosophy other than ambition. His big chance came at the EU Ref when, despite clearly being a leaver, he supported Remain because he thought they would win and it would be better for his career.
People don't want media performers any more - they are looking for politicians with genuine convictions. Which is why JRM is clear favourite amongst Con members.
Javid may be able to get into the frame IF he can show he really believes in anything, but I am not holding my breath....
Guaranteed to be another empty suit , going up the greasy pole
Windrush excepted, Javid will be tougher on "illegal" immigration than even May seemed to be.
Let's see. The first problem for Javid is to clearly differentiate the two groups, and avoid giving any anxiety (or reason to vote Labour) for those who are properly settled, without tying them up in a Kafkaesque nightmare. He might even suggest an amnesty, as the Foreign Secretary already has.
Another elephant trap Javid must skilfully negotiate is, as made plain by grandees from both parties yesterday, that this issue might be used as a front for the introduction of ID cards. After all, if we had a national database of all citizens, these injustices would not have arisen. Except of course, they would -- when the database was being set up.
While I was originally against ID cards on principle I’m coming round to the idea they might not be such a bad thing after all.
I don't want compulsory ID cards. But I would be open to the idea of having an optional one that people who want or need to regularise and document their position can easily apply for.
Such a document could have wider effect than a passport because it would also be available to those who are not (yet) entitled to UK citizenship but are nevertheless entitled to be here, rent a house, open a bank account, have a driving licence, be employed etc. I would have thought such a document is going to be essential for EU citizens after any transitional period of Brexit.
We must be more creative with this. British traditional hostility to form filling and dealing with bureaucrats combined with our current laws on immigration have proved a truly toxic mix.
An ID card that you need to access almost-essential things is in effect a compulsory one. One that you needed just for government payments like benefits is in effect an ID card for poor people only.
As someone said downthread, the current crisis doesn't so much make the case for an ID card as to indicate that if we introduce one there will be people whose entitlement to one will be very difficult to verify.
Those of us who are UK citizens and have a passport or UK birth certificate would not need it.
But I agree that creating such a document would generate phenomenal quantities of work and there would be hundreds of thousands of "difficult" cases where the entitlement to remain will be unclear. That is why I favour an amnesty. If we don't take those who have been here for, say, 10 years plus out of the system we risk replicating our current immigration mess which generates bad decisions and administrative chaos.
This was an interesting aside in the BBC story on Javid* - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43957020 As housing secretary he pushed hard, ultimately unsuccessfully, to make bolder moves than Number 10 and 11 would accept. Already today he has made plain that he's ready to junk existing policy...
His apparent efforts on housing suggest he has at least the right political instincts in one area. As Home Secretary appointed in these particular circumstances, he will have rather more power to argue his corner than he did in his previous job. It will be at least interesting to see what he does next.
*autocorrect suggested Jarvis..... needs cultural re-education.
Also interesting because May's words on entering office appeared to suggest that she *got* the magnitude of the problems we face and knew things had to change. The lack of more radical action then being down to some combination of lack of imagination to identify workable solutions and lack of political capital to push them through against the inertia and vested interests of the Tory party. Whereas this suggests that no.10 is itself blocking more radical action; not at all what we were promised.
Windrush excepted, Javid will be tougher on "illegal" immigration than even May seemed to be.
Let's see. The first problem for Javid is to clearly differentiate the two groups, and avoid giving any anxiety (or reason to vote Labour) for those who are properly settled, without tying them up in a Kafkaesque nightmare. He might even suggest an amnesty, as the Foreign Secretary already has.
Another elephant trap Javid must skilfully negotiate is, as made plain by grandees from both parties yesterday, that this issue might be used as a front for the introduction of ID cards. After all, if we had a national database of all citizens, these injustices would not have arisen. Except of course, they would -- when the database was being set up.
While I was originally against ID cards on principle I’m coming round to the idea they might not be such a bad thing after all.
Me too. Plenty of other countries have them without being police states.
+1 Living in Spain it's a non-issue and they're very useful for the holder.
Sajid Javid....as I said earlier,. he is one of the very few Tories that could turn my head....I don't understand why he has never been mentioned as a runner and rider in the leadership debate.....
A couple of years ago he was getting a similar build up, potential CoE etc, then he had some really dodgy media outings and quickly got shuffled off to a more minor role.
In fairness I think a fair bit of that had to do with the precipitous fall of his patron (Osborne) and having to win back favour with the new regime. By political standards he was pretty loyal.
