What an utterly stupid and tin-eared suggestion. Apart from anything else HMQ does not travel abroad anymore and is well able to hire (or even buy) a boat if she wants to sail round Scotland.
I am also pretty annoyed with £2.5 million of our money being spent on Harry and Meghan’s new home while they act all hoity toity with us. If they want a private life fine but don't bloody well expect us to pay for it.
+1. Boris is going to be truely inept. His style reminds me of Gordon Browns crass attempts to co-opt people so he could gain popularity. It did not work for Gordon and will not for Boris...
Its an interesting piece but what's with the David Gauke fanclub bit ?
At one of his RoryforLeader rallies, Rory Stewart paid a heartfelt tribute to David Gauke and the three things he learnt about leadership from him. (1) Gauke communicated his values to his team, which they respected him for; (2) he genuinely listened to them and their arguments; and (3) finally, he had courage and was willing to make tough choices.
This David Gauke:
In December 2013 Gauke was reported to HM Revenue and Customs after advertising an unpaid six-month "training post" at his constituency office in Rickmansworth, Hertfordshire.
Gauke claimed £10,248.32 in stamp duty and fees involved in the purchase of his second home in London, a flat. A Channel 4 Dispatches programme revealed that he was claiming expenses on the flat in central London despite having a property located only one hour away on public transport.
What an utterly stupid and tin-eared suggestion. Apart from anything else HMQ does not travel abroad anymore and is well able to hire (or even buy) a boat if she wants to sail round Scotland.
I am also pretty annoyed with £2.5 million of our money being spent on Harry and Meghan’s new home while they act all hoity toity with us. If they want a private life fine but don't bloody well expect us to pay for it.
Time was it’s the tower for you for saying that.
Not me though, as it’s writing for all to see I don’t agree with you.
UK is a different place these days. You kinda sense the younger royals do get this.
If today’s big cricket match was played in the 1970s, surely you would be able to spot a Union Jack in the crowd.
We are no longer a Christian nation but aethiest/agnostic.
We are quickly becoming post industrial.
A woman’s place is the boardroom, the mans at the kitchen sink.
There is no fox hunting and it’s only the Conservative party campaigning to bring it back, which they probably will at some point
Its an interesting piece but what's with the David Gauke fanclub bit ?
At one of his RoryforLeader rallies, Rory Stewart paid a heartfelt tribute to David Gauke and the three things he learnt about leadership from him. (1) Gauke communicated his values to his team, which they respected him for; (2) he genuinely listened to them and their arguments; and (3) finally, he had courage and was willing to make tough choices.
This David Gauke:
In December 2013 Gauke was reported to HM Revenue and Customs after advertising an unpaid six-month "training post" at his constituency office in Rickmansworth, Hertfordshire.
Gauke claimed £10,248.32 in stamp duty and fees involved in the purchase of his second home in London, a flat. A Channel 4 Dispatches programme revealed that he was claiming expenses on the flat in central London despite having a property located only one hour away on public transport.
Interesting article but I would dispute one of your conclusions, your second one.
The issue not that people beleive the civil servants need to be politicised to believe in what the government is doing, it is that we believe the civil servants have already been politicised into believing the opposite of what the government is seeking to do and are thus not serving the country well already.
Unsurprisingly when the political orthodox for the last four decades has been that we need to be in the EU, those in positions of responsibility now are not unbiased wise and neutral mandarins. We have people implementing Brexit who believe it to be a disastrous mistake which goes against what they have been doing for the last four decades.
If the civil servants are unable to serve the country neutrally and actively oppose what the government is doing then they should recuse themselves.
What is your evidence for the claim that civil servants are not serving their political masters?
You seem to be at risk of confusing those who point out practical difficulties, laws etc - which is precisely what advisors should do - with active opposition. The two are not the same and yet we have far too many on the pro-No Deal Brexit side insisting that belief in a policy is all that is needed. And today Farage was suggesting a purge of those who don’t agree with such a policy.
It is not belief which is needed but practical solutions which work. As well as an understanding of all the levant laws and regulations. Far too many No Deal Brexiteers show very little understanding of these and then rail against the advisors who point out inconvenient facts.
Yet the Treasury told us there would be a guaranteed year long recession immediately after a Leave vote.
How can you be sure that that forecast was not because of a bias within the Treasury ?
Alternatively it might have been because the Treasury are utterly incompetent at forecasts or because they produced the sort of forecast which would suit the purposes of George Osborne.
Would you agree that there should have been an outside, independent investigation ?
As others have said, another great article by @Cyclefree. It baffles me that the two big parties aren't bidding against each other to hire her as an independent, firm, and indomitable, but fair, investigator of allegations of racism in their organisations.
On a related point, this is rather good:
Yet ask Johnson’s small band of more sophisticated no-dealers, and a different justification begins to emerge. It lies in the theories of creative disruption espoused by the postwar economist Joseph Schumpeter and his followers. To them, occasional bouts of chaos are necessary. As during wars, recessions and Thatcherism, Britain needs a therapeutic shock to jolt it into a new karma, a new inner greatness.
As a marginal republican, I think the Queen should have her Royal Yacht. What's the point of monarchy if you don't have the bling?
I agree, though a campaign for public subscription to find it would be wise. Britain is overflowing with wealthy brown-nosers who would be keen to ingratiate themselves with the Royals.
In reference to the green agenda of the heir, and likely first Royal to set sail, I would suggest sail and electric motors rather than diesel.
Its an interesting piece but what's with the David Gauke fanclub bit ?
At one of his RoryforLeader rallies, Rory Stewart paid a heartfelt tribute to David Gauke and the three things he learnt about leadership from him. (1) Gauke communicated his values to his team, which they respected him for; (2) he genuinely listened to them and their arguments; and (3) finally, he had courage and was willing to make tough choices.
This David Gauke:
In December 2013 Gauke was reported to HM Revenue and Customs after advertising an unpaid six-month "training post" at his constituency office in Rickmansworth, Hertfordshire.
Gauke claimed £10,248.32 in stamp duty and fees involved in the purchase of his second home in London, a flat. A Channel 4 Dispatches programme revealed that he was claiming expenses on the flat in central London despite having a property located only one hour away on public transport.
So being a good leader means, err, not being the leader? Not completely sure about that.
Carrington was a gent and an exceptionally honourable man but he was never PM and there may be reasons for that.
I also think that the underlying principles of Ministerial responsibility are archaic and anachronistic. It reflected a time when governments made far fewer decision and those decisions were indeed made by Ministers. In the modern world many, many decisions are in fact made by civil servants and they should be held accountable for them. Many are also made by executive agencies with minimal Ministerial involvement.
Of course leaders should support their staff doing their jobs. But the example of Boris here shows the limitations of the principle. I don't think anyone, certainly not Boris, ever argued that Darroch did anything wrong. I don't think anyone, certainly not Boris suggested that the blame lay with anyone but the leaker who will hopefully go to jail. But Boris was being asked to confirm that a man who Trump would not speak to (or allow his administration to speak to) should continue as our Ambassador. Despite the irritation caused by Trump's rudeness, bullying and irrationality that would be a pretty strange call as Darroch himself recognised.
In short, and somewhat unusually, I almost totally disagree with @Cyclefree. Gulp.
Your first sentence is bizarre since I don’t say that.
Re Darroch, what Boris should have done is support in public and stood up to Trump. If Trump wanted formally to declare the British Ambassador persona non grata, he should have been forced to do that not get his way through bitchy tweeting and his friends abroad hanging an honourable civil servant out to dry.
I disagree that Ministerial accountability is outdated and archaic. It is the political equivalent of Senior Manager responsibility in the world of finance. It does not absolve civil servants of their individual responsibilities. But those in positions of leadership need to take responsibility for what happens on their watch.
I see no evidence that Johnson understands this. IMO it is a severe failing in someone who wants to be a leader.
