Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Yeah, just like Richard Leonard chose to stand down in Scotland.
FROM THE PREVIOUS THREAD:SOMEONE SOMEHOW POSTED A POST THAT WAS MADE TO LOOK LIKE I SAID SOMETHING I DID NOT SAY. I FIND THIS A LITTLE CONCERNING (HENCE CAP'S SORRY!). I HAVE MY SUSPICIANS AS TO WHO DID IT AND I HOPE MODERATORS WILL DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT
I HAVE MY SUSPICIANS ALSO!
You are the personification of a dishonest Nat. Too gullible and brainwashed to engage with argument about lies and gradiences put out by your hate filled small minded party, so you try to misrepresent people. You are really very pathetic. I should tell you to grow up, but it would be pointless. It would be like suggesting Alex Salmond go on a diversity training course, or Malcolmg apply to Mensa.
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
Ah. No idea of the background of it. Did someone die/resign/etc? Surely SKS didn't just think "let's have a by election"?
An MP resigned because they were facing an employment tribunal regarding allegations of sexual harassment.
Ah thanks. And @justin124 is saying, in the face of a sexual harassment charge, just to have withdrawn the whip.
Gotit.
It's a tricky one. I think MPs lose their seat if sentenced to one year or more in prison, or is it perhaps guilty of a crime which *can* carry that sentence.
On general criminal charges this does not see to be such an issue, which is strange.
Fiona Onasanya did not resign her seat; she was ejected by a Recall petition. Claudia Webbe, who has a date in Court scheduled for charges around an alleged course of harassment is suspended from the whip but has not resigned as an MP.
There have been a significant number of sexual harassment claims against MPs which have been anything from delusions / fictions to 'not standing up when investigated' to 'lead to guilty verdicts'. Milroy-Sloan, the complainant against Neil and Christine Hamilton for rape, even ended up in prison for perjury.
Where does the balance lie?
I think suspension of the whip during investigation is reasonable, and defensible, then for parties to reconsider what they can do at charge and court stage.
I do not know why Mike Hill stood down as an MP, though I would punt at the likelihood that the reporting of his trial would poison the news flow in the lead up to the Local Election being a factor.
One thing people are missing here.
Mike Hill is very likely to be bankrupted by this tribunal...
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Yeah, just like Richard Leonard chose to stand down in Scotland.
I think it was a case of jump before pushed.
But the party doesn't have the power to force an MP to vacate their seat, I don't think?
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Yeah, just like Richard Leonard chose to stand down in Scotland.
I think it was a case of jump before pushed.
But the party doesn't have the power to force an MP to vacate their seat, I don't think?
That's right. They can suspend the whip, but resignation is the choice of the MP.
Wee Doogie Ross obviously a bit of a trailblazer when it comes to downers on travelling folk. Slightly weird that two ultra remoaners have moved onto this issue, mind.
If Boris orders pubs and restaurants to close down again because he fucked up over the Indian variant, I will not be responsible for my actions.
Enough.
I would estimate the chances of that between zero and, err, zero. By 21st June we will have handed out something like another 14m vaccines in this country, maybe more. Pretty much everyone vulnerable will have had 2. Hospital admissions for Covid alone will have a frequency somewhere similar to lightening strikes. There is absolutely no way Boris is going to be persuaded to back off.
How could you doubt this when Peston is saying the opposite? What more proof do you need?
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Yeah, just like Richard Leonard chose to stand down in Scotland.
I think it was a case of jump before pushed.
But the party doesn't have the power to force an MP to vacate their seat, I don't think?
Correct. They can withdraw the whip or suspend / expel from the Party afaik.
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
Employment Tribunal litigants are not like other litigants.
That rather depends upon how it is being funded.
True but the fact that costs don’t automatically follow the event, and the emotional investiture people accused of harassment have in publicly “clearing their name”, means that settlement (in my experience) doesn’t follow the same patterns in other forums.
Who knows what data we will see over the next few weeks? We may see a distinct uptick in positive tests, hospitalisations or deaths. In which case there is a good chance that reopening will be postponed - particularly if it is the latter two.
Personally (and I am not an epidemiologist, but then nor are most politicians and nor are most scientists) I do not expect to see an uptick in hospitalisations or deaths. We may see an uptick in positive tests, though I am expecting not.
However, we may still not reopen, because doing so will ultimately be a political decision. And there are powerful people - sage, politicians of all stripes, the media, and importantly, voters - who will consider it too risky, regardless of the numbers.
I'm not particularly worried about variants. But I am worried about the reaction of people to variants and to hysteria about variants.
The only crumb of optimism I cling to is that there are still people whose opinions I respect who think that we will reopen.
Uptick in cases is very likely IMO. More transmissible variant + easing restrictions makes that inevitable.
I think small uptick in hospitalizations also quite likely, given there will simply be more COVID around and some young people do get it bad enough to be hospitalized. But I don't expect to see much of an uptick in deaths because the vaccination rates will hopefully prevent that.
Time will tell!
As you say in your last para, it's a race between vaccination (aided to a minor extent by immunity from prior infection) and transmission. I think the former will win! At any rate, an uptick isn't inevitable.
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
He was persuaded to do so. They should simply have refrained from that and simply removed the Whip.
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
He was persuaded to do so. They should simply have refrained from that and simply removed the Whip.
If Boris orders pubs and restaurants to close down again because he fucked up over the Indian variant, I will not be responsible for my actions.
Enough.
I would estimate the chances of that between zero and, err, zero. By 21st June we will have handed out something like another 14m vaccines in this country, maybe more. Pretty much everyone vulnerable will have had 2. Hospital admissions for Covid alone will have a frequency somewhere similar to lightening strikes. There is absolutely no way Boris is going to be persuaded to back off.
How could you doubt this when Peston is saying the opposite? What more proof do you need?
I have the next five weeks at around 20-24m vaccine doses but the next three weeks for first doses are really key at the moment. I have that in at 6-8m which would take us up to 44m people with at least single dose immunity of 70% and single dose spread prevention of 45%. That's herd immunity.
Indeed. First rule of being in someone else's country is that you slag off their traditions and institutions at your peril. He is showing the poor judgement of a man who has always had his judgements made for him.
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Yeah, just like Richard Leonard chose to stand down in Scotland.
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Yeah, just like Richard Leonard chose to stand down in Scotland.
I think it was a case of jump before pushed.
The leadership had no power to push him - but they talked him into resigning.
If Boris orders pubs and restaurants to close down again because he fucked up over the Indian variant, I will not be responsible for my actions.
Enough.
I would estimate the chances of that between zero and, err, zero. By 21st June we will have handed out something like another 14m vaccines in this country, maybe more. Pretty much everyone vulnerable will have had 2. Hospital admissions for Covid alone will have a frequency somewhere similar to lightening strikes. There is absolutely no way Boris is going to be persuaded to back off.
How could you doubt this when Peston is saying the opposite? What more proof do you need?
Look, I'm not one of his biggest critics, but strong-minded and firm of principle Boris is not. If I wanted a PM to face down an internal enemy and do the right thing regardless, he isn't necessarily the one I'd go for.
Re header, gosh, terrible for Keir Starmer. He has a year to turn things around and I'd be lying if I said I'm confident he will. But let's see. I'm long of him at 7.6 to be next PM and I'm still expecting to be laying that back at much shorter well before the GE.
Anyway let's park Starmer, because I'd like to say a word about Boris Johnson for a change. It's depressing beyond measure that such a man sits astride English politics but sit astride English politics such a man doth sit. It’s the truth of the matter and it must be faced.
I hear the dissing of him that goes on. He’s lucky. People don’t really like him, it’s all vaccine bounce, or it’s Brexit. Plus the Foremain OGH thesis - ok he wins elections but look at the opponents, a fag end Ken Livingstone, the risible Jeremy Corbyn. Anyone could have beaten them.
I don’t buy this. Red Ken was a London icon and London is a Labour city. Johnson beat him then beat him again. Jeremy Corbyn was such a terrible candidate that in the GE of 2017 he racked up Labour’s best English vote share since the 97 landslide and came within a whisker of number ten. Yes, he’d become a whipping boy by GE19, but does anybody really think if Jeremy Hunt had won the Tory leadership (another Johnson electoral triumph, btw, right there) that he’d have managed anything close to the 80 seat majority that Johnson scored. Not a chance. 30 seats max.
And let’s not forget Johnson’s biggest election win of all, 23 June 2016, 52/48, against a certain David Cameron, super smooth, super confident PM of the time, fresh from a GE triumph of his own the year before, see-er off of the rampant Scots the year before that. DC knew he’d win until he heard Johnson had plumped for the other side. Then he started to worry and he was right to.
So there you go. It’s not a view I enjoy holding but it is my view. Boris Johnson IS the Heineken politician. He DOES reach the people and the parts that other Tories cannot reach. And those people and parts are perfectly situated for turning Tory votes into Tory seats in FPTP general elections.
