Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
If the future holds songs of 'let's hear it for Sir Kier Starmer' I'd be more than amazed.
His main good point is that he's not Corbyn.
Indeed, and that should be cause enough for the Tories to be worried; add to that he seems quite competent and add to that that it is apparent Johnson has no leadership skills, and is looking more idiotic by the day. Starmer is to Johnson what Cameron was to Brown. I would expect a similar result when the time comes, assuming Bozo lasts that long.
I'd vote Boris over Starmer merely on character though. It's mostly all Boris has got, but that's enough.
What’s your definition of character...man of principle or a character good for a laugh?
A 'bit of a character' rather than possessing that quality, as his whole career would attest.
Also, why is everyone referring only to peaceful protests, when most of them in the US have clearly been anything but peaceful?
Are you sure? My impression is that most are indeed peaceful (unless one counts shouting as violence), but of course the media highlight the ones that aren't.
I will say that the only demo that has really stuck in my mind in a good way was the utterly silent Tamil protest about Srti Lanka outside Parliament - thousands of dignified people quietly carrying banners. I remember a Tory MP and I both agreeing that it had made us look at the issue more closely than we had done.
It is clear that there have been two very distinct sets of protests in the US. In the day time there have been huge, generally well behaved, well organised protests with mass support which have been commended by the police and the authorities. As those protests have eded and we have moved into the evening, they have been replaced by far more violent protests, often accompanied by looting and arson which are not supported by either the BLM movement or the vast majority of the protestors.
One of the problems is it appears to me that Trump and others like him seem to be trying to conflate the two separate reactions into one so as to discredit the whole movement.
Have BLM and the peaceful protestors condemned the looting and violence? I would be interested in your links to that.
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
I don't remember Tone, also a lawyer, writing many letters when he was LotO. Why didn't Tone feel the need to?
Funny how anyone could think that polemic writing, gameshow hosting, or mediocre book writing are better credentials than a lawyer. Mr NorthWales, you perhaps ought to made aware that parliament is not about showbiz, it is about making laws. A legal background is probably about as good a background as you could have to be there. Unless you think "we have had enough of experts". We are certainly testing that idea to destruction by having Boris Johnson as our extremely amateur PM
Are lawyers the right people to be making laws? I'm not entirely sure about that.
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
If the future holds songs of 'let's hear it for Sir Kier Starmer' I'd be more than amazed.
His main good point is that he's not Corbyn.
Indeed, and that should be cause enough for the Tories to be worried; add to that he seems quite competent and add to that that it is apparent Johnson has no leadership skills, and is looking more idiotic by the day. Starmer is to Johnson what Cameron was to Brown. I would expect a similar result when the time comes, assuming Bozo lasts that long.
I'd vote Boris over Starmer merely on character though. It's mostly all Boris has got, but that's enough.
What’s your definition of character...man of principle or a character good for a laugh?
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
Indeed. Also the attacks seem quite scattergun, as if they don't realise that the purpose of the letter is the headline and pressure it generates rather than the fine detail of the content. It's a win win situation for Starmer - if Johnson belatedly acts he is following Starmer's prompting and if he doesn't then Johnson is effectively endorsing Trump by his silence.
I also think that the more the Conservatives attack Starmer directly, the more it will marginalise those within Labour still seeking to undermine his authority. So it's all good as far as I'm concerned.
Also, why is everyone referring only to peaceful protests, when most of them in the US have clearly been anything but peaceful?
Are you sure? My impression is that most are indeed peaceful (unless one counts shouting as violence), but of course the media highlight the ones that aren't.
I will say that the only demo that has really stuck in my mind in a good way was the utterly silent Tamil protest about Srti Lanka outside Parliament - thousands of dignified people quietly carrying banners. I remember a Tory MP and I both agreeing that it had made us look at the issue more closely than we had done.
It is clear that there have been two very distinct sets of protests in the US. In the day time there have been huge, generally well behaved, well organised protests with mass support which have been commended by the police and the authorities. As those protests have eded and we have moved into the evening, they have been replaced by far more violent protests, often accompanied by looting and arson which are not supported by either the BLM movement or the vast majority of the protestors.
One of the problems is it appears to me that Trump and others like him seem to be trying to conflate the two separate reactions into one so as to discredit the whole movement.
Have BLM and the peaceful protestors condemned the looting and violence? I would be interested in your links to that.
Have you condemned the killing of George Floyd? Apologies if you have.
You know how we have manifestos telling us what somebody plans to do if they get into power - what is the equivalent over there?
Is there something other than the rhetoric on the campaign trail?
Newt Gingrich did his "Contract with America' in the 1994 Congressional elections
Yes, I recall that. Turbo boost to partisanship, some say.
But Trump, say, did we get a manifesto in 2016?
Or was it just "Build That Wall" etc from his rallies?
No, we don't have manifestos in the British/Commonwealth sense. What we do have is that one of the things that the party Conventions do, as well as formally elect the party's Presidential ticket, is write the party platform which notionally the Presidential and Congressional campaigns are fought on.
Because of the separation of powers and because electoral candidates are elected by the people in primary elections, not selected by the party machine (and therefore can be "de-selected" for not adhering to the party line) party discipline is not like it is in the UK. This means that there's no practical way for the President, or even a Congressional majority of the same party, to push through legislation implementing a platform "plank" in the way that British governments, with a guaranteed parliamentary majority, can push passing a "manifesto commitment" as a moral obligation.
That's not to say that the party platforms are meaningless: they do constitute general statements of intended policy over the next 2-4 years if elected, and many of the "planks" in practice do get implemented, but they don't carry the weight that an election manifesto does in the Westminster system.
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
Letters create evidence. You may not be rattled by Starmer, but Johnson clearly is, as are a number of posters on here. I can understand why. He is far smarter than the PM, more on top of his brief and not afraid of a bit of hard work. Since he has become leader, the polls have closed and his personal numbers have become steadily more positive, as have those for the Labour party. It's two months today that he became Labour leader. It's not a bad start.
