Johnson's lying is often "just" a consequence of laziness and failure to seriously engage with the details (when he needs to - micromanagement leads to other issues of course) in favour of simple crowd pleasing solutions.
And often he just flat out lies.
"I paid for the wallpaper", as an example
Is there proof that he didn't pay and even if he didn't it did not cost the taxpayer a penny. Wallpapergate did for Labour in the by and local elections...
Yes it did, what was spent was on top of the annual £30,000 taxpayer funded allowance for Downing Street improvement.
That's splitting hairs. The Pm is entitled to spend 30k a year on refurbishment. The wallpaper cost the taxpayer nothing
I think you have missed the point being made. But let's assume for a moment, you haven't, therein lies a bigger issue. Who paid for the £200,000 wallpaper, either directly, or indirectly, and what did they expect in return?
Let's move back to the real world. The wallpaper did not cost 200k...
You've forgotten about the curtains too.
In all fairness, removal of Mrs May's John Lewis beige decor was worth every penny. My point is who paid for it and why?
Wallpaper-gate ... It is just bemusing that you are so interested in it.
After all ... Llafur spent £ 52 m on an airport which is virtually worthless. Dodgy Dave would have made £ 21 m on Greensill share options (lovely paean in the header, BTW). That is corruption. And we are talking about wallpaper and Theresa May's curtains !
Are you the kind of person who asks the window-cleaner for a receipt? Or sits in the forecourt of a Motorway Service station on a folding fishing chair with your own Thermoses, cheese sandwich and digestives.?
Wallpaper-gate seems to betray a complete lack of perspective on the part of its small but very dedicated band of followers.
Sure, let's make sure public money is spent wisely, and let's start with some huge-ticket items.
I don't dispute the airport was a waste of taxpayers money. Pies anyone?
£52m is a similar amount to the cost to the public purse of the garden bridge. And in fairness, although few planes might fly out of Rhoose, the airport does in fact exist.
It is true the Rhoose airport exists. That means it is continuing to cost public money. An additional £ 42 million loan was written off in Mar 2021. And more bills to come.
The Garden Bridge does not exist. Thankfully. Because that means it is not continuing to cost money.
I guess what surprises me is there is a huge example of corruption and mismanagement on your doorstep in Rhoose, but you seem completely uninterested in it, yet absolutely fascinated by the minutae of wall-paper in No 10. Still, each to their own.
In any case, the Daily Merkle has moved on from Wallpaper-gate, and we have now reached Takeway-gate. Rich donors are buying posh takeaway nosh for Boris and Carrie. Gasp-ee. Gosh-o.
What next?
Surely, Toilet paper-gate. Rich billionaires are buying ultra-soft gold-leaf toilet paper for the ample Johnson posterior.
Surely this nonsense is being leaked to the Mail by Johnson strategists.
It is at level of celebrity tittle-tattle. It is designed to leave us with the impression that Johnson is a celebrity, and should be judged not on his politics but on his ability to keep us entertained with his clownish antics.
If my tax pounds are being wasted on an airport, which I use or Johnson's curtains which I don't, the key word is "waste". I want my taxes to be spent wisely irrespective of party stripe.
And Johnson's paid for indulgences do worry me. It is not about gold wallpaper, it is more what it tells us about how he and his government roll, with my taxes and my vote
I understand that, and I feel the same way.
I am pointing out that Greensill or the purchase of Rhoose airport have received rather little attention ... compared to Wallpaper-gate.
And I am asking why.
And I am pointing that there are benefits to keeping everyone distracted by trivia.
Why is the Cardiff airport a white elephant? It’s not as if South Wales doesn’t have a big enough population to support a medium sized airport.
Hmm, I think the bigger failure from the Lib Dems was to disown their achievements in government and run as an opposition party against their own record.
It made them look ridiculous. Every time they popped up with some insane uttering about how shit the government was and how they would have done it better if they were the government it was just really weird.
The only thing people remember about the LibDems time in government was the tuition fees betrayal.
A million people infected a week. That's what would have been needed for the 60% to have had it by autumn figure.
A million per week.
Absolutely banananaananas, back of the envelope math's shows it was nut bar.
That's why the government thought it needed the Nightingale hospitals. It would have been horrific but there would have been some economy left at the end of it. In 1968 Hong Kong flu killed up to 4m worldwide, similar to what Covid has officially done if you believe the Chinese, Iranian, Brazilian and Indian figures to date although Covid is definitely going to exceed this figure. Something like 30k died in the UK. And the economy carried on as normal as did football matches etc. Its hardly surprising people thought we could do the same with Covid.
Johnson's lying is often "just" a consequence of laziness and failure to seriously engage with the details (when he needs to - micromanagement leads to other issues of course) in favour of simple crowd pleasing solutions.
And often he just flat out lies.
"I paid for the wallpaper", as an example
Is there proof that he didn't pay and even if he didn't it did not cost the taxpayer a penny. Wallpapergate did for Labour in the by and local elections...
Yes it did, what was spent was on top of the annual £30,000 taxpayer funded allowance for Downing Street improvement.
That's splitting hairs. The Pm is entitled to spend 30k a year on refurbishment. The wallpaper cost the taxpayer nothing
I think you have missed the point being made. But let's assume for a moment, you haven't, therein lies a bigger issue. Who paid for the £200,000 wallpaper, either directly, or indirectly, and what did they expect in return?
Let's move back to the real world. The wallpaper did not cost 200k...
You've forgotten about the curtains too.
In all fairness, removal of Mrs May's John Lewis beige decor was worth every penny. My point is who paid for it and why?
Wallpaper-gate ... It is just bemusing that you are so interested in it.
After all ... Llafur spent £ 52 m on an airport which is virtually worthless. Dodgy Dave would have made £ 21 m on Greensill share options (lovely paean in the header, BTW). That is corruption. And we are talking about wallpaper and Theresa May's curtains !
Are you the kind of person who asks the window-cleaner for a receipt? Or sits in the forecourt of a Motorway Service station on a folding fishing chair with your own Thermoses, cheese sandwich and digestives.?
Wallpaper-gate seems to betray a complete lack of perspective on the part of its small but very dedicated band of followers.
Sure, let's make sure public money is spent wisely, and let's start with some huge-ticket items.
I don't dispute the airport was a waste of taxpayers money. Pies anyone?
£52m is a similar amount to the cost to the public purse of the garden bridge. And in fairness, although few planes might fly out of Rhoose, the airport does in fact exist.
It is true the Rhoose airport exists. That means it is continuing to cost public money. An additional £ 42 million loan was written off in Mar 2021. And more bills to come.
The Garden Bridge does not exist. Thankfully. Because that means it is not continuing to cost money.
I guess what surprises me is there is a huge example of corruption and mismanagement on your doorstep in Rhoose, but you seem completely uninterested in it, yet absolutely fascinated by the minutae of wall-paper in No 10. Still, each to their own.
In any case, the Daily Merkle has moved on from Wallpaper-gate, and we have now reached Takeway-gate. Rich donors are buying posh takeaway nosh for Boris and Carrie. Gasp-ee. Gosh-o.
What next?
Surely, Toilet paper-gate. Rich billionaires are buying ultra-soft gold-leaf toilet paper for the ample Johnson posterior.
Surely this nonsense is being leaked to the Mail by Johnson strategists.
It is at level of celebrity tittle-tattle. It is designed to leave us with the impression that Johnson is a celebrity, and should be judged not on his politics but on his ability to keep us entertained with his clownish antics.
If my tax pounds are being wasted on an airport, which I use or Johnson's curtains which I don't, the key word is "waste". I want my taxes to be spent wisely irrespective of party stripe.
And Johnson's paid for indulgences do worry me. It is not about gold wallpaper, it is more what it tells us about how he and his government roll, with my taxes and my vote
I understand that, and I feel the same way.
I am pointing out that Greensill or the purchase of Rhoose airport have received rather little attention ... compared to Wallpaper-gate.
And I am asking why.
And I am pointing that there are benefits to keeping everyone distracted by trivia.
Why is the Cardiff airport a white elephant? It’s not as if South Wales doesn’t have a big enough population to support a medium sized airport.
Not a white elephant but unclear why the welsh government paid the amount they did for it.
Not sure how much it is to do with Cameron, equally important factors are a couple of poor leaders in Farron and Swinson followed by the current anonymous one and their failure to stand up for and explain coalition government.
As a floating voter it is extremely off putting when party members say the reason for the party is an ideas farm for Labour and the Tories to copy rather than an aspiration for power, even shared power.
Sorry, Mr Above. I have not come across a single Lib Dem member who has said "the reason for the party is an ideas farm for Labour and the Tories to copy". Not one.
The people who say that are usually Conservatives.
I have asked on here several times this year what is the point of the LDs at the national level and that is the most coherent answer that comes back at me.
I am your target audience, I have voted Tory, Labour, Green and LDs but most often Lib Dem. I really dislike this government but can find no enthusiasm for the current Lib Dems.
I wrote a thread header on what the Lib Dems *ought* to be advancing: broadly speaking, liberal policies designed to protect people’s freedoms while advancing national prosperity.
Currently Labour has no policy, and the Tories a series of populist spasms, so in theory there is a large policy space to fill.
Yes policy is weak in all parties nowadays, they are too driven by either short term polling or ideology and not by what would work in todays world.
But the LDs problem goes further than that, in that if they hold the balance of power, it seems they do not wish to exercise that power, as they are afraid of the political fall out of siding with either Tories or Labour.
The LDs need to champion coalition governments not demonise them. It takes strong leadership to do that in a country that historically prefers single party governments, but I have no doubt someone like Ashdown could have effectively communicated why coalitions are better to the LD voter pool.
Are there examples from Continental European politics of a minor party in a coalition doing relatively well compared to the major party in a coalition? Obviously, in most circumstances, a party of government eventually gets hammered as being held responsible for the discontents of the society of the day, but in the examples I am aware of (mostly in Ireland) the smaller party in a coalition appears fated to suffer out of proportion to their ability to achieve a different outcome.
I do think you can make the case that the Lib Dem's handling of tuition fees was one of the two* greatest acts of electoral self-harm in British politics in the post-war** period, but equally I think there's a case to be made that, in our political culture, it's an inevitable price that would be paid by a junior coalition partner, who are likely to have to make the greatest compromises, and have the most contrary voters least willing to accept compromises.
* No prizes for identifying the other. ** Is there any accepted way to break up what is now becoming a very long period into meaningfully distinct periods?
It was not inevitable that Nick Clegg should cave on tuition fees, thus committing, as you say, "one of the two greatest acts of electoral self-harm in British politics in the post-war period". Prima facie, since putting up tuition fees was not a crucial part of the Conservative programme – in fact, they'd pledged to abolish fees completely just five years earlier – this would not have been crucial to negotiations.
More importantly, we know that Nick Clegg was advised against reneging on his party's tuition fees pledge by none other than George Osborne.
Nick Clegg screwed LibDem voters and the LibDem Party and he did it for no readily apparent reason. He's not even Russian!
Are there examples from Continental European politics of a minor party in a coalition doing relatively well compared to the major party in a coalition? Obviously, in most circumstances, a party of government eventually gets hammered as being held responsible for the discontents of the society of the day, but in the examples I am aware of (mostly in Ireland) the smaller party in a coalition appears fated to suffer out of proportion to their ability to achieve a different outcome.
I do think you can make the case that the Lib Dem's handling of tuition fees was one of the two* greatest acts of electoral self-harm in British politics in the post-war** period, but equally I think there's a case to be made that, in our political culture, it's an inevitable price that would be paid by a junior coalition partner, who are likely to have to make the greatest compromises, and have the most contrary voters least willing to accept compromises.
* No prizes for identifying the other. ** Is there any accepted way to break up what is now becoming a very long period into meaningfully distinct periods?
The danger was much less known back in March 2020.
According to China less than 3k had died from covid at the beginning of March.
In Italy a couple of dozen, in Spain zero.
The first reported death in the UK was only on the 6th March.
By the 12th of March (when Boris had the wash your hands but absolutely no restrictions to be put in place press conference) a thousand had died in Italy. By the 16th when the first tentative restrictions were put in place in the UK Italy had had over 2000 deaths. By the 23rd Italy had had 6000 deaths.
So Priti Patel wasn't challenged on the Daniel Morgan report in spite of his family's public statement. I presume that was a precondition of her agreeing to be interviewed.
Cyclefree - perhaps. But remember it was Labour's Tom Watson who really went after that issue and the targets of the police investigation were the rich and powerful. Not quite sure what that means for Priti's 'values.'
Of course herd immunity was the plan, why the fuck was literally ever upilitocal hack going "herd immunity is the best plan ever, only an idiot would lockdown, 60% to get covid by then end of autumn is definetly the smart thing to do you plebs".
We had threads upon threads discussing it here before the handbrake abrupt about turn and the columnists sudden memory holing.
The are really only two endpoints to a pandemic, either suppression/elimination, or herd immunity. You either stop the virus spreading or eventually most people are going to be infected. We are pursuing herd immunity now, but through vaccination rather than due to infection, as suppression/elimination appears to be almost impossible.
The trouble with the term "herd immunity" is that in encompasses a very wide range of scenarios. If transmission is slow then a health care system might be able to cope with the severe cases of the disease, on the other hand if transmission is swift then even the best health care systems could be overwhelmed by the number of cases. If the severity of the disease is low then even with a large number of cases the pressure on the health care system and the cost in terms of harm and death might be bearable, on the other hand if the severity is high then even a low case rate might come with a high cost in terms of harm. Herd immunity through natural infections might well be an appropriate way of dealing with a disease if tranmissibility and severity are relatively low.
In the case of COVID-19 the transmissiblity and severity are both relatively high, compared to other common diseases. Once we realised quite how high, from Italian data, and those parameters were used in the modelling by Imperial College we saw that herd immunity through natural infection would come at a very high cost, the NHS would be overwhelmed within weeks and a death toll of 500,000 was plausible. That put an end to allowing herd immunity to develop through infection, even with shielding of the most vulnerable people the cost would have been huge.
I don't see any plausible scenario where the UK could have avoided lockdown, given what we know about COVID-19 if we didn't have vaccines or treatments only NPIs are left and lockdown does work. Anyone suggesting there was a way of avoiding lockdown is going to have to produce some very convincing evidence.