I’m not as bearish on Labour for the next GE as many seem to be – sense there’s some herd thinking going on – but I confess here and now that I’d fancy their chances a lot more if they were facing any Tory leader bar Boris Johnson. The guy’s a menace.
The issue here is the same as the issue in the US and it is an issue that's completely ignored by many on here.
Pollsters struggle to register brexity white working class voters here in the same way as they struggle to register Trumpist republicans in the US.
And so the pollsters here were totally wrongfooted ahead of Hartlepool in the same way and many of the US pollsters were wrongfooted in Iowa, Ohio, Texas, Florida and North Carolina.
We can debate why, but its a definite phenomenon.
Indeed, the Tories core vote, as with the GOP, is now the skilled white working class in small and medium towns and rural areas.
The profesional upper middle class in wealthy suburbia is increasingly moving left liberal, it was gains in the suburbs of Philadelphia, Detroit, Phoenix and Atlanta which won Biden the electoral college, Trump still won small town and rural America comfortably
I also sense that Johnson's magnificent error-free victory over Covid (confirmed by opening the nation for business in the last ten days) mirrors Mrs Thatcher's victory over General Galtieri. His desired reputation as the Churchillian war leader is looking good for the moment. Not shared by me, but then I haven't backed a winner since 2005.
That said, Starmer's spat with Rayner, and subsequent capitulation made him look very weak.
I think that Rayner will continue to be interesting.
Isn't her new team Jack Dromey and a swarm of Corbynistas?
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
He was persuaded to do so. They should simply have refrained from that and simply removed the Whip.
For someone who demands a rigid moral code from his politicians, have you been following Hill's testimony at the employment tribunal?
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
Employment Tribunal litigants are not like other litigants.
That rather depends upon how it is being funded.
True but the fact that costs don’t automatically follow the event, and the emotional investiture people accused of harassment have in publicly “clearing their name”, means that settlement (in my experience) doesn’t follow the same patterns in other forums.
You should try neighbour disputes (actually don't, its miserable).
One of my friends had a complaint against him to the Law Society because he told the insurers that the offer on the table was one that anyone paying the pursuit of the claim out of their own pocket would have taken. It was hanging over him for nearly 2 years before it was dismissed.
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Yeah, just like Richard Leonard chose to stand down in Scotland.
I think it was a case of jump before pushed.
But the party doesn't have the power to force an MP to vacate their seat, I don't think?
No, they don’t, but they can bring pressure to bear. Of course if he said ‘no’ then that’s it. They could try a recall petition but that’s all.
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
He was persuaded to do so. They should simply have refrained from that and simply removed the Whip.
For someone who demands a rigid moral code from his politicians, have you been following Hill's testimony at the employment tribunal?
If Boris orders pubs and restaurants to close down again because he fucked up over the Indian variant, I will not be responsible for my actions.
Enough.
I would estimate the chances of that between zero and, err, zero. By 21st June we will have handed out something like another 14m vaccines in this country, maybe more. Pretty much everyone vulnerable will have had 2. Hospital admissions for Covid alone will have a frequency somewhere similar to lightening strikes. There is absolutely no way Boris is going to be persuaded to back off.
How could you doubt this when Peston is saying the opposite? What more proof do you need?
Look, I'm not one of his biggest critics, but strong-minded and firm of principle Boris is not. If I wanted a PM to face down an internal enemy and do the right thing regardless, he isn't necessarily the one I'd go for.
If I wanted one who was going to take the popular option despite some whining by some white coated boffin he is exactly the one I'd go for.
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
Employment Tribunal litigants are not like other litigants.
That rather depends upon how it is being funded.
True but the fact that costs don’t automatically follow the event, and the emotional investiture people accused of harassment have in publicly “clearing their name”, means that settlement (in my experience) doesn’t follow the same patterns in other forums.
You should try neighbour disputes (actually don't, its miserable).
One of my friends had a complaint against him to the Law Society because he told the insurers that the offer on the table was one that anyone paying the pursuit of the claim out of their own pocket would have taken. It was hanging over him for nearly 2 years before it was dismissed.
Out of interest, what was the ground for complaint?
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
He was persuaded to do so. They should simply have refrained from that and simply removed the Whip.
You're scraping the barrel here I think
I really think not. All Labour had to do was disown him by withdrawing the Whip. I have seen no suggestion that Hill resigned his seat out of petulance when threatened with that. Moreover, he denies the allegations - which were nothing like as serious as those made against the prominent Tory MP who was arrested by the police.
The media today really are fighting a war against the rolling back of lockdown.
Every scrap of anti-freeing evidence and rhetoric is being pitched in to the worst kind of doom-laden headlines and articles
The Mail's headline of 21 June hopes fade' is based solely on Peston's totally unattributed ITV report, which comes from a SAGE source anyway and not a government source.
Its quite remarkable stuff.
So you've come around to recognising it's media bullshit and the unlocking is going to proceed?
Welcome aboard. Glad we can finally agree.
No, I think there's a subtle distinction here. It's media bullshit <> unlocking is going to proceed. If enough media pressure can be brought to bear, unlocking will not proceed. We are in thrall to media bullshit.
Yes, Round One is a clear victory for Indy Sage and the Zerovidians. The government has been completely outfoxed, outplayed and outrun, and we are heading for a rolling back of 21 June unless they can get in front of it now. Pagel et al have the media in the palm of their hands.
Nah, I think the government is giving these idiots enough rope to hang themselves. The data simply won't support any kind of lockdown or any restrictions by the time we get to June 21st.
The vaccine programme this week and next week will get most over 30s vaccinated which is another huge reduction in spreading of the virus. The cumulative reduction in hospitalisations will be absolutely massive by then because we're going to be at over 90% for over 40s and over 75% for over 30s at single dose efficacy along with almost all of groups 1-9 with two dose efficacy.
I’m already thinking I might be wrong and you and Philip right.
Why? I’ve just seen an interview with Boris. He’s now saying, “next few days” to confirm 21 June and says there is nothing in the data to imply a deviation from that date.
Sounds to me like the latest day looks quite promising (a la John Burn-Murdoch last night).
I mean, we all believe there should be limits to free speech, don’t we?
The nasty nutters shouting the most vile anti-Semitic abuse from their car in London comes to mind as an example.
Does anyone believe that should be allowed because free speech?
Yes, but the point is that it is not really his place to comment. How would many people here feel/react if Chelsea Clinton came to live over here and said "you have a Royal family - it's bonkers". Many people would say we don't care about your opinions and f off back to the US
The media today really are fighting a war against the rolling back of lockdown.
Every scrap of anti-freeing evidence and rhetoric is being pitched in to the worst kind of doom-laden headlines and articles
The Mail's headline of 21 June hopes fade' is based solely on Peston's totally unattributed ITV report, which comes from a SAGE source anyway and not a government source.
Its quite remarkable stuff.
So you've come around to recognising it's media bullshit and the unlocking is going to proceed?
Welcome aboard. Glad we can finally agree.
No, I think there's a subtle distinction here. It's media bullshit <> unlocking is going to proceed. If enough media pressure can be brought to bear, unlocking will not proceed. We are in thrall to media bullshit.
Yes, Round One is a clear victory for Indy Sage and the Zerovidians. The government has been completely outfoxed, outplayed and outrun, and we are heading for a rolling back of 21 June unless they can get in front of it now. Pagel et al have the media in the palm of their hands.
Nah. The media has a choice:
1. Unlocking is going to happen it’s all fluffy and lively. DISASTER! Low rates of infection.. ho hum
2. DRAMA! Unlocking isn’t going to happen! TRIUMPH! It does! Infection rates tick up but remain low… DISASTER! BORIS MYST GO!
They have calculated that 2 will sell more papers…
Mandatory printing of car registration numbers on all Drive Thru packaging.
I would like to get all Drive Thru retailers to be required to print car registrations on all take away packaging. Hopefully, to cut down on the amount of litter that is blighting roadsides all over the country.
Off topic, why does Harry find the first amendment "baffling" ?
Because he's not very bright?
Because he has been convinced all his life that the UK press are a pack of uncontrolled snarling monsters out to exploit him and his family and he now finds that they are extremely controlled by our libel and other laws compared with the press in the US? A shattering of illusions.
If only he had a US wife who could have told him what the US Constitution says ........
If he struggles with getting his head around the first amendment, wait until he hears about the second!
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Yeah, just like Richard Leonard chose to stand down in Scotland.
I think it was a case of jump before pushed.
But the party doesn't have the power to force an MP to vacate their seat, I don't think?
No, they don’t, but they can bring pressure to bear. Of course if he said ‘no’ then that’s it. They could try a recall petition but that’s all.
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Yeah, just like Richard Leonard chose to stand down in Scotland.
I think it was a case of jump before pushed.
But the party doesn't have the power to force an MP to vacate their seat, I don't think?
No, they don’t, but they can bring pressure to bear. Of course if he said ‘no’ then that’s it. They could try a recall petition but that’s all.
The media today really are fighting a war against the rolling back of lockdown.