But he didn't achieve a lot when at Business in terms of "cutting red tape". Pretty much uncle Vince levels of activity. And he hasn't been exactly prominent in building new housing either. OTOH facing up to Abbott would make most people look good.
I've always talked him up as a potential Tory leader. He has a great backstory and had been positioned by Osborne as supporter. He was an investment banker and was linked to a fraud on bonuses. Anyone know anything more about it
Sajid Javid....as I said earlier,. he is one of the very few Tories that could turn my head....I don't understand why he has never been mentioned as a runner and rider in the leadership debate.....
A couple of years ago he was getting a similar build up, potential CoE etc, then he had some really dodgy media outings and quickly got shuffled off to a more minor role.
In fairness I think a fair bit of that had to do with the precipitous fall of his patron (Osborne) and having to win back favour with the new regime. By political standards he was pretty loyal.
But he didn't achieve a lot when at Business in terms of "cutting red tape". Pretty much uncle Vince levels of activity. And he hasn't been exactly prominent in building new housing either. OTOH facing up to Abbott would make most people look good.
I've always talked him up as a potential Tory leader. He has a great backstory and had been positioned by Osborne as supporter. He was an investment banker and was linked to a fraud on bonuses. Anyone know anything more about it
This was an interesting aside in the BBC story on Javid* - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43957020 As housing secretary he pushed hard, ultimately unsuccessfully, to make bolder moves than Number 10 and 11 would accept. Already today he has made plain that he's ready to junk existing policy...
His apparent efforts on housing suggest he has at least the right political instincts in one area. As Home Secretary appointed in these particular circumstances, he will have rather more power to argue his corner than he did in his previous job. It will be at least interesting to see what he does next.
*autocorrect suggested Jarvis..... needs cultural re-education.
.
Windrush excepted, Javid will be tougher on "illegal" immigration than even May seemed to be.
Let's see. The first problem for Javid is to clearly differentiate the two groups, and avoid giving any anxiety (or reason to vote Labour) for those who are properly settled, without tying them up in a Kafkaesque nightmare. He might even suggest an amnesty, as the Foreign Secretary already has.
Another elephant trap Javid must skilfully negotiate is, as made plain by grandees from both parties yesterday, that this issue might be used as a front for the introduction of ID cards. After all, if we had a national database of all citizens, these injustices would not have arisen. Except of course, they would -- when the database was being set up.
While I was originally against ID cards on principle I’m coming round to the idea they might not be such a bad thing after all.
Me too. Plenty of other countries have them without being police states.
+1 Living in Spain it's a non-issue and they're very useful for the holder.
While I don’t live in Thailand I visit quite often and am sometimes asked for ID when visiting official buildings. Usually I’ve found my driving licence adequate, although I had a problem earlier this year when it was passport or nothing. Fortunately driving licence was accepted eventually, with a lecture on having my passport with me at all times. To which I just said OK, promised I would, and went where I wanted to go and and had a very interesting few hours.
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Whilst I understand your motivation (and JRM is so utterly unsuitable to be PM I can scarcely believe sensible Conservatives support him), I fail to believe your membership of Labour does anything other than aid Corbyn and the far left. That is despite your excellent threader and comments.
I don't want my son growing up in an environment of bigotry and hate that JRM or Corbyn promises the country. The way to do that is to counter their views - and of those like them - robustly. It is hard to do that from within the Labour tent, for the reasons Woodcock and others are finding.
He cannot be any worse than the lying , cheating , incompetent toerags in power at present.
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Whilst I understand your motivation (and JRM is so utterly unsuitable to be PM I can scarcely believe sensible Conservatives support him), I fail to believe your membership of Labour does anything other than aid Corbyn and the far left. That is despite your excellent threader and comments.
I don't want my son growing up in an environment of bigotry and hate that JRM or Corbyn promises the country. The way to do that is to counter their views - and of those like them - robustly. It is hard to do that from within the Labour tent, for the reasons Woodcock and others are finding.
He cannot be any worse than the lying , cheating , incompetent toerags in power at present.
I see you are your usual ray of sunshine this morning, Eliza!
I;m planning to be up your way for a few walks in a month or so, if I get my exeat form. There are some beautiful areas up there that I've not really visited before.
Sajid Javid....as I said earlier,. he is one of the very few Tories that could turn my head....I don't understand why he has never been mentioned as a runner and rider in the leadership debate.....
A couple of years ago he was getting a similar build up, potential CoE etc, then he had some really dodgy media outings and quickly got shuffled off to a more minor role.