Lawyers are focused on looking backwards. Very little evidence of Starmer looking forwards
The type of lawyer Starmer has been is completely focused on the future. Their job is to build a case to secure a verdict. They are deliberately moving towards an outcome in the future.
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
Letters create evidence. You may not be rattled by Starmer, but Johnson clearly is, as are a number of posters on here. I can understand why. He is far smarter than the PM, more on top of his brief and not afraid of a bit of hard work. Since he has become leader, the polls have closed and his personal numbers have become steadily more positive, as have those for the Labour party. It's two months today that he became Labour leader. It's not a bad start.
Spot on. The letters are a means of keeping a record of accountability. Because of the current crisis, including curtailed parliamentary proceedings, Starmer has few opportunities for other forms of scrutiny. Ministers, including the PM, seem reluctant to appear on any debating forum (TV, radio) outside parliament.
At PMQs yesterday Johnson didn't even try to answer Starmer's questions, instead resorting to a quite aggressive "asking me questions like this is not patriotic during a crisis" mode. This probably worked okay yesterday, but won't keep working.
Starmer is methodically getting under Boris's skin, and is in no great hurry to do so. Bit by bit he'll chip away, and Boris will not cope with the scrutiny or the detail. A diminished figure, not suitable to be PM - this will happen before the next election. The letters are just part of the tactics.
Starmer will not be worried about the polls. His ratings are fine. The chances of the Labour Party making a lot of headway quickly after several years with an awful reputation are low. Give it a year.
The NHS coronavirus test-and-trace system designed to prevent a second deadly wave is not expected to work at full speed until September or October, the Guardian has learned.
Tony Prestedge, the chief operating officer of the NHS scheme, admitted in a webinar to staff that the programme would be “imperfect” at launch, adding that he hoped it would be operational at a world-class level within three to four months.
It comes as a leaked email from the chief executive of Serco – one of the main companies contracted to deliver the service – revealed how he doubted the scheme would evolve smoothly but said he wanted it to “cement the position of the private sector” in the NHS supply chain.
Also, why is everyone referring only to peaceful protests, when most of them in the US have clearly been anything but peaceful?
Are you sure? My impression is that most are indeed peaceful (unless one counts shouting as violence), but of course the media highlight the ones that aren't.
I will say that the only demo that has really stuck in my mind in a good way was the utterly silent Tamil protest about Srti Lanka outside Parliament - thousands of dignified people quietly carrying banners. I remember a Tory MP and I both agreeing that it had made us look at the issue more closely than we had done.
It is clear that there have been two very distinct sets of protests in the US. In the day time there have been huge, generally well behaved, well organised protests with mass support which have been commended by the police and the authorities. As those protests have eded and we have moved into the evening, they have been replaced by far more violent protests, often accompanied by looting and arson which are not supported by either the BLM movement or the vast majority of the protestors.
One of the problems is it appears to me that Trump and others like him seem to be trying to conflate the two separate reactions into one so as to discredit the whole movement.
Have BLM and the peaceful protestors condemned the looting and violence? I would be interested in your links to that.
Yes.
Not that it matters. Two wrongs don't make a right and the killings of innocents came first and is worse.
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
If the future holds songs of 'let's hear it for Sir Kier Starmer' I'd be more than amazed.
His main good point is that he's not Corbyn.
Indeed, and that should be cause enough for the Tories to be worried; add to that he seems quite competent and add to that that it is apparent Johnson has no leadership skills, and is looking more idiotic by the day. Starmer is to Johnson what Cameron was to Brown. I would expect a similar result when the time comes, assuming Bozo lasts that long.
I'd vote Boris over Starmer merely on character though. It's mostly all Boris has got, but that's enough.
The NHS coronavirus test-and-trace system designed to prevent a second deadly wave is not expected to work at full speed until September or October, the Guardian has learned.
Tony Prestedge, the chief operating officer of the NHS scheme, admitted in a webinar to staff that the programme would be “imperfect” at launch, adding that he hoped it would be operational at a world-class level within three to four months.
It comes as a leaked email from the chief executive of Serco – one of the main companies contracted to deliver the service – revealed how he doubted the scheme would evolve smoothly but said he wanted it to “cement the position of the private sector” in the NHS supply chain.
I wonder if it'll be running at 1%, 10% or 90% of full speed before then? Things don't have to be running at top speed to be effective (although I'm not claiming it is currently effective).
The NHS coronavirus test-and-trace system designed to prevent a second deadly wave is not expected to work at full speed until September or October, the Guardian has learned.
Tony Prestedge, the chief operating officer of the NHS scheme, admitted in a webinar to staff that the programme would be “imperfect” at launch, adding that he hoped it would be operational at a world-class level within three to four months.
It comes as a leaked email from the chief executive of Serco – one of the main companies contracted to deliver the service – revealed how he doubted the scheme would evolve smoothly but said he wanted it to “cement the position of the private sector” in the NHS supply chain.
Ah, okay, we're finally seeing some names behind the blob.
Who is this guy, to whom does he report, how much are we paying him, what were his terms of reference, why is the project he leads failing badly, how did they appoint Serco, given their terrible record in delivery of public projects?
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
Letters create evidence. You may not be rattled by Starmer, but Johnson clearly is, as are a number of posters on here. I can understand why. He is far smarter than the PM, more on top of his brief and not afraid of a bit of hard work. Since he has become leader, the polls have closed and his personal numbers have become steadily more positive, as have those for the Labour party. It's two months today that he became Labour leader. It's not a bad start.
I'm in the David Herdson camp over Starmer. Not as impressive as Ed Miliband.
The NHS coronavirus test-and-trace system designed to prevent a second deadly wave is not expected to work at full speed until September or October, the Guardian has learned.
Tony Prestedge, the chief operating officer of the NHS scheme, admitted in a webinar to staff that the programme would be “imperfect” at launch, adding that he hoped it would be operational at a world-class level within three to four months.
It comes as a leaked email from the chief executive of Serco – one of the main companies contracted to deliver the service – revealed how he doubted the scheme would evolve smoothly but said he wanted it to “cement the position of the private sector” in the NHS supply chain.