Every scrap of anti-freeing evidence and rhetoric is being pitched in to the worst kind of doom-laden headlines and articles
The Mail's headline of 21 June hopes fade' is based solely on Peston's totally unattributed ITV report, which comes from a SAGE source anyway and not a government source.
Its quite remarkable stuff.
So you've come around to recognising it's media bullshit and the unlocking is going to proceed?
Welcome aboard. Glad we can finally agree.
No, I think there's a subtle distinction here. It's media bullshit <> unlocking is going to proceed. If enough media pressure can be brought to bear, unlocking will not proceed. We are in thrall to media bullshit.
Yes, Round One is a clear victory for Indy Sage and the Zerovidians. The government has been completely outfoxed, outplayed and outrun, and we are heading for a rolling back of 21 June unless they can get in front of it now. Pagel et al have the media in the palm of their hands.
Nah, I think the government is giving these idiots enough rope to hang themselves. The data simply won't support any kind of lockdown or any restrictions by the time we get to June 21st.
The vaccine programme this week and next week will get most over 30s vaccinated which is another huge reduction in spreading of the virus. The cumulative reduction in hospitalisations will be absolutely massive by then because we're going to be at over 90% for over 40s and over 75% for over 30s at single dose efficacy along with almost all of groups 1-9 with two dose efficacy.
I’m already thinking I might be wrong and you and Philip right.
Why? I’ve just seen an interview with Boris. He’s now saying, “next few days” to confirm 21 June and says there is nothing in the data to imply a deviation from that date.
Sounds to me like the latest day looks quite promising (a la John Burn-Murdoch last night).
We’ll see.
BBC lunchtime news doing its bit to fly the independent sage flag today having a rather angry person on criticising the govts failures on reopening.
I’d be interested in how this outfit is funded and who/what groups funds this outfit.
It looks like they play to hang around once Covid has gone to be a thorn in the side of the govt on climate change.
I mean, we all believe there should be limits to free speech, don’t we?
The nasty nutters shouting the most vile anti-Semitic abuse from their car in London comes to mind as an example.
Does anyone believe that should be allowed because free speech?
Such speech might not be protected by the First Amendment anyway. Advocacy of force or criminal activity does not receive First Amendment protections if (1) the advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action, and (2) is likely to incite or produce such action. A decent lawyer would argue that neither of those tests were satisfied here but there’s an arguable case there IMHO.
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
He was persuaded to do so. They should simply have refrained from that and simply removed the Whip.
You're scraping the barrel here I think
I really think not. All Labour had to do was disown him by withdrawing the Whip. I have seen no suggestion that Hill resigned his seat out of petulance when threatened with that. Moreover, he denies the allegations - which were nothing like as serious as those made against the prominent Tory MP who was arrested by the police.
You keep forgetting that the Tory MP wasn't charged, yet the tribunal is going ahead in this case.
Mandatory printing of car registration numbers on all Drive Thru packaging.
I would like to get all Drive Thru retailers to be required to print car registrations on all take away packaging. Hopefully, to cut down on the amount of litter that is blighting roadsides all over the country.
Manufactured ignorance like that adds very little to the debate.
If you are selected as Labour candidate for Bootle or Tory candidate for Sevenoaks, I’d say your job is as good as sewn up for life. Your voters will never be canvassed and will count themselves lucky if they ever see an election leaflet, probably just the one delivered by the Royal Mail at taxpayers’ expense.
As someone in Bootle, I can confirm that in 2019 we received zero leaflets except the taxpayers expense one, no one knocked on the door and excepting a few posters in a very few windows, you wouldn't have known there was an election on at all during December 2019.
Indeed, earlier this month was the same. The local Lib Dem lady put in a huge effort (three leaflets and a personal visit), Labour did nothing and the Lib Dems got wiped out again, managing second. And this was in Victoria ward (Sefton) which isn't even deepest darkest Bootle proper.
If you live in a safe ward or safe parliamentary seat you won't get anything beyond the election address as the activists will all be leafletting and canvassing in the marginal wards and marginal seats. If you want more you need to move to a marginal seat, or hope we eventually get PR.
Though IanB2 was wrong about Sevenoaks, the LDs won the Sevenoaks town seat in the county council elections even if rural Sevenoaks stayed Tory
Wrong in saying the Tory MP has a job for life? I think not. The new one is most unlikely to be caught molesting women, as well.
At general election level you may be right but Sevenoaks actually saw the Tory voteshare fall by 3% in 2019 from 2017, against the national trend
So it will become marginal in about fifty years’ time, then?
It was the MPs I was talking about.
So when you said I was wrong, you meant to say that I was right?
FROM THE PREVIOUS THREAD:SOMEONE SOMEHOW POSTED A POST THAT WAS MADE TO LOOK LIKE I SAID SOMETHING I DID NOT SAY. I FIND THIS A LITTLE CONCERNING (HENCE CAP'S SORRY!). I HAVE MY SUSPICIANS AS TO WHO DID IT AND I HOPE MODERATORS WILL DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT
Looks like @Theuniondivvie edited the text in the quote block when replying to you. Not very gentlemanly, but not a hack.
I'm just wondering why Nigel's cap is sorry. Maybe the guilty party?
It was a instinctive apostrophe as an indication of abbreviation, which in pedant's hindsight might be regarded as a "normal" abbreviation, so therefore unnecessary. There should also have been a comma after CAPS. Good spot though!
Your welcome. Having outed myself as a pendant, Ill have to bare in mind Im open to criticism's of my own grandma from now on!
The media today really are fighting a war against the rolling back of lockdown.
Every scrap of anti-freeing evidence and rhetoric is being pitched in to the worst kind of doom-laden headlines and articles
The Mail's headline of 21 June hopes fade' is based solely on Peston's totally unattributed ITV report, which comes from a SAGE source anyway and not a government source.
Its quite remarkable stuff.
So you've come around to recognising it's media bullshit and the unlocking is going to proceed?
Welcome aboard. Glad we can finally agree.
No, I think there's a subtle distinction here. It's media bullshit <> unlocking is going to proceed. If enough media pressure can be brought to bear, unlocking will not proceed. We are in thrall to media bullshit.
Yes, Round One is a clear victory for Indy Sage and the Zerovidians. The government has been completely outfoxed, outplayed and outrun, and we are heading for a rolling back of 21 June unless they can get in front of it now. Pagel et al have the media in the palm of their hands.
Nah, I think the government is giving these idiots enough rope to hang themselves. The data simply won't support any kind of lockdown or any restrictions by the time we get to June 21st.
The vaccine programme this week and next week will get most over 30s vaccinated which is another huge reduction in spreading of the virus. The cumulative reduction in hospitalisations will be absolutely massive by then because we're going to be at over 90% for over 40s and over 75% for over 30s at single dose efficacy along with almost all of groups 1-9 with two dose efficacy.
I’m already thinking I might be wrong and you and Philip right.
Why? I’ve just seen an interview with Boris. He’s now saying, “next few days” to confirm 21 June and says there is nothing in the data to imply a deviation from that date.
Sounds to me like the latest day looks quite promising (a la John Burn-Murdoch last night).
We’ll see.
Never mind what SAGE or the zerovidians are saying. What is the mood on Tory 1922 committee? I suspect it is close to nuclear over this talk of not fully unlocking in June. They will be getting their membership up in arms I suspect over all this talk and all the air time the modellers and the independent SAGE types are getting. It is simple to most people: we were promised that when vaccines had protected the vulnerable then the emergency use of lockdown would end.
Johnson must be very aware of the Tory MP pressure. Does he really want to rely on Captain Hindsight to get further extensions of all this?
I mean, we all believe there should be limits to free speech, don’t we?
The nasty nutters shouting the most vile anti-Semitic abuse from their car in London comes to mind as an example.
Does anyone believe that should be allowed because free speech?
Such speech might not be protected by the First Amendment anyway. Advocacy of force or criminal activity does not receive First Amendment protections if (1) the advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action, and (2) is likely to incite or produce such action. A decent lawyer would argue that neither of those tests were satisfied here but there’s an arguable case there IMHO.
Hmm, shouting "rape their women" is an open and shut case of incitement, surely?
Manufactured ignorance like that adds very little to the debate.
If you are selected as Labour candidate for Bootle or Tory candidate for Sevenoaks, I’d say your job is as good as sewn up for life. Your voters will never be canvassed and will count themselves lucky if they ever see an election leaflet, probably just the one delivered by the Royal Mail at taxpayers’ expense.
As someone in Bootle, I can confirm that in 2019 we received zero leaflets except the taxpayers expense one, no one knocked on the door and excepting a few posters in a very few windows, you wouldn't have known there was an election on at all during December 2019.
Indeed, earlier this month was the same. The local Lib Dem lady put in a huge effort (three leaflets and a personal visit), Labour did nothing and the Lib Dems got wiped out again, managing second. And this was in Victoria ward (Sefton) which isn't even deepest darkest Bootle proper.
If you live in a safe ward or safe parliamentary seat you won't get anything beyond the election address as the activists will all be leafletting and canvassing in the marginal wards and marginal seats. If you want more you need to move to a marginal seat, or hope we eventually get PR.