The way of avoiding lockdown would have been to seal the borders. However (unlike the Australians) we're not prepared to do that. Dr John Campbell suggests that stopping all international air travel for a period of a few weeks in January would have stopped it in its tracks.
It would also have left literally millions of Brits trapped all over the world with little or no means to support themselves. It could never in reality have been a policy of first resort, however much it might theoretically have worked.
But allowing even more to go abroad was madness.
Indeed - but remember international travel to and from the UK is not just Brits. If shutting down inbound international flights traps millions of Brits abroad, shutting down outgoing ones also traps millions of non-Brits here...
Now you can argue for a policy on paper whereby non Brits can leave, but Brits can't - but good luck putting that together in a few days. Stopping flights full stop you can do. Stopping flights to a subset of individuals, that's a serious administrative task to put together in a few days.
And on the back of a threat that wasn't particularly understood, or at the time seeming particularly to be concerning to the public? Even when the scenes were emerging out of Bergamo, large numbers of people were buying into the idea that Italians were overwhelming their hospitals just because they had big families and were very touchy feely.
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
If the BBC's coverage of Glastonbury is amazing then its probably because it sends an army of staff to what is after all the middle class metropolitan leftist's premier annual w@ankfest.
The demand at the Corporation to get on such a freebie must be enormous. Skin up with Islington's finest, sing 'oh Jeremy Corbyn' with the rest, pay 25 quid for a spiced latte and a lentil burger, watch the bands on Tristram's shoulders and hand job a tattooed roadie round the back of the main stage.
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
Ms Patel is a most infuriating politician. I have a sneaking regard for her, despite everything. She is often awful. But every so often she has the right instincts and tries to do the right thing. For instance, she is now consulting Sir Richard Henriques, the judge, who wrote the excoriating report on what the police got wrong in Operation Midland, on what needs to be done to put matters right.
I hope she overcomes resistance from the Home Office and the police on this. The police need their arses kicked - and hard - on this.
I'm not a great fan of the Home Secretary but much of the flak directed her way seems personally rather than politically offensive: she is too short to see over the lectern; she drops her g's; her backside is too broad. Her critics play the woman, not the ball.
1. He junked the Lib Dem‘s PRINCIPAL policy in coalition.
2. He wasted capital promoting a national voting system (AV) that even PR proponents think is meh. (He should have insisted on PR in local govt instead).
3. He didn’t take the key portfolio, ie Home Secretary, or maybe less riskily, Justice, which would allow him to advance “low cost” but critical Liberal reform.
4. He was naively happy to stand right alongside the Tories until the end of the government, even while the Tories were briefing against the Lib Dems. He should have negotiated for the coalition proper to last just four years, with the last year seeing a supply and confidence agreement only from the Libs.
The danger was much less known back in March 2020.
According to China less than 3k had died from covid at the beginning of March.
In Italy a couple of dozen, in Spain zero.
The first reported death in the UK was only on the 6th March.
By the 12th of March (when Boris had the wash your hands but absolutely no restrictions to be put in place press conference) a thousand had died in Italy. By the 16th when the first tentative restrictions were put in place in the UK Italy had had over 2000 deaths. By the 23rd Italy had had 6000 deaths.
And how many deaths had the UK on those dates ?
Think back to what we were saying on PB at that time - Catholic Mass was believed to be a major spreader as was Italian multi-generational homes (that was likely true) while air pollution in Lombardy was studied in detail.
There needs to be a sense of threat for behavioural attitudes to change.
Even when Boris told people not to go to pubs there were PBers subsequently going to pubs.
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
Ms Patel is a most infuriating politician. I have a sneaking regard for her, despite everything. She is often awful. But every so often she has the right instincts and tries to do the right thing. For instance, she is now consulting Sir Richard Henriques, the judge, who wrote the excoriating report on what the police got wrong in Operation Midland, on what needs to be done to put matters right.
I hope she overcomes resistance from the Home Office and the police on this. The police need their arses kicked - and hard - on this.
I'm not a great fan of the Home Secretary but much of the flak directed her way seems personally rather than politically offensive: she is too short to see over the lectern; she drops her g's; her backside is too broad. Her critics play the woman, not the ball.
Ms Patel is hated because she has strayed off the left's plantation.
People of Asian descent are to be represented, and have their ambitions interpreted, exclusively by white middle class daughters of university lecturers or other senior public sector role occupiers.
The danger was much less known back in March 2020.
According to China less than 3k had died from covid at the beginning of March.
In Italy a couple of dozen, in Spain zero.
The first reported death in the UK was only on the 6th March.
You should go back to the threads on PB in February then.
I stopped taking public transport that month, based on what I was reading about the virus in China and Italy.
And, I closed the office down one week before Boris did.
You weren't the only one. My wife and I had closed down a little earlier even - she had moved her stuff ready to work from home. And she stopped taking the train to visit her elderly relatives still earlier. We don't have the resources of HM Government, but what we could read in the papers and New Sci was quite enough.
So Priti Patel wasn't challenged on the Daniel Morgan report in spite of his family's public statement. I presume that was a precondition of her agreeing to be interviewed.
Cyclefree - perhaps. But remember it was Labour's Tom Watson who really went after that issue and the targets of the police investigation were the rich and powerful. Not quite sure what that means for Priti's 'values.'
He really went after the *Conservative politicians* who were named by that lying idiot.
Strangely, although a member of the Labour Shadow Cabinet was allegedly also implicated and interviewed, that name has never been released, and the one report on it (in the Independent, FWIW) was taken down. Possibly they were told it wasn’t correct. But that didn’t stop Watson naming everyone else, all of whom appear to have been completely innocent.
Afaik he’s never apologised either.
It was party politics at its most brutal, and thoroughly unedifying. One of the more uncomfortable and concerning things among many in Labour’s antisemitism scandal was that it was so bad even Watson couldn’t stomach it. But truthfully he’s no loss to public life.
So Priti Patel wasn't challenged on the Daniel Morgan report in spite of his family's public statement. I presume that was a precondition of her agreeing to be interviewed.
Cyclefree - perhaps. But remember it was Labour's Tom Watson who really went after that issue and the targets of the police investigation were the rich and powerful. Not quite sure what that means for Priti's 'values.'
Tom Watson was part of the problem not the solution. His actions led to injustice. His grandstanding and pushing of Exaro was utterly reprehensible. He gave cover for the police to behave in ways which were at worst illegal, at best utterly unprofessional.
Priti Patel is wrong to hold back the Morgan report.
But the police acted appallingly over Midland. The IOPC also behaved appallingly. The Henriques Report needs to be implemented not ignored and if she makes sure it is then I will cheer that.
The lack of professionalism in the police has been a menace for years. It is an Augean Stable which needs clearing out. A start needs to be made somewhere. If Labour had even the ghost of an instinct on how to do politics it would be focusing on this not bloody wallpaper. But it isn't so it will have to be Priti.
And don't worry I will hold her feet to the fire on this if she doesn't.
Of course herd immunity was the plan, why the fuck was literally ever upilitocal hack going "herd immunity is the best plan ever, only an idiot would lockdown, 60% to get covid by then end of autumn is definetly the smart thing to do you plebs".
We had threads upon threads discussing it here before the handbrake abrupt about turn and the columnists sudden memory holing.
The are really only two endpoints to a pandemic, either suppression/elimination, or herd immunity. You either stop the virus spreading or eventually most people are going to be infected. We are pursuing herd immunity now, but through vaccination rather than due to infection, as suppression/elimination appears to be almost impossible.
The trouble with the term "herd immunity" is that in encompasses a very wide range of scenarios. If transmission is slow then a health care system might be able to cope with the severe cases of the disease, on the other hand if transmission is swift then even the best health care systems could be overwhelmed by the number of cases. If the severity of the disease is low then even with a large number of cases the pressure on the health care system and the cost in terms of harm and death might be bearable, on the other hand if the severity is high then even a low case rate might come with a high cost in terms of harm. Herd immunity through natural infections might well be an appropriate way of dealing with a disease if tranmissibility and severity are relatively low.
In the case of COVID-19 the transmissiblity and severity are both relatively high, compared to other common diseases. Once we realised quite how high, from Italian data, and those parameters were used in the modelling by Imperial College we saw that herd immunity through natural infection would come at a very high cost, the NHS would be overwhelmed within weeks and a death toll of 500,000 was plausible. That put an end to allowing herd immunity to develop through infection, even with shielding of the most vulnerable people the cost would have been huge.
I don't see any plausible scenario where the UK could have avoided lockdown, given what we know about COVID-19 if we didn't have vaccines or treatments only NPIs are left and lockdown does work. Anyone suggesting there was a way of avoiding lockdown is going to have to produce some very convincing evidence.
The way of avoiding lockdown would have been to seal the borders. However (unlike the Australians) we're not prepared to do that. Dr John Campbell suggests that stopping all international air travel for a period of a few weeks in January would have stopped it in its tracks.
It would also have left literally millions of Brits trapped all over the world with little or no means to support themselves. It could never in reality have been a policy of first resort, however much it might theoretically have worked.
But allowing even more to go abroad was madness.
Indeed - but remember international travel to and from the UK is not just Brits. If shutting down inbound international flights traps millions of Brits abroad, shutting down outgoing ones also traps millions of non-Brits here...
Now you can argue for a policy on paper whereby non Brits can leave, but Brits can't - but good luck putting that together in a few days. Stopping flights full stop you can do. Stopping flights to a subset of individuals, that's a serious administrative task to put together in a few days.
And on the back of a threat that wasn't particularly understood, or at the time seeming particularly to be concerning to the public? Even when the scenes were emerging out of Bergamo, large numbers of people were buying into the idea that Italians were overwhelming their hospitals just because they had big families and were very touchy feely.
Sure but they were still allowing package holiday flights plus the infamous football flights to Liverpool.
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
Ms Patel is a most infuriating politician. I have a sneaking regard for her, despite everything. She is often awful. But every so often she has the right instincts and tries to do the right thing. For instance, she is now consulting Sir Richard Henriques, the judge, who wrote the excoriating report on what the police got wrong in Operation Midland, on what needs to be done to put matters right.
I hope she overcomes resistance from the Home Office and the police on this. The police need their arses kicked - and hard - on this.
I'm not a great fan of the Home Secretary but much of the flak directed her way seems personally rather than politically offensive: she is too short to see over the lectern; she drops her g's; her backside is too broad. Her critics play the woman, not the ball.
Ms Patel is hated because she has strayed off the left's plantation.
People of Asian descent are to be represented, and have their ambitions interpreted, exclusively by white middle class daughters of university lecturers or other senior public sector role occupiers.
Weirdly, Rishi doesn’t get the same treatment. Ergo; your theory is bollocks.
Patel is hated because she’s a nasty piece of work.
So Priti Patel wasn't challenged on the Daniel Morgan report in spite of his family's public statement. I presume that was a precondition of her agreeing to be interviewed.
Cyclefree - perhaps. But remember it was Labour's Tom Watson who really went after that issue and the targets of the police investigation were the rich and powerful. Not quite sure what that means for Priti's 'values.'
He really went after the *Conservative politicians* who were named by that lying idiot.
Strangely, although a member of the Labour Shadow Cabinet was allegedly also implicated and interviewed, that name has never been released, and the one report on it (in the Independent, FWIW) was taken down. Possibly they were told it wasn’t correct. But that didn’t stop Watson naming everyone else, all of whom appear to have been completely innocent.
Afaik he’s never apologised either.
It was party politics at its most brutal, and thoroughly unedifying. One of the more uncomfortable and concerning things among many in Labour’s antisemitism scandal was that it was so bad even Watson couldn’t stomach it. But truthfully he’s no loss to public life.
In passing, have you seen this? (just in case you have missed it)
The government wanted to avoid a 'swamped NHS' scenario in which 500,000 would die by following a 'squash the sombrero' strategy in which 400,000 would die.
And then someone realised that 400,000 is a rather large number. Mind, so is 150,000. Slightly higher than the 20,000 they wanted to be judged against.
Johnson's lying is often "just" a consequence of laziness and failure to seriously engage with the details (when he needs to - micromanagement leads to other issues of course) in favour of simple crowd pleasing solutions.
And often he just flat out lies.
"I paid for the wallpaper", as an example
Is there proof that he didn't pay and even if he didn't it did not cost the taxpayer a penny. Wallpapergate did for Labour in the by and local elections...
Yes it did, what was spent was on top of the annual £30,000 taxpayer funded allowance for Downing Street improvement.
That's splitting hairs. The Pm is entitled to spend 30k a year on refurbishment. The wallpaper cost the taxpayer nothing
I think you have missed the point being made. But let's assume for a moment, you haven't, therein lies a bigger issue. Who paid for the £200,000 wallpaper, either directly, or indirectly, and what did they expect in return?
Let's move back to the real world. The wallpaper did not cost 200k...
You've forgotten about the curtains too.
In all fairness, removal of Mrs May's John Lewis beige decor was worth every penny. My point is who paid for it and why?
Wallpaper-gate ... It is just bemusing that you are so interested in it.
After all ... Llafur spent £ 52 m on an airport which is virtually worthless. Dodgy Dave would have made £ 21 m on Greensill share options (lovely paean in the header, BTW). That is corruption. And we are talking about wallpaper and Theresa May's curtains !
Are you the kind of person who asks the window-cleaner for a receipt? Or sits in the forecourt of a Motorway Service station on a folding fishing chair with your own Thermoses, cheese sandwich and digestives.?
Wallpaper-gate seems to betray a complete lack of perspective on the part of its small but very dedicated band of followers.
Sure, let's make sure public money is spent wisely, and let's start with some huge-ticket items.
I don't dispute the airport was a waste of taxpayers money. Pies anyone?
£52m is a similar amount to the cost to the public purse of the garden bridge. And in fairness, although few planes might fly out of Rhoose, the airport does in fact exist.
It is true the Rhoose airport exists. That means it is continuing to cost public money. An additional £ 42 million loan was written off in Mar 2021. And more bills to come.
The Garden Bridge does not exist. Thankfully. Because that means it is not continuing to cost money.
I guess what surprises me is there is a huge example of corruption and mismanagement on your doorstep in Rhoose, but you seem completely uninterested in it, yet absolutely fascinated by the minutae of wall-paper in No 10. Still, each to their own.