Trump did make Darroch persona non grata. He did it via bitchy tweeting but he did it either way.
In practice yes but not in theory. There’s a formal process to go through to declare someone PNG
It’s why when we are expelling someone they are always summoned to see the Foreign Secretary
So being a good leader means, err, not being the leader? Not completely sure about that.
Carrington was a gent and an exceptionally honourable man but he was never PM and there may be reasons for that.
I also think that the underlying principles of Ministerial responsibility are archaic and anachronistic. It reflected a time when governments made far fewer decision and those decisions were indeed made by Ministers. In the modern world many, many decisions are in fact made by civil servants and they should be held accountable for them. Many are also made by executive agencies with minimal Ministerial involvement.
Of course leaders should support their staff doing their jobs. But the example of Boris here shows the limitations of the principle. I don't think anyone, certainly not Boris, ever argued that Darroch did anything wrong. I don't think anyone, certainly not Boris suggested that the blame lay with anyone but the leaker who will hopefully go to jail. But Boris was being asked to confirm that a man who Trump would not speak to (or allow his administration to speak to) should continue as our Ambassador. Despite the irritation caused by Trump's rudeness, bullying and irrationality that would be a pretty strange call as Darroch himself recognised.
In short, and somewhat unusually, I almost totally disagree with @Cyclefree. Gulp.
Your first sentence is bizarre since I don’t say that.
Re Darroch, what Boris should have done is support in public and stood up to Trump. If Trump wanted formally to declare the British Ambassador persona non grata, he should have been forced to do that not get his way through bitchy tweeting and his friends abroad hanging an honourable civil servant out to dry.
I disagree that Ministerial accountability is outdated and archaic. It is the political equivalent of Senior Manager responsibility in the world of finance. It does not absolve civil servants of their individual responsibilities. But those in positions of leadership need to take responsibility for what happens on their watch.
I see no evidence that Johnson understands this. IMO it is a severe failing in someone who wants to be a leader.
Trump did make Darroch persona non grata. He did it via bitchy tweeting but he did it either way.
PNG is a very specific dimplomatic term, and Trump did not make Darroch an official PNG.
Dimplomatic?
May be we should have more cute blonde ambassadoresses?
In a vaguely betting related post: the atmosphere around Newcastle United has become so unbelievably toxic that I think betting on us to be relegated this season is basically free money. The absolute state of the club.
Indeed. Teams normally reach for the Big Sam panic button when they are facing relegation square in the face. Rarely do they conclude this before the season starts. And Sam rejecting them says all you need to know.
As others have said, another great article by @Cyclefree. It baffles me that the two big parties aren't bidding against each other to hire her as an independent, firm, and indomitable, but fair, investigator of allegations of racism in their organisations.
On a related point, this is rather good:
Yet ask Johnson’s small band of more sophisticated no-dealers, and a different justification begins to emerge. It lies in the theories of creative disruption espoused by the postwar economist Joseph Schumpeter and his followers. To them, occasional bouts of chaos are necessary. As during wars, recessions and Thatcherism, Britain needs a therapeutic shock to jolt it into a new karma, a new inner greatness.
Not sure that it is wise of the Tories to follow the advice of Bakunin: The urge to destroy is also a creative urge.
Certainly some countries such as Russia, China, Japan, Germany have reinvented themselves successfully and vigorously after crises in the last century. Notably though this was in each case the downfall of the old establishment and aristocracy.
Its an interesting piece but what's with the David Gauke fanclub bit ?
At one of his RoryforLeader rallies, Rory Stewart paid a heartfelt tribute to David Gauke and the three things he learnt about leadership from him. (1) Gauke communicated his values to his team, which they respected him for; (2) he genuinely listened to them and their arguments; and (3) finally, he had courage and was willing to make tough choices.
This David Gauke:
In December 2013 Gauke was reported to HM Revenue and Customs after advertising an unpaid six-month "training post" at his constituency office in Rickmansworth, Hertfordshire.
Gauke claimed £10,248.32 in stamp duty and fees involved in the purchase of his second home in London, a flat. A Channel 4 Dispatches programme revealed that he was claiming expenses on the flat in central London despite having a property located only one hour away on public transport.
It was Gauke's speech to the Lord Mayor's Banquet which I rather liked and which prompted my reflections. That and the fact that Rory had made a point of praising what he had learnt from Gauke at the Ministry of Justice. It is not often you see that, whether in politics or elsewhere.
I have done a number of talks on leadership which have been well-received and I have also had to think about what this means in the context of my own work and team. So it is a topic which is close to my heart. I have had good bosses and some bloody awful ones. Having a good boss is probably one of the most important things about a job. A bad one makes life utterly miserable whereas a good one can make even the most stressful of jobs feel worthwhile.
As others have said, another great article by @Cyclefree. It baffles me that the two big parties aren't bidding against each other to hire her as an independent, firm, and indomitable, but fair, investigator of allegations of racism in their organisations.
On a related point, this is rather good:
Yet ask Johnson’s small band of more sophisticated no-dealers, and a different justification begins to emerge. It lies in the theories of creative disruption espoused by the postwar economist Joseph Schumpeter and his followers. To them, occasional bouts of chaos are necessary. As during wars, recessions and Thatcherism, Britain needs a therapeutic shock to jolt it into a new karma, a new inner greatness.
As a marginal republican, I think the Queen should have her Royal Yacht. What's the point of monarchy if you don't have the bling?
I agree, though a campaign for public subscription to find it would be wise. Britain is overflowing with wealthy brown-nosers who would be keen to ingratiate themselves with the Royals.
In reference to the green agenda of the heir, and likely first Royal to set sail, I would suggest sail and electric motors rather than diesel.
I’m agnostic on it, but Boris offering it as some kind of poirbouire to HM has utterly soiled the idea.
Its an interesting piece but what's with the David Gauke fanclub bit ?
At one of his RoryforLeader rallies, Rory Stewart paid a heartfelt tribute to David Gauke and the three things he learnt about leadership from him. (1) Gauke communicated his values to his team, which they respected him for; (2) he genuinely listened to them and their arguments; and (3) finally, he had courage and was willing to make tough choices.
This David Gauke:
In December 2013 Gauke was reported to HM Revenue and Customs after advertising an unpaid six-month "training post" at his constituency office in Rickmansworth, Hertfordshire.
Gauke claimed £10,248.32 in stamp duty and fees involved in the purchase of his second home in London, a flat. A Channel 4 Dispatches programme revealed that he was claiming expenses on the flat in central London despite having a property located only one hour away on public transport.
It was Gauke's speech to the Lord Mayor's Banquet which I rather liked and which prompted my reflections. That and the fact that Rory had made a point of praising what he had learnt from Gauke at the Ministry of Justice. It is not often you see that, whether in politics or elsewhere.
I have done a number of talks on leadership which have been well-received and I have also had to think about what this means in the context of my own work and team. So it is a topic which is close to my heart. I have had good bosses and some bloody awful ones. Having a good boss is probably one of the most important things about a job. A bad one makes life utterly miserable whereas a good one can make even the most stressful of jobs feel worthwhile.
As others have said, another great article by @Cyclefree. It baffles me that the two big parties aren't bidding against each other to hire her as an independent, firm, and indomitable, but fair, investigator of allegations of racism in their organisations.
On a related point, this is rather good:
Yet ask Johnson’s small band of more sophisticated no-dealers, and a different justification begins to emerge. It lies in the theories of creative disruption espoused by the postwar economist Joseph Schumpeter and his followers. To them, occasional bouts of chaos are necessary. As during wars, recessions and Thatcherism, Britain needs a therapeutic shock to jolt it into a new karma, a new inner greatness.
As others have said, another great article by @Cyclefree. It baffles me that the two big parties aren't bidding against each other to hire her as an independent, firm, and indomitable, but fair, investigator of allegations of racism in their organisations.