Though IanB2 was wrong about Sevenoaks, the LDs won the Sevenoaks town seat in the county council elections even if rural Sevenoaks stayed Tory
Wrong in saying the Tory MP has a job for life? I think not. The new one is most unlikely to be caught molesting women, as well.
At general election level you may be right but Sevenoaks actually saw the Tory voteshare fall by 3% in 2019 from 2017, against the national trend
So it will become marginal in about fifty years’ time, then?
It was the MPs I was talking about.
So when you said I was wrong, you meant to say that I was right?
As well as the swing from the Tories to the LDs in Sevenoaks at the 2019 general election, the discussion also covered the local elections and as I pointed out Sevenoaks Town now has a LD county councillor
I mean, we all believe there should be limits to free speech, don’t we?
The nasty nutters shouting the most vile anti-Semitic abuse from their car in London.
Does anyone believe that should be allowed because free speech?
I don't think that was an edge case - it was threatening behaviour / incitement.
Was it incitement? It was offensive but who was likely to be incited? Surely it was more likely to incite retaliation against the speakers than that anyone would actually rape Jewish men's daughters. And is flying a flag threatening behaviour? Bad news for politicians if it is.
Maybe we should have a Prohibition of Complete Dickheads Act to cover situations like this where people are clearly trying to be offensive and provocative without actually crossing the line into clear criminality.
On another note, isn't it odd that only four people were arrested? There were more than four in the video.
I mean, we all believe there should be limits to free speech, don’t we?
The nasty nutters shouting the most vile anti-Semitic abuse from their car in London comes to mind as an example.
Does anyone believe that should be allowed because free speech?
Such speech might not be protected by the First Amendment anyway. Advocacy of force or criminal activity does not receive First Amendment protections if (1) the advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action, and (2) is likely to incite or produce such action. A decent lawyer would argue that neither of those tests were satisfied here but there’s an arguable case there IMHO.
Hmm, shouting "rape their women" is an open and shut case of incitement, surely?
Yes - much less violent speech has been prosecuted in the US, IIRC.
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
He was persuaded to do so. They should simply have refrained from that and simply removed the Whip.
For someone who demands a rigid moral code from his politicians, have you been following Hill's testimony at the employment tribunal?
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
He was persuaded to do so. They should simply have refrained from that and simply removed the Whip.
For someone who demands a rigid moral code from his politicians, have you been following Hill's testimony at the employment tribunal?
Had I been a Hartlepool elector I would have wanted Hill out - but that was not a matter for Starmer as Leader of the party.A party leader has to have 'nous' - be able to think politically . This matter raises serious doubts as to whether he is up to it on that score.
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
Employment Tribunal litigants are not like other litigants.
That rather depends upon how it is being funded.
True but the fact that costs don’t automatically follow the event, and the emotional investiture people accused of harassment have in publicly “clearing their name”, means that settlement (in my experience) doesn’t follow the same patterns in other forums.
You should try neighbour disputes (actually don't, its miserable).
One of my friends had a complaint against him to the Law Society because he told the insurers that the offer on the table was one that anyone paying the pursuit of the claim out of their own pocket would have taken. It was hanging over him for nearly 2 years before it was dismissed.
For a local councillor, any sort of neighbour dispute is always the worst.
Advise them to find an opportunity to talk to their neighbour, frighten them with some story of someone who was eventually bankrupted from legal fees arising from a dispute that started because their neighbour didn’t cut the hedge, and retreat.
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
Employment Tribunal litigants are not like other litigants.
That rather depends upon how it is being funded.
True but the fact that costs don’t automatically follow the event, and the emotional investiture people accused of harassment have in publicly “clearing their name”, means that settlement (in my experience) doesn’t follow the same patterns in other forums.
You should try neighbour disputes (actually don't, its miserable).
One of my friends had a complaint against him to the Law Society because he told the insurers that the offer on the table was one that anyone paying the pursuit of the claim out of their own pocket would have taken. It was hanging over him for nearly 2 years before it was dismissed.
Out of interest, what was the ground for complaint?
That he had a conflict of interest between the client and the insurer and that she had been prejudiced as a result.
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
He was persuaded to do so. They should simply have refrained from that and simply removed the Whip.
You're scraping the barrel here I think
I really think not. All Labour had to do was disown him by withdrawing the Whip. I have seen no suggestion that Hill resigned his seat out of petulance when threatened with that. Moreover, he denies the allegations - which were nothing like as serious as those made against the prominent Tory MP who was arrested by the police.
The allegations against the Tory MP proved to be unfounded. He wasn’t charged with any offence.
If Boris orders pubs and restaurants to close down again because he fucked up over the Indian variant, I will not be responsible for my actions.
Enough.
I would estimate the chances of that between zero and, err, zero. By 21st June we will have handed out something like another 14m vaccines in this country, maybe more. Pretty much everyone vulnerable will have had 2. Hospital admissions for Covid alone will have a frequency somewhere similar to lightening strikes. There is absolutely no way Boris is going to be persuaded to back off.
How could you doubt this when Peston is saying the opposite? What more proof do you need?
Look, I'm not one of his biggest critics, but strong-minded and firm of principle Boris is not. If I wanted a PM to face down an internal enemy and do the right thing regardless, he isn't necessarily the one I'd go for.
If I wanted one who was going to take the popular option despite some whining by some white coated boffin he is exactly the one I'd go for.
Yes, but I fear unlocking is not the popular option.
Mandatory printing of car registration numbers on all Drive Thru packaging.
I would like to get all Drive Thru retailers to be required to print car registrations on all take away packaging. Hopefully, to cut down on the amount of litter that is blighting roadsides all over the country.
Re header, gosh, terrible for Keir Starmer. He has a year to turn things around and I'd be lying if I said I'm confident he will. But let's see. I'm long of him at 7.6 to be next PM and I'm still expecting to be laying that back at much shorter well before the GE.
Anyway let's park Starmer, because I'd like to say a word about Boris Johnson for a change. It's depressing beyond measure that such a man sits astride English politics but sit astride English politics such a man doth sit. It’s the truth of the matter and it must be faced.
I hear the dissing of him that goes on. He’s lucky. People don’t really like him, it’s all vaccine bounce, or it’s Brexit. Plus the Foremain OGH thesis - ok he wins elections but look at the opponents, a fag end Ken Livingstone, the risible Jeremy Corbyn. Anyone could have beaten them.
I don’t buy this. Red Ken was a London icon and London is a Labour city. Johnson beat him then beat him again. Jeremy Corbyn was such a terrible candidate that in the GE of 2017 he racked up Labour’s best English vote share since the 97 landslide and came within a whisker of number ten. Yes, he’d become a whipping boy by GE19, but does anybody really think if Jeremy Hunt had won the Tory leadership (another Johnson electoral triumph, btw, right there) that he’d have managed anything close to the 80 seat majority that Johnson scored. Not a chance. 30 seats max.
And let’s not forget Johnson’s biggest election win of all, 23 June 2016, 52/48, against a certain David Cameron, super smooth, super confident PM of the time, fresh from a GE triumph of his own the year before, see-er off of the rampant Scots the year before that. DC knew he’d win until he heard Johnson had plumped for the other side. Then he started to worry and he was right to.
So there you go. It’s not a view I enjoy holding but it is my view. Boris Johnson IS the Heineken politician. He DOES reach the people and the parts that other Tories cannot reach. And those people and parts are perfectly situated for turning Tory votes into Tory seats in FPTP general elections.
I’m not as bearish on Labour for the next GE as many seem to be – sense there’s some herd thinking going on – but I confess here and now that I’d fancy their chances a lot more if they were facing any Tory leader bar Boris Johnson. The guy’s a menace.
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
He was persuaded to do so. They should simply have refrained from that and simply removed the Whip.
You're scraping the barrel here I think
I really think not. All Labour had to do was disown him by withdrawing the Whip. I have seen no suggestion that Hill resigned his seat out of petulance when threatened with that. Moreover, he denies the allegations - which were nothing like as serious as those made against the prominent Tory MP who was arrested by the police.
You keep forgetting that the Tory MP wasn't charged, yet the tribunal is going ahead in this case.
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
He was persuaded to do so. They should simply have refrained from that and simply removed the Whip.
You're scraping the barrel here I think
I really think not. All Labour had to do was disown him by withdrawing the Whip. I have seen no suggestion that Hill resigned his seat out of petulance when threatened with that. Moreover, he denies the allegations - which were nothing like as serious as those made against the prominent Tory MP who was arrested by the police.
You keep forgetting that the Tory MP wasn't charged, yet the tribunal is going ahead in this case.
I have not forgotten that at all. The Tory MP was arrested! The evidence required for a successful criminal conviction -'beyond all reasonable doubt'- is much higher than required at an Employment Tribunal where the civil rules apply.
I mean, we all believe there should be limits to free speech, don’t we?
The nasty nutters shouting the most vile anti-Semitic abuse from their car in London comes to mind as an example.