In any case, the Daily Merkle has moved on from Wallpaper-gate, and we have now reached Takeway-gate. Rich donors are buying posh takeaway nosh for Boris and Carrie. Gasp-ee. Gosh-o.
What next?
Surely, Toilet paper-gate. Rich billionaires are buying ultra-soft gold-leaf toilet paper for the ample Johnson posterior.
Surely this nonsense is being leaked to the Mail by Johnson strategists.
It is at level of celebrity tittle-tattle. It is designed to leave us with the impression that Johnson is a celebrity, and should be judged not on his politics but on his ability to keep us entertained with his clownish antics.
If my tax pounds are being wasted on an airport, which I use or Johnson's curtains which I don't, the key word is "waste". I want my taxes to be spent wisely irrespective of party stripe.
And Johnson's paid for indulgences do worry me. It is not about gold wallpaper, it is more what it tells us about how he and his government roll, with my taxes and my vote
I understand that, and I feel the same way.
I am pointing out that Greensill or the purchase of Rhoose airport have received rather little attention ... compared to Wallpaper-gate.
And I am asking why.
And I am pointing that there are benefits to keeping everyone distracted by trivia.
Why is the Cardiff airport a white elephant? It’s not as if South Wales doesn’t have a big enough population to support a medium sized airport.
Not a white elephant but unclear why the welsh government paid the amount they did for it.
Agreed. It is not necessarily a white elephant.
At about the same time, the Scottish Government paid £1 for Prestwick Airport. A similar kind of airport, with similar problems & similar liabilities.
It just shows how good the Scottish Government is compared to the God-awful Welsh one.
By contrast, the Welsh Government paid £52 m for Rhoose Airport. It is always been unclear as to how the lacklustre Rhoose airport was actually valued at such a substantial amount.
Since then, the Welsh Government has made repeated "loans" to the airport to keep it running (the "loans" subsequently get written off). For example, in March 2021, the Welsh Government wrote off £42.6m & gave the airport another £42.6m.
It is true that owning an airport in a pandemic is a bad move. But Cardiff airport was always going to face huge competition from Bristol airport, and there are very few airline companies that fly from Rhoose. Ryanair does a handful of destinations in Spain. It basically needs an excellent business plan to be profitable -- not something ministers in the Welsh Government know much about.
The Welsh Government also had to purchase land (again, allegedly from people closely connected to Llafur) to improve road access to the airport.
The reason why it got mentioned is all this dodginess is taking place right on @MexicanPete's doorstep in the Vale of Glamorgan.
On topic. I wonder what the equivalent thread header 50 years ago would have said? The Liberals reduced to 6 MPs, the nearest to London being Montgomeryshire, and 3 of those (Thorpe, Steel, Pardoe) having 3-digit majorities. Do they have a future at all?
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
Ms Patel is a most infuriating politician. I have a sneaking regard for her, despite everything. She is often awful. But every so often she has the right instincts and tries to do the right thing. For instance, she is now consulting Sir Richard Henriques, the judge, who wrote the excoriating report on what the police got wrong in Operation Midland, on what needs to be done to put matters right.
I hope she overcomes resistance from the Home Office and the police on this. The police need their arses kicked - and hard - on this.
I'm not a great fan of the Home Secretary but much of the flak directed her way seems personally rather than politically offensive: she is too short to see over the lectern; she drops her g's; her backside is too broad. Her critics play the woman, not the ball.
That happens to all women in politics, in any public position. And to Asian women too for not fitting into an assumed template of what they must think.
There is plenty to criticise her for on substance. But on this issue she is right, if the press report is correct. I hope she gives the police the kicking they deserve.
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
Ms Patel is a most infuriating politician. I have a sneaking regard for her, despite everything. She is often awful. But every so often she has the right instincts and tries to do the right thing. For instance, she is now consulting Sir Richard Henriques, the judge, who wrote the excoriating report on what the police got wrong in Operation Midland, on what needs to be done to put matters right.
I hope she overcomes resistance from the Home Office and the police on this. The police need their arses kicked - and hard - on this.
I'm not a great fan of the Home Secretary but much of the flak directed her way seems personally rather than politically offensive: she is too short to see over the lectern; she drops her g's; her backside is too broad. Her critics play the woman, not the ball.
Ms Patel is hated because she has strayed off the left's plantation.
People of Asian descent are to be represented, and have their ambitions interpreted, exclusively by white middle class daughters of university lecturers or other senior public sector role occupiers.
That is not key here, even if were true. The Home Secretary is also sneered at by the right, even on PB. Remembering the civil service report, and without checking, one suspects Priti Patel is guilty of not going to Oxford, and is unable to understand classical allusions and make puns in Latin and Greek.
So Priti Patel wasn't challenged on the Daniel Morgan report in spite of his family's public statement. I presume that was a precondition of her agreeing to be interviewed.
Cyclefree - perhaps. But remember it was Labour's Tom Watson who really went after that issue and the targets of the police investigation were the rich and powerful. Not quite sure what that means for Priti's 'values.'
Tom Watson was part of the problem not the solution. His actions led to injustice. His grandstanding and pushing of Exaro was utterly reprehensible. He gave cover for the police to behave in ways which were at worst illegal, at best utterly unprofessional.
Priti Patel is wrong to hold back the Morgan report.
But the police acted appallingly over Midland. The IOPC also behaved appallingly. The Henriques Report needs to be implemented not ignored and if she makes sure it is then I will cheer that.
The lack of professionalism in the police has been a menace for years. It is an Augean Stable which needs clearing out. A start needs to be made somewhere. If Labour had even the ghost of an instinct on how to do politics it would be focusing on this not bloody wallpaper. But it isn't so it will have to be Priti.
And don't worry I will hold her feet to the fire on this if she doesn't.
Watson wasn't part of the problem. He was the problem.
Of course herd immunity was the plan, why the fuck was literally ever upilitocal hack going "herd immunity is the best plan ever, only an idiot would lockdown, 60% to get covid by then end of autumn is definetly the smart thing to do you plebs".
We had threads upon threads discussing it here before the handbrake abrupt about turn and the columnists sudden memory holing.
The irony is of course that the loudest advocate for first herd immunity and then locking down, denying he had ever said the first, was (checks notes) Dominic Cummings.
The Guardian article suggests he has evidence to the contrary?
He never has evidence. He just makes shit up. His ‘evidence’ will be ‘I’m saying it so it must be true.’
And we all know of course that he’s a thoroughly untrustworthy liar.
There is a difference between Gove-Cummings and Johnson, though.
Johnson does just make stuff up. Generally on the basis of "what does my current audience want to hear?"
G-C usually have some sort of factual basis, and lots of footnotes. It's just that their sources get twisted out of all recognition in support of the conclusion they've already reached.
Though choosing between the approaches is like choosing which painful disease you want to get.
(On the substantive point, DC is going to need more than this to significantly harm BoJo.)
Johnson's lying is often "just" a consequence of laziness and failure to seriously engage with the details (when he needs to - micromanagement leads to other issues of course) in favour of simple crowd pleasing solutions.
No it is down to fact that he is just a liar and a fraud.
Are there examples from Continental European politics of a minor party in a coalition doing relatively well compared to the major party in a coalition? Obviously, in most circumstances, a party of government eventually gets hammered as being held responsible for the discontents of the society of the day, but in the examples I am aware of (mostly in Ireland) the smaller party in a coalition appears fated to suffer out of proportion to their ability to achieve a different outcome.
I do think you can make the case that the Lib Dem's handling of tuition fees was one of the two* greatest acts of electoral self-harm in British politics in the post-war** period, but equally I think there's a case to be made that, in our political culture, it's an inevitable price that would be paid by a junior coalition partner, who are likely to have to make the greatest compromises, and have the most contrary voters least willing to accept compromises.
* No prizes for identifying the other. ** Is there any accepted way to break up what is now becoming a very long period into meaningfully distinct periods?
It was not inevitable that Nick Clegg should cave on tuition fees, thus committing, as you say, "one of the two greatest acts of electoral self-harm in British politics in the post-war period". Prima facie, since putting up tuition fees was not a crucial part of the Conservative programme – in fact, they'd pledged to abolish fees completely just five years earlier – this would not have been crucial to negotiations.
More importantly, we know that Nick Clegg was advised against reneging on his party's tuition fees pledge by none other than George Osborne.
Nick Clegg screwed LibDem voters and the LibDem Party and he did it for no readily apparent reason. He's not even Russian!
Are there examples from Continental European politics of a minor party in a coalition doing relatively well compared to the major party in a coalition? Obviously, in most circumstances, a party of government eventually gets hammered as being held responsible for the discontents of the society of the day, but in the examples I am aware of (mostly in Ireland) the smaller party in a coalition appears fated to suffer out of proportion to their ability to achieve a different outcome.
I do think you can make the case that the Lib Dem's handling of tuition fees was one of the two* greatest acts of electoral self-harm in British politics in the post-war** period, but equally I think there's a case to be made that, in our political culture, it's an inevitable price that would be paid by a junior coalition partner, who are likely to have to make the greatest compromises, and have the most contrary voters least willing to accept compromises.
* No prizes for identifying the other. ** Is there any accepted way to break up what is now becoming a very long period into meaningfully distinct periods?
It was not inevitable that Nick Clegg should cave on tuition fees, thus committing, as you say, "one of the two greatest acts of electoral self-harm in British politics in the post-war period". Prima facie, since putting up tuition fees was not a crucial part of the Conservative programme – in fact, they'd pledged to abolish fees completely just five years earlier – this would not have been crucial to negotiations.
More importantly, we know that Nick Clegg was advised against reneging on his party's tuition fees pledge by none other than George Osborne.
Nick Clegg screwed LibDem voters and the LibDem Party and he did it for no readily apparent reason. He's not even Russian!
The measure of the man was clear when he admitted to drunken arson of a collection of cacti.
Are there examples from Continental European politics of a minor party in a coalition doing relatively well compared to the major party in a coalition? Obviously, in most circumstances, a party of government eventually gets hammered as being held responsible for the discontents of the society of the day, but in the examples I am aware of (mostly in Ireland) the smaller party in a coalition appears fated to suffer out of proportion to their ability to achieve a different outcome.
I do think you can make the case that the Lib Dem's handling of tuition fees was one of the two* greatest acts of electoral self-harm in British politics in the post-war** period, but equally I think there's a case to be made that, in our political culture, it's an inevitable price that would be paid by a junior coalition partner, who are likely to have to make the greatest compromises, and have the most contrary voters least willing to accept compromises.
* No prizes for identifying the other. ** Is there any accepted way to break up what is now becoming a very long period into meaningfully distinct periods?
It was not inevitable that Nick Clegg should cave on tuition fees, thus committing, as you say, "one of the two greatest acts of electoral self-harm in British politics in the post-war period". Prima facie, since putting up tuition fees was not a crucial part of the Conservative programme – in fact, they'd pledged to abolish fees completely just five years earlier – this would not have been crucial to negotiations.
More importantly, we know that Nick Clegg was advised against reneging on his party's tuition fees pledge by none other than George Osborne.
Nick Clegg screwed LibDem voters and the LibDem Party and he did it for no readily apparent reason. He's not even Russian!
I think there was an element in which Clegg saw the tuition fees policy as an opportunity to demonstrate that the LibDems were now a serious party of Government, prepared to take the hard but unpopular decisions in the national interest. And that was why they didn't just go along with the policy, but actually had their implementation led by one of the LibDem cabinet ministers (Vince Cable, I think). Whereas the other unpopular measures around budget cuts etc were priced in by the general economic situation and could be ridden out to some extent, he actually saw this as something which the party could own as its own.
And i also think they underestimated the response to the policy - thinking it would actually be popular. Because it was a sort of graduate tax, linked explicitly to ability to pay, and incorporate (i believe) a new system of grants for the poorest students. Needless to say they got that wrong (but also - and this is my main criticism of the policy ie. the extent to which it would be exploited by universities and property developers - a failure which has come home to roost during the pandemic when it has become apparent quite how dependent universities have become on the income stream from accommodation which was a corollary of the new loans system).
So Priti Patel wasn't challenged on the Daniel Morgan report in spite of his family's public statement. I presume that was a precondition of her agreeing to be interviewed.
Cyclefree - perhaps. But remember it was Labour's Tom Watson who really went after that issue and the targets of the police investigation were the rich and powerful. Not quite sure what that means for Priti's 'values.'
He really went after the *Conservative politicians* who were named by that lying idiot.
Strangely, although a member of the Labour Shadow Cabinet was allegedly also implicated and interviewed, that name has never been released, and the one report on it (in the Independent, FWIW) was taken down. Possibly they were told it wasn’t correct. But that didn’t stop Watson naming everyone else, all of whom appear to have been completely innocent.
Afaik he’s never apologised either.
It was party politics at its most brutal, and thoroughly unedifying. One of the more uncomfortable and concerning things among many in Labour’s antisemitism scandal was that it was so bad even Watson couldn’t stomach it. But truthfully he’s no loss to public life.
In passing, have you seen this? (just in case you have missed it)
I hadn’t seen it, thank you. There is one school in Bedford (surprisingly) that’s had to go back to remote learning over this.
As it happens, I’m torn. I never thought masks were any bloody use in the first place, while the severe negative impact they had on learning, child welfare and classroom control meant that they were always a very, very bad idea.
One thing I will say though is that in a sense that data is almost irrelevant for two reasons:
1) If it was spreading fast despite masks that merely proves they were pointless to start and therefore there was no reason to keep them and
2) However fast this variant is spreading in schools it’s making no difference to the fatalities and hospitalisations which is all we should really be worried about.
At the same time, the government shouldn’t really be suppressing data, as they did when Gibb infamously claimed just 0.2% of schoolchildren had Covid (the figure was actually 4.2%). But I’m not going to say it’s made an enormous difference here.
The danger was much less known back in March 2020.
According to China less than 3k had died from covid at the beginning of March.
In Italy a couple of dozen, in Spain zero.
The first reported death in the UK was only on the 6th March.
By the 12th of March (when Boris had the wash your hands but absolutely no restrictions to be put in place press conference) a thousand had died in Italy. By the 16th when the first tentative restrictions were put in place in the UK Italy had had over 2000 deaths. By the 23rd Italy had had 6000 deaths.
