Tories are still lying *******s

[Crunchie]

Inflation 4.6% higher for the poorest households than the richest. Brutal and due to a higher % of wages going to food and gas

https://mobile.twitter.com/VictimOfMaths/status/1627967113364140033
No matter what party gets in charge the rich will always get richer and the poor poorer, that was proved when Blair and Labour came to power, not that it was ever in doubt.

[Mibbes Aye]

No matter what party gets in charge the rich will always get richer and the poor poorer, that was proved when Blair and Labour came to power, not that it was ever in doubt.

New Labour made child poverty and pensioner poverty one of their priorities. That's why more than a million children and more than a million pensioners came out of poverty.

Other policies like the National Minimum Wage, Sure Start and big, increased funding for education, including higher education were solid policies that would reduce poverty in the long-term too.

I think a lot of people don't remember or were too young when the NMW was brought in. The Tories and a lot of voices in business predicted catastrophe. It didn't happen.

Sure Start yielded huge benefits, especially in socially deprived areas. Since 2010 it has been 'death by a thousand cuts' thanks to the Tories.

[Santa Cruz]

New Labour made child poverty and pensioner poverty one of their priorities. That's why more than a million children and more than a million pensioners came out of poverty.

Other policies like the National Minimum Wage, Sure Start and big, increased funding for education, including higher education were solid policies that would reduce poverty in the long-term too.

I think a lot of people don't remember or were too young when the NMW was brought in. The Tories and a lot of voices in business predicted catastrophe. It didn't happen.

Sure Start yielded huge benefits, especially in socially deprived areas. Since 2010 it has been 'death by a thousand cuts' thanks to the Tories.


plus the Child Trust Fund.

[Stairway 2 7]

New Labour made child poverty and pensioner poverty one of their priorities. That's why more than a million children and more than a million pensioners came out of poverty.

Other policies like the National Minimum Wage, Sure Start and big, increased funding for education, including higher education were solid policies that would reduce poverty in the long-term too.

I think a lot of people don't remember or were too young when the NMW was brought in. The Tories and a lot of voices in business predicted catastrophe. It didn't happen.

Sure Start yielded huge benefits, especially in socially deprived areas. Since 2010 it has been 'death by a thousand cuts' thanks to the Tories.

Seems bizarre we never had a minimum wage, Rees Mogg and his Victorian values would have loved that

[Stairway 2 7]

Tories government are constantly playing to a small minority. The nation is turning less interested in immigration, there's been a number of polls similar.

https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/feb/23/uk-now-among-most-accepting-countries-for-foreign-workers-survey-finds

UK now among most accepting countries for foreign workers, survey finds
Exclusive: Study’s authors note ‘extraordinary shift’ since 2009 on question of British jobs for British workers

[grunt]

97% of small boat asylum applications - equivalent to 34,793 - in 2022 are awaiting a decision

83% of asylum cases since 2018 - equivalent to 56,883 cases - are awaiting a decision

[grunt]

https://twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/1628474788783030273?s=20


Asked if those organising protests outside hotels against asylum seekers should be described as "far right", Suella Braverman tells GB News that asylum seekers are putting "really serious pressures on communities and saying so does not make you racist or bigoted."

[grunt]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fpp5ZigWYAIszgJ?format=png&name=900x900

[LunasBoots]

https://twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/1628474788783030273?s=20

May aswell change the Tory Party name to the BNP these days

[Kato]

May aswell change the Tory Party name to the BNP these days"Putting pressure on communties" that they care nothing about.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Kato]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fpp5ZigWYAIszgJ?format=png&name=900x900He's a great asset for Russia.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[grunt]

This PPE corruption scandal should have seen the end of this Government years ago. This company acted as middlemen between Innova and Cummings.

https://t.co/lS8ssg36tT


Company with just £85 in the bank made £20m profit after Dominic Cummings referred Innova Medical into the VIP lane.

[Kato]

Tory supporters handing over their vote and waiting for 40 hospitals, sunlit uplands, prosperity, competence with the economy...anything good really.

https://twitter.com/TheFigen_/status/1627374275559653376?t=LGOiVEc8quwvgxnstWuYCQ&s=19

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[He's here!]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/feb/24/sir-bernard-ingham-obituary

I never knew Bernard Ingham was so left-leaning before he was appointed by Thatcher.

[Colr]

Hmmmmm!

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/25/house-of-lords-worked-with-far-right

[Stairway 2 7]

Well finger's crossed its proven as he has been incompetent in every role he's had

Sam Coates Sky
@SamCoatesSky

Deputy Prime Minister Dominic Raab commits to @SophyRidgeSky

“If an allegation of bullying is upheld I will resign”

[Mibbes Aye]

I would say 'Fill your boots' but given the amount of loss suffered by people in every part o the country then it feels crass

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/#source=refresh

[Callum_62]

These whatsapp leaks are quite something

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230302/8bf6873334b55bf59c4c31496b3bb6f7.jpg

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230302/aa662e6ef9251c304213afe2ff5892b9.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://twitter.com/fr4ser/status/1631072028798189572?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

What are the benefits of Brexit?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230302/aa662e6ef9251c304213afe2ff5892b9.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Can forgive them the covid spike at the end, but not the rest

[grunt]

https://twitter.com/fr4ser/status/1631072028798189572?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

What are the benefits of Brexit?
Almost feel sorry for her. Almost.

[grunt]

Tory paranoia at Westminster

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FqNc01aXwAE8vrL?format=jpg&name=medium

[TrumpIsAPeado]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/feb/24/sir-bernard-ingham-obituary

I never knew Bernard Ingham was so left-leaning before he was appointed by Thatcher.

Just goes to show that money can ultimately turn a person with good intentions into an utterly incomprehensible person. I wonder if he ever cared to apologise for his Hillsborough comments that only contributed further to the suffering of the family and friends of the victims? I suspect he didn't.

[Bostonhibby]

Anyone else see the irony of sneaky Matt Hancock whinging about betrayals?

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Kato]

Still lying. Every day.

https://twitter.com/implausibleblog/status/1630917785986428929?t=UUpwh_Uu8FItbohU6BVp8Q&s=09

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

I think Hankcock comes off as daft but one of the ones most pushing for restrictions in the conversations. Williamson comes off as vile which is no surprise. Sunaks coming this weekend apparently. He was fiercely in favour of no restrictions throughout, including bringing in anti lockdown nutters to speak to the cabinet

[cabbageandribs1875]

i agree with this scouser 110%+ :agree:

Mike F Shaw (@mikefshaw61) | TikTok (https://www.tiktok.com/@mikefshaw61/video/7194771666612833542)




warning, some absolutely necessary sweary words :)

[Hibbyradge]

i agree with this scouser 110%+ :agree:

Mike F Shaw (@mikefshaw61) | TikTok (https://www.tiktok.com/@mikefshaw61/video/7194771666612833542)




warning, some absolutely necessary sweary words :)

Seriously?

I have never, and will never, say I don't dislike the Tory party. Horrible words to say.

Hate and despise might be stronger, but I'm not going to tolerate them on any level.

[Bostonhibby]

Seriously?

I have never, and will never, say I don't dislike the Tory party. Horrible words to say.

Hate and despise might be stronger, but I'm not going to tolerate them on any level.I'm guessing he has a soft spot for Baroness Mone though? Doesn't get a mention, but she's got to be the flag bearer for what these heartless, thieving liars are about. [emoji6].



Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Hibbyradge]

I'm guessing he has a soft spot for Michelle Mone though? She's got to be the flag bearer for what these heartless, thieving liars are about. [emoji6].



Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

That makes sense. Thanks for clearing it up.

[Ozyhibby]

https://twitter.com/jessicaelgot/status/1631773605414551552?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

Sunak covering up outbreaks of covid to avoid eat out to help out getting the blame. Very big if true.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230303/b1a92276bca636e7905431ec422f0c8c.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TrumpIsAPeado]

https://twitter.com/jessicaelgot/status/1631773605414551552?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

Sunak covering up outbreaks of covid to avoid eat out to help out getting the blame. Very big if true.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In any normal functioning democracy it would be very big news. In the UK, it has been completely normalised over the years. People in general won't bat an eye lid unfortunately.

[Kato]

Seems like they can rely on the press to dampen stories down going by the screenshots. They will try with this one as well.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[cabbageandribs1875]

get Bunter in jail as well :agree: including that nest on top of his bonce

Evidence Boris Johnson misled MPs exists, interim Partygate report says | Boris Johnson | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/mar/03/boris-johnson-give-evidence-privileges-committee-inquiry)

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230303/84217fd5bc26d5bd2017456c806a75df.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Glory Lurker]

Chuck them all in jail.