In fairness I think a fair bit of that had to do with the precipitous fall of his patron (Osborne) and having to win back favour with the new regime. By political standards he was pretty loyal.
But he didn't achieve a lot when at Business in terms of "cutting red tape". Pretty much uncle Vince levels of activity. And he hasn't been exactly prominent in building new housing either. OTOH facing up to Abbott would make most people look good.
I've always talked him up as a potential Tory leader. He has a great backstory and had been positioned by Osborne as supporter. He was an investment banker and was linked to a fraud on bonuses. Anyone know anything more about it
It’s not fair to call it a “fraud” on bonuses. Some too-clever tax planner thought he’d come up with a whizzo scheme. Some employees participated. The HMRC ruled against them and made them pay back the tax owed.
LOL, there speaks the elite, it is never crooked when they "inadvertantly" do not pay tax on squillions , but woe betide anyone that gets an extra pound in benefits.
Windrush excepted, Javid will be tougher on "illegal" immigration than even May seemed to be.
Let's see. The first problem for Javid is to clearly differentiate the two groups, and avoid giving any anxiety (or reason to vote Labour) for those who are properly settled, without tying them up in a Kafkaesque nightmare. He might even suggest an amnesty, as the Foreign Secretary already has.
Another elephant trap Javid must skilfully negotiate is, as made plain by grandees from both parties yesterday, that this issue might be used as a front for the introduction of ID cards. After all, if we had a national database of all citizens, these injustices would not have arisen. Except of course, they would -- when the database was being set up.
While I was originally against ID cards on principle I’m coming round to the idea they might not be such a bad thing after all.
I don't want compulsory ID cards. But I would be open to the idea of having an optional one that people who want or need to regularise and document their position can easily apply for.
Such a document could have wider effect than a passport because it would also be available to those who are not (yet) entitled to UK citizenship but are nevertheless entitled to be here, rent a house, open a bank account, have a driving licence, be employed etc. I would have thought such a document is going to be essential for EU citizens after any transitional period of Brexit.
We must be more creative with this. British traditional hostility to form filling and dealing with bureaucrats combined with our current laws on immigration have proved a truly toxic mix.
An ID card that you need to access almost-essential things is in effect a compulsory one. One that you needed just for government payments like benefits is in effect an ID card for poor people only.
As someone said downthread, the current crisis doesn't so much make the case for an ID card as to indicate that if we introduce one there will be people whose entitlement to one will be very difficult to verify.
Why not just make it a driving licence, you can get one regardless of whether you drive a car.
Windrush excepted, Javid will be tougher on "illegal" immigration than even May seemed to be.
Let's see. The first problem for Javid is to clearly differentiate the two groups, and avoid giving any anxiety (or reason to vote Labour) for those who are properly settled, without tying them up in a Kafkaesque nightmare. He might even suggest an amnesty, as the Foreign Secretary already has.
Another elephant trap Javid must skilfully negotiate is, as made plain by grandees from both parties yesterday, that this issue might be used as a front for the introduction of ID cards. After all, if we had a national database of all citizens, these injustices would not have arisen. Except of course, they would -- when the database was being set up.
While I was originally against ID cards on principle I’m coming round to the idea they might not be such a bad thing after all.
I don't want compulsory ID cards. But I would be open to the idea of having an optional one that people who want or need to regularise and document their position can easily apply for.
Such a document could have wider effect than a passport because it would also be available to those who are not (yet) entitled to UK citizenship but are nevertheless entitled to be here, rent a house, open a bank account, have a driving licence, be employed etc. I would have thought such a document is going to be essential for EU citizens after any transitional period of Brexit.
We must be more creative with this. British traditional hostility to form filling and dealing with bureaucrats combined with our current laws on immigration have proved a truly toxic mix.
An ID card that you need to access almost-essential things is in effect a compulsory one. One that you needed just for government payments like benefits is in effect an ID card for poor people only.
As someone said downthread, the current crisis doesn't so much make the case for an ID card as to indicate that if we introduce one there will be people whose entitlement to one will be very difficult to verify.
Why not just make it a driving licence, you can get one regardless of whether you drive a car.
This was an interesting aside in the BBC story on Javid* - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43957020 As housing secretary he pushed hard, ultimately unsuccessfully, to make bolder moves than Number 10 and 11 would accept. Already today he has made plain that he's ready to junk existing policy...
His apparent efforts on housing suggest he has at least the right political instincts in one area. As Home Secretary appointed in these particular circumstances, he will have rather more power to argue his corner than he did in his previous job. It will be at least interesting to see what he does next.