And how many deaths had the UK on those dates ?
Think back to what we were saying on PB at that time - Catholic Mass was believed to be a major spreader as was Italian multi-generational homes (that was likely true) while air pollution in Lombardy was studied in detail.
There needs to be a sense of threat for behavioural attitudes to change.
Even when Boris told people not to go to pubs there were PBers subsequently going to pubs.
Errr, you were saying Italy had had a couple of dozen deaths. Off by a couple of orders of magnitude.
Johnson's lying is often "just" a consequence of laziness and failure to seriously engage with the details (when he needs to - micromanagement leads to other issues of course) in favour of simple crowd pleasing solutions.
And often he just flat out lies.
"I paid for the wallpaper", as an example
Is there proof that he didn't pay and even if he didn't it did not cost the taxpayer a penny. Wallpapergate did for Labour in the by and local elections...
Yes it did, what was spent was on top of the annual £30,000 taxpayer funded allowance for Downing Street improvement.
That's splitting hairs. The Pm is entitled to spend 30k a year on refurbishment. The wallpaper cost the taxpayer nothing
I think you have missed the point being made. But let's assume for a moment, you haven't, therein lies a bigger issue. Who paid for the £200,000 wallpaper, either directly, or indirectly, and what did they expect in return?
Let's move back to the real world. The wallpaper did not cost 200k...
You've forgotten about the curtains too.
In all fairness, removal of Mrs May's John Lewis beige decor was worth every penny. My point is who paid for it and why?
Wallpaper-gate ... It is just bemusing that you are so interested in it.
After all ... Llafur spent £ 52 m on an airport which is virtually worthless. Dodgy Dave would have made £ 21 m on Greensill share options (lovely paean in the header, BTW). That is corruption. And we are talking about wallpaper and Theresa May's curtains !
Are you the kind of person who asks the window-cleaner for a receipt? Or sits in the forecourt of a Motorway Service station on a folding fishing chair with your own Thermoses, cheese sandwich and digestives.?
Wallpaper-gate seems to betray a complete lack of perspective on the part of its small but very dedicated band of followers.
Sure, let's make sure public money is spent wisely, and let's start with some huge-ticket items.
I don't dispute the airport was a waste of taxpayers money. Pies anyone?
£52m is a similar amount to the cost to the public purse of the garden bridge. And in fairness, although few planes might fly out of Rhoose, the airport does in fact exist.
It is true the Rhoose airport exists. That means it is continuing to cost public money. An additional £ 42 million loan was written off in Mar 2021. And more bills to come.
The Garden Bridge does not exist. Thankfully. Because that means it is not continuing to cost money.
I guess what surprises me is there is a huge example of corruption and mismanagement on your doorstep in Rhoose, but you seem completely uninterested in it, yet absolutely fascinated by the minutae of wall-paper in No 10. Still, each to their own.
In any case, the Daily Merkle has moved on from Wallpaper-gate, and we have now reached Takeway-gate. Rich donors are buying posh takeaway nosh for Boris and Carrie. Gasp-ee. Gosh-o.
What next?
Surely, Toilet paper-gate. Rich billionaires are buying ultra-soft gold-leaf toilet paper for the ample Johnson posterior.
Surely this nonsense is being leaked to the Mail by Johnson strategists.
It is at level of celebrity tittle-tattle. It is designed to leave us with the impression that Johnson is a celebrity, and should be judged not on his politics but on his ability to keep us entertained with his clownish antics.
If my tax pounds are being wasted on an airport, which I use or Johnson's curtains which I don't, the key word is "waste". I want my taxes to be spent wisely irrespective of party stripe.
And Johnson's paid for indulgences do worry me. It is not about gold wallpaper, it is more what it tells us about how he and his government roll, with my taxes and my vote
I understand that, and I feel the same way.
I am pointing out that Greensill or the purchase of Rhoose airport have received rather little attention ... compared to Wallpaper-gate.
And I am asking why.
And I am pointing that there are benefits to keeping everyone distracted by trivia.
Why is the Cardiff airport a white elephant? It’s not as if South Wales doesn’t have a big enough population to support a medium sized airport.
Not a white elephant but unclear why the welsh government paid the amount they did for it.
Agreed. It is not necessarily a white elephant.
At about the same time, the Scottish Government paid £1 for Prestwick Airport. A similar kind of airport, with similar problems & similar liabilities.
It just shows how good the Scottish Government is compared to the God-awful Welsh one.
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
Ms Patel is a most infuriating politician. I have a sneaking regard for her, despite everything. She is often awful. But every so often she has the right instincts and tries to do the right thing. For instance, she is now consulting Sir Richard Henriques, the judge, who wrote the excoriating report on what the police got wrong in Operation Midland, on what needs to be done to put matters right.
I hope she overcomes resistance from the Home Office and the police on this. The police need their arses kicked - and hard - on this.
I'm not a great fan of the Home Secretary but much of the flak directed her way seems personally rather than politically offensive: she is too short to see over the lectern; she drops her g's; her backside is too broad. Her critics play the woman, not the ball.
Ms Patel is hated because she has strayed off the left's plantation.
People of Asian descent are to be represented, and have their ambitions interpreted, exclusively by white middle class daughters of university lecturers or other senior public sector role occupiers.
Weirdly, Rishi doesn’t get the same treatment. Ergo; your theory is bollocks.
Patel is hated because she’s a nasty piece of work.
He absolutely has been....it has been called an uncle tom and no idea what it is really like to be an ethnic minority as he isn't a proper asian. Same with the likes of javid and Badenoch
Rishi Sunak ‘looks like Prince Charles in brownface’, says BBC guest sparking race row
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
Ms Patel is a most infuriating politician. I have a sneaking regard for her, despite everything. She is often awful. But every so often she has the right instincts and tries to do the right thing. For instance, she is now consulting Sir Richard Henriques, the judge, who wrote the excoriating report on what the police got wrong in Operation Midland, on what needs to be done to put matters right.
I hope she overcomes resistance from the Home Office and the police on this. The police need their arses kicked - and hard - on this.
I'm not a great fan of the Home Secretary but much of the flak directed her way seems personally rather than politically offensive: she is too short to see over the lectern; she drops her g's; her backside is too broad. Her critics play the woman, not the ball.
Ms Patel is hated because she has strayed off the left's plantation.
People of Asian descent are to be represented, and have their ambitions interpreted, exclusively by white middle class daughters of university lecturers or other senior public sector role occupiers.
That is not key here, even if were true. The Home Secretary is also sneered at by the right, even on PB. Remembering the civil service report, and without checking, one suspects Priti Patel is guilty of not going to Oxford, and is unable to understand classical allusions and make puns in Latin and Greek.
PLenty of Oxford graduates can't understand classical allusions those days. The University stopped demanding a Latin O level as a basic entrance qualification *checks* in 1960. The scientists at least have moved on since the days of Roger Bacon when it was the routine language of Philosophia Naturalis.
Are there examples from Continental European politics of a minor party in a coalition doing relatively well compared to the major party in a coalition? Obviously, in most circumstances, a party of government eventually gets hammered as being held responsible for the discontents of the society of the day, but in the examples I am aware of (mostly in Ireland) the smaller party in a coalition appears fated to suffer out of proportion to their ability to achieve a different outcome.
I do think you can make the case that the Lib Dem's handling of tuition fees was one of the two* greatest acts of electoral self-harm in British politics in the post-war** period, but equally I think there's a case to be made that, in our political culture, it's an inevitable price that would be paid by a junior coalition partner, who are likely to have to make the greatest compromises, and have the most contrary voters least willing to accept compromises.
* No prizes for identifying the other. ** Is there any accepted way to break up what is now becoming a very long period into meaningfully distinct periods?
It was not inevitable that Nick Clegg should cave on tuition fees, thus committing, as you say, "one of the two greatest acts of electoral self-harm in British politics in the post-war period". Prima facie, since putting up tuition fees was not a crucial part of the Conservative programme – in fact, they'd pledged to abolish fees completely just five years earlier – this would not have been crucial to negotiations.
More importantly, we know that Nick Clegg was advised against reneging on his party's tuition fees pledge by none other than George Osborne.
Nick Clegg screwed LibDem voters and the LibDem Party and he did it for no readily apparent reason. He's not even Russian!
Yes, it's a strong case, but I wonder whether we are making a mistake in concentrating on the specific form that the Lib Dem's fall from grace as a junior coalition partner took. If it hadn't been tuition fees, perhaps it would have been something else?
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
Ms Patel is a most infuriating politician. I have a sneaking regard for her, despite everything. She is often awful. But every so often she has the right instincts and tries to do the right thing. For instance, she is now consulting Sir Richard Henriques, the judge, who wrote the excoriating report on what the police got wrong in Operation Midland, on what needs to be done to put matters right.
I hope she overcomes resistance from the Home Office and the police on this. The police need their arses kicked - and hard - on this.
I'm not a great fan of the Home Secretary but much of the flak directed her way seems personally rather than politically offensive: she is too short to see over the lectern; she drops her g's; her backside is too broad. Her critics play the woman, not the ball.
Ms Patel is hated because she has strayed off the left's plantation.
People of Asian descent are to be represented, and have their ambitions interpreted, exclusively by white middle class daughters of university lecturers or other senior public sector role occupiers.
Weirdly, Rishi doesn’t get the same treatment. Ergo; your theory is bollocks.
Patel is hated because she’s a nasty piece of work.
He absolutely has been....it has been called an uncle tom and no idea what it is really like to be an ethnic minority as he isn't a proper asian. Same with the likes of javid and Badenoch
Rishi Sunak ‘looks like Prince Charles in brownface’, says BBC guest sparking race row
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
Ms Patel is a most infuriating politician. I have a sneaking regard for her, despite everything. She is often awful. But every so often she has the right instincts and tries to do the right thing. For instance, she is now consulting Sir Richard Henriques, the judge, who wrote the excoriating report on what the police got wrong in Operation Midland, on what needs to be done to put matters right.
I hope she overcomes resistance from the Home Office and the police on this. The police need their arses kicked - and hard - on this.
I'm not a great fan of the Home Secretary but much of the flak directed her way seems personally rather than politically offensive: she is too short to see over the lectern; she drops her g's; her backside is too broad. Her critics play the woman, not the ball.
Ms Patel is hated because she has strayed off the left's plantation.
People of Asian descent are to be represented, and have their ambitions interpreted, exclusively by white middle class daughters of university lecturers or other senior public sector role occupiers.
Weirdly, Rishi doesn’t get the same treatment. Ergo; your theory is bollocks.
Patel is hated because she’s a nasty piece of work.
He absolutely has been....it has been called an uncle tom and no idea what it is really like to be an ethnic minority as he isn't a proper asian. Same with the likes of javid and Badenoch
Rishi Sunak ‘looks like Prince Charles in brownface’, says BBC guest sparking race row
There’s a certain section of the commentariat, who really dislike conservatives from ethnic minority backgrounds. It’s lazy racism, and needs to be called out as such.
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
Ms Patel is a most infuriating politician. I have a sneaking regard for her, despite everything. She is often awful. But every so often she has the right instincts and tries to do the right thing. For instance, she is now consulting Sir Richard Henriques, the judge, who wrote the excoriating report on what the police got wrong in Operation Midland, on what needs to be done to put matters right.
I hope she overcomes resistance from the Home Office and the police on this. The police need their arses kicked - and hard - on this.
I'm not a great fan of the Home Secretary but much of the flak directed her way seems personally rather than politically offensive: she is too short to see over the lectern; she drops her g's; her backside is too broad. Her critics play the woman, not the ball.
Ms Patel is hated because she has strayed off the left's plantation.
People of Asian descent are to be represented, and have their ambitions interpreted, exclusively by white middle class daughters of university lecturers or other senior public sector role occupiers.
That is not key here, even if were true. The Home Secretary is also sneered at by the right, even on PB. Remembering the civil service report, and without checking, one suspects Priti Patel is guilty of not going to Oxford, and is unable to understand classical allusions and make puns in Latin and Greek.
For me Ms Patel is not the sharpest tool in the box. Those around her who do not share her convictions clearly find it easy to frustrate her ambitions because she is not the sharpest tool in the box.
The civil servants of the great and blessed lady Thatcher (PBUH) found their attempts to frustrate her destroyed by the fact the blessed lady had an incredible grasp of detail and an indefatigable energy. Their reports would be covered in red (or was it green?) pen.
The danger was much less known back in March 2020.
According to China less than 3k had died from covid at the beginning of March.
In Italy a couple of dozen, in Spain zero.
The first reported death in the UK was only on the 6th March.
By the 12th of March (when Boris had the wash your hands but absolutely no restrictions to be put in place press conference) a thousand had died in Italy. By the 16th when the first tentative restrictions were put in place in the UK Italy had had over 2000 deaths. By the 23rd Italy had had 6000 deaths.
And how many deaths had the UK on those dates ?
Think back to what we were saying on PB at that time - Catholic Mass was believed to be a major spreader as was Italian multi-generational homes (that was likely true) while air pollution in Lombardy was studied in detail.
There needs to be a sense of threat for behavioural attitudes to change.
Even when Boris told people not to go to pubs there were PBers subsequently going to pubs.
Errr, you were saying Italy had had a couple of dozen deaths. Off by a couple of orders of magnitude.
I said that Italy had a couple of dozen deaths at the beginning of March.
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
Ms Patel is a most infuriating politician. I have a sneaking regard for her, despite everything. She is often awful. But every so often she has the right instincts and tries to do the right thing. For instance, she is now consulting Sir Richard Henriques, the judge, who wrote the excoriating report on what the police got wrong in Operation Midland, on what needs to be done to put matters right.
I hope she overcomes resistance from the Home Office and the police on this. The police need their arses kicked - and hard - on this.
I'm not a great fan of the Home Secretary but much of the flak directed her way seems personally rather than politically offensive: she is too short to see over the lectern; she drops her g's; her backside is too broad. Her critics play the woman, not the ball.
I've said before that I'm one of her constituents and that while I find many of her policies repellent, face to face, she's very pleasant indeed. And I don't know whether she thinks, misguidedly, that I vote for her, but whenever I do write to her (and I don't bang off letters to my MP every hour on the hour as some appear to do) I get a reply with a little hand-written 'with good wishes', or similar over her signature. Furthermore, she 'doesn't take a good photograph'; she's much better looking than often appears. I totally agree that she shouldn't mess about with the Morgan report. High time a light was shined into that.