But we need to do something about government business being done on unofficial channels - UK and Scotland both.

[Ozyhibby]

It’s a pretty impressive scoop by Oakshot even though she does come across as a horrible human being. And of course this is the second time she has burned her sources which isn’t the reputation a good journalist necessarily wants. However the stupidity of Hancock in handing all this to her probably deserves this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cabbageandribs1875]

silly moggy Q. is a socialist cabal less dirty than a corrupt cabal

Farrukh on Twitter: "Left: Mogg says Sue Gray is not impartial Middle: Mogg says Sue Gray is independent, has the highest integrity and greatest reputation Right: Heappey says Sue Gray is independent End: John Bishop says Sue Gray doesn't need to investigate, she just needs the CCTV footage https://t.co/QrfxNbUTQS" / Twitter (https://twitter.com/implausibleblog/status/1631602583155490817)

[Stairway 2 7]

Latest WhatsApp story is a surprise, it was kept out the news thar eat out to help out was causing spread

https://mobile.twitter.com/devisridhar/status/1631797624251592704

devisridhar
Wow- UK govt & PM Sunak knew that Eat out to Help Out was causing a rise in cases but tried to keep its impact on a new wave quiet bc of the optics

[Speedy]

Latest WhatsApp story is a surprise, it was kept out the news thar eat out to help out was causing spread

https://mobile.twitter.com/devisridhar/status/1631797624251592704

devisridhar
Wow- UK govt & PM Sunak knew that Eat out to Help Out was causing a rise in cases but tried to keep its impact on a new wave quiet bc of the optics

No surprise at all.

Eat out to help out was a massive success. It was designed to get people out again and it did exactly that.

The fact it would inevitably lead to a spike in cases was obvious, and the fact the government tried to overlook that for optics is absolutely no surprise.

[TrumpIsAPeado]

Why did anybody ever think that Boris Johnson was a good idea?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOLFftQUqsU

[Kato]

Why did anybody ever think that Boris Johnson was a good idea?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOLFftQUqsUSunday morning Laura Kuenssberg interviewing a Tory. Tory bloke says "I believe Boris is an honest man" - no further questions, no push back.

Interviewing a Labour bloke, "So what more could Labour have done during the pandemic?"

****** up really.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[TrumpIsAPeado]

Sunday morning Laura Kuenssberg interviewing a Tory. Tory bloke says "I believe Boris is an honest man" - no further questions, no push back.

Interviewing a Labour bloke, "So what more could Labour have done during the pandemic?"

****** up really.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

They were just looking for another "Corbyn wears the wrong socks" headline.

[Ozyhibby]

https://twitter.com/lara_spirit/status/1632521144409497600?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TrumpIsAPeado]

https://twitter.com/lara_spirit/status/1632521144409497600?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wonder how much dirt his old man must have on him.

[Bostonhibby]

Wonder how much dirt his old man must have on him.If that's the criteria he's going to have to make a last minute bid to get jennifer arcuri on the throne before the coronation.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

https://twitter.com/lara_spirit/status/1632521144409497600?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Caligula and his horse vibes

[heretoday]

Sunday morning Laura Kuenssberg interviewing a Tory. Tory bloke says "I believe Boris is an honest man" - no further questions, no push back.

Interviewing a Labour bloke, "So what more could Labour have done during the pandemic?"

****** up really.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Chris Heaton-Harris MP is the Tory bloke to whom you refer. He's Secretary of state for N.Ireland and a sleekit individual if ever there was one.
He was on Sky before the BBC interview and more or less repeated his performance. I thought Laura did OK. It was obvious the guy was talking tosh about Boris' integrity.

Sometimes you have to let the action speak for itself.

[TrumpIsAPeado]

If that's the criteria he's going to have to make a last minute bid to get jennifer arcuri on the throne before the coronation.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

I would suspect that he has a fair amount of dirt on her as well.

[Kato]

Chris Heaton-Harris MP is the Tory bloke to whom you refer. He's Secretary of state for N.Ireland and a sleekit individual if ever there was one.
He was on Sky before the BBC interview and more or less repeated his performance. I thought Laura did OK. It was obvious the guy was talking tosh about Boris' integrity.

Sometimes you have to let the action speak for itself.There are more than a few examples of the ex-Pm's lies she could have given him, I didn't notice any push back at all. Compared to the previous week when Stephen Flynn called him out as a liar and Kuenssberg interjected with "That's quite a charge." He's probably the best known liar in the UK just now but the BBC seem to have difficulty seeing this.

They also spoke as though it were the lies he told about his parties at No10 which brought him down. It wasn't, it was a whole other set of lies.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

Caligula and his horse vibes

Of course for tales of Caligula’s debauchery and licentiousness, we rely on the writings of Suetonius.

In Johnson’s case we rely on Sue Gray.

[Hibbyradge]

Of course for tales of Caligula’s debauchery and licentiousness, we rely on the writings of Suetonius.

In Johnson’s case we rely on Sue Gray.

:not worth

[grunt]

Storage costs for unused PPE & equipment since the start of the pandemic have hit £1.4bn.

[Kato]

Storage costs for unused PPE & equipment since the start of the pandemic have hit £1.4bn.World Beating Britain.

No one else buys up, stores then incinerates useless PPE like us.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[archie]

World Beating Britain.

No one else buys up, stores then incinerates useless PPE like us.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

I'm not one for defending the Tories, but what would you have done. They secured PPE that fortunately wasn't needed. Isn't that better than situations where we needed it and couldn't get it?

[grunt]

I'm not one for defending the Tories, but what would you have done. They secured PPE that fortunately wasn't needed. Isn't that better than situations where we needed it and couldn't get it?
They bought multiple times what could possibly be needed because they got all excited about how much of the country's money they found they could funnel to their friends. If you want to discuss scandals, the corrupt and venal Tories' Covid PPE scandal is up there with the worst. *Edit to add: much of the PPE purchased from Tory friends and family was substandard and could not be used / would not have protected our healthcare workers.

[archie]

They bought multiple times what could possibly be needed because they got all excited about how much of the country's money they found they could funnel to their friends. If you want to discuss scandals, the corrupt and venal Tories' Covid PPE scandal is up there with the worst.

If that's the case it is indefensible.

[Kato]

I'm not one for defending the Tories,


Errm, ok.


but what would you have done.?

Prioritised companies with a history of procuring PPE and used some due diligence rather than prioritised a VIP Fast Track lane which had zero due diligence and was subsequently found to be illegal.



They secured PPE that fortunately wasn't needed.

Seems like you are a tad wanting in the information stakes on this one, archie.

They secured PPE that was unusable. Which is why it is being burned.

It was no good, duff, dodgy, snide, counterfeit.




Isn't that better than situations where we needed it and couldn't get it?

It would've been great if we got a bargain. Instead we are lumbered with having to pay for the cost, pay for the storage while it's waiting to get burned and paying for it getting burned. Meanwhile Michelle Mone has a new yacht paid for by us with nothing in return.



Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[archie]

Errm, ok.



Prioritised companies with a history of procuring PPE and used some due diligence rather than prioritised a VIP Fast Track lane which had zero due diligence and was subsequently found to be illegal.




Seems like you are a tad wanting in the information stakes on this one, archie.

They secured PPE that was unusable. Which is why it is being burned.

It was no good, duff, dodgy, snide, counterfeit.





It would've been great if we got a bargain. Instead we are lumbered with having to pay for the cost, pay for the storage while it's waiting to get burned and paying for it getting burned. Meanwhile Michelle Mone has a new yacht paid for by us with nothing in return.



Sent from my SM-A528B using TapatalkI'm not defending any of that. I think it is at least reasonable to examine a range of motivations, rather than immediately assume the venal.

[Smartie]

I'm not defending any of that. I think it is at least reasonable to examine a range of motivations, rather than immediately assume the venal.

To be fair, we've had a couple of years now to consider the range of motivations.

An automatic assumption of the venal might have been unfair at the time.

But by now? I think there's enough out there to suggest it was all a bit ropey.

[archie]

To be fair, we've had a couple of years now to consider the range of motivations.

An automatic assumption of the venal might have been unfair at the time.

But by now? I think there's enough out there to suggest it was all a bit ropey.I think the panic and need for speed may well have given opportunity.