On a related point, this is rather good:
Yet ask Johnson’s small band of more sophisticated no-dealers, and a different justification begins to emerge. It lies in the theories of creative disruption espoused by the postwar economist Joseph Schumpeter and his followers. To them, occasional bouts of chaos are necessary. As during wars, recessions and Thatcherism, Britain needs a therapeutic shock to jolt it into a new karma, a new inner greatness.
Well, I'd certainly be better than Shami (not that that's a high bar). But I do have a reputation to maintain you know.
They've turned down Lord Falconer's offers of help and he is a very good lawyer. (Interest declared: I know him from work and some social events.). And other lawyers are fleeing the Labour embrace because they fear being tainted with its stench. There are more important things than money.
And the Tories under Boris will do nothing about anti-Muslim prejudice. He's already resiled from the promise he made. They will make the same mistakes as Labour: ignore small problems, come up with excuses, one or two apples, blah, blah and not do anything until it is too late and the problem is very much worse and their reputation much more damaged. More fools them.
On the other hand, the Darroch leak inquiry - that I would be up for.......
As others have said, another great article by @Cyclefree. It baffles me that the two big parties aren't bidding against each other to hire her as an independent, firm, and indomitable, but fair, investigator of allegations of racism in their organisations.
On a related point, this is rather good:
Yet ask Johnson’s small band of more sophisticated no-dealers, and a different justification begins to emerge. It lies in the theories of creative disruption espoused by the postwar economist Joseph Schumpeter and his followers. To them, occasional bouts of chaos are necessary. As during wars, recessions and Thatcherism, Britain needs a therapeutic shock to jolt it into a new karma, a new inner greatness.
When I started posting on this here burgh many years ago, I never thought one of the things I would quote most often would the Futurist Manifesto. The Futurists were a gaggle of early 20th Century Italian painters, and their manifesto reads:
"...We want to glorify war - the only cure for the world - militarism, patriotism, the destructive gesture of the anarchists, the beautiful ideas which kill, and contempt for woman..."
And then there was World War 1.
There is always somebody who says destruction is creative, that things need to be shook up. They are always theoreticians, untroubled by doubt or experience. They never have to pick up the pieces, mop up the blood, or clear up the mess afterwards. They live tidy lives and are puzzled by failure.
Its an interesting piece but what's with the David Gauke fanclub bit ?
At one of his RoryforLeader rallies, Rory Stewart paid a heartfelt tribute to David Gauke and the three things he learnt about leadership from him. (1) Gauke communicated his values to his team, which they respected him for; (2) he genuinely listened to them and their arguments; and (3) finally, he had courage and was willing to make tough choices.
This David Gauke:
In December 2013 Gauke was reported to HM Revenue and Customs after advertising an unpaid six-month "training post" at his constituency office in Rickmansworth, Hertfordshire.
Gauke claimed £10,248.32 in stamp duty and fees involved in the purchase of his second home in London, a flat. A Channel 4 Dispatches programme revealed that he was claiming expenses on the flat in central London despite having a property located only one hour away on public transport.
As others have said, another great article by @Cyclefree. It baffles me that the two big parties aren't bidding against each other to hire her as an independent, firm, and indomitable, but fair, investigator of allegations of racism in their organisations.
On a related point, this is rather good:
Yet ask Johnson’s small band of more sophisticated no-dealers, and a different justification begins to emerge. It lies in the theories of creative disruption espoused by the postwar economist Joseph Schumpeter and his followers. To them, occasional bouts of chaos are necessary. As during wars, recessions and Thatcherism, Britain needs a therapeutic shock to jolt it into a new karma, a new inner greatness.
As others have said, another great article by @Cyclefree. It baffles me that the two big parties aren't bidding against each other to hire her as an independent, firm, and indomitable, but fair, investigator of allegations of racism in their organisations.
On a related point, this is rather good:
Yet ask Johnson’s small band of more sophisticated no-dealers, and a different justification begins to emerge. It lies in the theories of creative disruption espoused by the postwar economist Joseph Schumpeter and his followers. To them, occasional bouts of chaos are necessary. As during wars, recessions and Thatcherism, Britain needs a therapeutic shock to jolt it into a new karma, a new inner greatness.
Not sure that it is wise of the Tories to follow the advice of Bakunin: The urge to destroy is also a creative urge.
Certainly some countries such as Russia, China, Japan, Germany have reinvented themselves successfully and vigorously after crises in the last century. Notably though this was in each case the downfall of the old establishment and aristocracy.
I wasn't suggesting it was wise, far from it. But I think Simon Jenkins might be on to something, in terms of explaining how at least some of the madness has taken hold.
In a vaguely betting related post: the atmosphere around Newcastle United has become so unbelievably toxic that I think betting on us to be relegated this season is basically free money. The absolute state of the club.
Indeed. Teams normally reach for the Big Sam panic button when they are facing relegation square in the face. Rarely do they conclude this before the season starts. And Sam rejecting them says all you need to know.
While Liverpool and Man City look secure, Spurs probably too, Man U, Chelsea, and Arsenal all look ripe for the taking. Wolves may be busy with the Europa League, but this may well be the best chance for a while for Everton, Leicester or Watford to break into the top 6.
Its an interesting piece but what's with the David Gauke fanclub bit ?
At one of his RoryforLeader rallies, Rory Stewart paid a heartfelt tribute to David Gauke and the three things he learnt about leadership from him. (1) Gauke communicated his values to his team, which they respected him for; (2) he genuinely listened to them and their arguments; and (3) finally, he had courage and was willing to make tough choices.
This David Gauke:
In December 2013 Gauke was reported to HM Revenue and Customs after advertising an unpaid six-month "training post" at his constituency office in Rickmansworth, Hertfordshire.
Gauke claimed £10,248.32 in stamp duty and fees involved in the purchase of his second home in London, a flat. A Channel 4 Dispatches programme revealed that he was claiming expenses on the flat in central London despite having a property located only one hour away on public transport.
As others have said, another great article by @Cyclefree. It baffles me that the two big parties aren't bidding against each other to hire her as an independent, firm, and indomitable, but fair, investigator of allegations of racism in their organisations.
On a related point, this is rather good:
Yet ask Johnson’s small band of more sophisticated no-dealers, and a different justification begins to emerge. It lies in the theories of creative disruption espoused by the postwar economist Joseph Schumpeter and his followers. To them, occasional bouts of chaos are necessary. As during wars, recessions and Thatcherism, Britain needs a therapeutic shock to jolt it into a new karma, a new inner greatness.
When I started posting on this here burgh many years ago, I never thought one of the things I would quote most often would the Futurist Manifesto. The Futurists were a gaggle of early 20th Century Italian painters, and their manifesto reads:
"...We want to glorify war - the only cure for the world - militarism, patriotism, the destructive gesture of the anarchists, the beautiful ideas which kill, and contempt for woman..."
And then there was World War 1.
There is always somebody who says destruction is creative, that things need to be shook up. They are always theoreticians, untroubled by doubt or experience. They never have to pick up the pieces, mop up the blood, or clear up the mess afterwards. They live tidy lives and are puzzled by failure.
As others have said, another great article by @Cyclefree. It baffles me that the two big parties aren't bidding against each other to hire her as an independent, firm, and indomitable, but fair, investigator of allegations of racism in their organisations.
On a related point, this is rather good:
Yet ask Johnson’s small band of more sophisticated no-dealers, and a different justification begins to emerge. It lies in the theories of creative disruption espoused by the postwar economist Joseph Schumpeter and his followers. To them, occasional bouts of chaos are necessary. As during wars, recessions and Thatcherism, Britain needs a therapeutic shock to jolt it into a new karma, a new inner greatness.
When I started posting on this here burgh many years ago, I never thought one of the things I would quote most often would the Futurist Manifesto. The Futurists were a gaggle of early 20th Century Italian painters, and their manifesto reads:
"...We want to glorify war - the only cure for the world - militarism, patriotism, the destructive gesture of the anarchists, the beautiful ideas which kill, and contempt for woman..."