Does anyone believe that should be allowed because free speech?
Such speech might not be protected by the First Amendment anyway. Advocacy of force or criminal activity does not receive First Amendment protections if (1) the advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action, and (2) is likely to incite or produce such action. A decent lawyer would argue that neither of those tests were satisfied here but there’s an arguable case there IMHO.
Hmm, shouting "rape their women" is an open and shut case of incitement, surely?
A decent lawyer would argue that it wasn’t directed at anyone specifically was thus unlikely to result in such action. Whether that’a a convincing argument is up to the jury.
Ascot going ahead max 4,000/day. No one who didn't buy tickets last year at this stage.
Royal Ascot will be a poignant affair for Her Majesty. Her first without the Duke of Edinburgh, in all likelihood. It is also a shame it falls the week before 21st June's freedom-ish day.
Re header, gosh, terrible for Keir Starmer. He has a year to turn things around and I'd be lying if I said I'm confident he will. But let's see. I'm long of him at 7.6 to be next PM and I'm still expecting to be laying that back at much shorter well before the GE.
Anyway let's park Starmer, because I'd like to say a word about Boris Johnson for a change. It's depressing beyond measure that such a man sits astride English politics but sit astride English politics such a man doth sit. It’s the truth of the matter and it must be faced.
I hear the dissing of him that goes on. He’s lucky. People don’t really like him, it’s all vaccine bounce, or it’s Brexit. Plus the Foremain OGH thesis - ok he wins elections but look at the opponents, a fag end Ken Livingstone, the risible Jeremy Corbyn. Anyone could have beaten them.
I don’t buy this. Red Ken was a London icon and London is a Labour city. Johnson beat him then beat him again. Jeremy Corbyn was such a terrible candidate that in the GE of 2017 he racked up Labour’s best English vote share since the 97 landslide and came within a whisker of number ten. Yes, he’d become a whipping boy by GE19, but does anybody really think if Jeremy Hunt had won the Tory leadership (another Johnson electoral triumph, btw, right there) that he’d have managed anything close to the 80 seat majority that Johnson scored. Not a chance. 30 seats max.
And let’s not forget Johnson’s biggest election win of all, 23 June 2016, 52/48, against a certain David Cameron, super smooth, super confident PM of the time, fresh from a GE triumph of his own the year before, see-er off of the rampant Scots the year before that. DC knew he’d win until he heard Johnson had plumped for the other side. Then he started to worry and he was right to.
So there you go. It’s not a view I enjoy holding but it is my view. Boris Johnson IS the Heineken politician. He DOES reach the people and the parts that other Tories cannot reach. And those people and parts are perfectly situated for turning Tory votes into Tory seats in FPTP general elections.
I’m not as bearish on Labour for the next GE as many seem to be – sense there’s some herd thinking going on – but I confess here and now that I’d fancy their chances a lot more if they were facing any Tory leader bar Boris Johnson. The guy’s a menace.
I am banking on a major post Covid, post Brexit economic shock, although now II don't believe it will occur for eighteen months to two years, and before that we will experience a post Covid boom. Johnson therefore has a comfortable window of opportunity to bolster his majority with an early election.
A victorious Johnson can then retire to the $1,000,000 a night US after-dinner circuit, leaving Sunak to face the carnage.
P.S. Yvette on WATO has her boots on. Keir looking even weaker in his absence.
The media today really are fighting a war against the rolling back of lockdown.
Every scrap of anti-freeing evidence and rhetoric is being pitched in to the worst kind of doom-laden headlines and articles
The Mail's headline of 21 June hopes fade' is based solely on Peston's totally unattributed ITV report, which comes from a SAGE source anyway and not a government source.
Its quite remarkable stuff.
So you've come around to recognising it's media bullshit and the unlocking is going to proceed?
Welcome aboard. Glad we can finally agree.
No, I think there's a subtle distinction here. It's media bullshit <> unlocking is going to proceed. If enough media pressure can be brought to bear, unlocking will not proceed. We are in thrall to media bullshit.
Yes, Round One is a clear victory for Indy Sage and the Zerovidians. The government has been completely outfoxed, outplayed and outrun, and we are heading for a rolling back of 21 June unless they can get in front of it now. Pagel et al have the media in the palm of their hands.
Nah, I think the government is giving these idiots enough rope to hang themselves. The data simply won't support any kind of lockdown or any restrictions by the time we get to June 21st.
The vaccine programme this week and next week will get most over 30s vaccinated which is another huge reduction in spreading of the virus. The cumulative reduction in hospitalisations will be absolutely massive by then because we're going to be at over 90% for over 40s and over 75% for over 30s at single dose efficacy along with almost all of groups 1-9 with two dose efficacy.
I’m already thinking I might be wrong and you and Philip right.
Why? I’ve just seen an interview with Boris. He’s now saying, “next few days” to confirm 21 June and says there is nothing in the data to imply a deviation from that date.
Sounds to me like the latest day looks quite promising (a la John Burn-Murdoch last night).
We’ll see.
BBC lunchtime news doing its bit to fly the independent sage flag today having a rather angry person on criticising the govts failures on reopening.
I’d be interested in how this outfit is funded and who/what groups funds this outfit.
It looks like they play to hang around once Covid has gone to be a thorn in the side of the govt on climate change.
Self appointed. No official, legal status. Seems to be a self selected gathering of zero covid zealots.
Why is this group given a ton of coverage by BBC when Great Barrington are basically banned completely and ridiculed at every opportunity?
Whose to say which group of scientists is right? We probably wont even know for years.
Mandatory printing of car registration numbers on all Drive Thru packaging.
I would like to get all Drive Thru retailers to be required to print car registrations on all take away packaging. Hopefully, to cut down on the amount of litter that is blighting roadsides all over the country.
Re header, gosh, terrible for Keir Starmer. He has a year to turn things around and I'd be lying if I said I'm confident he will. But let's see. I'm long of him at 7.6 to be next PM and I'm still expecting to be laying that back at much shorter well before the GE.
Anyway let's park Starmer, because I'd like to say a word about Boris Johnson for a change. It's depressing beyond measure that such a man sits astride English politics but sit astride English politics such a man doth sit. It’s the truth of the matter and it must be faced.
I hear the dissing of him that goes on. He’s lucky. People don’t really like him, it’s all vaccine bounce, or it’s Brexit. Plus the Foremain OGH thesis - ok he wins elections but look at the opponents, a fag end Ken Livingstone, the risible Jeremy Corbyn. Anyone could have beaten them.
I don’t buy this. Red Ken was a London icon and London is a Labour city. Johnson beat him then beat him again. Jeremy Corbyn was such a terrible candidate that in the GE of 2017 he racked up Labour’s best English vote share since the 97 landslide and came within a whisker of number ten. Yes, he’d become a whipping boy by GE19, but does anybody really think if Jeremy Hunt had won the Tory leadership (another Johnson electoral triumph, btw, right there) that he’d have managed anything close to the 80 seat majority that Johnson scored. Not a chance. 30 seats max.
And let’s not forget Johnson’s biggest election win of all, 23 June 2016, 52/48, against a certain David Cameron, super smooth, super confident PM of the time, fresh from a GE triumph of his own the year before, see-er off of the rampant Scots the year before that. DC knew he’d win until he heard Johnson had plumped for the other side. Then he started to worry and he was right to.
So there you go. It’s not a view I enjoy holding but it is my view. Boris Johnson IS the Heineken politician. He DOES reach the people and the parts that other Tories cannot reach. And those people and parts are perfectly situated for turning Tory votes into Tory seats in FPTP general elections.
I’m not as bearish on Labour for the next GE as many seem to be – sense there’s some herd thinking going on – but I confess here and now that I’d fancy their chances a lot more if they were facing any Tory leader bar Boris Johnson. The guy’s a menace.
Labour deluded if they don't recognise Boris Johnson is a formidable opponent who will be very tough to shift.
Unpopular opinion among left-wing circles: Boris Johnson is actually pretty funny. But why can't Labour find a politician who can tell a joke or two?
Mandatory printing of car registration numbers on all Drive Thru packaging.
I would like to get all Drive Thru retailers to be required to print car registrations on all take away packaging. Hopefully, to cut down on the amount of litter that is blighting roadsides all over the country.
Who on earth has got time to go through every bit of litter to look for a car registration number?
Furthermore, are they expecting McDonalds etc to print a reg number on every single bit of packaging for each customer? That's going to take ages.
Have not thought it through.
Easy - print a label, stick it on. Stop the feckers littering.
Print a label, stick it on the bag. Print another label stick it on the chips. Print another label stick it on the burger. Print another label stick it on the drink. Repeat x4 for a family of 4.
OT: the quack has just phoned to invite me for a second jab this afternoon (although there must be a slight chance it was an enterprising burglar ensuring the coast will be clear).
Off topic, why does Harry find the first amendment "baffling" ?
Because he's not very bright?