[Kato]

I'm not defending any of that. I think it is at least reasonable to examine a range of motivations, rather than immediately assume the venal.I used to do that regarding Tories. Then, once I hit ten years old, the penny dropped.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Kato]

I think the panic and need for speed may well have given opportunity.Political connections ie cronyism gave the opportunity.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Bostonhibby]

They bought multiple times what could possibly be needed because they got all excited about how much of the country's money they found they could funnel to their friends. If you want to discuss scandals, the corrupt and venal Tories' Covid PPE scandal is up there with the worst. *Edit to add: much of the PPE purchased from Tory friends and family was substandard and could not be used / would not have protected our healthcare workers.Be interesting to know which companies are profiting from said storage, and if it's an open ended arrangement.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[archie]

Political connections ie cronyism gave the opportunity.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

So there was no panic and need for speed.

[Kato]

So there was no panic and need for speed.


No need for panic. A govt that invokes panic or panics itself is useless.

Of course we needed items quickly, I'm struggling to see where I said differently.

Things could have been sped up if they hadn't ignored valid companies with experience, in favour of their chums with no experience at all.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/uks-biggest-ppe-suppliers-ignored-24175698.amp

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Kato]

This article dates from before the existence of a VIP Fast Lane was known.

https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/2020/apr/16/government-ignores-uk-textiles-firms-desperate-to-make-ppe

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Kato]

They secured PPE that fortunately wasn't needed.

An interesting assertion.

Do you have a source which explains this, archie?

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

Article on the subject, behind paywall

When waste is worth it
The British government made mistakes when sourcing protective gear
Not all of them were bad

Storing tens of billions of surgical masks, gowns and gloves is expensive, it turns out. By the end of 2021 the government had spent about £737m ($967m) for the privilege of owning unused personal protective equipment (ppe) bought in a panic during the pandemic. Although £301m of this was normal storage fees, such as renting warehouses, the majority was fines. It racked up £436m in the logistics equivalent of parking tickets—charges for leaving goods in shipping containers because it had nowhere to put them.
A report published on March 30th by the National Audit Office, an official spending watchdog, into the government’s purchase of ppe during the crisis is littered with such horrors. A buying frenzy in spring 2020, as the pandemic let rip, saw it spend about £13bn on 38bn pieces of ppe. By July, the health department realised it had purchased far more than it could possibly use. About 14bn items remain unopened in shipping containers and warehouses. Around 1.5bn of them are likely to pass their expiry date soon and to end up in the bin. Nearly 4bn were never fit for front-line use in the first place, at a cost of roughly £3bn. That is an awful lot of waste, both physical and fiscal.
So mistakes were undeniably made, but some were worth making. At the start of the pandemic, the government had to take risks. Countries were fighting over ppe supplies. “We had Trump sending the cia round trying to gazump everybody on ppe,” recalled Dominic Cummings, a former aide to the prime minister, before a parliamentary committee in 2021. Meanwhile, nhs staff were reduced to wearing bin-bags. The price of a surgical gown shot up from £0.33 before the pandemic to £4.50 in the middle of it. In short, all was chaos.
The government abandoned caution in response. Usual spending rules were set aside. Officials buying ppe were exempted from usual procurement rules, with the aim of speeding up the process and avoiding them being outbid by foreign spooks. Due diligence was sometimes replaced by a quick Google, and some suppliers were paid up-front. Predictably, on occasion nothing was received in return. Some ppe was substandard. About 20% of all orders were expected to be unusable. In the end, the figure was only 11%.
In normal times, the government’s problem with risk is aversion rather than addiction. Civil servants can be overcautious, moving slowly to avoid wasting money or having a decision reversed by a judge. Usually, this instinct is healthy. A business can move fast and break things; a government should not. Reversing this principle in the pandemic made sense, despite the sometimes poor results, which were entirely predictable. Business as usual would have meant less money wasted. But it would also have meant less ppe available, argue the government’s defenders, and potentially more nhs staff dying.
Some mistakes cannot be forgiven so readily, however. The government set up a “ vip lane” along which suppliers known to ministers or officials were fast-tracked. Chancers claiming to have access to ppe were splashed across newspapers and then put before ministers, who were desperate both for supply and to avoid negative headlines. “Most of them were full of ****,” says one person involved. It looked like crony capitalism and a court later said the scheme was unlawful. Perhaps worse, it was ineffective. Equipment bought through the usual channels turned out less likely to be defective and more likely to arrive on time. By contrast, the nao estimates that a third of spending through the vip lane, or roughly £1.4bn, is “at risk”.
Memories of the chaos of 2020 are already fading. Labour has attacked the Conservatives over wasteful spending in this period. At the time, however, the government was waging a war against a new and terrifying illness, with the state balance-sheet as a weapon. Gloves and gowns were a fraction of the £400bn bill for surviving the pandemic. Inevitably not all of it was spent well. John Maynard Keynes summed up a similar situation when describing the British government’s decision to trash its finances to fight the second world war: “We threw good housekeeping to the wind, but we saved ourselves.”

[Stairway 2 7]

This tory government really are the dregs. Heartless pathetic policy for an almost non existent problem. Yvette Cooper and Diana Johnson have both spoke well but it's a totally depressing watch

@PolitlcsUK
·
A summary of the Illegal Migration Bill:

- asylum seekers will be deported within 28 days
- claims will be heard remotely
- illegal immigrants banned from claiming modern slavery
- legal duty on Home Sec to deport illegal immigrants

[Ozyhibby]

This tory government really are the dregs. Heartless pathetic policy for an almost non existent problem. Yvette Cooper and Diana Johnson have both spoke well but it's a totally depressing watch

@PolitlcsUK
·
A summary of the Illegal Migration Bill:

- asylum seekers will be deported within 28 days
- claims will be heard remotely
- illegal immigrants banned from claiming modern slavery
- legal duty on Home Sec to deport illegal immigrants

Did Suella say that 100 million people are on their way here in parliament today?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

Did Suella say that 100 million people are on their way here in parliament today?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

From the BBC


More than 45,000 people entered the UK via Channel crossings last year, up from about 300 in 2018

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230307/3f8f14baa161350a6f4048873ce7b356.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[archie]

An interesting assertion.

Do you have a source which explains this, archie?

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

This details the pressing needs and errors made https://www.nao.org.uk/reports/investigation-into-the-management-of-ppe-contracts/

[hibsbollah]

Tory MP Tom Hunt (mr nominative determinism) calls out Keir Starmer for once saying there was a ‘racist undercurrent’ to asylum law in the U.K. I would love it if Keir STILL says this and stands by this self evident truth, but really pathetic if that’s the limit of their attacks. And the question itself is clear evidence that
in the minds of these rancid racist corrupt ****s on the Tory back benches, it IS really about race.

[hibsbollah]

Good for John McDonnell for calling out the inflammatory language the ****ing **** Home Secretary **** is using.

[Kato]

This details the pressing needs and errors made https://www.nao.org.uk/reports/investigation-into-the-management-of-ppe-contracts/A bit opaque that one.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Kato]

Article on the subject, behind paywall

When waste is worth it
The British government made mistakes when sourcing protective gear
Not all of them were bad

Storing tens of billions of surgical masks, gowns and gloves is expensive, it turns out. By the end of 2021 the government had spent about £737m ($967m) for the privilege of owning unused personal protective equipment (ppe) bought in a panic during the pandemic. Although £301m of this was normal storage fees, such as renting warehouses, the majority was fines. It racked up £436m in the logistics equivalent of parking tickets—charges for leaving goods in shipping containers because it had nowhere to put them.
A report published on March 30th by the National Audit Office, an official spending watchdog, into the government’s purchase of ppe during the crisis is littered with such horrors. A buying frenzy in spring 2020, as the pandemic let rip, saw it spend about £13bn on 38bn pieces of ppe. By July, the health department realised it had purchased far more than it could possibly use. About 14bn items remain unopened in shipping containers and warehouses. Around 1.5bn of them are likely to pass their expiry date soon and to end up in the bin. Nearly 4bn were never fit for front-line use in the first place, at a cost of roughly £3bn. That is an awful lot of waste, both physical and fiscal.
So mistakes were undeniably made, but some were worth making. At the start of the pandemic, the government had to take risks. Countries were fighting over ppe supplies. “We had Trump sending the cia round trying to gazump everybody on ppe,” recalled Dominic Cummings, a former aide to the prime minister, before a parliamentary committee in 2021. Meanwhile, nhs staff were reduced to wearing bin-bags. The price of a surgical gown shot up from £0.33 before the pandemic to £4.50 in the middle of it. In short, all was chaos.
The government abandoned caution in response. Usual spending rules were set aside. Officials buying ppe were exempted from usual procurement rules, with the aim of speeding up the process and avoiding them being outbid by foreign spooks. Due diligence was sometimes replaced by a quick Google, and some suppliers were paid up-front. Predictably, on occasion nothing was received in return. Some ppe was substandard. About 20% of all orders were expected to be unusable. In the end, the figure was only 11%.
In normal times, the government’s problem with risk is aversion rather than addiction. Civil servants can be overcautious, moving slowly to avoid wasting money or having a decision reversed by a judge. Usually, this instinct is healthy. A business can move fast and break things; a government should not. Reversing this principle in the pandemic made sense, despite the sometimes poor results, which were entirely predictable. Business as usual would have meant less money wasted. But it would also have meant less ppe available, argue the government’s defenders, and potentially more nhs staff dying.
Some mistakes cannot be forgiven so readily, however. The government set up a “ vip lane” along which suppliers known to ministers or officials were fast-tracked. Chancers claiming to have access to ppe were splashed across newspapers and then put before ministers, who were desperate both for supply and to avoid negative headlines. “Most of them were full of ****,” says one person involved. It looked like crony capitalism and a court later said the scheme was unlawful. Perhaps worse, it was ineffective. Equipment bought through the usual channels turned out less likely to be defective and more likely to arrive on time. By contrast, the nao estimates that a third of spending through the vip lane, or roughly £1.4bn, is “at risk”.
Memories of the chaos of 2020 are already fading. Labour has attacked the Conservatives over wasteful spending in this period. At the time, however, the government was waging a war against a new and terrifying illness, with the state balance-sheet as a weapon. Gloves and gowns were a fraction of the £400bn bill for surviving the pandemic. Inevitably not all of it was spent well. John Maynard Keynes summed up a similar situation when describing the British government’s decision to trash its finances to fight the second world war: “We threw good housekeeping to the wind, but we saved ourselves.”What publication is that from SW?