The NHS coronavirus test-and-trace system designed to prevent a second deadly wave is not expected to work at full speed until September or October, the Guardian has learned.
Tony Prestedge, the chief operating officer of the NHS scheme, admitted in a webinar to staff that the programme would be “imperfect” at launch, adding that he hoped it would be operational at a world-class level within three to four months.
It comes as a leaked email from the chief executive of Serco – one of the main companies contracted to deliver the service – revealed how he doubted the scheme would evolve smoothly but said he wanted it to “cement the position of the private sector” in the NHS supply chain.
Initially an app was supposed to be part of a national rollout of the test-and-trace programme, but this element has been beset by problems and instead the tracing system started without it.
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
If the future holds songs of 'let's hear it for Sir Kier Starmer' I'd be more than amazed.
His main good point is that he's not Corbyn.
Indeed, and that should be cause enough for the Tories to be worried; add to that he seems quite competent and add to that that it is apparent Johnson has no leadership skills, and is looking more idiotic by the day. Starmer is to Johnson what Cameron was to Brown. I would expect a similar result when the time comes, assuming Bozo lasts that long.
I'd vote Boris over Starmer merely on character though. It's mostly all Boris has got, but that's enough.
Character?
You mean charisma surely.
I'm reasonably confident that if I'd meant charisma rather than character I'd have phrased it so.
Well, all that breathless reporting was for nothing then.
Huge relief considering the impact a positive result could have had. Still pretty bone-headed of JRM to set up the conga queue though. Presumably that plan is now filed in the bin.
The NHS coronavirus test-and-trace system designed to prevent a second deadly wave is not expected to work at full speed until September or October, the Guardian has learned.
Tony Prestedge, the chief operating officer of the NHS scheme, admitted in a webinar to staff that the programme would be “imperfect” at launch, adding that he hoped it would be operational at a world-class level within three to four months.
It comes as a leaked email from the chief executive of Serco – one of the main companies contracted to deliver the service – revealed how he doubted the scheme would evolve smoothly but said he wanted it to “cement the position of the private sector” in the NHS supply chain.
I wonder if it'll be running at 1%, 10% or 90% of full speed before then? Things don't have to be running at top speed to be effective (although I'm not claiming it is currently effective).
Yes it's not all or nothing. Good point.
I just wish Johnson hadn't felt the need to promise something "world beating".
It's so juvenile. Just a step up from "gonna have a big beautiful track and trace system, best ever, gonna be just so so good, gonna trace and track and test so many people you won't believe it".
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
Letters create evidence. You may not be rattled by Starmer, but Johnson clearly is, as are a number of posters on here. I can understand why. He is far smarter than the PM, more on top of his brief and not afraid of a bit of hard work. Since he has become leader, the polls have closed and his personal numbers have become steadily more positive, as have those for the Labour party. It's two months today that he became Labour leader. It's not a bad start.
I'm in the David Herdson camp over Starmer. Not as impressive as Ed Miliband.
He does not need to be better than Ed Miliband. Just better than Johnson.
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
Letters create evidence. You may not be rattled by Starmer, but Johnson clearly is, as are a number of posters on here. I can understand why. He is far smarter than the PM, more on top of his brief and not afraid of a bit of hard work. Since he has become leader, the polls have closed and his personal numbers have become steadily more positive, as have those for the Labour party. It's two months today that he became Labour leader. It's not a bad start.
I'm in the David Herdson camp over Starmer. Not as impressive as Ed Miliband.
We'll have to agree to disagree. For me Starmer is a better performer in the Commons, is a lot smarter, is much more in control of his party and looks a lot more impressive than the PM he is facing. He also owes absolutely nothing to Len McCluskey and did not stab his brother in the back.
Starmer's fine in my book. By architecting Labour's ludicrous Brexit policy he contributed handsomely to a big Tory win. That's the only policy development work I've seen him be responsible for. He'll need to be far better in the future if he's going to become PM.
If the government is serious about dropping food standards, it’s even barmier than I thought
If the government wants to secure a trade deal with the US it will have no choice. This is how things will work from here. We sit down with a bigger entity - the EU, the US, China, India, etc - and we are told what will work. Our choice is whether or not we walk away.
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
Letters create evidence. You may not be rattled by Starmer, but Johnson clearly is, as are a number of posters on here. I can understand why. He is far smarter than the PM, more on top of his brief and not afraid of a bit of hard work. Since he has become leader, the polls have closed and his personal numbers have become steadily more positive, as have those for the Labour party. It's two months today that he became Labour leader. It's not a bad start.
I'm in the David Herdson camp over Starmer. Not as impressive as Ed Miliband.
We'll have to agree to disagree. For me Starmer is a better performer in the Commons, is a lot smarter, is much more in control of his party and looks a lot more impressive than the PM he is facing. He also owes absolutely nothing to Len McCluskey and did not stab his brother in the back.
And Starmer doesn't look geeky like EdM and Boris is scared shitless of him.
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
If the future holds songs of 'let's hear it for Sir Kier Starmer' I'd be more than amazed.
His main good point is that he's not Corbyn.
Indeed, and that should be cause enough for the Tories to be worried; add to that he seems quite competent and add to that that it is apparent Johnson has no leadership skills, and is looking more idiotic by the day. Starmer is to Johnson what Cameron was to Brown. I would expect a similar result when the time comes, assuming Bozo lasts that long.
I'd vote Boris over Starmer merely on character though. It's mostly all Boris has got, but that's enough.
Character?
You mean charisma surely.
I'm reasonably confident that if I'd meant charisma rather than character I'd have phrased it so.
Fair enough.
So in which aspects do you judge Johnson to have a better character than Starmer?
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
Letters create evidence. You may not be rattled by Starmer, but Johnson clearly is, as are a number of posters on here. I can understand why. He is far smarter than the PM, more on top of his brief and not afraid of a bit of hard work. Since he has become leader, the polls have closed and his personal numbers have become steadily more positive, as have those for the Labour party. It's two months today that he became Labour leader. It's not a bad start.