Because he has been convinced all his life that the UK press are a pack of uncontrolled snarling monsters out to exploit him and his family and he now finds that they are extremely controlled by our libel and other laws compared with the press in the US? A shattering of illusions.
If only he had a US wife who could have told him what the US Constitution says ........
He's an embarrassingly stupid man who has no real understanding of just how stupid he is.
As my mother said at the weekend; he got a B and a D at A level…and one of those was in art
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
Sort of. He was a local. But at the end of the day I don't think a candidate would have made much difference.
I'm of the opinion Labour could have ran Nigel Farage as their candidate and still lost.
Maybe. But given Brexit has happened there are three positions you can take: Enthusiasm, Campaign to rejoin EU/EFTA, Accept Through Gritted Teeth.
Labour has done the third - exemplified by their Hartlepool candidate. SNP and LDs have done the second - and fair play to them. The third is the one which can never work. Until Labour decide (and act in terms of candidates and attitudes) what they think between rejoin or enthusiastically accept they have a problem.
It's a long term thing, but parties must either be on the side of history or have the courage to make history. Labour have neither position at the moment.
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
He was persuaded to do so. They should simply have refrained from that and simply removed the Whip.
You're scraping the barrel here I think
I really think not. All Labour had to do was disown him by withdrawing the Whip. I have seen no suggestion that Hill resigned his seat out of petulance when threatened with that. Moreover, he denies the allegations - which were nothing like as serious as those made against the prominent Tory MP who was arrested by the police.
The allegations against the Tory MP proved to be unfounded. He wasn’t charged with any offence.
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
He was persuaded to do so. They should simply have refrained from that and simply removed the Whip.
You're scraping the barrel here I think
I really think not. All Labour had to do was disown him by withdrawing the Whip. I have seen no suggestion that Hill resigned his seat out of petulance when threatened with that. Moreover, he denies the allegations - which were nothing like as serious as those made against the prominent Tory MP who was arrested by the police.
The allegations against the Tory MP proved to be unfounded. He wasn’t charged with any offence.
That is a 'non sequitur'. It simply meant that the evidence was not sufficiently compelling to meet the threshold of 'beyond all reasonable doubt.' The police will surely have had good reason to justify arresting a prominent MP.
All the hotels are instantly full. The holiday coaches have returned. And the park is full of visitors wandering around asking how to get to the beach or Botanic Garden. God knows what the proper summer is going to be like. That’s going to be a terrible few days.
Nah, I think it's a smart comment, showing his British sense of irony, by saying something nuts/dissing his adopted country, therefore implicitly exercising his first amendment right to free speech.
In re Cosplay SAGE - from the BBC’s Nick Tiggle a couple of hours ago -
There have been plenty of experts questioning whether Monday's unlocking was worth the risk, including members of Independent Sage and the British Medical Association.
But it is worth noting that these are the same critics who warned against the full re-opening of schools in March, saying it would lead to a surge. They also said the January lockdown was not tough enough to bring cases of the UK variant down and objected to delaying the gap between vaccine doses to 12 weeks. (my emphasis)
"We know if it goes wrong the critics will say 'we told you so'. But... those people criticising now have been wrong before," another of those involved in the meetings last week said.
That, of course, is the price that comes with power - and if cases and, crucially, hospitalisations do take off it will look like a mistake.
Re header, gosh, terrible for Keir Starmer. He has a year to turn things around and I'd be lying if I said I'm confident he will. But let's see. I'm long of him at 7.6 to be next PM and I'm still expecting to be laying that back at much shorter well before the GE.
Anyway let's park Starmer, because I'd like to say a word about Boris Johnson for a change. It's depressing beyond measure that such a man sits astride English politics but sit astride English politics such a man doth sit. It’s the truth of the matter and it must be faced.
I hear the dissing of him that goes on. He’s lucky. People don’t really like him, it’s all vaccine bounce, or it’s Brexit. Plus the Foremain OGH thesis - ok he wins elections but look at the opponents, a fag end Ken Livingstone, the risible Jeremy Corbyn. Anyone could have beaten them.
I don’t buy this. Red Ken was a London icon and London is a Labour city. Johnson beat him then beat him again. Jeremy Corbyn was such a terrible candidate that in the GE of 2017 he racked up Labour’s best English vote share since the 97 landslide and came within a whisker of number ten. Yes, he’d become a whipping boy by GE19, but does anybody really think if Jeremy Hunt had won the Tory leadership (another Johnson electoral triumph, btw, right there) that he’d have managed anything close to the 80 seat majority that Johnson scored. Not a chance. 30 seats max.
And let’s not forget Johnson’s biggest election win of all, 23 June 2016, 52/48, against a certain David Cameron, super smooth, super confident PM of the time, fresh from a GE triumph of his own the year before, see-er off of the rampant Scots the year before that. DC knew he’d win until he heard Johnson had plumped for the other side. Then he started to worry and he was right to.
So there you go. It’s not a view I enjoy holding but it is my view. Boris Johnson IS the Heineken politician. He DOES reach the people and the parts that other Tories cannot reach. And those people and parts are perfectly situated for turning Tory votes into Tory seats in FPTP general elections.
I’m not as bearish on Labour for the next GE as many seem to be – sense there’s some herd thinking going on – but I confess here and now that I’d fancy their chances a lot more if they were facing any Tory leader bar Boris Johnson. The guy’s a menace.
Labour deluded if they don't recognise Boris Johnson is a formidable opponent who will be very tough to shift.
Unpopular opinion among left-wing circles: Boris Johnson is actually pretty funny. But why can't Labour find a politician who can tell a joke or two?
Herman Goering could be pretty funny and managed to connect with the wider German public in a way his fellow criminals failed to do.
Re header, gosh, terrible for Keir Starmer. He has a year to turn things around and I'd be lying if I said I'm confident he will. But let's see. I'm long of him at 7.6 to be next PM and I'm still expecting to be laying that back at much shorter well before the GE.
Anyway let's park Starmer, because I'd like to say a word about Boris Johnson for a change. It's depressing beyond measure that such a man sits astride English politics but sit astride English politics such a man doth sit. It’s the truth of the matter and it must be faced.
I hear the dissing of him that goes on. He’s lucky. People don’t really like him, it’s all vaccine bounce, or it’s Brexit. Plus the Foremain OGH thesis - ok he wins elections but look at the opponents, a fag end Ken Livingstone, the risible Jeremy Corbyn. Anyone could have beaten them.
I don’t buy this. Red Ken was a London icon and London is a Labour city. Johnson beat him then beat him again. Jeremy Corbyn was such a terrible candidate that in the GE of 2017 he racked up Labour’s best English vote share since the 97 landslide and came within a whisker of number ten. Yes, he’d become a whipping boy by GE19, but does anybody really think if Jeremy Hunt had won the Tory leadership (another Johnson electoral triumph, btw, right there) that he’d have managed anything close to the 80 seat majority that Johnson scored. Not a chance. 30 seats max.
And let’s not forget Johnson’s biggest election win of all, 23 June 2016, 52/48, against a certain David Cameron, super smooth, super confident PM of the time, fresh from a GE triumph of his own the year before, see-er off of the rampant Scots the year before that. DC knew he’d win until he heard Johnson had plumped for the other side. Then he started to worry and he was right to.
So there you go. It’s not a view I enjoy holding but it is my view. Boris Johnson IS the Heineken politician. He DOES reach the people and the parts that other Tories cannot reach. And those people and parts are perfectly situated for turning Tory votes into Tory seats in FPTP general elections.
I’m not as bearish on Labour for the next GE as many seem to be – sense there’s some herd thinking going on – but I confess here and now that I’d fancy their chances a lot more if they were facing any Tory leader bar Boris Johnson. The guy’s a menace.
Labour deluded if they don't recognise Boris Johnson is a formidable opponent who will be very tough to shift.
Unpopular opinion among left-wing circles: Boris Johnson is actually pretty funny. But why can't Labour find a politician who can tell a joke or two?
Angela Eagle LOTO, Jess Phillips deputy would scare Boris and electrify the nation.
Off topic, why does Harry find the first amendment "baffling" ?
Because he's not very bright?
Because he has been convinced all his life that the UK press are a pack of uncontrolled snarling monsters out to exploit him and his family and he now finds that they are extremely controlled by our libel and other laws compared with the press in the US? A shattering of illusions.
If only he had a US wife who could have told him what the US Constitution says ........
He's an embarrassingly stupid man who has no real understanding of just how stupid he is.
As my mother said at the weekend; he got a B and a D at A level…and one of those was in art
Confirms Eton is overcharging parents?
Also, how easy must the entrance exam be? Or has Eton gone all Harrow and let in any kid of rich feckers?
I mean, we all believe there should be limits to free speech, don’t we?
The nasty nutters shouting the most vile anti-Semitic abuse from their car in London.
Does anyone believe that should be allowed because free speech?
I don't think that was an edge case - it was threatening behaviour / incitement.
Was it incitement? It was offensive but who was likely to be incited? Surely it was more likely to incite retaliation against the speakers than that anyone would actually rape Jewish men's daughters. And is flying a flag threatening behaviour? Bad news for politicians if it is.