And then there was World War 1.
There is always somebody who says destruction is creative, that things need to be shook up. They are always theoreticians, untroubled by doubt or experience. They never have to pick up the pieces, mop up the blood, or clear up the mess afterwards. They live tidy lives and are puzzled by failure.
Time for one of my favourite Albert Camus quotes:-
"Mistaken ideas always end in bloodshed but in every case it is someone else's blood . That is why some of our thinkers feel free to say just about anything."
As others have said, another great article by @Cyclefree. It baffles me that the two big parties aren't bidding against each other to hire her as an independent, firm, and indomitable, but fair, investigator of allegations of racism in their organisations.
On a related point, this is rather good:
Yet ask Johnson’s small band of more sophisticated no-dealers, and a different justification begins to emerge. It lies in the theories of creative disruption espoused by the postwar economist Joseph Schumpeter and his followers. To them, occasional bouts of chaos are necessary. As during wars, recessions and Thatcherism, Britain needs a therapeutic shock to jolt it into a new karma, a new inner greatness.
When I started posting on this here burgh many years ago, I never thought one of the things I would quote most often would the Futurist Manifesto. The Futurists were a gaggle of early 20th Century Italian painters, and their manifesto reads:
"...We want to glorify war - the only cure for the world - militarism, patriotism, the destructive gesture of the anarchists, the beautiful ideas which kill, and contempt for woman..."
And then there was World War 1.
There is always somebody who says destruction is creative, that things need to be shook up. They are always theoreticians, untroubled by doubt or experience. They never have to pick up the pieces, mop up the blood, or clear up the mess afterwards. They live tidy lives and are puzzled by failure.
Yes, at times it has been hard to understand the urge of Edwardian Europe for war as a way to reinvigorate what was seen as a sclerotic and enfeebled nation, but we do seem to have gone round the clock on this one. At present it is just bellicosity rather than war planned, but once those trains start rolling...
In a vaguely betting related post: the atmosphere around Newcastle United has become so unbelievably toxic that I think betting on us to be relegated this season is basically free money. The absolute state of the club.
Indeed. Teams normally reach for the Big Sam panic button when they are facing relegation square in the face. Rarely do they conclude this before the season starts. And Sam rejecting them says all you need to know.
While Liverpool and Man City look secure, Spurs probably too, Man U, Chelsea, and Arsenal all look ripe for the taking. Wolves may be busy with the Europa League, but this may well be the best chance for a while for Everton, Leicester or Watford to break into the top 6.
As an Evertonian I am ever the optimist. Looks like we are making a serious effort to get Diego Costa. Would be a fine addition to a team which looked very decent in the final few months. Not sure of the timing though...after VAR is introduced.
An interesting article. As a civil servant of 10 years I'd suggest that senior civil servants are not without faults in this regard. With one notable exception, none of the SCS that I have encountered have particularly impressed me.
The culture of wanting promotion and leadership positions without wanting the responsibility that comes with it is just as prevalent in the CS as it is anywhere else in society.
Exactly. Take the example of Sharon Shoesmith. It would be appalling if she had not been held responsible for the incompetence, disorganisation and neglect of a department that she was responsible for. Balls was criticised for sacking her and it was found to have been done unprocedurally. But he was right. Absolutely right.
And you base that certainty on what ?
The fact that even although she was not a politician but a Civil Servant she had the actual responsibility for running her department whose failings resulted in the unnecessary death of a child (as determined by an independent inquiry). It is an example of why I disagree with @Cyclefree. Civil servants who screw up should not hide behind Ministers taking responsibility, they should be held accountable themselves. If that requires giving them opportunities to defend themselves and their actions I have no problem with that. Ministerial responsibility for things that the Minister is not in fact responsible for is just silly and outdated.
Interesting article but I would dispute one of your conclusions, your second one.
The issue not that people beleive the civil servants need to be politicised to believe in what the government is doing, it is that we believe the civil servants have already been politicised into believing the opposite of what the government is seeking to do and are thus not serving the country well already.
Unsurprisingly when the political orthodox for the last four decades has been that we need to be in the EU, those in positions of responsibility now are not unbiased wise and neutral mandarins. We have people implementing Brexit who believe it to be a disastrous mistake which goes against what they have been doing for the last four decades.
If the civil servants are unable to serve the country neutrally and actively oppose what the government is doing then they should recuse themselves.
What is your evidence for the claim that civil servants are not serving their political masters?
You seem to be at risk of confusing those who point out practical difficulties, laws etc - which is precisely what advisors should do - with active opposition. The two are not the same and yet we have far too many on the pro-No Deal Brexit side insisting that belief in a policy is all that is needed. And today Farage was suggesting a purge of those who don’t agree with such a policy.
It is not belief which is needed but practical solutions which work. As well as an understanding of all the levant laws and regulations. Far too many No Deal Brexiteers show very little understanding of these and then rail against the advisors who point out inconvenient facts.
Yet the Treasury told us there would be a guaranteed year long recession immediately after a Leave vote.
How can you be sure that that forecast was not because of a bias within the Treasury ?
Alternatively it might have been because the Treasury are utterly incompetent at forecasts or because they produced the sort of forecast which would suit the purposes of George Osborne.
Would you agree that there should have been an outside, independent investigation ?
There should certainly have been an independent review of why the forecasts were wrong. Was it because of bias, poor assumptions, actions taken, other factors or a mixture of all of them? Lessons should always be learnt, especially from mistakes or things not going to plan.
How can we discourage this flood of right justified text?
Pedant alert... the thread header was fully justified not right justified, and looked very fine for it imo.
Even more pedant, text is justified or rag set, as I recall from a small brush with typography in an earlier existence. There is no left, right or full justification. The rule with justified text was that you must hyphenate it, otherwise the lines of text stretch too much, making it ugly and difficult to read.
As others have said, another great article by @Cyclefree. It baffles me that the two big parties aren't bidding against each other to hire her as an independent, firm, and indomitable, but fair, investigator of allegations of racism in their organisations.
On a related point, this is rather good:
Yet ask Johnson’s small band of more sophisticated no-dealers, and a different justification begins to emerge. It lies in the theories of creative disruption espoused by the postwar economist Joseph Schumpeter and his followers. To them, occasional bouts of chaos are necessary. As during wars, recessions and Thatcherism, Britain needs a therapeutic shock to jolt it into a new karma, a new inner greatness.
When I started posting on this here burgh many years ago, I never thought one of the things I would quote most often would the Futurist Manifesto. The Futurists were a gaggle of early 20th Century Italian painters, and their manifesto reads:
"...We want to glorify war - the only cure for the world - militarism, patriotism, the destructive gesture of the anarchists, the beautiful ideas which kill, and contempt for woman..."
And then there was World War 1.
There is always somebody who says destruction is creative, that things need to be shook up. They are always theoreticians, untroubled by doubt or experience. They never have to pick up the pieces, mop up the blood, or clear up the mess afterwards. They live tidy lives and are puzzled by failure.
Yes, at times it has been hard to understand the urge of Edwardian Europe for war as a way to reinvigorate what was seen as a sclerotic and enfeebled nation, but we do seem to have gone round the clock on this one. At present it is just velocity rather than war planned, but once those trains start rolling...
75th anniversary of Arnhem coming up.
Roy Urquhart to Fred Browning: "Sir, you’ve ordered me to plan this operation and I have done it, and now I wish to inform you that I think it is a suicide operation."
As a marginal republican, I think the Queen should have her Royal Yacht. What's the point of monarchy if you don't have the bling?
They can have what they want but they can pay for it themselves as the rest of us would have to.
Though I don't mind if some sycophant buys them one.
Mogg's got plenty of dosh perhaps he could start a collection - million quid donors get made an honorary admiral.
