Again, who is this guy and why should we be taking what he says with any validity? As far as i can tell he is some random off twitter. What special insight / sources does he have?
Evidence based policy is needed more than ever in criminal justice, but 'Hangman' Patel shows her true ignorant reactionary colours.
What an awful Home Secretary we have indeed.
If you read this criticism from the piece:
'Frances Crook, chief executive from the Howard League for Penal Reform, said the sentencing changes were not “a sensible, evidence-based policy”. She said: “It is the politics of the lynch mob … this is about making people spend more time in prison, which will affect thousands of men and will probably put staff in danger by taking hope away from people. We already know that prisoners are in appalling conditions, with a lot of violence, injury and suicides. A lot of it is directed at staff. It’s very irresponsible.”'
What she is saying is that if we don't release these prisoners early, they will inflict violence on prison staff. Does that indicate that we should support these prisoners being released early? It is inherently contradictory.
Again, who is this guy and why should we be taking what he says with any validity? As far as i can tell he is some random off twitter. What special insight / sources does he have?
Given that the US founded and funded AQ it's hardly a new position for them
Again, who is this guy and why should we be taking what he says with any validity? As far as i can tell he is some random off twitter. What special insight / sources does he have?
Given that the US founded and funded AQ it's hardly a new position for them
Not saying it is beyond the realms of possibilities, more people keep quoting this guy as some sort of reliable source but he doesnt seem to be anybody who is anybody to have the inside track on this (and every other news story of the day that he seems to.claim special breaking news knowledge of).
Evidence based policy is needed more than ever in criminal justice, but 'Hangman' Patel shows her true ignorant reactionary colours.
What an awful Home Secretary we have indeed.
If you read this criticism from the piece:
'Frances Crook, chief executive from the Howard League for Penal Reform, said the sentencing changes were not “a sensible, evidence-based policy”. She said: “It is the politics of the lynch mob … this is about making people spend more time in prison, which will affect thousands of men and will probably put staff in danger by taking hope away from people. We already know that prisoners are in appalling conditions, with a lot of violence, injury and suicides. A lot of it is directed at staff. It’s very irresponsible.”'
What she is saying is that if we don't release these prisoners early, they will inflict violence on prison staff. Does that indicate that we should support these prisoners being released early? It is inherently contradictory.
Sure, that's exactly what she's saying. If you want to oversimplify it to the point of gutting most of the meaning out of it. But then... of course you do.
Can anybody make sense of that? He's a war criminal, in substance in not in fact.
We're going to need to make deals with this imbecile fairly quickly to replace what we are losing in Europe.
Do you think we could trade the Isle of Wight for Florida while he's gaga but still in office?
sell Lincolnshire SELL LINCOLNSHIRE
Need a hard border and there's no natural border around Lincolnshire. The IoW has the Solent, a treacherous stretch of water with Martello Towers already in place.
Is she were to read out a Cromwell speech the government would probably rather it be the one about the tyranny of eternal parliaments.
Given the fact that Brexit has demonstrated that the monarchy is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the PM, I cannot see why she bothers at all. She might as well get Boris to read out his own fantasies policies and stay in Buck Palace with a nice warm cuppa...
This isn’t news. The monarchy has been apolitical for hundreds of years now.
Ultra-Remainers main objection is that it wasn’t political enough: they wanted HMQ to tell Boris where to go, and cared nothing for the constitutional consequences of that.
Can anybody make sense of that? He's a war criminal, in substance in not in fact.
We're going to need to make deals with this imbecile fairly quickly to replace what we are losing in Europe.
Do you think we could trade the Isle of Wight for Florida while he's gaga but still in office?
sell Lincolnshire SELL LINCOLNSHIRE
Need a hard border and there's no natural border around Lincolnshire. The IoW has the Solent, a treacherous stretch of water with Martello Towers already in place.
O/t, but there’s a piece in the Guardian today from someone from the Association of Electoral Officers who suggests it’s technically difficult to impossible to hold a General Election before Christmas, since all the halls etc are already booked, and the longer we wait, the more the difficult it becomes.
I suspect you view “Europeans” or “humans” as a single demos, while I limit it based on national units)
So you think England should vote on its relationship to other nations as England?
The U.K. is our demos
Do you think Wales will stick with us if Scotland and NI choose the EU over the UK?
Yes, Wales voted to Leave the EU like England and is much poorer per capita than Scotland or the Republic of Ireland
Evidence suggests, I understand, that, although The Valleys did what every disadvantaged area did, and voted Leave, many of the Leave other voters were retirees from England.
O/t, but there’s a piece in the Guardian today from someone from the Association of Electoral Officers who suggests it’s technically difficult to impossible to hold a General Election before Christmas, since all the halls etc are already booked, and the longer we wait, the more the difficult it becomes.
That's not really an issue. Hall bookings are cancelled all the time - I have had a number of rehearsals cancelled/moved because of bookings for elections. A way is always found - venues will always put the needs of an election ahead of regular hall users.