Lawyers are focused on looking backwards. Very little evidence of Starmer looking forwards
The type of lawyer Starmer has been is completely focused on the future. Their job is to build a case to secure a verdict. They are deliberately moving towards an outcome in the future.
That is utter tosh. Building a case is backward looking not "will this man be guilty in the future of some offence". He was DPP FFS.
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
Letters create evidence. You may not be rattled by Starmer, but Johnson clearly is, as are a number of posters on here. I can understand why. He is far smarter than the PM, more on top of his brief and not afraid of a bit of hard work. Since he has become leader, the polls have closed and his personal numbers have become steadily more positive, as have those for the Labour party. It's two months today that he became Labour leader. It's not a bad start.
I'm in the David Herdson camp over Starmer. Not as impressive as Ed Miliband.
We'll have to agree to disagree. For me Starmer is a better performer in the Commons, is a lot smarter, is much more in control of his party and looks a lot more impressive than the PM he is facing. He also owes absolutely nothing to Len McCluskey and did not stab his brother in the back.
And Starmer doesn't look geeky like EdM and Boris is scared shitless of him.
He looks brylcreemy. Like the hero on the front cover of a 1960s Mills and Boon doctor & nurse romance.
Worrying for Labour after such a bad week for the Tories and they are still not even close. I maintain until Brexit is delivered the Tories will lead the polls, only then might voting patterns change.
I suspect they'll be looking at the near 20pt drop since the start of April, and not be too worried about 1pt here or there (and bear in mind this company reported a 6 pt drop over the period when the Cumming saga was at it's height. During this period the main news has been lockdown being loosened).
The Brexit stuff is likely to unwind over the parliament - hopefully in a couple of years what Remainers/Leavers think won't be relevant.
Also the Greens would not poll 5% in a GE. A good half of that vote would be likely to switch to Labour.
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
Letters create evidence. You may not be rattled by Starmer, but Johnson clearly is, as are a number of posters on here. I can understand why. He is far smarter than the PM, more on top of his brief and not afraid of a bit of hard work. Since he has become leader, the polls have closed and his personal numbers have become steadily more positive, as have those for the Labour party. It's two months today that he became Labour leader. It's not a bad start.
I'm in the David Herdson camp over Starmer. Not as impressive as Ed Miliband.
We'll have to agree to disagree. For me Starmer is a better performer in the Commons, is a lot smarter, is much more in control of his party and looks a lot more impressive than the PM he is facing. He also owes absolutely nothing to Len McCluskey and did not stab his brother in the back.
And Starmer doesn't look geeky like EdM and Boris is scared shitless of him.
He looks brylcreemy. Like the hero on the front cover of a 1960s Mills and Boon doctor & nurse romance.
Whereas Boris' Barnet is straight off the cover of Hair and Beauty magazine?
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
Letters create evidence. You may not be rattled by Starmer, but Johnson clearly is, as are a number of posters on here. I can understand why. He is far smarter than the PM, more on top of his brief and not afraid of a bit of hard work. Since he has become leader, the polls have closed and his personal numbers have become steadily more positive, as have those for the Labour party. It's two months today that he became Labour leader. It's not a bad start.
I'm in the David Herdson camp over Starmer. Not as impressive as Ed Miliband.
He does not need to be better than Ed Miliband. Just better than Johnson.
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
Letters create evidence. You may not be rattled by Starmer, but Johnson clearly is, as are a number of posters on here. I can understand why. He is far smarter than the PM, more on top of his brief and not afraid of a bit of hard work. Since he has become leader, the polls have closed and his personal numbers have become steadily more positive, as have those for the Labour party. It's two months today that he became Labour leader. It's not a bad start.
Lawyers are focused on looking backwards. Very little evidence of Starmer looking forwards
The type of lawyer Starmer has been is completely focused on the future. Their job is to build a case to secure a verdict. They are deliberately moving towards an outcome in the future.
That is utter tosh. Building a case is backward looking not "will this man be guilty in the future of some offence". He was DPP FFS.
Yes - and as DPP his job was specifically to assess whether the evidence in a case was suffiucient so that there was a reasonable chance it could lead to a conviction at a trial set for a date in the future.
This is really interesting: "Voters who dislike both Trump and Biden overwhelmingly back Biden, 46% to 14%, in a head-to-head matchup."
There are differing degrees of "dislike".
The difference between loath and dislike I'd guess. It's very much from a distance but the impression I get is that the people who really loath Biden are Bernie Bros ultras, most of the rest seem generally exasperated that this is the best option they've got against Trump.
UK could get a 'coronavirus bank holiday' in OCTOBER as Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden says it is an 'excellent proposal' amid claims it could deliver £500m boost to struggling tourism sector
(Mail)
That winter 2nd wave wont take off itself you know.
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
Letters create evidence. You may not be rattled by Starmer, but Johnson clearly is, as are a number of posters on here. I can understand why. He is far smarter than the PM, more on top of his brief and not afraid of a bit of hard work. Since he has become leader, the polls have closed and his personal numbers have become steadily more positive, as have those for the Labour party. It's two months today that he became Labour leader. It's not a bad start.
I'm in the David Herdson camp over Starmer. Not as impressive as Ed Miliband.
We'll have to agree to disagree. For me Starmer is a better performer in the Commons, is a lot smarter, is much more in control of his party and looks a lot more impressive than the PM he is facing. He also owes absolutely nothing to Len McCluskey and did not stab his brother in the back.
And Starmer doesn't look geeky like EdM and Boris is scared shitless of him.
Cameron knew how to handle Miliband. Johnson has not got a clue how to handle Starmer. Johnson's basic problem is that Starmer will always be better briefed and prepared at PMQs because he is not a lazy sod who prefers to wing it.
This is really interesting: "Voters who dislike both Trump and Biden overwhelmingly back Biden, 46% to 14%, in a head-to-head matchup."
There are differing degrees of "dislike".