Biggest bunch of greedy grasping chancers around, the young one seem to be the worst. They want to gouge us big time then whinge about getting a photo taken. Time they were forced to do a real days work and earn their own money instead of relying on benefits, bloody scroungers.
An interesting article. As a civil servant of 10 years I'd suggest that senior civil servants are not without faults in this regard. With one notable exception, none of the SCS that I have encountered have particularly impressed me.
The culture of wanting promotion and leadership positions without wanting the responsibility that comes with it is just as prevalent in the CS as it is anywhere else in society.
Exactly. Take the example of Sharon Shoesmith. It would be appalling if she had not been held responsible for the incompetence, disorganisation and neglect of a department that she was responsible for. Balls was criticised for sacking her and it was found to have been done unprocedurally. But he was right. Absolutely right.
And you base that certainty on what ?
The fact that even although she was not a politician but a Civil Servant she had the actual responsibility for running her department whose failings resulted in the unnecessary death of a child (as determined by an independent inquiry). It is an example of why I disagree with @Cyclefree. Civil servants who screw up should not hide behind Ministers taking responsibility, they should be held accountable themselves. If that requires giving them opportunities to defend themselves and their actions I have no problem with that. Ministerial responsibility for things that the Minister is not in fact responsible for is just silly and outdated.
I haven't said that civil servants should not be accountable for their actions. Shoosmith should have been disciplined.
But Ministers should still bear ultimate responsibility for their departments.
As others have said, another great article by @Cyclefree. It baffles me that the two big parties aren't bidding against each other to hire her as an independent, firm, and indomitable, but fair, investigator of allegations of racism in their organisations.
On a related point, this is rather good:
Yet ask Johnson’s small band of more sophisticated no-dealers, and a different justification begins to emerge. It lies in the theories of creative disruption espoused by the postwar economist Joseph Schumpeter and his followers. To them, occasional bouts of chaos are necessary. As during wars, recessions and Thatcherism, Britain needs a therapeutic shock to jolt it into a new karma, a new inner greatness.
When I started posting on this here burgh many years ago, I never thought one of the things I would quote most often would the Futurist Manifesto. The Futurists were a gaggle of early 20th Century Italian painters, and their manifesto reads:
"...We want to glorify war - the only cure for the world - militarism, patriotism, the destructive gesture of the anarchists, the beautiful ideas which kill, and contempt for woman..."
And then there was World War 1.
There is always somebody who says destruction is creative, that things need to be shook up. They are always theoreticians, untroubled by doubt or experience. They never have to pick up the pieces, mop up the blood, or clear up the mess afterwards. They live tidy lives and are puzzled by failure.
An interesting article. As a civil servant of 10 years I'd suggest that senior civil servants are not without faults in this regard. With one notable exception, none of the SCS that I have encountered have particularly impressed me.
The culture of wanting promotion and leadership positions without wanting the responsibility that comes with it is just as prevalent in the CS as it is anywhere else in society.
Exactly. Take the example of Sharon Shoesmith. It would be appalling if she had not been held responsible for the incompetence, disorganisation and neglect of a department that she was responsible for. Balls was criticised for sacking her and it was found to have been done unprocedurally. But he was right. Absolutely right.
And you base that certainty on what ?
The fact that even although she was not a politician but a Civil Servant she had the actual responsibility for running her department whose failings resulted in the unnecessary death of a child (as determined by an independent inquiry). It is an example of why I disagree with @Cyclefree. Civil servants who screw up should not hide behind Ministers taking responsibility, they should be held accountable themselves. If that requires giving them opportunities to defend themselves and their actions I have no problem with that. Ministerial responsibility for things that the Minister is not in fact responsible for is just silly and outdated.
I haven't said that civil servants should not be accountable for their actions. Shoosmith should have been disciplined.
But Ministers should still bear ultimate responsibility for their departments.
It's not either/or.
Well let's take your example. Was Carrington right to resign? No he wasn't. Was the government improved by his absence? Certainly not. Was this leadership? No, it was in fact an abrogation of responsibility when his country was going into a difficult war where it urgently needed all the allies it could get.
Carrington did what he did because he had a strong sense of honour and he was an honourable man. But he was wrong. I have no problem with the fact that this anachronism which I studied decades ago (before Carrington's resignation actually) has fallen into desuetude. It is silly.
The country voted for Brexit, most of the establishment, the Judiciary, Parliament and civil service are Remainers. It will take a huge and determined personality like Boris to achieve it, much as Churchill over appeasement or Thatcher over breaking the post war consensus also faced huge establishment opposition when trying to deliver it
Just come back from knocking up for a closely fought parish council by election in Chigwell Row, the result was 344 Tories 288 LD after a hard fought campaign
The country voted for Brexit, most of the establishment, the Judiciary, Parliament and civil service are Remainers. It will take a huge and determined personality like Boris to achieve it, much as Churchill over appeasement or Thatcher over breaking the post war consensus also faced huge establishment opposition when trying to deliver it
Bollx.
Where is your evidence that the impartial judiciary are blocking Brexit?
Truly the Conservative Party (clue used to be in the name) has jumped the shark and become the UK Tea Party.
When you have razed every ages-old institution of the British Isles to the ground in order to see whether unicorns exist perhaps you will all reflect on what you have done.
Just come back from knocking up for a closely fought parish council by election in Chigwell Row, the result was 344 Tories 288 LD after a hard fought campaign
iirc Foster was presented on BBC PoliticsLive this am with Andrew Neill as a Guardian journalist
As a regular, near daily, reader, I thought oh that's funny - never heard of her.
Turns out she is a staff writer at Jacobin magazine and an opinion writer on occasion for Guardian.
She was defending Jezza, Milne and Formby and co based on her views as an opinion writer and columnist. Nothing wrong with that.
But she is not doing so as a impartial journalist.
Am I wrong?
Not really any different from the Telegraph and Spectator “journalists” that appear on such programmes regularly. I don’t rate Foster from her written work at all, and prefer journalists that at least attempt to see more than one side of each issue.
A fine article indeed, and I say that even though I do not always agree with cyclefree on some issues. It would be interesting indeed to attend a course she ran, but I fear I am not senior enough to get the full effect.
Regarding Labour, I make no secret that I do not think much of the perpetual moaners who seem to do very little, who happily campaign to make Corbyn PM while they talk and talk about how much they do not like what he is doing. And I still see little reason to think they will actually do something other than mouth off on twitter and PLP meetings, it's a game they play to assure themselves they are righteous and doing all they can, while in reality it is a pretext to defend their tribal instincts.
However, it really is remarkable to see the Deputy Leader and General Secretary bitching at each other in formal letters. It cannot be good for the organisation of which they are a part, and even I have to wonder how long can both remain in place while so openly hostile. Of course, May's shambolic last few months shows just how far you can string things out, but it is still remarkable to see the hostility, even if I don't think it is wholly genuine (if it were, there would be more action).
Just come back from knocking up for a closely fought parish council by election in Chigwell Row, the result was 344 Tories 288 LD after a hard fought campaign
Congratulations.
Yes, an example of how the LDs can be beaten with plenty of canvassing, leaflets and targeted knocking up. Well done new Cllr Bhanot
Just come back from knocking up for a closely fought parish council by election in Chigwell Row, the result was 344 Tories 288 LD after a hard fought campaign
That’s quite the swing to the Lib Dems then. Any comments on that?
Just come back from knocking up for a closely fought parish council by election in Chigwell Row, the result was 344 Tories 288 LD after a hard fought campaign
Congratulations.
Yes, an example of how the LDs can be beaten with plenty of canvassing, leaflets and targeted knocking up. Well done new Cllr Bhanot
In a ward where the Tories got 63% last time? Laughable.
Just come back from knocking up for a closely fought parish council by election in Chigwell Row, the result was 344 Tories 288 LD after a hard fought campaign
That’s quite the swing to the Lib Dems then. Any comments on that?