Invoking Keynes at the end is a nice trick.

I'm not finding it that well rounded as there is no explanation as to why established suppliers were shunned.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[archie]

A bit opaque that one.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

It's a National Audit report. Maybe glance at the summary?

[Ozyhibby]

https://twitter.com/hewitson10/status/1633088913244913664?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

With 100 million people on the way, house prices should go up a bit I would think.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

What publication is that from SW?

Invoking Keynes at the end is a nice trick.

I'm not finding it that well rounded as there is no explanation as to why established suppliers were shunned.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

The Economist.

A report from the audits office here
https://www.firstpracticemanagement.co.uk/blog/2022-blog-posts/criticism-over-government-ppe-payments-following-nao-report/


I think there was a panic and a race to get ppe at the start. There wasn't enough to go around. The tories saw an opportunity and lined there pockets undoubtedly, how much I don't know

[Kato]

The Economist.

A report from the audits office here
https://www.firstpracticemanagement.co.uk/blog/2022-blog-posts/criticism-over-government-ppe-payments-following-nao-report/


I think there was a panic and a race to get ppe at the start. There wasn't enough to go around. The tories saw an opportunity and lined there pockets undoubtedly, how much I don't knowCheers, on the Keynes reference - at that time after the war a way was found to park the debt then embark a public spending programme which saw disparity fall probably to its lowest levels ever in the UK.

Invoking his name given what is happening now is just laughable.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

Michael Gove says parents of children who are truant from school should have benefits cut, because poverty improves attendance maybe? Absolute c of a man

https://leftfootforward.org/2023/03/michael-gove-blasted-for-comments-on-cutting-parents-benefits-over-school-truancy/?doing_wp_cron=1678125867.0692350864410400390625

[Ozyhibby]

https://twitter.com/peston/status/1633136398751481856?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230307/66735c49c0e5e5443358b72cb867753b.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

The DHSC wrote off £8.7billion on PPE:



£0.67 billion - "PPE which cannot be used, for instance because it is defective."

£2.6 billion - "PPE which is not suitable for use within the health and social care sector but which the Department considers might be suitable for other uses (although these potential other uses are as yet uncertain)."

£0.75 billion - "PPE which is in excess of the amount that will ultimately be needed."

£4.7 billion - "Adjustment to the year-end valuation of PPE due to the market price of equivalent PPE at the year-end being lower than the original purchase price."

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1051381/DHSC-Annual-Report-and-Accounts-2020-21.pdf

[Stairway 2 7]

Positively vile Sir Graham Brady will stand down at the next election

[Stairway 2 7]

Stephen flynn not mincing his words today when replying to mirror journalist

Pippa Crerar
@PippaCrerar
·
Suella Braverman says there are 100 million people across the world who could qualify for refugee status under UK's current laws. "Let's be clear, they're coming here

Stephen Flynn MP
@StephenFlynnSNP
·
The Home Secretary is a liar.

[Bristolhibby]

From the BBC


More than 45,000 people entered the UK via Channel crossings last year, up from about 300 in 2018

Wonder what changed from 2018 to 2022?

All roads lead to the Tory ship storm of BREXIT.

J

[grunt]

The UN's Refugee Agency say they are "profoundly concerned" by the Government's 'Illegal Migration Bill' which they say is essentially a refugee ban.

"This would be a clear breach of the Refugee Convention and would undermine a longstanding, humanitarian tradition."

[grunt]

Asylum seekers make up 6% of all immigrants into the UK and just 60% are successful in their applications.

Remember small boats before Brexit? There were none because there were safe routes into the UK.

This crisis like the hate is being generated by the government.

Every day seems to bring a political announcement designed not to improve British society but primarily to divide the electorate, create unnecessary barriers between us, and get us shouting at each other. It's so exhausting and over time hugely damaging.

[cabbageandribs1875]

Petition · Rishi Sunak should block Boris Johnson’s plan to give an honour to his father · Change.org (https://www.change.org/p/rishi-sunak-should-block-boris-johnson-s-plan-to-give-an-honour-to-his-father?redirect=false)

[Mibbes Aye]

Asylum seekers make up 6% of all immigrants into the UK and just 60% are successful in their applications.

Remember small boats before Brexit? There were none because there were safe routes into the UK.

This crisis like the hate is being generated by the government.

Every day seems to bring a political announcement designed not to improve British society but primarily to divide the electorate, create unnecessary barriers between us, and get us shouting at each other. It's so exhausting and over time hugely damaging.

There was a significant shift, from shipping containers to small boats, for a number of reasons, both before and after Brexit. Brexit was one factor but far from the only one. And small boats were coming from at least twenty years ago after the French shut Sangatte.

[hibsbollah]

Asylum seekers make up 6% of all immigrants into the UK and just 60% are successful in their applications.

Remember small boats before Brexit? There were none because there were safe routes into the UK.

This crisis like the hate is being generated by the government.

Every day seems to bring a political announcement designed not to improve British society but primarily to divide the electorate, create unnecessary barriers between us, and get us shouting at each other. It's so exhausting and over time hugely damaging.

You are correct, both in your timeline about Brexit and the political blame imperatives that led to it. Home Office processing centres, which used to exist in central and Eastern Europe post Syria, could resolve this situation overnight.

[Col2]

The “stop the boats” campaign and legislation today really pushes my buttons. Not because it isn’t a problem, it’s the blatant deliberate attempt to announce for the 456th time a new strategy that they know and hope fails and then blame everyone else over the next few months.

It’s the worst kind of politics but even more so as it goes against any basic humanity. I am genuinely embarrassed to be associated with this country when I listen to this toxic crap.

Surely to god even with the Mail and Express cheerleading this doesn’t land as a big deal to your average voter? Or certainly not any more than 2-3% halfwits.

[ElginHibbie]

The “stop the boats” campaign and legislation today really pushes my buttons. Not because it isn’t a problem, it’s the blatant deliberate attempt to announce for the 456th time a new strategy that they know and hope fails and then blame everyone else over the next few months.

It’s the worst kind of politics but even more so as it goes against any basic humanity. I am genuinely embarrassed to be associated with this country when I listen to this toxic crap.

Surely to god even with the Mail and Express cheerleading this doesn’t land as a big deal to your average voter? Or certainly not any more than 2-3% halfwits.

You'd like to think so, but with state that they are in fact they are pushing this so hard they must it's a vote winner.

Come the next election 75% of Tory platform is gonna be this plus some anti-Trans rhetoric cause it's all they will have

[Bostonhibby]

You'd like to think so, but with state that they are in fact they are pushing this so hard they must it's a vote winner.

Come the next election 75% of Tory platform is gonna be this plus some anti-Trans rhetoric cause it's all they will haveYou never know, they might decide to throw in something about our entrenched wealthy Russian community in Kensington, Belgravia and Mayfair who are only here by virtue of their wealth and connections to a certain political party. They didnt get in on small boats and weren't asylum seekers or former EU citizens either so are arguably easier targets for Suella and Rishi to do a bit of populist deporting?

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Col2]

You'd like to think so, but with state that they are in fact they are pushing this so hard they must it's a vote winner.