Maybe we should have a Prohibition of Complete Dickheads Act to cover situations like this where people are clearly trying to be offensive and provocative without actually crossing the line into clear criminality.
On another note, isn't it odd that only four people were arrested? There were more than four in the video.
There are surely enough honourable members in the Commons with enough insight to make the passing of a Prohibition of complete dickheads Act an impossibility.
Re header, gosh, terrible for Keir Starmer. He has a year to turn things around and I'd be lying if I said I'm confident he will. But let's see. I'm long of him at 7.6 to be next PM and I'm still expecting to be laying that back at much shorter well before the GE.
Anyway let's park Starmer, because I'd like to say a word about Boris Johnson for a change. It's depressing beyond measure that such a man sits astride English politics but sit astride English politics such a man doth sit. It’s the truth of the matter and it must be faced.
I hear the dissing of him that goes on. He’s lucky. People don’t really like him, it’s all vaccine bounce, or it’s Brexit. Plus the Foremain OGH thesis - ok he wins elections but look at the opponents, a fag end Ken Livingstone, the risible Jeremy Corbyn. Anyone could have beaten them.
I don’t buy this. Red Ken was a London icon and London is a Labour city. Johnson beat him then beat him again. Jeremy Corbyn was such a terrible candidate that in the GE of 2017 he racked up Labour’s best English vote share since the 97 landslide and came within a whisker of number ten. Yes, he’d become a whipping boy by GE19, but does anybody really think if Jeremy Hunt had won the Tory leadership (another Johnson electoral triumph, btw, right there) that he’d have managed anything close to the 80 seat majority that Johnson scored. Not a chance. 30 seats max.
And let’s not forget Johnson’s biggest election win of all, 23 June 2016, 52/48, against a certain David Cameron, super smooth, super confident PM of the time, fresh from a GE triumph of his own the year before, see-er off of the rampant Scots the year before that. DC knew he’d win until he heard Johnson had plumped for the other side. Then he started to worry and he was right to.
So there you go. It’s not a view I enjoy holding but it is my view. Boris Johnson IS the Heineken politician. He DOES reach the people and the parts that other Tories cannot reach. And those people and parts are perfectly situated for turning Tory votes into Tory seats in FPTP general elections.
I’m not as bearish on Labour for the next GE as many seem to be – sense there’s some herd thinking going on – but I confess here and now that I’d fancy their chances a lot more if they were facing any Tory leader bar Boris Johnson. The guy’s a menace.
Labour deluded if they don't recognise Boris Johnson is a formidable opponent who will be very tough to shift.
Unpopular opinion among left-wing circles: Boris Johnson is actually pretty funny. But why can't Labour find a politician who can tell a joke or two?
Laura Pidcock could be an engaging speaker but lost her seat. What Starmer should have done is taken my advice and booked some professional coaching. It worked for Mrs Thatcher. It can't be that hard to find some left-leaning luvvies to give him a couple of hours a week.
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
He was persuaded to do so. They should simply have refrained from that and simply removed the Whip.
You're scraping the barrel here I think
I really think not. All Labour had to do was disown him by withdrawing the Whip. I have seen no suggestion that Hill resigned his seat out of petulance when threatened with that. Moreover, he denies the allegations - which were nothing like as serious as those made against the prominent Tory MP who was arrested by the police.
The allegations against the Tory MP proved to be unfounded. He wasn’t charged with any offence.
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
He was persuaded to do so. They should simply have refrained from that and simply removed the Whip.
You're scraping the barrel here I think
I really think not. All Labour had to do was disown him by withdrawing the Whip. I have seen no suggestion that Hill resigned his seat out of petulance when threatened with that. Moreover, he denies the allegations - which were nothing like as serious as those made against the prominent Tory MP who was arrested by the police.
The allegations against the Tory MP proved to be unfounded. He wasn’t charged with any offence.
That is a 'non sequitur'. It simply meant that the evidence was not sufficiently compelling to meet the threshold of 'beyond all reasonable doubt.' The police will surely have had good reason to justify arresting a prominent MP.
The comment was in the context of him not resigning as an MP. Why should he resign if he wasn’t charged with an offence?
The Hartlepool MP resigned, only because SKS persuaded him in order to avoid bad publicity in the run up to the elections.
Batley and Spen is another unforced by-election. To lose one unforced by-election is unlucky, to lose two in a row is a problem.
Off topic, why does Harry find the first amendment "baffling" ?
Because he's not very bright?
Because he has been convinced all his life that the UK press are a pack of uncontrolled snarling monsters out to exploit him and his family and he now finds that they are extremely controlled by our libel and other laws compared with the press in the US? A shattering of illusions.
If only he had a US wife who could have told him what the US Constitution says ........
He's an embarrassingly stupid man who has no real understanding of just how stupid he is.
As my mother said at the weekend; he got a B and a D at A level…and one of those was in art
Harry inherited £10 million from Diana, so he knew he would be able to live a top 1% lifestyle no matter what his grades were and even if he no longer receives any Sovereign Grant or Duchy of Cornwall funds he still can
Mandatory printing of car registration numbers on all Drive Thru packaging.
I would like to get all Drive Thru retailers to be required to print car registrations on all take away packaging. Hopefully, to cut down on the amount of litter that is blighting roadsides all over the country.
Who on earth has got time to go through every bit of litter to look for a car registration number?
Furthermore, are they expecting McDonalds etc to print a reg number on every single bit of packaging for each customer? That's going to take ages.
Have not thought it through.
Easy - print a label, stick it on. Stop the feckers littering.
Print a label, stick it on the bag. Print another label stick it on the chips. Print another label stick it on the burger. Print another label stick it on the drink. Repeat x4 for a family of 4.
Some takeaways already have label printing for operational reasons, eg Domino's and Papa Johns will have a label on every pizza.
Off topic, why does Harry find the first amendment "baffling" ?
Because he's not very bright?
Because he has been convinced all his life that the UK press are a pack of uncontrolled snarling monsters out to exploit him and his family and he now finds that they are extremely controlled by our libel and other laws compared with the press in the US? A shattering of illusions.
If only he had a US wife who could have told him what the US Constitution says ........
He's an embarrassingly stupid man who has no real understanding of just how stupid he is.
As my mother said at the weekend; he got a B and a D at A level…and one of those was in art
Confirms Eton is overcharging parents?
Also, how easy must the entrance exam be? Or has Eton gone all Harrow and let in any kid of rich feckers?
You have to pass an entrance exam to get into Harrow too, Harrow may not be as academic as Eton or Winchester or Westminster but it is not Stowe either (and even Stowe requires 55% average at Common Entrance)
Mandatory printing of car registration numbers on all Drive Thru packaging.
I would like to get all Drive Thru retailers to be required to print car registrations on all take away packaging. Hopefully, to cut down on the amount of litter that is blighting roadsides all over the country.
Who on earth has got time to go through every bit of litter to look for a car registration number?
Furthermore, are they expecting McDonalds etc to print a reg number on every single bit of packaging for each customer? That's going to take ages.
Have not thought it through.
Easy - print a label, stick it on. Stop the feckers littering.
Print a label, stick it on the bag. Print another label stick it on the chips. Print another label stick it on the burger. Print another label stick it on the drink. Repeat x4 for a family of 4.
Some takeaways already have label printing for operational reasons, eg Domino's and Papa Johns will have a label on every pizza.
If Boris orders pubs and restaurants to close down again because he fucked up over the Indian variant, I will not be responsible for my actions.
Enough.
I would estimate the chances of that between zero and, err, zero. By 21st June we will have handed out something like another 14m vaccines in this country, maybe more. Pretty much everyone vulnerable will have had 2. Hospital admissions for Covid alone will have a frequency somewhere similar to lightening strikes. There is absolutely no way Boris is going to be persuaded to back off.
How could you doubt this when Peston is saying the opposite? What more proof do you need?
Look, I'm not one of his biggest critics, but strong-minded and firm of principle Boris is not. If I wanted a PM to face down an internal enemy and do the right thing regardless, he isn't necessarily the one I'd go for.
If I wanted one who was going to take the popular option despite some whining by some white coated boffin he is exactly the one I'd go for.
Yes, but I fear unlocking is not the popular option.
Oh it is. Indeed well before 21st June it will be a fait accompli.
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
He was persuaded to do so. They should simply have refrained from that and simply removed the Whip.
You're scraping the barrel here I think
I really think not. All Labour had to do was disown him by withdrawing the Whip. I have seen no suggestion that Hill resigned his seat out of petulance when threatened with that. Moreover, he denies the allegations - which were nothing like as serious as those made against the prominent Tory MP who was arrested by the police.
The allegations against the Tory MP proved to be unfounded. He wasn’t charged with any offence.
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
Hartlepool has changed my view of Starmer. It was a totally unnecessary by-election for which he thoroughly deserves heavy flak. A leader should not be easily forgiven for such a self inflicted wound.
Was it? How could it have been avoided?