The difference between loath and dislike I'd guess. It's very much from a distance but the impression I get is that the people who really loath Biden are Bernie Bros ultras, most of the rest seem generally exasperated that this is the best option they've got against Trump.
I think you are right, uniondivvie, that most of his dislikes will come from his left, not his right. Of course, the same is true for Trump, but there is a lot more to the left of him ...
I think BLM campaign will help boost the Democrats GOTV in the upcoming US election, even if said people are not massively enthused by Biden. I think it can only be good for him.
The NHS coronavirus test-and-trace system designed to prevent a second deadly wave is not expected to work at full speed until September or October, the Guardian has learned.
Tony Prestedge, the chief operating officer of the NHS scheme, admitted in a webinar to staff that the programme would be “imperfect” at launch, adding that he hoped it would be operational at a world-class level within three to four months.
It comes as a leaked email from the chief executive of Serco – one of the main companies contracted to deliver the service – revealed how he doubted the scheme would evolve smoothly but said he wanted it to “cement the position of the private sector” in the NHS supply chain.
I wonder if it'll be running at 1%, 10% or 90% of full speed before then? Things don't have to be running at top speed to be effective (although I'm not claiming it is currently effective).
Yes it's not all or nothing. Good point.
I just wish Johnson hadn't felt the need to promise something "world beating".
It's so juvenile. Just a step up from "gonna have a big beautiful track and trace system, best ever, gonna be just so so good, gonna trace and track and test so many people you won't believe it".
It is, but I don’t really care about that nonsense.
What really annoys me is that they could have set all this up months ago, in parallel, or even in advance of the testing ramp up - and it is one of the essential components of being able to reopen the economy.
In 204 weeks or 1,428 days it will be General Election day.
It has been 25 weeks or 175 days since the last General Election.
An enormous amount has happened and we are barely 11% of the way into this Parliament. Anyone who can state with any sense of conviction how the next GE is going to turn out is clearly mad, sad or bad (delete as appropriate).
Worrying about infinitesimally small moves in opinion polls is presumably all some have to look forward in the next 1,428 days.
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
Letters create evidence. You may not be rattled by Starmer, but Johnson clearly is, as are a number of posters on here. I can understand why. He is far smarter than the PM, more on top of his brief and not afraid of a bit of hard work. Since he has become leader, the polls have closed and his personal numbers have become steadily more positive, as have those for the Labour party. It's two months today that he became Labour leader. It's not a bad start.
I'm in the David Herdson camp over Starmer. Not as impressive as Ed Miliband.
We'll have to agree to disagree. For me Starmer is a better performer in the Commons, is a lot smarter, is much more in control of his party and looks a lot more impressive than the PM he is facing. He also owes absolutely nothing to Len McCluskey and did not stab his brother in the back.
And Starmer doesn't look geeky like EdM and Boris is scared shitless of him.
He looks brylcreemy. Like the hero on the front cover of a 1960s Mills and Boon doctor & nurse romance.
Whereas Boris' Barnet is straight off the cover of Hair and Beauty magazine?
Anyone with kempt hair 12 weeks in to a no hairdressing regime has questions to answer.
If the government is serious about dropping food standards, it’s even barmier than I thought
If the government wants to secure a trade deal with the US it will have no choice. This is how things will work from here. We sit down with a bigger entity - the EU, the US, China, India, etc - and we are told what will work. Our choice is whether or not we walk away.
I think there is a difference. HMG is very happy to accede to US demands to lower standards; it sees any EU demand to maintain standards as an affront to its sovereignty.
Thatcher, Major, Hague, IDS, Howard, Cameron, May, Johnson...
The only truly popular leaders in my lifetime have been Blair, and perhaps Johnson.
Eh? Margaret Thatcher was extremely popular. In fact, she still is amongst those old enough to remember her premiership - the only ex-PM for which that is true.
I think she was respected, rather than popular. And respect is more important than popularity.
She was respected but also widely despised. Johnson is also despised by many but viewed with contempt .
UK could get a 'coronavirus bank holiday' in OCTOBER as Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden says it is an 'excellent proposal' amid claims it could deliver £500m boost to struggling tourism sector
(Mail)
That winter 2nd wave wont take off itself you know.
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
Letters create evidence. You may not be rattled by Starmer, but Johnson clearly is, as are a number of posters on here. I can understand why. He is far smarter than the PM, more on top of his brief and not afraid of a bit of hard work. Since he has become leader, the polls have closed and his personal numbers have become steadily more positive, as have those for the Labour party. It's two months today that he became Labour leader. It's not a bad start.
I'm in the David Herdson camp over Starmer. Not as impressive as Ed Miliband.
We'll have to agree to disagree. For me Starmer is a better performer in the Commons, is a lot smarter, is much more in control of his party and looks a lot more impressive than the PM he is facing. He also owes absolutely nothing to Len McCluskey and did not stab his brother in the back.
And Starmer doesn't look geeky like EdM and Boris is scared shitless of him.
He looks brylcreemy. Like the hero on the front cover of a 1960s Mills and Boon doctor & nurse romance.
Whereas Boris' Barnet is straight off the cover of Hair and Beauty magazine?
I know he likes the unkempt hair look, but someone really does need to drag him through a barber shop. It's not a good look when dealing with a serious national crisis.
Interesting take on what's hitting Trump from the right - his thin skin
One Alt-right commentator I read is disappointed that when so much is going on in the US, Corona, the economy, riots, Trump is still getting embroiled in personal spats and squabbles.
It looks petty, mean and, most of all, it doesn't project stability.
After a poor day yesterday, some better numbers on death tolls and cases today though I am still concerned the new cases figure is higher than many would like and especially if we are moving toward a new phase of easing restrictions in eleven days.
No real surprise to hear face "coverings" will be mandatory on public transport. It's going to be a long way from Paddington to Penzance if you have to keep the mask on the whole time.
None of this solves the fundamental capacity issue confronting London Underground and other mass transit systems. Even with social distancing cut to 1m, the tube can only convey a quarter of its usual passenger load.