Come the next election 75% of Tory platform is gonna be this plus some anti-Trans rhetoric cause it's all they will have

It’s incredible. They might as well call themselves UKIP. They have zero idea how to grow the economy other than burn EU regulations to let corporate cut down on employer rights and bring in cheaper goods that don’t make minimum standards. Braverman makes my top 3 of most despised people ever to live in this planet. I wish the absolute worst for her.

[neil7908]

It used to be said that whenever the US goes, the UK follows. Now apparently we are copying Australia.

The sad thing is that stop the boats stuff worked over there. I fear that we may see a similar impact in the UK in the months ahead.

[Scorrie]

The forthcoming general election is shaping up to be an awful campaign with immigration and keeping out foreigners at its core. If UKIP or BNP had come out with this 10-15 years ago, there probably would have been outcry. Now it’s mainstream. Truly depressing. And as for the Daily Mail calling out Gary Linekars comments on the asylum policy, I would worry about criticism from a “newspaper” that cheered Mosley’s Blackshirts

[Kato]

The forthcoming general election is shaping up to be an awful campaign with immigration and keeping out foreigners at its core. If UKIP or BNP had come out with this 10-15 years ago, there probably would have been outcry. Now it’s mainstream. Truly depressing. And as for the Daily Mail calling out Gary Linekars comments on the asylum policy, I would worry about criticism from a “newspaper” that cheered Mosley’s BlackshirtsWe might be at war before then.


https://twitter.com/JoostBroekers/status/1633103917633482755?t=N7LJt0CWe2FPcrHiSpk93g&s=09

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[hibsbollah]

We might be at war before then.


https://twitter.com/JoostBroekers/status/1633103917633482755?t=N7LJt0CWe2FPcrHiSpk93g&s=09

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

And if you disagree you are the direct descendant of Neville Chamberlain.
It’s almost too obvious but this immediately comes to mind.
https://youtu.be/r3BO6GP9NMY

[grunt]

Disgusting from anyone. That it comes from a Minister of the Crown? Appalling.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fqr7ehNWAAEd6Zp?format=jpg&name=medium

[archie]

My take on it. The Tories know they are toast unless there is a dramatic shift. So they have to pick on wedge issues that they know can get some traction. It looks like these will be: immigration; voting ID and gender stuff. They aren't daft, so they know that this will get pushback. And that will enable the seed of doubt to be put in voters heads.

The thing is how should there be a response to that? To my mind a calm,measured response is needed in all of these. Take voting ID. It's a device to stop poorer people voting. But in the States the unanswerable question posed by the right is 'why don't you want elections to be secure'? That immediately puts opponents on the defensive. Inevitably the visceral easily understood making voting secure argument trumps the more nuanced opposition rebuttal. On small boats the Tories are desperate for opponents to jump in with arguments that can be spun as open borders arguments. And on trans issues there is always someone who says stuff so OTT that it can be exploited. Nobody says it's fair. So how do we combat that?

In my view we need to focus on the human stories of people on the boats. I also think opposition politicians have to identify solutions that stop people getting on the boats. Whether that is a mix of ways to apply for asylum or funding the French to enforce better or funding more home based solutions in originating countries or whatever, keep the focus on the people at the heart of it.

[grunt]

Take voting ID. It's a device to stop poorer people voting. But in the States the unanswerable question posed by the right is 'why don't you want elections to be secure'? That immediately puts opponents on the defensive. Inevitably the visceral easily understood making voting secure argument trumps the more nuanced opposition rebuttal.
Eminently answerable, and has been many times. We don't have a problem with voter fraud, and the numbers strongly support this. And the Tories' "solution" makes more problems than it solves. Also eminently provable.

[archie]

Eminently answerable, and has been many times. We don't have a problem with voter fraud, and the numbers strongly support this. And the Tories' "solution" makes more problems than it solves. Also eminently provable.

That's right. But the point of the line of attack is that it doesn't get that far. The seed is sown.

[ErinGoBraghHFC]

Disgusting from anyone. That it comes from a Minister of the Crown? Appalling.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fqr7ehNWAAEd6Zp?format=jpg&name=medium

Billions[emoji1787] she sounds like one of those Americans in YouTube comment sections bragging about how it’s the best country in the world and everywhere else is ***** and how everyone wants to move to America. Tone deaf, “the west” is falling apart all around us and she’s hitting out with that, Jesus wept.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

That's right. But the point of the line of attack is that it doesn't get that far. The seed is sown.Not an "unanswerable question" then.

[archie]

Not an "unanswerable question" then.

Any question is answerable. But the point is to set up questions where giving the answer reinforces the point that the questioner was making. It's a very old ( and effective) political trick.

[grunt]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FqsZmqvWwAAU2Cp?format=jpg&name=large

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FqsZmqxWIAMrerg?format=jpg&name=large

[Iain G]

Billions[emoji1787] she sounds like one of those Americans in YouTube comment sections bragging about how it’s the best country in the world and everywhere else is ***** and how everyone wants to move to America. Tone deaf, “the west” is falling apart all around us and she’s hitting out with that, Jesus wept.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

She is even more of a **** than Priti Patel, who knew that was even possible!

Sunak saying that the people want the boats stopped, he is pandering to the same little Englander "who won the war / bloody foreigners coming over here and stealing our dole money" mentality that lead to the disaster that is Brexit.

The UK is ****ed.

[heretoday]

I can't understand how the combined forces of the law on both sides of the Channel can't root out the gangsters who are ripping the migrants off and giving them false hope. Where do the big boats come from for a start?

[Kato]

I can't understand how the combined forces of the law on both sides of the Channel can't root out the gangsters who are ripping the migrants off and giving them false hope. Where do the big boats come from for a start?Seems like they don't care about stopping the boats by the more sensible means. Allowing migrants in and stacking them in hotels in red wall constituencies is resulting in the kick back they want, rile up the racists and play culture wars until the election.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Just Alf]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FqsZmqvWwAAU2Cp?format=jpg&name=large

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FqsZmqxWIAMrerg?format=jpg&name=large




Incredible.

So the UK's current rules on seeking asylum mean you have to be already here before you can claim for it.

[heretoday]

Seems like they don't care about stopping the boats by the more sensible means. Allowing migrants in and stacking them in hotels in red wall constituencies is resulting in the kick back they want, rile up the racists and play culture wars until the election.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Well if you say so but I rather imagine the whole business is run by mafia-type organisations and the cops just don't have the resources to hunt them down.

[grunt]

Incredible.

So the UK's current rules on seeking asylum mean you have to be already here before you can claim for it. ... and you're not allowed to travel here in order to seek asylum.

[Kato]

Well if you say so but I rather imagine the whole business is run by mafia-type organisations and the cops just don't have the resources to hunt them down.The mafia don't place them in the hotels.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Jones28]

Incredible.

So the UK's current rules on seeking asylum mean you have to be already here before you can claim for it.

And if you travel here "illegally" to seek asylum you're automatically prohibited from being granted asylum.

[Bristolhibby]

Incredible.

So the UK's current rules on seeking asylum mean you have to be already here before you can claim for it.

Just don’t come here on a boat.

Swim?

Fly?

Back of a truck?

Someone’s boot?

J

[silverhibee]

We might be at war before then.


https://twitter.com/JoostBroekers/status/1633103917633482755?t=N7LJt0CWe2FPcrHiSpk93g&s=09

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Disabled and unemployed will be first to be sent to front line in Ukraine.

[silverhibee]

I can't understand how the combined forces of the law on both sides of the Channel can't root out the gangsters who are ripping the migrants off and giving them false hope. Where do the big boats come from for a start?

Yip, someone in France is making a fortune selling boats, probably a Tory with shares in a dinghy company.

[Kato]

https://twitter.com/implausibleblog/status/1633443332704673792?t=GjDOcDYxkUgS2tGeJZ7DEA&s=19


As I said it's almost as though they want to foment discontent with the more racisty element. Don't process those ineligible so they hang around doing nothing, tabloids drip hate every day, home secretary says people's "concerns" ( ie hatred ) is understandable. A recipe for violence and more racism.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[cabbageandribs1875]

a very good point Mr Lineker, it's uncanny, and Scottish unionists want us to remain tied to a vile Government in London, pfftt



https://scontent.fman1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/330275547_459147306348953_8541599872748709546_n.jp g?_nc_cat=105&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=dbeb18&_nc_ohc=w-aaHQ1uuyUAX_N9mNa&_nc_ht=scontent.fman1-2.fna&oh=00_AfCQI9ST_4OSsxtxawai-SCah1hgbHdy9hp7u5st-5ok_A&oe=640E359B

[Stairway 2 7]

Uk asylum applications vs our big eu neighbours..

https://mobile.twitter.com/AlexTaylorNews/status/1633230687443484672

AlexTaylorNews
Thank you
@BBCRosAtkins
as ever for being one of the very rare UK journalists to show UK has far fewer asylum applications than big EU countries👇

Most UK media never point this out, fanning the "they're all coming here" hysteria behind Sunak and Braverman's hateful policies

[Iain G]

I still find it very weird and disconcerting that people whose families came here as immigrants are the ones who seem so intent to stop other people being given that chance.