It was a by election, the LDs raison d'etre, without a good campaign and given current polling the Tories would have lost it
An odd way of putting the question. I'd assume the Queen would say she does not want one, she has plenty of stuff already. Now, if the argument is it would provide a useful service to the nation, even as it is officially hers, well sure that might well be arguable.
Just come back from knocking up for a closely fought parish council by election in Chigwell Row, the result was 344 Tories 288 LD after a hard fought campaign
That’s quite the swing to the Lib Dems then. Any comments on that?
It was a by election, the LDs raison d'etre, without a good campaign and given current polling the Tories would have lost it
There’s nothing you wont spin. Are you not getting dizzy?
The country voted for Brexit, most of the establishment, the Judiciary, Parliament and civil service are Remainers. It will take a huge and determined personality like Boris to achieve it, much as Churchill over appeasement or Thatcher over breaking the post war consensus also faced huge establishment opposition when trying to deliver it
Bollx.
Where is your evidence that the impartial judiciary are blocking Brexit?
Truly the Conservative Party (clue used to be in the name) has jumped the shark and become the UK Tea Party.
When you have razed every ages-old institution of the British Isles to the ground in order to see whether unicorns exist perhaps you will all reflect on what you have done.
It was thanks to the judiciary's backing for the Gina Miller case that Parliament was able to both vote against and block the Withdrawal Agreement and No Deal
Just come back from knocking up for a closely fought parish council by election in Chigwell Row, the result was 344 Tories 288 LD after a hard fought campaign
Congratulations.
Yes, an example of how the LDs can be beaten with plenty of canvassing, leaflets and targeted knocking up. Well done new Cllr Bhanot
In a ward where the Tories got 63% last time? Laughable.
It was LD at one point in the 1990s and in 2002 the Tories won it by just 7 votes, they won it by 56 votes tonight
An odd way of putting the question. I'd assume the Queen would say she does not want one, she has plenty of stuff already. Now, if the argument is it would provide a useful service to the nation, even as it is officially hers, well sure that might well be arguable.
If the Queen says she doesn’t want one it obviously shows she doesn’t believe in Britain and is probably basically a Lib Dem and should be sacked.
Just come back from knocking up for a closely fought parish council by election in Chigwell Row, the result was 344 Tories 288 LD after a hard fought campaign
Congratulations.
Yes, an example of how the LDs can be beaten with plenty of canvassing, leaflets and targeted knocking up. Well done new Cllr Bhanot
In a ward where the Tories got 63% last time? Laughable.
It was LD at one point in the 1990s and in 2002 the Tories won it by just 7 votes, they won it by 56 votes tonight
What has 2002 got to do with anything? You won it by nearly 200 votes in 2016.
iirc Foster was presented on BBC PoliticsLive this am with Andrew Neill as a Guardian journalist
As a regular, near daily, reader, I thought oh that's funny - never heard of her.
Turns out she is a staff writer at Jacobin magazine and an opinion writer on occasion for Guardian.
She was defending Jezza, Milne and Formby and co based on her views as an opinion writer and columnist. Nothing wrong with that.
But she is not doing so as a impartial journalist.
Am I wrong?
Not really any different from the Telegraph and Spectator “journalists” that appear on such programmes regularly. I don’t rate Foster from her written work at all, and prefer journalists that at least attempt to see more than one side of each issue.
Indeed. PM tonight featured a discussion between "impartial journalists" from Guido and the Spectator, about Boris as PM. Needless to say, he is just what the country needs. Fancy that!
The country voted for Brexit, most of the establishment, the Judiciary, Parliament and civil service are Remainers. It will take a huge and determined personality like Boris to achieve it, much as Churchill over appeasement or Thatcher over breaking the post war consensus also faced huge establishment opposition when trying to deliver it
Bollx.
Where is your evidence that the impartial judiciary are blocking Brexit?
Truly the Conservative Party (clue used to be in the name) has jumped the shark and become the UK Tea Party.
When you have razed every ages-old institution of the British Isles to the ground in order to see whether unicorns exist perhaps you will all reflect on what you have done.
It was thanks to the judiciary's backing for the Gina Miller case that Parliament was able to both vote against and block the Withdrawal Agreement and No Deal
They made a ruling about the law, which is their job. Whatever others have done in reaction to that ruling, it does not speak as to their motivation in the slightest. Can you not see what an extreme accusation it is to make, to essentially imply the judiciary as a whole, because you assume most are remainers, are complicit in seeking to intervene in a political issue?
The logic of your position is that the Supreme Court should not have cared what the law required, they should not have 'backed' the Gina Miller case, for political reasons.
Wow. Just wow. This is the caring, kinder Left. The ones who love people and think we should all work together in one happy commune under the benign love of St Jezza.
"I didn't have a nervous breakdown, why did they?"
The fact that even although she was not a politician but a Civil Servant she had the actual responsibility for running her department whose failings resulted in the unnecessary death of a child (as determined by an independent inquiry). It is an example of why I disagree with @Cyclefree. Civil servants who screw up should not hide behind Ministers taking responsibility, they should be held accountable themselves. If that requires giving them opportunities to defend themselves and their actions I have no problem with that. Ministerial responsibility for things that the Minister is not in fact responsible for is just silly and outdated.
I haven't said that civil servants should not be accountable for their actions. Shoosmith should have been disciplined.
But Ministers should still bear ultimate responsibility for their departments.
It's not either/or.
Well let's take your example. Was Carrington right to resign? No he wasn't. Was the government improved by his absence? Certainly not. Was this leadership? No, it was in fact an abrogation of responsibility when his country was going into a difficult war where it urgently needed all the allies it could get.
Carrington did what he did because he had a strong sense of honour and he was an honourable man. But he was wrong. I have no problem with the fact that this anachronism which I studied decades ago (before Carrington's resignation actually) has fallen into desuetude. It is silly.
You raise an interesting point about whether or not his offer to resign should have been accepted by Thatcher. There is an argument for saying that he did the right thing in offering his resignation but that it would have been better if he had stayed and helped the government at a difficult time. That was Thatcher's decision to take.
Almost certainly given the political situation at the time that would have been untenable politically.
I think though we will have to disagree that Ministerial responsibility is an anachronism. It seems to me that too many people at the top refuse to take responsibility and that this has led to a degradation of public life. Senior people are willing to grab the rewards but run away from bearing responsibility. I find that despicable. If you want one you have to take the other too. This is a wider point than simply Ministerial responsibility for civil servants.
And old-fashioned as it may be, a bit of honour among those who would lead is not to be sniffed at. There has been far too much venal, self-serving and selfish behaviour for my liking. A bit of thinking about others first would not go amiss.
Just come back from knocking up for a closely fought parish council by election in Chigwell Row, the result was 344 Tories 288 LD after a hard fought campaign
Congratulations.
Yes, an example of how the LDs can be beaten with plenty of canvassing, leaflets and targeted knocking up. Well done new Cllr Bhanot
In a ward where the Tories got 63% last time? Laughable.
It was LD at one point in the 1990s and in 2002 the Tories won it by just 7 votes, they won it by 56 votes tonight
What has 2002 got to do with anything? You won it by nearly 200 votes in 2016.
That was a District council election, not a by election.
The LDs even gained Christchurch from the Tories in a by election in 1993
The country voted for Brexit, most of the establishment, the Judiciary, Parliament and civil service are Remainers. It will take a huge and determined personality like Boris to achieve it, much as Churchill over appeasement or Thatcher over breaking the post war consensus also faced huge establishment opposition when trying to deliver it
Bollx.
Where is your evidence that the impartial judiciary are blocking Brexit?
Truly the Conservative Party (clue used to be in the name) has jumped the shark and become the UK Tea Party.
When you have razed every ages-old institution of the British Isles to the ground in order to see whether unicorns exist perhaps you will all reflect on what you have done.