Double decker buses in London are now carrying just 20 passengers but the slide this evening shows public transport use remains severely depressed and while motor vehicle numbers are 75% of normal that hides a strong performance by HGV and LGV vehicles. We're back then to wondering just how many have gone back to work.
Anecdotally, here in downtown East Ham, there are more people about including many younger men and women and I wonder just what percentage of the population has been furloughed or has seen the jobs disappear.
Interesting take on what's hitting Trump from the right - his thin skin
One Alt-right commentator I read is disappointed that when so much is going on in the US, Corona, the economy, riots, Trump is still getting embroiled in personal spats and squabbles.
It looks petty, mean and, most of all, it doesn't project stability.
You're probably right. it's a variant on "It's rarely the crime, it's always the coverup".
And what made Dom-in-Durham-gate a problem wasn't so much the trip up the A1, it was the contortions to justify the trip to Castle Barnard.
Because Boris really is also remarkably thin-skinned...
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
Letters create evidence. You may not be rattled by Starmer, but Johnson clearly is, as are a number of posters on here. I can understand why. He is far smarter than the PM, more on top of his brief and not afraid of a bit of hard work. Since he has become leader, the polls have closed and his personal numbers have become steadily more positive, as have those for the Labour party. It's two months today that he became Labour leader. It's not a bad start.
I'm in the David Herdson camp over Starmer. Not as impressive as Ed Miliband.
We'll have to agree to disagree. For me Starmer is a better performer in the Commons, is a lot smarter, is much more in control of his party and looks a lot more impressive than the PM he is facing. He also owes absolutely nothing to Len McCluskey and did not stab his brother in the back.
And Starmer doesn't look geeky like EdM and Boris is scared shitless of him.
He looks brylcreemy. Like the hero on the front cover of a 1960s Mills and Boon doctor & nurse romance.
Whereas Boris' Barnet is straight off the cover of Hair and Beauty magazine?
I know he likes the unkempt hair look, but someone really does need to drag him through a barber shop. It's not a good look when dealing with a serious national crisis.
The messy hair and the "Boris" name are part of the brand. Without them he's just another over-promoted fat posh bloke.
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
Letters create evidence. You may not be rattled by Starmer, but Johnson clearly is, as are a number of posters on here. I can understand why. He is far smarter than the PM, more on top of his brief and not afraid of a bit of hard work. Since he has become leader, the polls have closed and his personal numbers have become steadily more positive, as have those for the Labour party. It's two months today that he became Labour leader. It's not a bad start.
Lawyers are focused on looking backwards. Very little evidence of Starmer looking forwards
The type of lawyer Starmer has been is completely focused on the future. Their job is to build a case to secure a verdict. They are deliberately moving towards an outcome in the future.
That is utter tosh. Building a case is backward looking not "will this man be guilty in the future of some offence". He was DPP FFS.
Yes - and as DPP his job was specifically to assess whether the evidence in a case was suffiucient so that there was a reasonable chance it could lead to a conviction at a trial set for a date in the future.
Also, why is everyone referring only to peaceful protests, when most of them in the US have clearly been anything but peaceful?
Are you sure? My impression is that most are indeed peaceful (unless one counts shouting as violence), but of course the media highlight the ones that aren't.
I will say that the only demo that has really stuck in my mind in a good way was the utterly silent Tamil protest about Srti Lanka outside Parliament - thousands of dignified people quietly carrying banners. I remember a Tory MP and I both agreeing that it had made us look at the issue more closely than we had done.
It is clear that there have been two very distinct sets of protests in the US. In the day time there have been huge, generally well behaved, well organised protests with mass support which have been commended by the police and the authorities. As those protests have eded and we have moved into the evening, they have been replaced by far more violent protests, often accompanied by looting and arson which are not supported by either the BLM movement or the vast majority of the protestors.
One of the problems is it appears to me that Trump and others like him seem to be trying to conflate the two separate reactions into one so as to discredit the whole movement.
Have BLM and the peaceful protestors condemned the looting and violence? I would be interested in your links to that.
You're probably right. it's a variant on "It's rarely the crime, it's always the coverup".
And what made Dom-in-Durham-gate a problem wasn't so much the trip up the A1, it was the contortions to justify the trip to Castle Barnard.
Because Boris really is also remarkably thin-skinned...
Strangely, what bothered me most about Cummings was his notion he wasn't safe in his own home because of social media having shown where he lived and the "ugly atmosphere" resulting from what he regarded as an inaccurate perception of his views on herd immunity.
For a man who had utilised social media so assiduously as a campaigning tool, he seemed oddly lacking in awareness of its negative connotations.
As I've always said "it doesn't matter who writes history, what matters is who re-writes it". If we are seeing an attempt to re-invent the past to show Cummings as having been a visionary in predicting the virus and a master strategist in favour of lockdown, that to me is much more disturbing than any trip to Barnard Castle.
After a poor day yesterday, some better numbers on death tolls and cases today though I am still concerned the new cases figure is higher than many would like and especially if we are moving toward a new phase of easing restrictions in eleven days.
The case figures are being inflated somewhat by a large expansion in mailed tests - 96k today, on top of 40k odd via drivethrough.
If the government is serious about dropping food standards, it’s even barmier than I thought
Surely labelling is the key here. If your food is labelled, you can make your own choice.
The FTA on current US demand will prohibit any requirement for labelling that identifies US origin.
But would it preclude voluntary labelling of food by other producers as being animal-humane, or hormone/chorline-free?
Nope. You would be able to voluntarily label your food as you liked.
However, this kind of labelling is also very weakly policed, outside the "official" organic labelling which does have certain requirements attached to it. If a US poultry producer wanted to create a "Humanely Farmed" label that looked very like existing labels, then - because "humanely farmed" does not have a specific legal definition - they could probably get away with it.
Personally, I have no issue with US food produce coming to the UK. What I have a serious issue with is mandatory labelling being considered a non tariff barrier that is prohibited under the terms of the treaty.