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
Ms Patel is a most infuriating politician. I have a sneaking regard for her, despite everything. She is often awful. But every so often she has the right instincts and tries to do the right thing. For instance, she is now consulting Sir Richard Henriques, the judge, who wrote the excoriating report on what the police got wrong in Operation Midland, on what needs to be done to put matters right.
I hope she overcomes resistance from the Home Office and the police on this. The police need their arses kicked - and hard - on this.
I'm not a great fan of the Home Secretary but much of the flak directed her way seems personally rather than politically offensive: she is too short to see over the lectern; she drops her g's; her backside is too broad. Her critics play the woman, not the ball.
That happens to all women in politics, in any public position. And to Asian women too for not fitting into an assumed template of what they must think.
There is plenty to criticise her for on substance. But on this issue she is right, if the press report is correct. I hope she gives the police the kicking they deserve.
And, it's an unpleasant feature throughout history that women in positions of power have faced extremely personal, and often extremely scatalogical, abuse.
The danger was much less known back in March 2020.
According to China less than 3k had died from covid at the beginning of March.
In Italy a couple of dozen, in Spain zero.
The first reported death in the UK was only on the 6th March.
You should go back to the threads on PB in February then.
I stopped taking public transport that month, based on what I was reading about the virus in China and Italy.
And, I closed the office down one week before Boris did.
I stopped going into the House in late February. MPs were all still shaking hands. The place was still full of groups of foreign students.
It was obvious they had no idea what was about to smack them around the head with an enormo-haddock.
Indeed.
I also remember when Peston suggested we were following a “herd immunity” approach.
It was already very clear that any such approach would lead to tens of thousands of deaths.
I was shocked.
It seemed, and still seems to me, basic common sense to close the borders and lock down upon news of fatal new contagion.
Meanwhile, “Chief Nurse” Jenny Harries was smugly assuring us that, because unlike inferior tribes without the law, we follow “evidence-based science”, that we would not be needing masks thank you very much, but that we should be hand-washing vigorously to avoid those pesky fomites.
We'd all be a load less shocked or bothered by this if we accepted that the country has, Outlander-style, gone through some stones to an earlier time in our history, namely, the 18th century when this sort of grift, favours, politics as personal relationships and weird out-of-control advisors were normal and accepted.
Personally, I'm hoping for a fit, sexy and red-haired Laird to whisk me off to **** ** *********, ********* *** *********** ** the heather.
Oh and the Enlightenment would be nice too.
Heather is a bit scratchy. Hold out for a bed of sphagnum moss....
That's what his tartan will be for.
If I get a sexy Laird I will be deliriously past caring about scratchy heather........
Are there examples from Continental European politics of a minor party in a coalition doing relatively well compared to the major party in a coalition? Obviously, in most circumstances, a party of government eventually gets hammered as being held responsible for the discontents of the society of the day, but in the examples I am aware of (mostly in Ireland) the smaller party in a coalition appears fated to suffer out of proportion to their ability to achieve a different outcome.
I do think you can make the case that the Lib Dem's handling of tuition fees was one of the two* greatest acts of electoral self-harm in British politics in the post-war** period, but equally I think there's a case to be made that, in our political culture, it's an inevitable price that would be paid by a junior coalition partner, who are likely to have to make the greatest compromises, and have the most contrary voters least willing to accept compromises.
* No prizes for identifying the other. ** Is there any accepted way to break up what is now becoming a very long period into meaningfully distinct periods?
It was not inevitable that Nick Clegg should cave on tuition fees, thus committing, as you say, "one of the two greatest acts of electoral self-harm in British politics in the post-war period". Prima facie, since putting up tuition fees was not a crucial part of the Conservative programme – in fact, they'd pledged to abolish fees completely just five years earlier – this would not have been crucial to negotiations.
More importantly, we know that Nick Clegg was advised against reneging on his party's tuition fees pledge by none other than George Osborne.
Nick Clegg screwed LibDem voters and the LibDem Party and he did it for no readily apparent reason. He's not even Russian!
Yes, it's a strong case, but I wonder whether we are making a mistake in concentrating on the specific form that the Lib Dem's fall from grace as a junior coalition partner took. If it hadn't been tuition fees, perhaps it would have been something else?
Has anyone on this thread inquired whether the Labour-LD coalition in Scotland is another example of the junior partner getting the sharny end of the stick, to offer more evidence for TSE's thesis? With Mr Salmond instead of Mr Cameron? I'm too hazy on this period (around 2010) to express an opinion. And it depends which parliament/voting system you go for: they have 4 MPs and 4 MSPs from Scotland versus Labour's single MP and 31 MSPs - and in Holyrood [edit] anyway are the 5th party behind the Greens.
1. He junked the Lib Dem‘s PRINCIPAL policy in coalition.
2. He wasted capital promoting a national voting system (AV) that even PR proponents think is meh. (He should have insisted on PR in local govt instead).
3. He didn’t take the key portfolio, ie Home Secretary, or maybe less riskily, Justice, which would allow him to advance “low cost” but critical Liberal reform.
4. He was naively happy to stand right alongside the Tories until the end of the government, even while the Tories were briefing against the Lib Dems. He should have negotiated for the coalition proper to last just four years, with the last year seeing a supply and confidence agreement only from the Libs.
I'd agree on 1 2 and 3. I'd never considered 4. I think the initial agreement should have been for 2 or 3 years. The Lib Dems lost a lot of their bargaining power in pretty much guaranteeing Cameron 5 years from the start.
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
Ms Patel is a most infuriating politician. I have a sneaking regard for her, despite everything. She is often awful. But every so often she has the right instincts and tries to do the right thing. For instance, she is now consulting Sir Richard Henriques, the judge, who wrote the excoriating report on what the police got wrong in Operation Midland, on what needs to be done to put matters right.
I hope she overcomes resistance from the Home Office and the police on this. The police need their arses kicked - and hard - on this.
I'm not a great fan of the Home Secretary but much of the flak directed her way seems personally rather than politically offensive: she is too short to see over the lectern; she drops her g's; her backside is too broad. Her critics play the woman, not the ball.
Ms Patel is hated because she has strayed off the left's plantation.
People of Asian descent are to be represented, and have their ambitions interpreted, exclusively by white middle class daughters of university lecturers or other senior public sector role occupiers.
Weirdly, Rishi doesn’t get the same treatment. Ergo; your theory is bollocks.
Patel is hated because she’s a nasty piece of work.
He absolutely has been....it has been called an uncle tom and no idea what it is really like to be an ethnic minority as he isn't a proper asian. Same with the likes of javid and Badenoch
Rishi Sunak ‘looks like Prince Charles in brownface’, says BBC guest sparking race row
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
Ms Patel is a most infuriating politician. I have a sneaking regard for her, despite everything. She is often awful. But every so often she has the right instincts and tries to do the right thing. For instance, she is now consulting Sir Richard Henriques, the judge, who wrote the excoriating report on what the police got wrong in Operation Midland, on what needs to be done to put matters right.
I hope she overcomes resistance from the Home Office and the police on this. The police need their arses kicked - and hard - on this.
I'm not a great fan of the Home Secretary but much of the flak directed her way seems personally rather than politically offensive: she is too short to see over the lectern; she drops her g's; her backside is too broad. Her critics play the woman, not the ball.
Ms Patel is hated because she has strayed off the left's plantation.
People of Asian descent are to be represented, and have their ambitions interpreted, exclusively by white middle class daughters of university lecturers or other senior public sector role occupiers.
Weirdly, Rishi doesn’t get the same treatment. Ergo; your theory is bollocks.
Patel is hated because she’s a nasty piece of work.
He absolutely has been....it has been called an uncle tom and no idea what it is really like to be an ethnic minority as he isn't a proper asian. Same with the likes of javid and Badenoch
Rishi Sunak ‘looks like Prince Charles in brownface’, says BBC guest sparking race row
There’s a certain section of the commentariat, who really dislike conservatives from ethnic minority backgrounds. It’s lazy racism, and needs to be called out as such.
It is called out, by people like you, daily, and out of all proportion to said section of the commentariat.
I am unsure how this article could be written without even a passing reference to the dangers to the Lib Dems from the Green Party.
In Solihull, which had a Lib Dem MP elected in 2005 and 2010, the Lib Dems are now reduced to 3 seats on the council, whereas the Green Party now have 15 and are the main opposition to the Tories on 30.
Nick Clegg's idiotic management of the Lib Dems was just a further example of feckless strategic management to which the defeated Jo Swinson added the pure fantasy of her forthcoming premiership.
The danger was much less known back in March 2020.
According to China less than 3k had died from covid at the beginning of March.
In Italy a couple of dozen, in Spain zero.
The first reported death in the UK was only on the 6th March.
By the 12th of March (when Boris had the wash your hands but absolutely no restrictions to be put in place press conference) a thousand had died in Italy. By the 16th when the first tentative restrictions were put in place in the UK Italy had had over 2000 deaths. By the 23rd Italy had had 6000 deaths.
And how many deaths had the UK on those dates ?
Think back to what we were saying on PB at that time - Catholic Mass was believed to be a major spreader as was Italian multi-generational homes (that was likely true) while air pollution in Lombardy was studied in detail.
There needs to be a sense of threat for behavioural attitudes to change.
Even when Boris told people not to go to pubs there were PBers subsequently going to pubs.
Errr, you were saying Italy had had a couple of dozen deaths. Off by a couple of orders of magnitude.
I said that Italy had a couple of dozen deaths at the beginning of March.
Which is correct.
Which absolute demonstrates the "hindsight" nature of much of the criticism. Yes it didn't appear that bad at the beginning of March. Yes, within two weeks the situation in Italy was utterly transformed.
But most people in their working lives will look to put off difficult decisions by months if they can get away with it (and politicians aren't going to be any different). The Government in mid march was suddenly confronted with the need (with hindsight) to impose the biggest restriction on UK liberties in at least 80 years, arguably ever. With very little, if any, real understanding of the nature of the dangers they were confronted with.
It's hardly surprising they got it wrong. And in a scenario where even getting it wrong and realising the error within a week wasn't sufficient.
On topic. I wonder what the equivalent thread header 50 years ago would have said? The Liberals reduced to 6 MPs, the nearest to London being Montgomeryshire, and 3 of those (Thorpe, Steel, Pardoe) having 3-digit majorities. Do they have a future at all?
In the late 50's there was a a suggestion that Malta be incorporated into the UK, with 3 MP's at Westminster, and, IIRC, it was the Spectator which suggested that it wouldn't be long before Jeremy and his party were replaced by a trio of Maltese. At one stage the Libs were down to 5, having lost a seat at a by-election.
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
Ms Patel is a most infuriating politician. I have a sneaking regard for her, despite everything. She is often awful. But every so often she has the right instincts and tries to do the right thing. For instance, she is now consulting Sir Richard Henriques, the judge, who wrote the excoriating report on what the police got wrong in Operation Midland, on what needs to be done to put matters right.
I hope she overcomes resistance from the Home Office and the police on this. The police need their arses kicked - and hard - on this.
I'm not a great fan of the Home Secretary but much of the flak directed her way seems personally rather than politically offensive: she is too short to see over the lectern; she drops her g's; her backside is too broad. Her critics play the woman, not the ball.
Ms Patel is hated because she has strayed off the left's plantation.
People of Asian descent are to be represented, and have their ambitions interpreted, exclusively by white middle class daughters of university lecturers or other senior public sector role occupiers.
Weirdly, Rishi doesn’t get the same treatment. Ergo; your theory is bollocks.
Patel is hated because she’s a nasty piece of work.
He absolutely has been....it has been called an uncle tom and no idea what it is really like to be an ethnic minority as he isn't a proper asian. Same with the likes of javid and Badenoch
Rishi Sunak ‘looks like Prince Charles in brownface’, says BBC guest sparking race row
I am unsure how this article could be written without even a passing reference to the dangers to the Lib Dems from the Green Party.
In Solihull, which had a Lib Dem MP elected in 2005 and 2010, the Lib Dems are now reduced to 3 seats on the council, whereas the Green Party now have 15 and are the main opposition to the Tories on 30.
Nick Clegg's idiotic management of the Lib Dems was just a further example of feckless strategic management to which the defeated Jo Swinson added the pure fantasy of her forthcoming premiership.
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
Ms Patel is a most infuriating politician. I have a sneaking regard for her, despite everything. She is often awful. But every so often she has the right instincts and tries to do the right thing. For instance, she is now consulting Sir Richard Henriques, the judge, who wrote the excoriating report on what the police got wrong in Operation Midland, on what needs to be done to put matters right.
I hope she overcomes resistance from the Home Office and the police on this. The police need their arses kicked - and hard - on this.
I'm not a great fan of the Home Secretary but much of the flak directed her way seems personally rather than politically offensive: she is too short to see over the lectern; she drops her g's; her backside is too broad. Her critics play the woman, not the ball.
Ms Patel is hated because she has strayed off the left's plantation.
People of Asian descent are to be represented, and have their ambitions interpreted, exclusively by white middle class daughters of university lecturers or other senior public sector role occupiers.
Weirdly, Rishi doesn’t get the same treatment. Ergo; your theory is bollocks.
Patel is hated because she’s a nasty piece of work.
He absolutely has been....it has been called an uncle tom and no idea what it is really like to be an ethnic minority as he isn't a proper asian. Same with the likes of javid and Badenoch
Rishi Sunak ‘looks like Prince Charles in brownface’, says BBC guest sparking race row
1. He junked the Lib Dem‘s PRINCIPAL policy in coalition.
2. He wasted capital promoting a national voting system (AV) that even PR proponents think is meh. (He should have insisted on PR in local govt instead).
3. He didn’t take the key portfolio, ie Home Secretary, or maybe less riskily, Justice, which would allow him to advance “low cost” but critical Liberal reform.
4. He was naively happy to stand right alongside the Tories until the end of the government, even while the Tories were briefing against the Lib Dems. He should have negotiated for the coalition proper to last just four years, with the last year seeing a supply and confidence agreement only from the Libs.