*autocorrect suggested Jarvis..... needs cultural re-education.
Also interesting because May's words on entering office appeared to suggest that she *got* the magnitude of the problems we face and knew things had to change. The lack of more radical action then being down to some combination of lack of imagination to identify workable solutions and lack of political capital to push them through against the inertia and vested interests of the Tory party. Whereas this suggests that no.10 is itself blocking more radical action; not at all what we were promised.
Windrush excepted, Javid will be tougher on "illegal" immigration than even May seemed to be.
Let's see. The first problem for Javid is to clearly differentiate the two groups, and avoid giving any anxiety (or reason to vote Labour) for those who are properly settled, without tying them up in a Kafkaesque nightmare. He might even suggest an amnesty, as the Foreign Secretary already has.
Another elephant trap Javid must skilfully negotiate is, as made plain by grandees from both parties yesterday, that this issue might be used as a front for the introduction of ID cards. After all, if we had a national database of all citizens, these injustices would not have arisen. Except of course, they would -- when the database was being set up.
While I was originally against ID cards on principle I’m coming round to the idea they might not be such a bad thing after all.
It’s not ID cards but the requirement to carry them and produce them on demand that is “unBritish”
This was an interesting aside in the BBC story on Javid* - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43957020 As housing secretary he pushed hard, ultimately unsuccessfully, to make bolder moves than Number 10 and 11 would accept. Already today he has made plain that he's ready to junk existing policy...
His apparent efforts on housing suggest he has at least the right political instincts in one area. As Home Secretary appointed in these particular circumstances, he will have rather more power to argue his corner than he did in his previous job. It will be at least interesting to see what he does next.
*autocorrect suggested Jarvis..... needs cultural re-education.
Also interesting because May's words on entering office appeared to suggest that she *got* the magnitude of the problems we face and knew things had to change. The lack of more radical action then being down to some combination of lack of imagination to identify workable solutions and lack of political capital to push them through against the inertia and vested interests of the Tory party. Whereas this suggests that no.10 is itself blocking more radical action; not at all what we were promised.
Windrush excepted, Javid will be tougher on "illegal" immigration than even May seemed to be.
Let's see. The first problem for Javid is to clearly differentiate the two groups, and avoid giving any anxiety (or reason to vote Labour) for those who are properly settled, without tying them up in a Kafkaesque nightmare. He might even suggest an amnesty, as the Foreign Secretary already has.
Another elephant trap Javid must skilfully negotiate is, as made plain by grandees from both parties yesterday, that this issue might be used as a front for the introduction of ID cards. After all, if we had a national database of all citizens, these injustices would not have arisen. Except of course, they would -- when the database was being set up.
While I was originally against ID cards on principle I’m coming round to the idea they might not be such a bad thing after all.
It’s not ID cards but the requirement to carry them and produce them on demand that is “unBritish”
Yes. I’d rather have a bit more illegal immigration that carry a compulsory ID card.
Want to know why I rejoined the Labour party? If the far left is not defeated it means the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson, Grayling, Leadsom and Patel shaping the future for my kids and their kids. I find that genuinely frightening.
Whilst I understand your motivation (and JRM is so utterly unsuitable to be PM I can scarcely believe sensible Conservatives support him), I fail to believe your membership of Labour does anything other than aid Corbyn and the far left. That is despite your excellent threader and comments.
I don't want my son growing up in an environment of bigotry and hate that JRM or Corbyn promises the country. The way to do that is to counter their views - and of those like them - robustly. It is hard to do that from within the Labour tent, for the reasons Woodcock and others are finding.
He cannot be any worse than the lying , cheating , incompetent toerags in power at present.
I see you are your usual ray of sunshine this morning, Eliza!
I;m planning to be up your way for a few walks in a month or so, if I get my exeat form. There are some beautiful areas up there that I've not really visited before.
JJ, many I have not visited either , probably more than yourself shamefully. Hope you get the weather.
Comments
1. Rees-Mogg: 6.4
2. Corbyn: 6.6
3. Johnson: 13
4. Gove 17.5
5. Hunt 22
6. Javid 32
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.125575094
It’s not only immigrants and civil servants seething at the loss of landing cards: historians are too
Guy Walters"
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/04/windrush-is-just-the-start-records-are-being-shredded-and-history-deleted/
https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2018/apr/30/sajid-javid-tory-power-stance?__twitter_impression=true
Trump will be our greatest ally after Brexit
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/b4ad0e3c-4cae-11e8-9812-5f003d09c84c
Midsized powers - as we will be - benefit from a rules based international environment. We want a strong World Trade Organisation to police trade. We do not benefit from being treated as the plaything of the US: where we can only avoid steel tariffs if we do what we're told.