It was thanks to the judiciary's backing for the Gina Miller case that Parliament was able to both vote against and block the Withdrawal Agreement and No Deal
They made a ruling about the law, which is their job. Whatever others have done in reaction to that ruling, it does not speak as to their motivation in the slightest. Can you not see what an extreme accusation it is to make, to essentially imply the judiciary as a whole, because you assume most are remainers, are complicit in seeking to intervene in a political issue?
The logic of your position is that the Supreme Court should not have cared what the law required, they should not have 'backed' the Gina Miller case, for political reasons.
As I said earlier, Tories are jumping the shark into a Tea Party world in which everything their forefathers held dear, like the rule of law, are up for grabs in a cultural war.
Wow. Just wow. This is the caring, kinder Left. The ones who love people and think we should all work together in one happy commune under the benign love of St Jezza.
"I didn't have a nervous breakdown, why did they?"
Wow. Just wow. This is the caring, kinder Left. The ones who love people and think we should all work together in one happy commune under the benign love of St Jezza.
"I didn't have a nervous breakdown, why did they?"
twitter.com/TheRedRoar/status/1149247565076021248
Nothing must get in the way of the revolution....if this is how they treat their own, imagine how they will treat those they actively hate.
The country voted for Brexit, most of the establishment, the Judiciary, Parliament and civil service are Remainers. It will take a huge and determined personality like Boris to achieve it, much as Churchill over appeasement or Thatcher over breaking the post war consensus also faced huge establishment opposition when trying to deliver it
Bollx.
Where is your evidence that the impartial judiciary are blocking Brexit?
Truly the Conservative Party (clue used to be in the name) has jumped the shark and become the UK Tea Party.
When you have razed every ages-old institution of the British Isles to the ground in order to see whether unicorns exist perhaps you will all reflect on what you have done.
It was thanks to the judiciary's backing for the Gina Miller case that Parliament was able to both vote against and block the Withdrawal Agreement and No Deal
They made a ruling about the law, which is their job. Whatever others have done in reaction to that ruling, it does not speak as to their motivation in the slightest. Can you not see what an extreme accusation it is to make, to essentially imply the judiciary as a whole, because you assume most are remainers, are complicit in seeking to intervene in a political issue?
The logic of your position is that the Supreme Court should not have cared what the law required, they should not have 'backed' the Gina Miller case, for political reasons.
The Gina Miller case was won 8 to 3, so at least 3 Supreme Court Justices believed Miller was wrong on the law and the government was right.
Wow. Just wow. This is the caring, kinder Left. The ones who love people and think we should all work together in one happy commune under the benign love of St Jezza.
"I didn't have a nervous breakdown, why did they?"
twitter.com/TheRedRoar/status/1149247565076021248
Nothing must get in the way of the revolution....if this is how they treat their own, imagine how they will treat those they actively hate.
To be fair, the Hard Left tends to treat its own even more badly than the 'enemy'.
Wow. Just wow. This is the caring, kinder Left. The ones who love people and think we should all work together in one happy commune under the benign love of St Jezza.
"I didn't have a nervous breakdown, why did they?"
Prime Minister Jezza is going to be quite a ride. Being right after the short reigning Prime Minister BoJo, it looks like being a very interesting run up to Christmas.
The Tory majority in Chigwell Row has reduced by nearly 75% and @HYUFD is happy.
I must know what drugs you are taking.
Dodgy maths there.
The swing was not 75%. It isn't possible to retain a seat on a 75% swing.
If a seat is held with a majority of 4 one election then held again with a majority of 1 I wouldn't say that was a bad result reducing the majority by 75%.
I wonder what Uncle Thickie's reaction would have been if it was anti-LGBT stuff? I have a feeling it would have been outraged of Islington mode...
Well, there has been some anti-LGBT stuff going on, some of it in Labour constituencies. And Corbyn has been remarkably quiet about it. Though Roger Godsiff MP was ticked off by the party for siding with the anti-LGBT mob.
Wow. Just wow. This is the caring, kinder Left. The ones who love people and think we should all work together in one happy commune under the benign love of St Jezza.
"I didn't have a nervous breakdown, why did they?"
As others have said, another great article by @Cyclefree. It baffles me that the two big parties aren't bidding against each other to hire her as an independent, firm, and indomitable, but fair, investigator of allegations of racism in their organisations.
On a related point, this is rather good:
Yet ask Johnson’s small band of more sophisticated no-dealers, and a different justification begins to emerge. It lies in the theories of creative disruption espoused by the postwar economist Joseph Schumpeter and his followers. To them, occasional bouts of chaos are necessary. As during wars, recessions and Thatcherism, Britain needs a therapeutic shock to jolt it into a new karma, a new inner greatness.
When I started posting on this here burgh many years ago, I never thought one of the things I would quote most often would the Futurist Manifesto. The Futurists were a gaggle of early 20th Century Italian painters, and their manifesto reads:
"...We want to glorify war - the only cure for the world - militarism, patriotism, the destructive gesture of the anarchists, the beautiful ideas which kill, and contempt for woman..."
And then there was World War 1.
There is always somebody who says destruction is creative, that things need to be shook up. They are always theoreticians, untroubled by doubt or experience. They never have to pick up the pieces, mop up the blood, or clear up the mess afterwards. They live tidy lives and are puzzled by failure.
I would have more respect for the No Deal fanatics if they were prepared to put their own money where there mouths are.
Marinetti fought on several fronts in WWI and with Italian forces in Russia in WWII. For better or worse, action wasn't just a word in a manifesto for him.
Wow. Just wow. This is the caring, kinder Left. The ones who love people and think we should all work together in one happy commune under the benign love of St Jezza.
"I didn't have a nervous breakdown, why did they?"
twitter.com/TheRedRoar/status/1149247565076021248
Nothing must get in the way of the revolution....if this is how they treat their own, imagine how they will treat those they actively hate.
Ah, but we know no one is more hated than internal opponents. External opponents are misguided fools. Internal opponents are traitorous fools. Just look at how much some Tories despise one another too.
The Tory majority in Chigwell Row has reduced by nearly 75% and @HYUFD is happy.
I must know what drugs you are taking.
Dodgy maths there.
The swing was not 75%. It isn't possible to retain a seat on a 75% swing.
If a seat is held with a majority of 4 one election then held again with a majority of 1 I wouldn't say that was a bad result reducing the majority by 75%.
I wonder what Uncle Thickie's reaction would have been if it was anti-LGBT stuff? I have a feeling it would have been outraged of Islington mode...
Well, there has been some anti-LGBT stuff going on, some of it in Labour constituencies. And Corbyn has been remarkably quiet about it. Though Roger Godsiff MP was ticked off by the party for siding with the anti-LGBT mob.
I meant within the Labour Party...but yes he has been remarkably quiet on this issue, no idea why...
The Tory majority in Chigwell Row has reduced by nearly 75% and @HYUFD is happy.
I must know what drugs you are taking.
Dodgy maths there.
The swing was not 75%. It isn't possible to retain a seat on a 75% swing.
If a seat is held with a majority of 4 one election then held again with a majority of 1 I wouldn't say that was a bad result reducing the majority by 75%.
No one said anything about the swing being 75%.
No but normally people talk about swing, instead you talk about "reduced majority" which is a dodgy bar chart phrase if I ever saw one. Hence my next line.
Comments
At one of his RoryforLeader rallies, Rory Stewart paid a heartfelt tribute to David Gauke and the three things he learnt about leadership from him. (1) Gauke communicated his values to his team, which they respected him for; (2) he genuinely listened to them and their arguments; and (3) finally, he had courage and was willing to make tough choices.
This David Gauke:
In December 2013 Gauke was reported to HM Revenue and Customs after advertising an unpaid six-month "training post" at his constituency office in Rickmansworth, Hertfordshire.