We are a nation built on immigration and currently have a huge shortfall in people wanting to work and live here since Brexit, wouldn't more immigration and integration be better for the UK and solve a lot of problems for immigrant and country?

[hibsbollah]

Fascinating celebrity positioning going on around the small boats culture wars cluster****. Post PMQs, a Starmer spokesman criticises Linekers use of language, only for Alistair Campbell Blairite spin doctor and darling of the daytime tv sofa, to support Lineker. Lord Dubs who was brought back from Nazi Germany as a child, similarly supportive. Emily Maitlis wondering why Lineker is allowed to put the boot into Qatar at the World Cup on the BBC without sanction but can’t criticize his own government…

Meanwhile people are struggling to heat their homes or clothe their kids without having two jobs. Pure distraction.

[heretoday]

Yip, someone in France is making a fortune selling boats, probably a Tory with shares in a dinghy company.

Matt Hancock strikes again.

[Bostonhibby]

Matt Hancock strikes again.His pub landlord will be moving from being awarded overpriced PPE contracts for equipment that wasnt fit for purpose to the rubber boat business?

Would you buy a dinghy from any of them?

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/suella-bravermans-cowardly-attack-civil-29404179

Another breach of the now meaningless ministerial code.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

Post PMQs, a Starmer spokesman criticises Linekers use of language ...I didn't see this. I am amazed at the contortions that Starmer seems to be going through to avoid upsetting Brexit voters and xenophobes. Instead of courting these people, he should be explaining to them why they are wrong to have these beliefs. If he can't do that, then he's not going to be an effective leader. Oh for some decent honest and truthful politicians in this country!

[hibsbollah]

I didn't see this. I am amazed at the contortions that Starmer seems to be going through to avoid upsetting Brexit voters and xenophobes. Instead of courting these people, he should be explaining to them why they are wrong to have these beliefs. If he can't do that, then he's not going to be an effective leader. Oh for some decent honest and truthful politicians in this country!

‘A spokesman for Starmer said: “I think there is a general observation that I’d make, which is I think comparisons with Germany in the 1930s aren’t always the best way to make one’s argument.’

Interestingly, this statement and further comments saying neutral things like ‘Mr Linekers comments are no surprise’ are now being trailed in the i and HuffPost as Starmer SUPPORTS Lineker, while the completely opposite negative take from Andrew Sparrow in the Guardian Live Feed, which describes the spokesman as calling the comments ‘wrong’, haven’t made the final edit.

It’s fairly clear Labour’s attack lines are that the Tories DELIVERY of policy is wrong, without criticizing the policies themselves. God forbid we’d ever have a coherent defence of the contribution refugees actually make.

[Smartie]

As bleak a picture as we like to paint of the country at times, I still find it impossible to accept that those who might like this policy are sufficient in number that they must be pandered to over those who object to it to different degrees.

[Stairway 2 7]

‘A spokesman for Starmer said: “I think there is a general observation that I’d make, which is I think comparisons with Germany in the 1930s aren’t always the best way to make one’s argument.’

Interestingly, this statement and further comments saying neutral things like ‘Mr Linekers comments are no surprise’ are now being trailed in the i and HuffPost as Starmer SUPPORTS Lineker, while the completely opposite negative take from Andrew Sparrow in the Guardian Live Feed, which describes the spokesman as calling the comments ‘wrong’, haven’t made the final edit.

It’s fairly clear Labour’s attack lines are that the Tories DELIVERY of policy is wrong, without criticizing the policies themselves. God forbid we’d ever have a coherent defence of the contribution refugees actually make.

The full quote is non committal verging on Lineker went too far but his views are understandable

A spokesman for Starmer said: “I think there is a general observation that I’d make, which is I think comparisons with Germany in the 1930s aren’t always the best way to make one’s argument.

“On the specifics of Gary Lineker speaking out, everybody will know that he has been a passionate advocate on behalf of refugees and refugee rights, including taking refugees into his own home.

“So, I don’t think it will come as a surprise that he has strong views on this subject.”

[WeeRussell]

Well-in, Lineker.

And the bbc being bothered about impartiality is a new one on me.

[Stairway 2 7]

Chris Daw kc very good on the subject

https://mobile.twitter.com/BestForBritain/status/1633497536831815680

BestForBritain
💥 AMAZING by Chris Daw KC
@crimlawuk
. A must-watch and must-share.

"To detain someone, without trial, without access to a lawyer, or the courts, and then deport them - it's abominable. The UK will become an international human rights pariah. There's nothing 50-50 about it."

[Stairway 2 7]

Well-in, Lineker.

And the bbc being bothered about impartiality is a new one on me.

Bbc chair can support the tories but its football host can't be against

[WeeRussell]

Bbc chair can support the tories but its football host can't be against

Sounds about right S27 👍

[Stairway 2 7]

Gray and Lineker are seen as shocking by the tories but the BBC and public sector being ran and edited by tories is fine.

The three News Agents are a loss to the BBC

https://mobile.twitter.com/TheNewsAgents/status/1633510388200349710

TheNewsAgents
“Robbie Gibb made my life really, really hard - people would say to me, “Robbie is watching you.”

@lewis_goodall
recalls being “lectured” at the BBC on impartiality by a board member who had been Theresa May's Head of Comms when she was PM.

[Rumble de Thump]

Bbc chair can support the tories but its football host can't be against

The BBC's director general also used to be a Tory councillor and was deputy chairman of the Hammersmith and Fulham Conservative party.

[Pretty Boy]

The rhetoric from the Tory Party has gone pure fascist now. The signs have been there for a while but the last couple of days have seen it move into openly official policy.

'Stop the boats' is just dehumanising on every level. Their tweet today saying Starmer won't 'stop the boats' because he's a 'lefty lawyer' is another step on the path. Lump the foreigners, commies (and I use the term in the loosest possible sense with Starmer) and judiciary and lawyers together as threats to 'our safety'.

It's an age old problem. People expect fascists and Nazis to march up the street in jack boots and black shirts. The reality is they will ride in on a wave of populism with a smart suit and the old school tie.

Labour need to stop arguing that the 'stop the boats' plan is unworkable or an imperfect solution and start calling it out for the abhorrent line and illegal plan that it is.

[grunt]

Chris Daw kc very good on the subject

https://mobile.twitter.com/BestForBritain/status/1633497536831815680

BestForBritain
�� AMAZING by Chris Daw KC
@crimlawuk
. A must-watch and must-share.

"To detain someone, without trial, without access to a lawyer, or the courts, and then deport them - it's abominable. The UK will become an international human rights pariah. There's nothing 50-50 about it."Came here to post this, so thank you. Clear commentary, most appreciated.

[Smartie]

The rhetoric from the Tory Party has gone pure fascist now. The signs have been there for a while but the last couple of days have seen it move into openly official policy.

'Stop the boats' is just dehumanising on every level. Their tweet today saying Starmer won't 'stop the boats' because he's a 'lefty lawyer' is another step on the path. Lump the foreigners, commies (and I use the term in the loosest possible sense with Starmer) and judiciary and lawyers together as threats to 'our safety'.

It's an age old problem. People expect fascists and Nazis to march up the street in jack boots and black shirts. The reality is they will ride in on a wave of populism with a smart suit and the old school tie.

Labour need to stop arguing that the 'stop the boats' plan is unworkable or an imperfect solution and start calling it out for the abhorrent line and illegal plan that it is.

:top marks

[grunt]

The rhetoric from the Tory Party has gone pure fascist now. I've got into trouble on this forum before for saying this. Gives me no pleasure to see others saying the same thing.

[He's here!]

‘A spokesman for Starmer said: “I think there is a general observation that I’d make, which is I think comparisons with Germany in the 1930s aren’t always the best way to make one’s argument.’

Interestingly, this statement and further comments saying neutral things like ‘Mr Linekers comments are no surprise’ are now being trailed in the i and HuffPost as Starmer SUPPORTS Lineker, while the completely opposite negative take from Andrew Sparrow in the Guardian Live Feed, which describes the spokesman as calling the comments ‘wrong’, haven’t made the final edit.