I am now thinking May will be gone by the end of May anyway. The Brexit betrayal carcrash is about to unfold - are the leavers really going to let her get away with BRINO?
Hugo Rifkind
The TSB fiasco is just a taste of the problems being created by our increasing reliance on systems we don’t understand"
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/if-our-tech-breaks-we-ll-be-back-in-the-dark-ages-j55l9znb9
I don't want my son growing up in an environment of bigotry and hate that JRM or Corbyn promises the country. The way to do that is to counter their views - and of those like them - robustly. It is hard to do that from within the Labour tent, for the reasons Woodcock and others are finding.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43957020
As housing secretary he pushed hard, ultimately unsuccessfully, to make bolder moves than Number 10 and 11 would accept. Already today he has made plain that he's ready to junk existing policy...
His apparent efforts on housing suggest he has at least the right political instincts in one area. As Home Secretary appointed in these particular circumstances, he will have rather more power to argue his corner than he did in his previous job. It will be at least interesting to see what he does next.
*autocorrect suggested Jarvis..... needs cultural re-education.
https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/953185/Piers-Morgan-Twitter-Diane-Abbott-interview-Good-Morning-Britain-news-latest-pictures
Abbott's reply of 'viewers can make their own minds up' was met with Morgan helpfully posting the video of the interview...
Will Bedford becomes the centre of political life in the UK in the coming years ?!? .... I rather think it may.
Probably, he is blinkered rather than thick, having led an existence and with views that give him little understanding of the modern world.
You are not a fool, but you will be used as a useful fool by the Corbynite followers.
I'd understand if there was any likelihood of a non-Corbynite leader within Labour. But there isn't, and the faithful are ruining the chances of anyone doing so.
We chose to rely on ourselves. And, you know what, sometimes that will be difficult. But swapping the EU for the US (and a slightly capricious US right now, at that) is merely choosing Atlanticism over Europeanism. (Now, there's nothing wrong with that - and I'm an Atlanticist at heart - but it is fundamentally dishonest to say that it's about "regaining control", if it's merely a question of changing masters.)
Another elephant trap Javid must skilfully negotiate is, as made plain by grandees from both parties yesterday, that this issue might be used as a front for the introduction of ID cards. After all, if we had a national database of all citizens, these injustices would not have arisen. Except of course, they would -- when the database was being set up.
Fact is, the Labour Party remains the biggest obstacle to getting a decent government in this country. Waiting for the second coming of Tony Blair is fool's gold (and even he was only decent for the first term).
1) They should only be used to access government services (e.g. Health, benefits, to vote) and police should not be able to demand they be produced at all times;
2) They must be issued for no fee;
3) I must be permitted full access to the database behind it, including seeing who else has accessed that data and why, with permission to sue named individuals who gain unauthorised or unnecessary access.
As (3) will certainly never happen and (1) and (2) are so improbable as to be dismissed, I remain opposed to them.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Labour_Party_Falkirk_candidate_selection
He's actually in quite a powerful position I think - virtually unsackable for the forseeable future. He might want to unwind quite a bit of the so-called hostile environment.
Such a document could have wider effect than a passport because it would also be available to those who are not (yet) entitled to UK citizenship but are nevertheless entitled to be here, rent a house, open a bank account, have a driving licence, be employed etc. I would have thought such a document is going to be essential for EU citizens after any transitional period of Brexit.
We must be more creative with this. British traditional hostility to form filling and dealing with bureaucrats combined with our current laws on immigration have proved a truly toxic mix.
As someone said downthread, the current crisis doesn't so much make the case for an ID card as to indicate that if we introduce one there will be people whose entitlement to one will be very difficult to verify.
Perhaps I don’t find the poster quite as impressive as others might because it’s so obvious a rehash of the original, which I remember well.
But I agree that creating such a document would generate phenomenal quantities of work and there would be hundreds of thousands of "difficult" cases where the entitlement to remain will be unclear. That is why I favour an amnesty. If we don't take those who have been here for, say, 10 years plus out of the system we risk replicating our current immigration mess which generates bad decisions and administrative chaos.
What more is needed for an ID card ?
I;m planning to be up your way for a few walks in a month or so, if I get my exeat form. There are some beautiful areas up there that I've not really visited before.
It brings out my liberal side.