I'd agree on 1 2 and 3. I'd never considered 4. I think the initial agreement should have been for 2 or 3 years. The Lib Dems lost a lot of their bargaining power in pretty much guaranteeing Cameron 5 years from the start.
The issue there was that Clegg wanted the Fixed Term Parliaments Act, to stop Cameron going to the country ‘early’. It’s difficult to reconcile that (in Cameron’s mind) with anything other than a five year commitment.
What the LDs should have done in 2015, is shouted from the rooftops about all the good things the coalition had achieved, and how they would be ready again if called upon to help form a government. Instead, they gave the impression of being ashamed of their time in government, and the electorate agreed.
1. He junked the Lib Dem‘s PRINCIPAL policy in coalition.
2. He wasted capital promoting a national voting system (AV) that even PR proponents think is meh. (He should have insisted on PR in local govt instead).
3. He didn’t take the key portfolio, ie Home Secretary, or maybe less riskily, Justice, which would allow him to advance “low cost” but critical Liberal reform.
4. He was naively happy to stand right alongside the Tories until the end of the government, even while the Tories were briefing against the Lib Dems. He should have negotiated for the coalition proper to last just four years, with the last year seeing a supply and confidence agreement only from the Libs.
I'd agree on 1 2 and 3. I'd never considered 4. I think the initial agreement should have been for 2 or 3 years. The Lib Dems lost a lot of their bargaining power in pretty much guaranteeing Cameron 5 years from the start.
Exactly. Roy Jenkins made his name as a 'liberal' Home Secretary.
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
Ms Patel is a most infuriating politician. I have a sneaking regard for her, despite everything. She is often awful. But every so often she has the right instincts and tries to do the right thing. For instance, she is now consulting Sir Richard Henriques, the judge, who wrote the excoriating report on what the police got wrong in Operation Midland, on what needs to be done to put matters right.
I hope she overcomes resistance from the Home Office and the police on this. The police need their arses kicked - and hard - on this.
I'm not a great fan of the Home Secretary but much of the flak directed her way seems personally rather than politically offensive: she is too short to see over the lectern; she drops her g's; her backside is too broad. Her critics play the woman, not the ball.
Ms Patel is hated because she has strayed off the left's plantation.
People of Asian descent are to be represented, and have their ambitions interpreted, exclusively by white middle class daughters of university lecturers or other senior public sector role occupiers.
Weirdly, Rishi doesn’t get the same treatment. Ergo; your theory is bollocks.
Patel is hated because she’s a nasty piece of work.
He absolutely has been....it has been called an uncle tom and no idea what it is really like to be an ethnic minority as he isn't a proper asian. Same with the likes of javid and Badenoch
Rishi Sunak ‘looks like Prince Charles in brownface’, says BBC guest sparking race row
There’s a certain section of the commentariat, who really dislike conservatives from ethnic minority backgrounds. It’s lazy racism, and needs to be called out as such.
The disgusting anti-semitic tropes from this week-end's pro Palestine marches show that we need a debate as to whether the authorities' attitude to racism in Britain is even handed or not.
The danger was much less known back in March 2020.
According to China less than 3k had died from covid at the beginning of March.
In Italy a couple of dozen, in Spain zero.
The first reported death in the UK was only on the 6th March.
By the 12th of March (when Boris had the wash your hands but absolutely no restrictions to be put in place press conference) a thousand had died in Italy. By the 16th when the first tentative restrictions were put in place in the UK Italy had had over 2000 deaths. By the 23rd Italy had had 6000 deaths.
And how many deaths had the UK on those dates ?
Think back to what we were saying on PB at that time - Catholic Mass was believed to be a major spreader as was Italian multi-generational homes (that was likely true) while air pollution in Lombardy was studied in detail.
There needs to be a sense of threat for behavioural attitudes to change.
Even when Boris told people not to go to pubs there were PBers subsequently going to pubs.
Errr, you were saying Italy had had a couple of dozen deaths. Off by a couple of orders of magnitude.
I said that Italy had a couple of dozen deaths at the beginning of March.
Which is correct.
Which absolute demonstrates the "hindsight" nature of much of the criticism. Yes it didn't appear that bad at the beginning of March. Yes, within two weeks the situation in Italy was utterly transformed.
But most people in their working lives will look to put off difficult decisions by months if they can get away with it (and politicians aren't going to be any different). The Government in mid march was suddenly confronted with the need (with hindsight) to impose the biggest restriction on UK liberties in at least 80 years, arguably ever. With very little, if any, real understanding of the nature of the dangers they were confronted with.
It's hardly surprising they got it wrong. And in a scenario where even getting it wrong and realising the error within a week wasn't sufficient.
Indeed.
Though I would say, as I have done so many times previously, it was almost impossible to impose early restrictions domestically when they were still allowing unrestricted international travel.
It also made it harder to convince other people of the potential danger when there were flights landing daily from China, Iran and Italy.
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
Ms Patel is a most infuriating politician. I have a sneaking regard for her, despite everything. She is often awful. But every so often she has the right instincts and tries to do the right thing. For instance, she is now consulting Sir Richard Henriques, the judge, who wrote the excoriating report on what the police got wrong in Operation Midland, on what needs to be done to put matters right.
I hope she overcomes resistance from the Home Office and the police on this. The police need their arses kicked - and hard - on this.
I'm not a great fan of the Home Secretary but much of the flak directed her way seems personally rather than politically offensive: she is too short to see over the lectern; she drops her g's; her backside is too broad. Her critics play the woman, not the ball.
Ms Patel is hated because she has strayed off the left's plantation.
People of Asian descent are to be represented, and have their ambitions interpreted, exclusively by white middle class daughters of university lecturers or other senior public sector role occupiers.
Weirdly, Rishi doesn’t get the same treatment. Ergo; your theory is bollocks.
Patel is hated because she’s a nasty piece of work.
He absolutely has been....it has been called an uncle tom and no idea what it is really like to be an ethnic minority as he isn't a proper asian. Same with the likes of javid and Badenoch
Rishi Sunak ‘looks like Prince Charles in brownface’, says BBC guest sparking race row
The Greens are going to destroy the Lib Dems. The Green brand is incredibly potent.
I seriously think the LDs should change their name to the Lib Greens. They have every right; Ed Davey probably has the best record of pro-Green policy of any politician in Britain.
We'd all be a load less shocked or bothered by this if we accepted that the country has, Outlander-style, gone through some stones to an earlier time in our history, namely, the 18th century when this sort of grift, favours, politics as personal relationships and weird out-of-control advisors were normal and accepted.
Personally, I'm hoping for a fit, sexy and red-haired Laird to whisk me off to **** ** *********, ********* *** *********** ** the heather.
Oh and the Enlightenment would be nice too.
Heather is a bit scratchy. Hold out for a bed of sphagnum moss....
That's what his tartan will be for.
If I get a sexy Laird I will be deliriously past caring about scratchy heather........
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
Ms Patel is a most infuriating politician. I have a sneaking regard for her, despite everything. She is often awful. But every so often she has the right instincts and tries to do the right thing. For instance, she is now consulting Sir Richard Henriques, the judge, who wrote the excoriating report on what the police got wrong in Operation Midland, on what needs to be done to put matters right.
I hope she overcomes resistance from the Home Office and the police on this. The police need their arses kicked - and hard - on this.
I'm not a great fan of the Home Secretary but much of the flak directed her way seems personally rather than politically offensive: she is too short to see over the lectern; she drops her g's; her backside is too broad. Her critics play the woman, not the ball.
Ms Patel is hated because she has strayed off the left's plantation.
People of Asian descent are to be represented, and have their ambitions interpreted, exclusively by white middle class daughters of university lecturers or other senior public sector role occupiers.
Weirdly, Rishi doesn’t get the same treatment. Ergo; your theory is bollocks.
Patel is hated because she’s a nasty piece of work.
He absolutely has been....it has been called an uncle tom and no idea what it is really like to be an ethnic minority as he isn't a proper asian. Same with the likes of javid and Badenoch
Rishi Sunak ‘looks like Prince Charles in brownface’, says BBC guest sparking race row
Are there examples from Continental European politics of a minor party in a coalition doing relatively well compared to the major party in a coalition? Obviously, in most circumstances, a party of government eventually gets hammered as being held responsible for the discontents of the society of the day, but in the examples I am aware of (mostly in Ireland) the smaller party in a coalition appears fated to suffer out of proportion to their ability to achieve a different outcome.
I do think you can make the case that the Lib Dem's handling of tuition fees was one of the two* greatest acts of electoral self-harm in British politics in the post-war** period, but equally I think there's a case to be made that, in our political culture, it's an inevitable price that would be paid by a junior coalition partner, who are likely to have to make the greatest compromises, and have the most contrary voters least willing to accept compromises.
* No prizes for identifying the other. ** Is there any accepted way to break up what is now becoming a very long period into meaningfully distinct periods?
It was not inevitable that Nick Clegg should cave on tuition fees, thus committing, as you say, "one of the two greatest acts of electoral self-harm in British politics in the post-war period". Prima facie, since putting up tuition fees was not a crucial part of the Conservative programme – in fact, they'd pledged to abolish fees completely just five years earlier – this would not have been crucial to negotiations.
More importantly, we know that Nick Clegg was advised against reneging on his party's tuition fees pledge by none other than George Osborne.
Nick Clegg screwed LibDem voters and the LibDem Party and he did it for no readily apparent reason. He's not even Russian!
Yes, it's a strong case, but I wonder whether we are making a mistake in concentrating on the specific form that the Lib Dem's fall from grace as a junior coalition partner took. If it hadn't been tuition fees, perhaps it would have been something else?
Has anyone on this thread inquired whether the Labour-LD coalition in Scotland is another example of the junior partner getting the sharny end of the stick, to offer more evidence for TSE's thesis? With Mr Salmond instead of Mr Cameron? I'm too hazy on this period (around 2010) to express an opinion. And it depends which parliament/voting system you go for: they have 4 MPs and 4 MSPs from Scotland versus Labour's single MP and 31 MSPs - and in Holyrood [edit] anyway are the 5th party behind the Greens.
I believe the SLD's vote went up every Holyrood election until the coalition with Cammo's Conservatives and then joining Bettertogether; it's gone down every election since. Working with Tories seems to be the common factor in voter disillusionment.
On topic. I wonder what the equivalent thread header 50 years ago would have said? The Liberals reduced to 6 MPs, the nearest to London being Montgomeryshire, and 3 of those (Thorpe, Steel, Pardoe) having 3-digit majorities. Do they have a future at all?
Well, they didn’t. Just twelve years later they effectively merged with another party.
The Greens are going to destroy the Lib Dems. The Green brand is incredibly potent.
I seriously think the LDs should change their name to the Lib Greens. They have every right; Ed Davey probably has the best record of pro-Green policy of any politician in Britain.
Green Democrats might be a better choice politically.
The Greens are going to destroy the Lib Dems. The Green brand is incredibly potent.
I seriously think the LDs should change their name to the Lib Greens. They have every right; Ed Davey probably has the best record of pro-Green policy of any politician in Britain.
Simon Hughes sometimes referred to himself as a Green Democrat.
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
Ms Patel is a most infuriating politician. I have a sneaking regard for her, despite everything. She is often awful. But every so often she has the right instincts and tries to do the right thing. For instance, she is now consulting Sir Richard Henriques, the judge, who wrote the excoriating report on what the police got wrong in Operation Midland, on what needs to be done to put matters right.
I hope she overcomes resistance from the Home Office and the police on this. The police need their arses kicked - and hard - on this.
I'm not a great fan of the Home Secretary but much of the flak directed her way seems personally rather than politically offensive: she is too short to see over the lectern; she drops her g's; her backside is too broad. Her critics play the woman, not the ball.
Ms Patel is hated because she has strayed off the left's plantation.
People of Asian descent are to be represented, and have their ambitions interpreted, exclusively by white middle class daughters of university lecturers or other senior public sector role occupiers.
Weirdly, Rishi doesn’t get the same treatment. Ergo; your theory is bollocks.
Patel is hated because she’s a nasty piece of work.
He absolutely has been....it has been called an uncle tom and no idea what it is really like to be an ethnic minority as he isn't a proper asian. Same with the likes of javid and Badenoch
Rishi Sunak ‘looks like Prince Charles in brownface’, says BBC guest sparking race row
One can evidence of anybody saying anything, in this digital age.
But broadly speaking Rishi is popular, certainly on the right and even among left-leaning voters.
Look at his polling.
Whereas Patel is hated, because she is hateful.
Hand-wringers hate any Home Secretary who isn't on the side of the criminals.
To some extent. But take a look at Home Secs since, say, 1990. Patel is very much at the authoritarian end.
Think you might have misread the previous comment - since you appear to have reinforced it.
If you think most of our Home Secs have “been on the side of criminals” since 1990 you are a demented gibbon.
And "hand-wringers" have "hated" virtually every home secretary over that period? But if Patel is "at the authoritarian end", then it stands to reason that she would be among the "most hated"?
We'd all be a load less shocked or bothered by this if we accepted that the country has, Outlander-style, gone through some stones to an earlier time in our history, namely, the 18th century when this sort of grift, favours, politics as personal relationships and weird out-of-control advisors were normal and accepted.
Personally, I'm hoping for a fit, sexy and red-haired Laird to whisk me off to **** ** *********, ********* *** *********** ** the heather.
Oh and the Enlightenment would be nice too.
Heather is a bit scratchy. Hold out for a bed of sphagnum moss....
That's what his tartan will be for.
If I get a sexy Laird I will be deliriously past caring about scratchy heather........
The danger was much less known back in March 2020.
According to China less than 3k had died from covid at the beginning of March.
In Italy a couple of dozen, in Spain zero.
The first reported death in the UK was only on the 6th March.
By the 12th of March (when Boris had the wash your hands but absolutely no restrictions to be put in place press conference) a thousand had died in Italy. By the 16th when the first tentative restrictions were put in place in the UK Italy had had over 2000 deaths. By the 23rd Italy had had 6000 deaths.
And how many deaths had the UK on those dates ?
Think back to what we were saying on PB at that time - Catholic Mass was believed to be a major spreader as was Italian multi-generational homes (that was likely true) while air pollution in Lombardy was studied in detail.
There needs to be a sense of threat for behavioural attitudes to change.