Interesting take on what's hitting Trump from the right - his thin skin
One Alt-right commentator I read is disappointed that when so much is going on in the US, Corona, the economy, riots, Trump is still getting embroiled in personal spats and squabbles.
It looks petty, mean and, most of all, it doesn't project stability.
You're probably right. it's a variant on "It's rarely the crime, it's always the coverup".
And what made Dom-in-Durham-gate a problem wasn't so much the trip up the A1, it was the contortions to justify the trip to Castle Barnard.
Because Boris really is also remarkably thin-skinned...
Boris dealt with Cummings by hearing the evidence, making a decision and then sticking to it despite the heaps of opprobrium.
Starmer by contrast has said nothing about Gardiner, Corbyn, Kinnock, Ali or Duffield, all of whom demonstrably breached lockdown or social distancing.
Interesting take on what's hitting Trump from the right - his thin skin
One Alt-right commentator I read is disappointed that when so much is going on in the US, Corona, the economy, riots, Trump is still getting embroiled in personal spats and squabbles.
It looks petty, mean and, most of all, it doesn't project stability.
Trump is a bully. He is a personally weak and vain character but regards every slight and affront as a personal challenge to his authority. General Maitlis is no threat but instead of ignoring the comments, Trump has to respond. He has made many enemies and as you say it shows questionable tactics trying to take them all on as if it were a "whack-a-mole" game.
Unlike under the British system where a politician has to learn how to argue and persuade, the American President can run the country like a business if he has a tame set of shareholders (Senators). Some business people are used to having their every utterance treated as wisdom and are used to their every command being obeyed. That's why so many fail in politics - they don't know how to persuade without the implied threat of coercion.
If the government is serious about dropping food standards, it’s even barmier than I thought
Surely labelling is the key here. If your food is labelled, you can make your own choice.
The FTA on current US demand will prohibit any requirement for labelling that identifies US origin.
That's a lie.
I don't appreciate being called a liar.
The US Trade Representative repeatedly highlights labeling as a barrier to trade in this document (mentioned 177 times)
The US is very aggressive in regarding mandatory labelling as a non-tariff barrier. Nowhere else - to be the best of my knowledge - takes such a stance.
For the record, the bigger issue (though) is not labelling country of origin, but more issues like "contains genetically modified produce".
If the government is serious about dropping food standards, it’s even barmier than I thought
Surely labelling is the key here. If your food is labelled, you can make your own choice.
The FTA on current US demand will prohibit any requirement for labelling that identifies US origin.
But would it preclude voluntary labelling of food by other producers as being animal-humane, or hormone/chorline-free?
Nope. You would be able to voluntarily label your food as you liked.
However, this kind of labelling is also very weakly policed, outside the "official" organic labelling which does have certain requirements attached to it. If a US poultry producer wanted to create a "Humanely Farmed" label that looked very like existing labels, then - because "humanely farmed" does not have a specific legal definition - they could probably get away with it.
Personally, I have no issue with US food produce coming to the UK. What I have a serious issue with is mandatory labelling being considered a non tariff barrier that is prohibited under the terms of the treaty.
I think you and I agree on the issues. It is not as though the US is free of mandatory labelling itself (e.g. cigarette packaging)
Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer
Hence lots of pointless letter writing
I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.
I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth
Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
Letters create evidence. You may not be rattled by Starmer, but Johnson clearly is, as are a number of posters on here. I can understand why. He is far smarter than the PM, more on top of his brief and not afraid of a bit of hard work. Since he has become leader, the polls have closed and his personal numbers have become steadily more positive, as have those for the Labour party. It's two months today that he became Labour leader. It's not a bad start.
I'm in the David Herdson camp over Starmer. Not as impressive as Ed Miliband.
We'll have to agree to disagree. For me Starmer is a better performer in the Commons, is a lot smarter, is much more in control of his party and looks a lot more impressive than the PM he is facing. He also owes absolutely nothing to Len McCluskey and did not stab his brother in the back.
And Starmer doesn't look geeky like EdM and Boris is scared shitless of him.
He looks brylcreemy. Like the hero on the front cover of a 1960s Mills and Boon doctor & nurse romance.
Whereas Boris' Barnet is straight off the cover of Hair and Beauty magazine?
I know he likes the unkempt hair look, but someone really does need to drag him through a barber shop. It's not a good look when dealing with a serious national crisis.
The messy hair and the "Boris" name are part of the brand. Without them he's just another over-promoted fat posh bloke.
What's the difference between a Corbyn fanatic and a Starmer fanatic?
About 35 years
Twitter has very little to offer in way of helping the debate but 'Starmtroopers' is a rather amusing descritption of some of his more avid supporters.
Why are we so late with everything, quarantining travellers, masks, track and trace, testing. It really is embarrassing. Bolted horse and stable door come to mind.
Still we might just about have caught up with the rest of Europe by the time the 2nd wave hits.
Comments
(Very far from laughs)
At PMQs yesterday Johnson didn't even try to answer Starmer's questions, instead resorting to a quite aggressive "asking me questions like this is not patriotic during a crisis" mode. This probably worked okay yesterday, but won't keep working.
Starmer is methodically getting under Boris's skin, and is in no great hurry to do so. Bit by bit he'll chip away, and Boris will not cope with the scrutiny or the detail. A diminished figure, not suitable to be PM - this will happen before the next election. The letters are just part of the tactics.
Starmer will not be worried about the polls. His ratings are fine. The chances of the Labour Party making a lot of headway quickly after several years with an awful reputation are low. Give it a year.
The NHS coronavirus test-and-trace system designed to prevent a second deadly wave is not expected to work at full speed until September or October, the Guardian has learned.
Tony Prestedge, the chief operating officer of the NHS scheme, admitted in a webinar to staff that the programme would be “imperfect” at launch, adding that he hoped it would be operational at a world-class level within three to four months.