It’s fairly clear Labour’s attack lines are that the Tories DELIVERY of policy is wrong, without criticizing the policies themselves. God forbid we’d ever have a coherent defence of the contribution refugees actually make.

Starmer's spokesman is correct. The go-to comparison with the Nazis which celebrity virtue signallers like Lineker now deploy in relation to pretty much anything perceived as right of centre belittles the horrors perpetrated by the Nazis - and shows a lack of respect for their victims.

[hibsbollah]

Starmer's spokesman is correct. The go-to comparison with the Nazis which celebrity virtue signallers like Lineker now deploy in relation to pretty much anything perceived as right of centre belittles the horrors perpetrated by the Nazis - and shows a lack of respect for their victims.

‘Portrayed’ as right of centre :faf:
Cmon now. By any sort of normal measurements this administration is extreme right.

[Pretty Boy]

Starmer's spokesman is correct. The go-to comparison with the Nazis which celebrity virtue signallers like Lineker now deploy in relation to pretty much anything perceived as right of centre belittles the horrors perpetrated by the Nazis - and shows a lack of respect for their victims.

There are times when comparisons with the Nazis are valid though. Godwin's law is flawed in that respect.

Sloganeering that is dehumanising, a cult of us and them, basing an entire political ideology broadly around ethno nationalism, strong border controls, national identity and taking back control is by any sensible measure extreme right wing politics.

When you reach that stage then comparisons with fascism and Nazism cease to be OTT scaremongering and become valid observations and criticism. Nothing about this policy and the rhetoric around it is 'centre right', it's way, way beyond that.

[Rumble de Thump]

Starmer's spokesman is correct. The go-to comparison with the Nazis which celebrity virtue signallers like Lineker now deploy in relation to pretty much anything perceived as right of centre belittles the horrors perpetrated by the Nazis - and shows a lack of respect for their victims.

The Nazis didn't just magically have power and control over the German people one day. They took various deliberate steps to bit by bit erode their freedoms and plunge Germany deep into fascism. That's when the real horrors began. The best way we could respect the victims of Nazis is by acknowledging when we see governments taking the same kind of steps the Nazis took that led to that horrific point (and ideally put a stop to it before it's too late).

[grunt]

Starmer's spokesman is correct. The go-to comparison with the Nazis which celebrity virtue signallers like Lineker now deploy in relation to pretty much anything perceived as right of centre belittles the horrors perpetrated by the Nazis - and shows a lack of respect for their victims.
Are you suggesting Lineker was wrong?

[Smartie]

Starmer's spokesman is correct. The go-to comparison with the Nazis which celebrity virtue signallers like Lineker now deploy in relation to pretty much anything perceived as right of centre belittles the horrors perpetrated by the Nazis - and shows a lack of respect for their victims.

There’s a fair point to be made about the dangers of using hyperbole, or by using overly dramatic language to describe innocuous situations - none more so than it means that those words carry less weight when they’re actually required to address something of sufficient gravity.

Unfortunately we’re in the latter category here and Lineker’s words were very much justified.

[Hibrandenburg]

There are times when comparisons with the Nazis are valid though. Godwin's law is flawed in that respect.

Sloganeering that is dehumanising, a cult of us and them, basing an entire political ideology broadly around ethno nationalism, strong border controls, national identity and taking back control is by any sensible measure extreme right wing politics.

When you reach that stage then comparisons with fascism and Nazism cease to be OTT scaremongering and become valid observations and criticism. Nothing about this policy and the rhetoric around it is 'centre right', it's way, way beyond that.

At least in the early days of German fascism there was an organised opposition, Emily Thornberry tonight refusing to say the Tory policy is morally wrong, instead she's arguing that it's just empty promises. At this rate Labour will be further right than the Tories come election time.

[heretoday]

I didn't see this. I am amazed at the contortions that Starmer seems to be going through to avoid upsetting Brexit voters and xenophobes. Instead of courting these people, he should be explaining to them why they are wrong to have these beliefs. If he can't do that, then he's not going to be an effective leader. Oh for some decent honest and truthful politicians in this country!

You're right. I'd love it if Starmer suddenly announced that Labour intend to hold another EU referendum within two years if they win the election. They'd get a huge number of votes in Scotland!

[Hibbyradge]

You're right. I'd love it if Starmer suddenly announced that Labour intend to hold another EU referendum within two years if they win the election. They'd get a huge number of votes in Scotland!

They would.

But the Tories would win the election.

[cabbageandribs1875]

You're right. I'd love it if Starmer suddenly announced that Labour intend to hold another EU referendum within two years if they win the election. They'd get a huge number of votes in Scotland!


and lose a huge number of votes down south

[Kato]

Is it fascism?

We already have the rampant cronyism and clear signs of corruption, we have their version of being a "patriot", they are now displaying a cleat disdain of human rights and the laws surrounding them, they're identifying and scapegoating a minority. The don't quite own the mass media but their allies in the press are still dripping their xenophobia. People might not buy these papers but their presence is well established in social media and, this can't be understated, the rhetoric of their front pages are given airtime every day on almost all TV news stations - that "tomorrow's front pages" crap is given way to much credence. Corporate power is protected eg the payments they pay to railway companies when the unions go on strike. They broke the working classes long ago so have pretty much succeeded in suppressing them, the culture of the working class has also been narrowed right down.

There's more than a bit fascism in there. Today they attacked the judiciary, the civil service and made sure everyone knew who they were in the process of othering, dissent being treated with disdain.

Where does this stop with them? They have knocking on two years left and the rhetoric is getting rather screechy. Tobias Elwood doing a bit tub thumping around the war too. These people are narcissistic freaks who feel entitled enough to do whatever they want with this country.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[cabbageandribs1875]

Dutch Newspaper Volkskrant

https://scontent.fman1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/53578819_358848288174163_3170406512715628544_n.jpg ?_nc_cat=102&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=TYaMiMa883AAX-8I9M3&_nc_ht=scontent.fman1-2.fna&oh=00_AfBFDJicumDREopK66nOXAH_-teVjfm-5kv90bBqQr9gpw&oe=64306781

[WeeRussell]

The Nazis didn't just magically have power and control over the German people one day. They took various deliberate steps to bit by bit erode their freedoms and plunge Germany deep into fascism. That's when the real horrors began. The best way we could respect the victims of Nazis is by acknowledging when we see governments taking the same kind of steps the Nazis took that led to that horrific point (and ideally put a stop to it before it's too late).

Pretty much sums up my thoughts. Lineker isn’t calling anyone nazis, he’s drawing-on how dangerous policy and language can develop and lead to unimaginable horrors, as it has in the past.

Similar to what you said - it’s not like a group of evil leaders suddenly appeared.

But then I think almost everyone knows that.

[WeeRussell]

Starmer's spokesman is correct. The go-to comparison with the Nazis which celebrity virtue signallers like Lineker now deploy in relation to pretty much anything perceived as right of centre belittles the horrors perpetrated by the Nazis - and shows a lack of respect for their victims.

Oh, and easily one of your worst in a while.

[Kato]

celebrity virtue signallers

Gee willickers.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Scorrie]

Is it fascism?

We already have the rampant cronyism and clear signs of corruption, we have their version of being a "patriot", they are now displaying a cleat disdain of human rights and the laws surrounding them, they're identifying and scapegoating a minority. The don't quite own the mass media but their allies in the press are still dripping their xenophobia. People might not buy these papers but their presence is well established in social media and, this can't be understated, the rhetoric of their front pages are given airtime every day on almost all TV news stations - that "tomorrow's front pages" crap is given way to much credence. Corporate power is protected eg the payments they pay to railway companies when the unions go on strike. They broke the working classes long ago so have pretty much succeeded in suppressing them, the culture of the working class has also been narrowed right down.

There's more than a bit fascism in there. Today they attacked the judiciary, the civil service and made sure everyone knew who they were in the process of othering, dissent being treated with disdain.

Where does this stop with them? They have knocking on two years left and the rhetoric is getting rather screechy. Tobias Elwood doing a bit tub thumping around the war too. These people are narcissistic freaks who feel entitled enough to do whatever they want with this country.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

For me, it’s well on the way to fascism. Many of the key features are there, or are emerging. As I mentioned earlier, if this agenda had been put forward by UKIP or BNP 15 years ago, it would have been called out. Now it’s mainstream. The calls to leave the ECHR cos it’s European is really worrying. The human rights it protects isn’t those just of asylum seekers or immigrants, it’s our human rights - you and me. If we leave that then there is pretty much no barrier to this or any government doing what they want.

[Kato]

I wonder who the celebrity virtue signallers were in 1930s Germany.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Hibrandenburg]

I wonder who the celebrity virtue signallers were in 1930s Germany.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

The pre war Anti-Nazi Resistance is well documented.