Didn't he parachute in a candidate?
No, Justin is saying the by election itself shouldn't have been held.
It didn't need to be held on 6th May which gave it a prominence that ultimately did Labour no favours at all and set the narrative for what were in fairness ultimately a rather mixed set of results with good results in Wales, Manchester, London and the West of England and some pretty poor results elsewhere.
This was very poor tactics, beyond a doubt. But these swings are absurd. Surely the end of lockdown is a bigger and short term factor?
With respect, there was no need to hold the by election at all! The MP concerned had not been convicted of a serious criminal offence for which he faced potential recall - as in the cases of Onasanya and the Brecon & Radnor MP. He was talked into resigning by Starmer - and perhaps the Chief Whip. It amounts to a very serious error of judgement on Starmer's part and raises questions re-his political 'nous' and antennae.
He's cut a pretty sorry figure at the Tribunal. If he was still a Labour MP that would have been even more damaging. How the hell the case has not been settled is beyond my comprehension.
The Whip should have been taken away - leaving him to sit as an Independent but no need for a by election.
Eh? Surely it was the MP's own choice to vacate the seat rather than Labour forcing him to?
He was persuaded to do so. They should simply have refrained from that and simply removed the Whip.
You're scraping the barrel here I think
I really think not. All Labour had to do was disown him by withdrawing the Whip. I have seen no suggestion that Hill resigned his seat out of petulance when threatened with that. Moreover, he denies the allegations - which were nothing like as serious as those made against the prominent Tory MP who was arrested by the police.
The allegations against the Tory MP proved to be unfounded. He wasn’t charged with any offence.
That is a 'non sequitur'. It simply meant that the evidence was not sufficiently compelling to meet the threshold of 'beyond all reasonable doubt.' The police will surely have had good reason to justify arresting a prominent MP.
The bar for charging someone is not the same. That only has to be a suspicion.
Comments
I think it was a case of jump before pushed.
Mike Hill is very likely to be bankrupted by this tribunal...
https://twitter.com/hkesvani/status/1394600640379301891?s=21
How could you doubt this when Peston is saying the opposite? What more proof do you need?
https://twitter.com/jon_bartley/status/1394555049049743362?s=20
Henry VIIII.
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1394615980320608264?s=20
Anyway let's park Starmer, because I'd like to say a word about Boris Johnson for a change. It's depressing beyond measure that such a man sits astride English politics but sit astride English politics such a man doth sit. It’s the truth of the matter and it must be faced.
I hear the dissing of him that goes on. He’s lucky. People don’t really like him, it’s all vaccine bounce, or it’s Brexit. Plus the Foremain OGH thesis - ok he wins elections but look at the opponents, a fag end Ken Livingstone, the risible Jeremy Corbyn. Anyone could have beaten them.
I don’t buy this. Red Ken was a London icon and London is a Labour city. Johnson beat him then beat him again. Jeremy Corbyn was such a terrible candidate that in the GE of 2017 he racked up Labour’s best English vote share since the 97 landslide and came within a whisker of number ten. Yes, he’d become a whipping boy by GE19, but does anybody really think if Jeremy Hunt had won the Tory leadership (another Johnson electoral triumph, btw, right there) that he’d have managed anything close to the 80 seat majority that Johnson scored. Not a chance. 30 seats max.
And let’s not forget Johnson’s biggest election win of all, 23 June 2016, 52/48, against a certain David Cameron, super smooth, super confident PM of the time, fresh from a GE triumph of his own the year before, see-er off of the rampant Scots the year before that. DC knew he’d win until he heard Johnson had plumped for the other side. Then he started to worry and he was right to.
So there you go. It’s not a view I enjoy holding but it is my view. Boris Johnson IS the Heineken politician. He DOES reach the people and the parts that other Tories cannot reach. And those people and parts are perfectly situated for turning Tory votes into Tory seats in FPTP general elections.
I’m not as bearish on Labour for the next GE as many seem to be – sense there’s some herd thinking going on – but I confess here and now that I’d fancy their chances a lot more if they were facing any Tory leader bar Boris Johnson. The guy’s a menace.
Isn't her new team Jack Dromey and a swarm of Corbynistas?
One of my friends had a complaint against him to the Law Society because he told the insurers that the offer on the table was one that anyone paying the pursuit of the claim out of their own pocket would have taken. It was hanging over him for nearly 2 years before it was dismissed.
I mean, we all believe there should be limits to free speech, don’t we?
The nasty nutters shouting the most vile anti-Semitic abuse from their car in London comes to mind as an example.
Does anyone believe that should be allowed because free speech?
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14976587/prince-harry-slams-americas-first-amendment-bonkers/
Why? I’ve just seen an interview with Boris. He’s now saying, “next few days” to confirm 21 June and says there is nothing in the data to imply a deviation from that date.
Sounds to me like the latest day looks quite promising (a la John Burn-Murdoch last night).
We’ll see.
1. Unlocking is going to happen it’s all fluffy and lively. DISASTER! Low rates of infection.. ho hum
2. DRAMA! Unlocking isn’t going to happen! TRIUMPH! It does! Infection rates tick up but remain low… DISASTER! BORIS MYST GO!
They have calculated that 2 will sell more papers…
I would like to get all Drive Thru retailers to be required to print car registrations on all take away packaging. Hopefully, to cut down on the amount of litter that is blighting roadsides all over the country.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/580772?fbclid=IwAR3or-1licyDK2gs9ohrc7Jb36vcmcQA4DzyLTRKU0-OwFAV7l_bxH2NdyI
I’d be interested in how this outfit is funded and who/what groups funds this outfit.
It looks like they play to hang around once Covid has gone to be a thorn in the side of the govt on climate change.
Furthermore, are they expecting McDonalds etc to print a reg number on every single bit of packaging for each customer? That's going to take ages.
Have not thought it through.
It was the MPs I was talking about.
So when you said I was wrong, you meant to say that I was right?
Johnson must be very aware of the Tory MP pressure. Does he really want to rely on Captain Hindsight to get further extensions of all this?
Henry IX
Maybe we should have a Prohibition of Complete Dickheads Act to cover situations like this where people are clearly trying to be offensive and provocative without actually crossing the line into clear criminality.
On another note, isn't it odd that only four people were arrested? There were more than four in the video.
No.10 Hits Back At Dominic Cummings Claim That UK Covid Border Policy Is 'A Joke'
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/downing-street-dominic-cummings-border-policy-a-joke-amber-list_uk_60a3a80ae4b063dcceae9576?fsg
Advise them to find an opportunity to talk to their neighbour, frighten them with some story of someone who was eventually bankrupted from legal fees arising from a dispute that started because their neighbour didn’t cut the hedge, and retreat.
now II don't believe it will occur for eighteen months to two years, and before that we will experience a post Covid boom. Johnson therefore has a comfortable window of opportunity to bolster his majority with an early election.
A victorious Johnson can then retire to the $1,000,000 a night US after-dinner circuit, leaving Sunak to face the carnage.
P.S. Yvette on WATO has her boots on. Keir looking even weaker in his absence.
Why is this group given a ton of coverage by BBC when Great Barrington are basically banned completely and ridiculed at every opportunity?
Whose to say which group of scientists is right? We probably wont even know for years.
You get back to solving the Middle East crisis, and stop wasting your time with trivia like discarded MacDonalds wrappers....
Unpopular opinion among left-wing circles: Boris Johnson is actually pretty funny.
But why can't Labour find a politician who can tell a joke or two?
Labour has done the third - exemplified by their Hartlepool candidate. SNP and LDs have done the second - and fair play to them. The third is the one which can never work. Until Labour decide (and act in terms of candidates and attitudes) what they think between rejoin or enthusiastically accept they have a problem.
It's a long term thing, but parties must either be on the side of history or have the courage to make history. Labour have neither position at the moment.
All the hotels are instantly full. The holiday coaches have returned. And the park is full of visitors wandering around asking how to get to the beach or Botanic Garden. God knows what the proper summer is going to be like. That’s going to be a terrible few days.
Or he's a bit of a tool.
There have been plenty of experts questioning whether Monday's unlocking was worth the risk, including members of Independent Sage and the British Medical Association.
But it is worth noting that these are the same critics who warned against the full re-opening of schools in March, saying it would lead to a surge. They also said the January lockdown was not tough enough to bring cases of the UK variant down and objected to delaying the gap between vaccine doses to 12 weeks. (my emphasis)
"We know if it goes wrong the critics will say 'we told you so'. But... those people criticising now have been wrong before," another of those involved in the meetings last week said.
That, of course, is the price that comes with power - and if cases and, crucially, hospitalisations do take off it will look like a mistake.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-57150871.amp
Also, how easy must the entrance exam be? Or has Eton gone all Harrow and let in any kid of rich feckers?
The Hartlepool MP resigned, only because SKS persuaded him in order to avoid bad publicity in the run up to the elections.
Batley and Spen is another unforced by-election. To lose one unforced by-election is unlucky, to lose two in a row is a problem.