Even when Boris told people not to go to pubs there were PBers subsequently going to pubs.
Errr, you were saying Italy had had a couple of dozen deaths. Off by a couple of orders of magnitude.
I said that Italy had a couple of dozen deaths at the beginning of March.
Which is correct.
No, they were already up to 50 on the 1st of march
In NZ, in 1991 under FPTP, essentially ALL the minor parties formed a coalition called the “Alliance” to contest seats.
Contained the Greens, a leftist-Labour spin-off, a Maori separatist party, a “Social Credit” vehicle, and a Liberal Tory spin-off.
They got 18% of the vote in 1993, and won 2 seats (out of 99). We then moved to PR, and they eventually entered government as a junior coalition partner for Labour.
Thanks for the header @TSE Re topic, the first thing the Lib Dem should do is proclaim loud and clear they are over Brexit. They still give off the impression of a party motivated by trying to reverse the 2016 vote, although less so than before.
The second thing is to identify the gap and insert themselves there. There is one, namely middle class voters who are worried about the environment and social issues but also fear that the Greens and Labour Party is too radical in its viewpoints. That won’t be a majority of the country but it will enable the party to establish itself in a number of towns and places, and rebuild from there. As TSE points out, that’s exactly the constituency Cameron succeeded in winning over with his rebranding and which Johnson now is prepared to neglect to push his agenda forwards.
The danger was much less known back in March 2020.
According to China less than 3k had died from covid at the beginning of March.
In Italy a couple of dozen, in Spain zero.
The first reported death in the UK was only on the 6th March.
By the 12th of March (when Boris had the wash your hands but absolutely no restrictions to be put in place press conference) a thousand had died in Italy. By the 16th when the first tentative restrictions were put in place in the UK Italy had had over 2000 deaths. By the 23rd Italy had had 6000 deaths.
And how many deaths had the UK on those dates ?
Think back to what we were saying on PB at that time - Catholic Mass was believed to be a major spreader as was Italian multi-generational homes (that was likely true) while air pollution in Lombardy was studied in detail.
There needs to be a sense of threat for behavioural attitudes to change.
Even when Boris told people not to go to pubs there were PBers subsequently going to pubs.
Errr, you were saying Italy had had a couple of dozen deaths. Off by a couple of orders of magnitude.
I said that Italy had a couple of dozen deaths at the beginning of March.
Which is correct.
No, they were already up to 50 on the 1st of march
These say 29 on the 29th February and 52 on 2nd March:
On topic I think that we are heading towards a situation where our 4th largest party (after the SNP, sadly) will become the Greens. In Scotland this has already happened and the Lib Dems are struggling to maintain a foothold in Wales. I expect it to be the same in England all too soon. I really struggle to see any kind of a future for them.
Apart from renaming themselves the Green Liberals (or the Liberal Greens), Ed Davey should also announce that effectively he and Daisy Cooper are *co-leaders* of the party.
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
Ms Patel is a most infuriating politician. I have a sneaking regard for her, despite everything. She is often awful. But every so often she has the right instincts and tries to do the right thing. For instance, she is now consulting Sir Richard Henriques, the judge, who wrote the excoriating report on what the police got wrong in Operation Midland, on what needs to be done to put matters right.
I hope she overcomes resistance from the Home Office and the police on this. The police need their arses kicked - and hard - on this.
I'm not a great fan of the Home Secretary but much of the flak directed her way seems personally rather than politically offensive: she is too short to see over the lectern; she drops her g's; her backside is too broad. Her critics play the woman, not the ball.
Ms Patel is hated because she has strayed off the left's plantation.
People of Asian descent are to be represented, and have their ambitions interpreted, exclusively by white middle class daughters of university lecturers or other senior public sector role occupiers.
Weirdly, Rishi doesn’t get the same treatment. Ergo; your theory is bollocks.
Patel is hated because she’s a nasty piece of work.
He absolutely has been....it has been called an uncle tom and no idea what it is really like to be an ethnic minority as he isn't a proper asian. Same with the likes of javid and Badenoch
Rishi Sunak ‘looks like Prince Charles in brownface’, says BBC guest sparking race row
There’s a certain section of the commentariat, who really dislike conservatives from ethnic minority backgrounds. It’s lazy racism, and needs to be called out as such.
You may be right, but equally there are sections of the commentariat who really dislike socialists from ethnic minority backgrounds. Diane Abbott has received more (racist) abuse than any other politician over the last 10 years. It's lazy racism, and needs to be called out as such.
On topic I think that we are heading towards a situation where our 4th largest party (after the SNP, sadly) will become the Greens. In Scotland this has already happened and the Lib Dems are struggling to maintain a foothold in Wales. I expect it to be the same in England all too soon. I really struggle to see any kind of a future for them.
I believe the Greens actually outpolled the Lib Dems nationally in Wales, but failed to win a seat due to the abortion of an electoral system the devolved nations use.
I have no idea what we actually spend the International Development budget on, but the benefits should be tangible and should be more than just about buying influence popularity.
Just on this point (apols for snipping the interesting discussion of aid for democracy), this is fairly helpful, though from 2019 - see page 5 in particular:
"Humitarian aid" is the largest but only at 15% - that's disaster relief etc., and quite popular. Health, government and infrastructure are all fairly clear alternatives. Looking at the countries, Pakistan and Afghhistan are presumably partly "political", investment in not letting extremism spiral out of control. Ethiopia is interesting. I remember a discussion with Hilary Benn about 15 years ago when he was DfID Minister. The dilemma was that Ethiopia had a notably efficient and uncorrupt government (thus a good "investment" of development aid) which was turning more authoritarian, locking up dissients etc. The question was whether to prioritise making our money efficient, or avoiding helping autocracies.
His solution was to withdraw support for aid to government institutions and give it to NGOs working with government agencies to help schools, medical care etc. But he said there was a substantial minority opinion in the Department that we should still be reinforcing government efficiency.
Why do we do it? Partly it really is collective altruism. People don't mind chipping in some tax money to help people obviously much worse off, if it's part of a joint national effort - just saying "let them give to charity" misses the point that majorities of voters are entitled to decide how tax money is spent, even if we individually don't like it (otherwise I'll start deducting tax payments for Trident etc.). Partly it's to buy goodwill, but more subtly it's to encourage countries to be "more like us" - better-educated, more productive, less prone to violent extremism. That's simply a good thing in an increasingly interconnected world. It does beg the question of whether we're a perfect model, but clearly Britain is a society that works better than, say, Somalia. I don't see why anyone would find that very controversial when we're talking about relatively small sums like 0.7% of GDP.
We probably need to retain the 15% for disaster relief but for me the other 85% should be focused on Covid vaccines for the foreseeable.
Thanks for the header @TSE Re topic, the first thing the Lib Dem should do is proclaim loud and clear they are over Brexit. They still give off the impression of a party motivated by trying to reverse the 2016 vote, although less so than before.
The second thing is to identify the gap and insert themselves there. There is one, namely middle class voters who are worried about the environment and social issues but also fear that the Greens and Labour Party is too radical in its viewpoints. That won’t be a majority of the country but it will enable the party to establish itself in a number of towns and places, and rebuild from there. As TSE points out, that’s exactly the constituency Cameron succeeded in winning over with his rebranding and which Johnson now is prepared to neglect to push his agenda forwards.
Which was exactly what Grimond and Thorpe (for all his faults) and Steel did. "Liberalism" was very popular among that group in the early 60's.
Thanks for the header @TSE Re topic, the first thing the Lib Dem should do is proclaim loud and clear they are over Brexit. They still give off the impression of a party motivated by trying to reverse the 2016 vote, although less so than before.
The second thing is to identify the gap and insert themselves there. There is one, namely middle class voters who are worried about the environment and social issues but also fear that the Greens and Labour Party is too radical in its viewpoints. That won’t be a majority of the country but it will enable the party to establish itself in a number of towns and places, and rebuild from there. As TSE points out, that’s exactly the constituency Cameron succeeded in winning over with his rebranding and which Johnson now is prepared to neglect to push his agenda forwards.
Absolutely. But I’d also add students. They just need a big mea culpa clause 4 scrapping announcement over the tuition fees disaster.
The hypocrisy from the right wing media over the BBC is vomit inducing . Bozo moaning about journalistic standards is equally so. Now the government will use the current Diana drama to take more control of the BBC or remove or slash the license fee.
So a cowered BBC becomes just the media arm of no 10 , together with the overwhelming right wing print media and good luck on any opposition party getting a fair hearing .
Taken together with the cesspit governments attack on protest , judicial review and voting , UK democracy is fast crumbling.
It seems curious that there has been little scrutiny of Independent Sage.
Its founder, Sir David King, was Chief Scientific Officer from October 2000 to 31 December 2007, under prime ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.
So, his opinion was no doubt sought on the famous claims of Sadaam's all powerful, 45 minute WMDs, before we all headed off to war at Blair's and Bush's behest in the Middle East.
Somehow, when the moment was really ripe for Sir David King as Chief Scientific Officer of the Government to utter some words of scientific advice in defiance of the prevailing Government orthodoxy, he failed.
(It is true he later became critical of the Iraq War, but not AFAIK at the time).
If iSAGE wanted an inflammatory conspiracist with questionable integrity as their media advisor, managing to get Carole Cadwallader on board is quite the appointment.
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
Ms Patel is a most infuriating politician. I have a sneaking regard for her, despite everything. She is often awful. But every so often she has the right instincts and tries to do the right thing. For instance, she is now consulting Sir Richard Henriques, the judge, who wrote the excoriating report on what the police got wrong in Operation Midland, on what needs to be done to put matters right.
I hope she overcomes resistance from the Home Office and the police on this. The police need their arses kicked - and hard - on this.
I'm not a great fan of the Home Secretary but much of the flak directed her way seems personally rather than politically offensive: she is too short to see over the lectern; she drops her g's; her backside is too broad. Her critics play the woman, not the ball.
Ms Patel is hated because she has strayed off the left's plantation.
People of Asian descent are to be represented, and have their ambitions interpreted, exclusively by white middle class daughters of university lecturers or other senior public sector role occupiers.
Weirdly, Rishi doesn’t get the same treatment. Ergo; your theory is bollocks.
Patel is hated because she’s a nasty piece of work.
He absolutely has been....it has been called an uncle tom and no idea what it is really like to be an ethnic minority as he isn't a proper asian. Same with the likes of javid and Badenoch
Rishi Sunak ‘looks like Prince Charles in brownface’, says BBC guest sparking race row
There’s a certain section of the commentariat, who really dislike conservatives from ethnic minority backgrounds. It’s lazy racism, and needs to be called out as such.
You may be right, but equally there are sections of the commentariat who really dislike socialists from ethnic minority backgrounds. Diane Abbott has received more (racist) abuse than any other politician over the last 10 years. It's lazy racism, and needs to be called out as such.
The vast majority of the negative comments from conservatives about Diane Abbot, were because she was innumerate and illiterate, not because she was female or black.
The danger was much less known back in March 2020.
According to China less than 3k had died from covid at the beginning of March.
In Italy a couple of dozen, in Spain zero.
The first reported death in the UK was only on the 6th March.
By the 12th of March (when Boris had the wash your hands but absolutely no restrictions to be put in place press conference) a thousand had died in Italy. By the 16th when the first tentative restrictions were put in place in the UK Italy had had over 2000 deaths. By the 23rd Italy had had 6000 deaths.
And how many deaths had the UK on those dates ?
Think back to what we were saying on PB at that time - Catholic Mass was believed to be a major spreader as was Italian multi-generational homes (that was likely true) while air pollution in Lombardy was studied in detail.
There needs to be a sense of threat for behavioural attitudes to change.
Even when Boris told people not to go to pubs there were PBers subsequently going to pubs.
Errr, you were saying Italy had had a couple of dozen deaths. Off by a couple of orders of magnitude.
I said that Italy had a couple of dozen deaths at the beginning of March.
Which is correct.
No, they were already up to 50 on the 1st of march
These say 29 on the 29th February and 52 on 2nd March:
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
Ms Patel is a most infuriating politician. I have a sneaking regard for her, despite everything. She is often awful. But every so often she has the right instincts and tries to do the right thing. For instance, she is now consulting Sir Richard Henriques, the judge, who wrote the excoriating report on what the police got wrong in Operation Midland, on what needs to be done to put matters right.
I hope she overcomes resistance from the Home Office and the police on this. The police need their arses kicked - and hard - on this.
I'm not a great fan of the Home Secretary but much of the flak directed her way seems personally rather than politically offensive: she is too short to see over the lectern; she drops her g's; her backside is too broad. Her critics play the woman, not the ball.
Ms Patel is hated because she has strayed off the left's plantation.
People of Asian descent are to be represented, and have their ambitions interpreted, exclusively by white middle class daughters of university lecturers or other senior public sector role occupiers.
Weirdly, Rishi doesn’t get the same treatment. Ergo; your theory is bollocks.
Patel is hated because she’s a nasty piece of work.
He absolutely has been....it has been called an uncle tom and no idea what it is really like to be an ethnic minority as he isn't a proper asian. Same with the likes of javid and Badenoch
Rishi Sunak ‘looks like Prince Charles in brownface’, says BBC guest sparking race row
There’s a certain section of the commentariat, who really dislike conservatives from ethnic minority backgrounds. It’s lazy racism, and needs to be called out as such.
You may be right, but equally there are sections of the commentariat who really dislike socialists from ethnic minority backgrounds. Diane Abbott has received more (racist) abuse than any other politician over the last 10 years. It's lazy racism, and needs to be called out as such.
The vast majority of the negative comments from conservatives about Diane Abbot, were because she was innumerate and illiterate, not because she was female or black.
So criticism of Abbot was because she was “innumerate and illiterate”, but criticism of Patel is because of racism.
Priti Patel tells #Marr the reputation of the BBC has been damaged. Says we are in “multi-media age” now, says this is the “Netflix generation”. “How relevant is the BBC?” she asks. https://twitter.com/SophiaSleigh/status/1396385830680281089
Interesting to see the fallout from the live streaming of the #Glastonbury event last night. People complain about the license fee but the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is always amazing. https://twitter.com/sallybogg/status/1396382996568084482
Was she challenged on the report she is sitting on that may indicate malpractice in News International?