It comes as a leaked email from the chief executive of Serco – one of the main companies contracted to deliver the service – revealed how he doubted the scheme would evolve smoothly but said he wanted it to “cement the position of the private sector” in the NHS supply chain.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jun/04/nhs-track-and-trace-system-not-expected-to-be-operating-fully-until-september-coronavirus?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Not that it matters. Two wrongs don't make a right and the killings of innocents came first and is worse.
You mean charisma surely.
Who is this guy, to whom does he report, how much are we paying him, what were his terms of reference, why is the project he leads failing badly, how did they appoint Serco, given their terrible record in delivery of public projects?
Is he the Nationwide banker of a similar name?
96k for mailed tests though. This number seems to be expanding quite rapidly, which perhaps suggests it's being used for something new. Care homes?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serco
Incredible levels of incompetence.
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1268554350240108551?s=20
He did, or rather they saw themselves off through their own breathtaking incompetence and backstabbing backbenchers (now in the cabinet).
I just wish Johnson hadn't felt the need to promise something "world beating".
It's so juvenile. Just a step up from "gonna have a big beautiful track and trace system, best ever, gonna be just so so good, gonna trace and track and test so many people you won't believe it".
May Keir Starmer have at least the same record, and be LotO through two general elections like his predecessor.
Just better than Johnson.
https://civiqs.com/results/favorable_joe_biden?uncertainty=true&annotations=true&zoomIn=true
So in which aspects do you judge Johnson to have a better character than Starmer?
This is really interesting: "Voters who dislike both Trump and Biden overwhelmingly back Biden, 46% to 14%, in a head-to-head matchup."
This is really interesting: "Voters who dislike both Trump and Biden overwhelmingly back Biden, 46% to 14%, in a head-to-head matchup."
There are differing degrees of "dislike".
I dislike Marmite and child slavery. I know which one I would be happier to continue for 4 years.
The difference between loath and dislike I'd guess.
It's very much from a distance but the impression I get is that the people who really loath Biden are Bernie Bros ultras, most of the rest seem generally exasperated that this is the best option they've got against Trump.
(Mail)
That winter 2nd wave wont take off itself you know.
It's very much from a distance but the impression I get is that the people who really loath Biden are Bernie Bros ultras, most of the rest seem generally exasperated that this is the best option they've got against Trump.
I think you are right, uniondivvie, that most of his dislikes will come from his left, not his right. Of course, the same is true for Trump, but there is a lot more to the left of him ...
Which is my sense of things too. I don't think it will be close.
What really annoys me is that they could have set all this up months ago, in parallel, or even in advance of the testing ramp up - and it is one of the essential components of being able to reopen the economy.
Plain incompetence.
In 204 weeks or 1,428 days it will be General Election day.
It has been 25 weeks or 175 days since the last General Election.
An enormous amount has happened and we are barely 11% of the way into this Parliament. Anyone who can state with any sense of conviction how the next GE is going to turn out is clearly mad, sad or bad (delete as appropriate).
Worrying about infinitesimally small moves in opinion polls is presumably all some have to look forward in the next 1,428 days.
One Alt-right commentator I read is disappointed that when so much is going on in the US, Corona, the economy, riots, Trump is still getting embroiled in personal spats and squabbles.
It looks petty, mean and, most of all, it doesn't project stability.
No real surprise to hear face "coverings" will be mandatory on public transport. It's going to be a long way from Paddington to Penzance if you have to keep the mask on the whole time.
None of this solves the fundamental capacity issue confronting London Underground and other mass transit systems. Even with social distancing cut to 1m, the tube can only convey a quarter of its usual passenger load.
Double decker buses in London are now carrying just 20 passengers but the slide this evening shows public transport use remains severely depressed and while motor vehicle numbers are 75% of normal that hides a strong performance by HGV and LGV vehicles. We're back then to wondering just how many have gone back to work.
Anecdotally, here in downtown East Ham, there are more people about including many younger men and women and I wonder just what percentage of the population has been furloughed or has seen the jobs disappear.
And what made Dom-in-Durham-gate a problem wasn't so much the trip up the A1, it was the contortions to justify the trip to Castle Barnard.
Because Boris really is also remarkably thin-skinned...
https://twitter.com/mattkatz00/status/1268571910008422405
Defendant. Boris Johnson.
Charge. Unfitness for office.
Trial Date. Starts now. Ends with GE.
Verdict. ????
https://mynews4.com/news/local/reno-protest-organizers-condemn-vandals-and-looting
https://time.com/4400330/st-paul-protests-philando-castile-black-lives-matter/
There are loads more.
For a man who had utilised social media so assiduously as a campaigning tool, he seemed oddly lacking in awareness of its negative connotations.
As I've always said "it doesn't matter who writes history, what matters is who re-writes it". If we are seeing an attempt to re-invent the past to show Cummings as having been a visionary in predicting the virus and a master strategist in favour of lockdown, that to me is much more disturbing than any trip to Barnard Castle.
In UK pillar 1 the % keeps falling though:
The US Trade Representative repeatedly highlights labeling as a barrier to trade in this document (mentioned 177 times)
However, this kind of labelling is also very weakly policed, outside the "official" organic labelling which does have certain requirements attached to it. If a US poultry producer wanted to create a "Humanely Farmed" label that looked very like existing labels, then - because "humanely farmed" does not have a specific legal definition - they could probably get away with it.
Personally, I have no issue with US food produce coming to the UK. What I have a serious issue with is mandatory labelling being considered a non tariff barrier that is prohibited under the terms of the treaty.
Starmer by contrast has said nothing about Gardiner, Corbyn, Kinnock, Ali or Duffield, all of whom demonstrably breached lockdown or social distancing.
About 35 years
Unlike under the British system where a politician has to learn how to argue and persuade, the American President can run the country like a business if he has a tame set of shareholders (Senators). Some business people are used to having their every utterance treated as wisdom and are used to their every command being obeyed. That's why so many fail in politics - they don't know how to persuade without the implied threat of coercion.
For the record, the bigger issue (though) is not labelling country of origin, but more issues like "contains genetically modified produce".
Still we might just about have caught up with the rest of Europe by the time the 2nd wave hits.