O/t, but there’s a piece in the Guardian today from someone from the Association of Electoral Officers who suggests it’s technically difficult to impossible to hold a General Election before Christmas, since all the halls etc are already booked, and the longer we wait, the more the difficult it becomes.
That's not really an issue. Hall bookings are cancelled all the time - I have had a number of rehearsals cancelled/moved because of bookings for elections. A way is always found - venues will always put the needs of an election ahead of regular hall users.
They'll be a lot more pissed off at cancelling Christmas performances than cancelling routine rehearsals.
I suspect you view “Europeans” or “humans” as a single demos, while I limit it based on national units)
So you think England should vote on its relationship to other nations as England?
The U.K. is our demos
Do you think Wales will stick with us if Scotland and NI choose the EU over the UK?
Yes, Wales voted to Leave the EU like England and is much poorer per capita than Scotland or the Republic of Ireland
Evidence suggests, I understand, that, although The Valleys did what every disadvantaged area did, and voted Leave, many of the Leave other voters were retirees from England.
So what? A narrow majority of Scottish born voted for Scottish independence in 2014, a majority of Quebec Francophones voted for independence from Canada in 1995.
Unless you want a country which bans immigration and bans people settling there in retirement that is
Has “People’s Vote” been officially dropped for “Confirmatory Referendum”?
Can’t we just call a spade a spade and call it the Losers Revote?
The basic problem Leavers have is that the more the public have seen of their plans, the less they like them. They have abjectly failed to create a consensus.
Their lack of introspection about this failure is the most enduring mystery of Brexit for me.
Contrast with the response of SNP, Green and other Yes campaigners who have never stopped trying to convert wavering No-ers to the Yes side since 2014. Change can only be achieved by converting previous opponents to your arguments. It is a basic, enduring truth of public life. Leavers totally fail to understand that. They think they will win by bullying, intimidation and bending the law. They won’t. The entire edifice is built on very shoddy foundations. It takes decades to build the solid base on which to advance. Leavers have been lazy, negligent and arrogant. There is no consensus to leave, and there never will be until the Leave side is lead by pleasant, trustworthy and persuasive people.
I hear Nicola is ready to put a hard border from Carlisle to Berwick if necessary affecting 60% of Scots exports.
Do you really think that even Scots will support such a barrier to trade and free movement within the UK. Is my Scottish wife going to have to provide her passport at the border when she visits family in the North of Scotland
In terms of value, Scotland exports more physical goods to the EU than to the rest of the UK. The only exception, AFAIK, is wood and wood products, and I don't believe a sheet of plywood or floor joist needs a phytosanitary certificate or a veterinary inspection, or has a limited shelf life compromised by customs delays.
If you are instead suggesting that there will be significant barriers to trade in services, especially financial services, between Scotland/EU/rest of the world and the UK after Brexit, maybe you should tell the City of London...
The thought of a hard border is as silly as the one in Ireland and would be as difficult an issue for those dealing with it
G, it would indeed be stupid , however physically it would be much easier to handle given we have 2 main roads and less than a handful of minor roads at the border. Maybe a couple of minutes delay now and again but not anything like Ireland border.
What happens if a deal in principle is brought back to the Commons for a vote but not the full deal with legal text .
What happens to the Benn Act if a deal in principle is passed but not the full deal.
And why would MPs agree to something which isn’t a full deal. Johnson is clearly by his recent actions not to be trusted .
Well theyll either agree it in principle and bypass Benn as part of that or vote it down and force Benn. If they want to sell 'we are against no deal so we are blocking a deal' to the voters then so be it, and good luck to them
What happens if a deal comes back preambled by the EU which states "This is the full and final offer. There will be no extension beyond 31/10 except to allow technical implementation of this deal. This deal must be ratified before 31/10. Otherwise UK leave with No Deal after 31/10".
I suspect you view “Europeans” or “humans” as a single demos, while I limit it based on national units)
So you think England should vote on its relationship to other nations as England?
I do but sadly the Scots didn't want to be an independent country.
That is such a perverse answer. We should decide as England, but only if Scotland lets us?
I hope to see the Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish be brave enough to go off on their own and take responsibility for themselves but if they're too frit to do so as the Scots were in 2014 don't want to shove the Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish away if they still want to cling to us. They're like little siblings, they can tag along if they want to but hopefully they'll grow up and leave us to ourselves eventually.
Yes, that is why they keep wittering on about never ever letting Scotland have a referendum again. They shat themselves at end of last one that was only won by last minute bribes ( welchers never paid).
Comments
'Frances Crook, chief executive from the Howard League for Penal Reform, said the sentencing changes were not “a sensible, evidence-based policy”. She said: “It is the politics of the lynch mob … this is about making people spend more time in prison, which will affect thousands of men and will probably put staff in danger by taking hope away from people. We already know that prisoners are in appalling conditions, with a lot of violence, injury and suicides. A lot of it is directed at staff. It’s very irresponsible.”'
What she is saying is that if we don't release these prisoners early, they will inflict violence on prison staff. Does that indicate that we should support these prisoners being released early? It is inherently contradictory.
Thread end is upon us
Unless you want a country which bans immigration and bans people settling there in retirement that is