Ms Patel is a most infuriating politician. I have a sneaking regard for her, despite everything. She is often awful. But every so often she has the right instincts and tries to do the right thing. For instance, she is now consulting Sir Richard Henriques, the judge, who wrote the excoriating report on what the police got wrong in Operation Midland, on what needs to be done to put matters right.
I hope she overcomes resistance from the Home Office and the police on this. The police need their arses kicked - and hard - on this.
I'm not a great fan of the Home Secretary but much of the flak directed her way seems personally rather than politically offensive: she is too short to see over the lectern; she drops her g's; her backside is too broad. Her critics play the woman, not the ball.
Ms Patel is hated because she has strayed off the left's plantation.
People of Asian descent are to be represented, and have their ambitions interpreted, exclusively by white middle class daughters of university lecturers or other senior public sector role occupiers.
Weirdly, Rishi doesn’t get the same treatment. Ergo; your theory is bollocks.
Patel is hated because she’s a nasty piece of work.
He absolutely has been....it has been called an uncle tom and no idea what it is really like to be an ethnic minority as he isn't a proper asian. Same with the likes of javid and Badenoch
Rishi Sunak ‘looks like Prince Charles in brownface’, says BBC guest sparking race row
There’s a certain section of the commentariat, who really dislike conservatives from ethnic minority backgrounds. It’s lazy racism, and needs to be called out as such.
You may be right, but equally there are sections of the commentariat who really dislike socialists from ethnic minority backgrounds. Diane Abbott has received more (racist) abuse than any other politician over the last 10 years. It's lazy racism, and needs to be called out as such.
The vast majority of the negative comments from conservatives about Diane Abbot, were because she was innumerate and illiterate, not because she was female or black.
Quite something to say about a Cambridge graduate.
And people are rude about the likes of Anglia Ruskin!
Comments
https://youtu.be/KUDjRZ30SNo
The danger was much less known back in March 2020.
According to China less than 3k had died from covid at the beginning of March.
In Italy a couple of dozen, in Spain zero.
The first reported death in the UK was only on the 6th March.
But the LDs problem goes further than that, in that if they hold the balance of power, it seems they do not wish to exercise that power, as they are afraid of the political fall out of siding with either Tories or Labour.
The LDs need to champion coalition governments not demonise them. It takes strong leadership to do that in a country that historically prefers single party governments, but I have no doubt someone like Ashdown could have effectively communicated why coalitions are better to the LD voter pool.
More importantly, we know that Nick Clegg was advised against reneging on his party's tuition fees pledge by none other than George Osborne.
Nick Clegg screwed LibDem voters and the LibDem Party and he did it for no readily apparent reason. He's not even Russian!
Cyclefree - perhaps. But remember it was Labour's Tom Watson who really went after that issue and the targets of the police investigation were the rich and powerful. Not quite sure what that means for Priti's 'values.'
Now you can argue for a policy on paper whereby non Brits can leave, but Brits can't - but good luck putting that together in a few days. Stopping flights full stop you can do. Stopping flights to a subset of individuals, that's a serious administrative task to put together in a few days.
And on the back of a threat that wasn't particularly understood, or at the time seeming particularly to be concerning to the public? Even when the scenes were emerging out of Bergamo, large numbers of people were buying into the idea that Italians were overwhelming their hospitals just because they had big families and were very touchy feely.
I stopped taking public transport that month, based on what I was reading about the virus in China and Italy.
And, I closed the office down one week before Boris did.
The demand at the Corporation to get on such a freebie must be enormous. Skin up with Islington's finest, sing 'oh Jeremy Corbyn' with the rest, pay 25 quid for a spiced latte and a lentil burger, watch the bands on Tristram's shoulders and hand job a tattooed roadie round the back of the main stage.
You have arrived.
1. He junked the Lib Dem‘s PRINCIPAL policy in coalition.
2. He wasted capital promoting a national voting system (AV) that even PR proponents think is meh. (He should have insisted on PR in local govt instead).
3. He didn’t take the key portfolio, ie Home Secretary, or maybe less riskily, Justice, which would allow him to advance “low cost” but critical Liberal reform.
4. He was naively happy to stand right alongside the Tories until the end of the government, even while the Tories were briefing against the Lib Dems. He should have negotiated for the coalition proper to last just four years, with the last year seeing a supply and confidence agreement only from the Libs.
Think back to what we were saying on PB at that time - Catholic Mass was believed to be a major spreader as was Italian multi-generational homes (that was likely true) while air pollution in Lombardy was studied in detail.
There needs to be a sense of threat for behavioural attitudes to change.
Even when Boris told people not to go to pubs there were PBers subsequently going to pubs.
People of Asian descent are to be represented, and have their ambitions interpreted, exclusively by white middle class daughters of university lecturers or other senior public sector role occupiers.
Strangely, although a member of the Labour Shadow Cabinet was allegedly also implicated and interviewed, that name has never been released, and the one report on it (in the Independent, FWIW) was taken down. Possibly they were told it wasn’t correct. But that didn’t stop Watson naming everyone else, all of whom appear to have been completely innocent.
Afaik he’s never apologised either.
It was party politics at its most brutal, and thoroughly unedifying. One of the more uncomfortable and concerning things among many in Labour’s antisemitism scandal was that it was so bad even Watson couldn’t stomach it. But truthfully he’s no loss to public life.
Priti Patel is wrong to hold back the Morgan report.
But the police acted appallingly over Midland. The IOPC also behaved appallingly. The Henriques Report needs to be implemented not ignored and if she makes sure it is then I will cheer that.
The lack of professionalism in the police has been a menace for years. It is an Augean Stable which needs clearing out. A start needs to be made somewhere. If Labour had even the ghost of an instinct on how to do politics it would be focusing on this not bloody wallpaper. But it isn't so it will have to be Priti.
And don't worry I will hold her feet to the fire on this if she doesn't.
Ergo; your theory is bollocks.
Patel is hated because she’s a nasty piece of work.
It was obvious they had no idea what was about to smack them around the head with an enormo-haddock.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/22/no-10-tried-to-block-data-on-spread-of-new-covid-variant-in-english-schools
And then someone realised that 400,000 is a rather large number. Mind, so is 150,000. Slightly higher than the 20,000 they wanted to be judged against.
At about the same time, the Scottish Government paid £1 for Prestwick Airport. A similar kind of airport, with similar problems & similar liabilities.
It just shows how good the Scottish Government is compared to the God-awful Welsh one.
By contrast, the Welsh Government paid £52 m for Rhoose Airport. It is always been unclear as to how the lacklustre Rhoose airport was actually valued at such a substantial amount.
Since then, the Welsh Government has made repeated "loans" to the airport to keep it running (the "loans" subsequently get written off). For example, in March 2021, the Welsh Government wrote off £42.6m & gave the airport another £42.6m.
It is true that owning an airport in a pandemic is a bad move. But Cardiff airport was always going to face huge competition from Bristol airport, and there are very few airline companies that fly from Rhoose. Ryanair does a handful of destinations in Spain. It basically needs an excellent business plan to be profitable -- not something ministers in the Welsh Government know much about.
The Welsh Government also had to purchase land (again, allegedly from people closely connected to Llafur) to improve road access to the airport.
The reason why it got mentioned is all this dodginess is taking place right on @MexicanPete's doorstep in the Vale of Glamorgan.
I wonder what the equivalent thread header 50 years ago would have said?
The Liberals reduced to 6 MPs, the nearest to London being Montgomeryshire, and 3 of those (Thorpe, Steel, Pardoe) having 3-digit majorities. Do they have a future at all?
There is plenty to criticise her for on substance. But on this issue she is right, if the press report is correct. I hope she gives the police the kicking they deserve.
And i also think they underestimated the response to the policy - thinking it would actually be popular. Because it was a sort of graduate tax, linked explicitly to ability to pay, and incorporate (i believe) a new system of grants for the poorest students. Needless to say they got that wrong (but also - and this is my main criticism of the policy ie. the extent to which it would be exploited by universities and property developers - a failure which has come home to roost during the pandemic when it has become apparent quite how dependent universities have become on the income stream from accommodation which was a corollary of the new loans system).
As it happens, I’m torn. I never thought masks were any bloody use in the first place, while the severe negative impact they had on learning, child welfare and classroom control meant that they were always a very, very bad idea.
One thing I will say though is that in a sense that data is almost irrelevant for two reasons:
1) If it was spreading fast despite masks that merely proves they were pointless to start and therefore there was no reason to keep them and
2) However fast this variant is spreading in schools it’s making no difference to the fatalities and hospitalisations which is all we should really be worried about.
At the same time, the government shouldn’t really be suppressing data, as they did when Gibb infamously claimed just 0.2% of schoolchildren had Covid (the figure was actually 4.2%). But I’m not going to say it’s made an enormous difference here.
Rishi Sunak ‘looks like Prince Charles in brownface’, says BBC guest sparking race row
https://www.google.com/amp/s/metro.co.uk/2020/10/28/rishi-sunak-is-prince-charles-in-brownface-says-bbc-guest-sparking-race-row-13492061/amp/
The oppression Olympic intersectionalist lot can't accept that a real ethnic minority could ever have the "wrong" opinions.
But broadly speaking Rishi is popular, certainly on the right and even among left-leaning voters.
Look at his polling.
Whereas Patel is hated, because she is hateful.
The civil servants of the great and blessed lady Thatcher (PBUH) found their attempts to frustrate her destroyed by the fact the blessed lady had an incredible grasp of detail and an indefatigable energy. Their reports would be covered in red (or was it green?) pen.
Ms Patel, sadly, does not have those qualities.
Which is correct.
Furthermore, she 'doesn't take a good photograph'; she's much better looking than often appears.
I totally agree that she shouldn't mess about with the Morgan report. High time a light was shined into that.
I also remember when Peston suggested we were following a “herd immunity” approach.
It was already very clear that any such approach would lead to tens of thousands of deaths.
I was shocked.
It seemed, and still seems to me, basic common sense to close the borders and lock down upon news of fatal new contagion.
Meanwhile, “Chief Nurse” Jenny Harries was smugly assuring us that, because unlike inferior tribes without the law, we follow “evidence-based science”, that we would not be needing masks thank you very much, but that we should be hand-washing vigorously to avoid those pesky fomites.
In Solihull, which had a Lib Dem MP elected in 2005 and 2010, the Lib Dems are now reduced to 3 seats on the council, whereas the Green Party now have 15 and are the main opposition to the Tories on 30.
Nick Clegg's idiotic management of the Lib Dems was just a further example of feckless strategic management to which the defeated Jo Swinson added the pure fantasy of her forthcoming premiership.
But most people in their working lives will look to put off difficult decisions by months if they can get away with it (and politicians aren't going to be any different). The Government in mid march was suddenly confronted with the need (with hindsight) to impose the biggest restriction on UK liberties in at least 80 years, arguably ever. With very little, if any, real understanding of the nature of the dangers they were confronted with.
It's hardly surprising they got it wrong. And in a scenario where even getting it wrong and realising the error within a week wasn't sufficient.
https://covid.joinzoe.com/data
At one stage the Libs were down to 5, having lost a seat at a by-election.
One little piggy went to Winchester & Lincoln College, Oxford.
And other little piggy went to Westfield Technical College, Watford & Keele.
My sty is the gutter, so I prefer Priti to Rushak 😉
But take a look at Home Secs since, say, 1990.
Patel is very much at the authoritarian end.
What the LDs should have done in 2015, is shouted from the rooftops about all the good things the coalition had achieved, and how they would be ready again if called upon to help form a government. Instead, they gave the impression of being ashamed of their time in government, and the electorate agreed.
https://twitter.com/BristOliver/status/1396184812885581825?s=19
Though I would say, as I have done so many times previously, it was almost impossible to impose early restrictions domestically when they were still allowing unrestricted international travel.
It also made it harder to convince other people of the potential danger when there were flights landing daily from China, Iran and Italy.
The Green brand is incredibly potent.
I seriously think the LDs should change their name to the Lib Greens. They have every right; Ed Davey probably has the best record of pro-Green policy of any politician in Britain.
I said "fit" and "sexy". He was neither.
Maybe i'm just missing something.
686,264 vaccinations in 🏴 yesterday - 178,251 1st doses, 508,013 2nd doses
Other nations still to come but clear this is an enormous day. 1 in 3 people in UK have now had both doses.”
Contained the Greens, a leftist-Labour spin-off, a Maori separatist party, a “Social Credit” vehicle, and a Liberal Tory spin-off.
They got 18% of the vote in 1993, and won 2 seats (out of 99). We then moved to PR, and they eventually entered government as a junior coalition partner for Labour.
The second thing is to identify the gap and insert themselves there. There is one, namely middle class voters who are worried about the environment and social issues but also fear that the Greens and Labour Party is too radical in its viewpoints. That won’t be a majority of the country but it will enable the party to establish itself in a number of towns and places, and rebuild from there. As TSE points out, that’s exactly the constituency Cameron succeeded in winning over with his rebranding and which Johnson now is prepared to neglect to push his agenda forwards.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/italy/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_Italy
Daisy has an appeal which, sadly, Davey lacks.
But I’d also add students.
They just need a big mea culpa clause 4 scrapping announcement over the tuition fees disaster.
So a cowered BBC becomes just the media arm of no 10 , together with the overwhelming right wing print media and good luck on any opposition party getting a fair hearing .
Taken together with the cesspit governments attack on protest , judicial review and voting , UK democracy is fast crumbling.
Its founder, Sir David King, was Chief Scientific Officer from October 2000 to 31 December 2007, under prime ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.
So, his opinion was no doubt sought on the famous claims of Sadaam's all powerful, 45 minute WMDs, before we all headed off to war at Blair's and Bush's behest in the Middle East.
Somehow, when the moment was really ripe for Sir David King as Chief Scientific Officer of the Government to utter some words of scientific advice in defiance of the prevailing Government orthodoxy, he failed.
(It is true he later became critical of the Iraq War, but not AFAIK at the time).
https://twitter.com/dr_burns1992/status/1396411793023643649?s=21
That's taking captain Hindsight to whole new levels.
"Hmm just seen deaths grow in Italy 30 fold in under two weeks? Well they were low 12 days ago so best do nothing"
OK.
And people are rude about the likes of Anglia Ruskin!