Gauke claimed £10,248.32 in stamp duty and fees involved in the purchase of his second home in London, a flat. A Channel 4 Dispatches programme revealed that he was claiming expenses on the flat in central London despite having a property located only one hour away on public transport.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Gauke
Not me though, as it’s writing for all to see I don’t agree with you.
UK is a different place these days. You kinda sense the younger royals do get this.
If today’s big cricket match was played in the 1970s, surely you would be able to spot a Union Jack in the crowd.
We are no longer a Christian nation but aethiest/agnostic.
We are quickly becoming post industrial.
A woman’s place is the boardroom, the mans at the kitchen sink.
There is no fox hunting and it’s only the Conservative party campaigning to bring it back, which they probably will at some point
How can you be sure that that forecast was not because of a bias within the Treasury ?
Alternatively it might have been because the Treasury are utterly incompetent at forecasts or because they produced the sort of forecast which would suit the purposes of George Osborne.
Would you agree that there should have been an outside, independent investigation ?
Using the concept as an excuse for deliberately fucking things up is just ridiculous.
In reference to the green agenda of the heir, and likely first Royal to set sail, I would suggest sail and electric motors rather than diesel.
(In no way am I bitter that we missed out on a 50-1 winner).
It’s why when we are expelling someone they are always summoned to see the Foreign Secretary
May be we should have more cute blonde ambassadoresses?
Thanks
And Sam rejecting them says all you need to know.
Certainly some countries such as Russia, China, Japan, Germany have reinvented themselves successfully and vigorously after crises in the last century. Notably though this was in each case the downfall of the old establishment and aristocracy.
I have done a number of talks on leadership which have been well-received and I have also had to think about what this means in the context of my own work and team. So it is a topic which is close to my heart. I have had good bosses and some bloody awful ones. Having a good boss is probably one of the most important things about a job. A bad one makes life utterly miserable whereas a good one can make even the most stressful of jobs feel worthwhile.
Though I don't mind if some sycophant buys them one.
Mogg's got plenty of dosh perhaps he could start a collection - million quid donors get made an honorary admiral.
Well, I'd certainly be better than Shami (not that that's a high bar). But I do have a reputation to maintain you know.
They've turned down Lord Falconer's offers of help and he is a very good lawyer. (Interest declared: I know him from work and some social events.). And other lawyers are fleeing the Labour embrace because they fear being tainted with its stench. There are more important things than money.
And the Tories under Boris will do nothing about anti-Muslim prejudice. He's already resiled from the promise he made. They will make the same mistakes as Labour: ignore small problems, come up with excuses, one or two apples, blah, blah and not do anything until it is too late and the problem is very much worse and their reputation much more damaged. More fools them.
On the other hand, the Darroch leak inquiry - that I would be up for.......
"...We want to glorify war - the only cure for the world - militarism, patriotism, the destructive gesture of the anarchists, the beautiful ideas which kill, and contempt for woman..."
And then there was World War 1.
There is always somebody who says destruction is creative, that things need to be shook up. They are always theoreticians, untroubled by doubt or experience. They never have to pick up the pieces, mop up the blood, or clear up the mess afterwards. They live tidy lives and are puzzled by failure.
And they are always, always fuckwits.
https://www.societyforasianart.org/sites/default/files/manifesto_futurista.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futurism
The new karma and new inner greatness would be Britain living within its means.
“Mistaken ideas always end in bloodshed, but in every case it is someone else's blood. This is why our thinkers feel free to say just about anything.”
"Mistaken ideas always end in bloodshed but in every case it is someone else's blood . That is why some of our thinkers feel free to say just about anything."
Not sure of the timing though...after VAR is introduced.
Israel has an awful lot of operatives doesn't it.
Over antisemitism. Can you image reading that in the Blair/Brown/Kinnock years?
https://twitter.com/DawnHFoster/status/1149414206174846976
https://twitter.com/LeeFromSwindon/status/1149428970351448064
Roy Urquhart to Fred Browning:
"Sir, you’ve ordered me to plan this operation and I have done it, and now I wish to inform you that I think it is a suicide operation."
But Ministers should still bear ultimate responsibility for their departments.
It's not either/or.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umberto_Boccioni
I would have more respect for the No Deal fanatics if they were prepared to put their own money where there mouths are.
So many of the lines she trots out are a direct lift from the rebuttal guide they put out ahead of the broadcast.
They are doomed to wallow in this mire of their own making.
iirc Foster was presented on BBC PoliticsLive this am with Andrew Neill as a Guardian journalist
As a regular, near daily, reader, I thought oh that's funny - never heard of her.
Turns out she is a staff writer at Jacobin magazine and an opinion writer on occasion for Guardian.
She was defending Jezza, Milne and Formby and co based on her views as an opinion writer and columnist. Nothing wrong with that.
But she is not doing so as a impartial journalist.
Am I wrong?
Wouldn't happen on NYT.
https://twitter.com/TheGolem_/status/1149344548491055109
Carrington did what he did because he had a strong sense of honour and he was an honourable man. But he was wrong. I have no problem with the fact that this anachronism which I studied decades ago (before Carrington's resignation actually) has fallen into desuetude. It is silly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rzt7UnIPMw
Where is your evidence that the impartial judiciary are blocking Brexit?
Truly the Conservative Party (clue used to be in the name) has jumped the shark and become the UK Tea Party.
When you have razed every ages-old institution of the British Isles to the ground in order to see whether unicorns exist perhaps you will all reflect on what you have done.
Regarding Labour, I make no secret that I do not think much of the perpetual moaners who seem to do very little, who happily campaign to make Corbyn PM while they talk and talk about how much they do not like what he is doing. And I still see little reason to think they will actually do something other than mouth off on twitter and PLP meetings, it's a game they play to assure themselves they are righteous and doing all they can, while in reality it is a pretext to defend their tribal instincts.
However, it really is remarkable to see the Deputy Leader and General Secretary bitching at each other in formal letters. It cannot be good for the organisation of which they are a part, and even I have to wonder how long can both remain in place while so openly hostile. Of course, May's shambolic last few months shows just how far you can string things out, but it is still remarkable to see the hostility, even if I don't think it is wholly genuine (if it were, there would be more action).
That's another £100m that John McDonnell can put into education without any come back from the tax bombshell.
Needless to say, he is just what the country needs.
Fancy that!
I must know what drugs you are taking.
The logic of your position is that the Supreme Court should not have cared what the law required, they should not have 'backed' the Gina Miller case, for political reasons.
"I didn't have a nervous breakdown, why did they?"
https://twitter.com/TheRedRoar/status/1149247565076021248
Almost certainly given the political situation at the time that would have been untenable politically.
I think though we will have to disagree that Ministerial responsibility is an anachronism. It seems to me that too many people at the top refuse to take responsibility and that this has led to a degradation of public life. Senior people are willing to grab the rewards but run away from bearing responsibility. I find that despicable. If you want one you have to take the other too. This is a wider point than simply Ministerial responsibility for civil servants.
And old-fashioned as it may be, a bit of honour among those who would lead is not to be sniffed at. There has been far too much venal, self-serving and selfish behaviour for my liking. A bit of thinking about others first would not go amiss.
The LDs even gained Christchurch from the Tories in a by election in 1993
As I said earlier, Tories are jumping the shark into a Tea Party world in which everything their forefathers held dear, like the rule of law, are up for grabs in a cultural war.
This looks like another vanity project like the Garden Bridge fiasco .
One Luciana Berger.
Little did we know that Corbyn was trolling us.
There it is. This is Leninism/Stalinism/Trotsky in a nutshell. Eggs may be broken along the way.
The swing was not 75%. It isn't possible to retain a seat on a 75% swing.
If a seat is held with a majority of 4 one election then held again with a majority of 1 I wouldn't say that was a bad result reducing the majority by 75%.
If the Windsors want a big f-off boat, let them go and buy one. Otherwise they could try a Hoeseasons holiday.