[Iain G]

I wonder who the celebrity virtue signallers were in 1930s Germany.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Gert von Luneker was prominent, but he got told to concentrate on selling bratwurst snacks and reading out the Bandy results on the wireless.

[Iain G]

Starmer's spokesman is correct. The go-to comparison with the Nazis which celebrity virtue signallers like Lineker now deploy in relation to pretty much anything perceived as right of centre belittles the horrors perpetrated by the Nazis - and shows a lack of respect for their victims.

What a load of virtue signalling nonsense, he has made no comment that "shows a lack of respect for their victims", you are getting all riled up and doing your own signalling and not understanding the context of what he is saying....jeezo man!

[He's here!]

Are you suggesting Lineker was wrong?

I don't necessarily agree with the government's proposals, but I do agree with Labour's Yvette Cooper that Lineker was wrong to use such rhetoric. Comparing a non-violent, if controversial, plan to control illegal immigration with one of the most barbaric, criminal regimes in history trivialises the horrors of Nazism and exemplifies today's Young Ones-style trend to tar anyone you disagree with as a fascist. I'm not sure I even get which language Lineker is referring to. Pretty much every nation in the world which is striving to curb illegal immigration talks about 'controlling' it. I'm quite surprised the supposedly impartial BBC is prepared to allow someone like Lineker, who has built his clout via that platform, to express such views publicly.

[He's here!]

I wonder who the celebrity virtue signallers were in 1930s Germany.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

How many immigrants were desperate to make a new life in Nazi Germany?

[Kato]

How many immigrants were desperate to make a new life in Nazi Germany?The circumstances of the people being targeted by fascist rhetoric is immaterial, its the targeting that is abhorrent.

Trying to negate people's opinion because of their fame or otherwise is pretty sinister.

Who else do you want to shut up because you disagree with them?

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[One Day Soon]

Get used to this because we are going to be on a diet of it and equivalents across other policy areas all the way to the next general election. They are a busted flush with no economic bullets left to fire, detested by a significant volume of the electorate after Johnson, Partygate, the widespread corruption and then Truss.

There is only one cure for this and that is turfing them out at the next election. Fail to do that and we'll see nakedly authoritarian government and the complete erosion of any remaining capacity of our public institutions and legal system to hold them to account. This is a brutally cynical attempt to bait the opposition and the British public in order to drag the terms of debate in the next election onto 'us and them' ground in a way that does **** all to address the policy issue and is all about trying to enrage the debate to two apparently incompatible extreme polar opposites so that people have to pick a side. They're betting on scaremongering and the Brexit zeitgeist delivering for hard right.

[Kato]

Get used to this because we are going to be on a diet of it and equivalents across other policy areas all the way to the next general election. They are a busted flush with no economic bullets left to fire, detested by a significant volume of the electorate after Johnson, Partygate, the widespread corruption and then Truss.

There is only one cure for this and that is turfing them out at the next election. Fail to do that and we'll see nakedly authoritarian government and the complete erosion of any remaining capacity of our public institutions and legal system to hold them to account. This is a brutally cynical attempt to bait the opposition and the British public in order to drag the terms of debate in the next election onto 'us and them' ground in a way that does **** all to address the policy issue and is all about trying to enrage the debate to two apparently incompatible extreme polar opposites so that people have to pick a side. They're betting on scaremongering and the Brexit zeitgeist delivering for hard right.Agree with all this.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[archie]

Get used to this because we are going to be on a diet of it and equivalents across other policy areas all the way to the next general election. They are a busted flush with no economic bullets left to fire, detested by a significant volume of the electorate after Johnson, Partygate, the widespread corruption and then Truss.

There is only one cure for this and that is turfing them out at the next election. Fail to do that and we'll see nakedly authoritarian government and the complete erosion of any remaining capacity of our public institutions and legal system to hold them to account. This is a brutally cynical attempt to bait the opposition and the British public in order to drag the terms of debate in the next election onto 'us and them' ground in a way that does **** all to address the policy issue and is all about trying to enrage the debate to two apparently incompatible extreme polar opposites so that people have to pick a side. They're betting on scaremongering and the Brexit zeitgeist delivering for hard right.

I couldn't agree more. This is a well planned campaign which is designed to to opponents on the back foot. The central triplet 'stop the boats' has resonance. Who doesn't want to stop the boats? But the framing of the question forces critics to give qualified answers. 'Do you want to stop illegal immigration '? Opponents answer 'yes but'. That's a deliberate tactic because it's the qualification that they want you to hear, giving the impression you support illegal immigration. It's the same with voter fraud. 'Do you want to stamp out voter fraud'? 'Yes but' has the same effect.

Because Labour know that's the tactic they don't jump in with both feet. But I suspect they are happy with the proxies doing it for them.

This isn’t new. In the 80s the Tories were under attack for racist policies. They ran a famous campaign 'Labour say he's black, we say he's British'. https://www.reddit.com/r/PropagandaPosters/comments/5pgin7/labour_says_hes_black_tories_say_hes_british_the/

Predictably Labour thundered in on the attack. The result? The Tory campaign put out what could be claimed to be an anti racist message. The noise of the pushback from opponents reassured Tories who were racists that their was nothing to worry about.

When your enemy sets a sophisticated trap you don't run into it.

[Stairway 2 7]

Tories official twitter seems all proud of the lefty lawyer line towards Starmer. I think the lawyer part is most interesting. They are going down the route of saying people who disagree with the legality of their decisions have a political agenda, it's a similar route trodden by the Republicans in the US

https://mobile.twitter.com/Conservatives/status/1633462282020696064

@Conservatives
Labour won’t stop the boats. Keir Starmer is just another lefty lawyer

[Bostonhibby]

Get used to this because we are going to be on a diet of it and equivalents across other policy areas all the way to the next general election. They are a busted flush with no economic bullets left to fire, detested by a significant volume of the electorate after Johnson, Partygate, the widespread corruption and then Truss.

There is only one cure for this and that is turfing them out at the next election. Fail to do that and we'll see nakedly authoritarian government and the complete erosion of any remaining capacity of our public institutions and legal system to hold them to account. This is a brutally cynical attempt to bait the opposition and the British public in order to drag the terms of debate in the next election onto 'us and them' ground in a way that does **** all to address the policy issue and is all about trying to enrage the debate to two apparently incompatible extreme polar opposites so that people have to pick a side. They're betting on scaremongering and the Brexit zeitgeist delivering for hard right.I really couldn't have put it any better myself, whipping up a good bit of deflection over this and similarly short term and divisive issues then drifting away from them should the aim be achieved is likely the strategy.

For example if preventing immigrants / asylum seekers coming in on small boats was an issue who has been in power for more than a decade? Why not do something this extreme earlier? Apart from the fact that it probably isn't legal or sustainable internationally.

Bozo lurching out of Europe signing things he never fully understood and being followed sheep like by his flock in the cabinet meant that the existing arrangements we had over this type of entry to the country got worse, not better, in view of the lack of a strategy to replace them and not actually recognising how UK had changed the nature of existing controls and arrangements between us and the EU.

Between now and the election there will be more slogan based statements that will largely come to nothing but will appeal to the core Nasty party supporter by way of validation and they will be hoping it touches a nerve with more. Think, £350m a week to the NHS plastered on the side of a bus.

Hopefully the other parties don't rise to this and other toxic bait that you rightly say will be thrown out there between now and the next election. The Nasties are desperate to get attention away from their terrible conduct so it's not going to be pleasant.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[hibsbollah]

When your enemy sets a sophisticated trap you don't run into it.

That’s one take. The other is continue to fight the good fight and make the case that has merit because society as a whole will be dragged down as a result if you don’t.

[archie]

Tories official twitter seems all proud of the lefty lawyer line towards Starmer. I think the lawyer part is most interesting. They are going down the route of saying people who disagree with the legality of their decisions have a political agenda, it's a similar route trodden by the Republicans in the US

https://mobile.twitter.com/Conservatives/status/1633462282020696064

@Conservatives
Labour won’t stop the boats. Keir Starmer is just another lefty lawyer

It's a coordinated campaign.

[archie]

That’s one take. The other is continue to fight the good fight and make the case that has merit because society as a whole will be dragged down as a result if you don’t.

OK, but I want them out, so the real victory is winning the next election. This is exactly the ground the tories want to fight on. Why gift them that advantage?

[Kato]

OK, but I want them out, so the real victory is winning the next election. This is exactly the ground the tories want to fight on. Why gift them that advantage?What should Labour do for the 2 years before the election?

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[grunt]

OK, but I want them out, so the real victory is winning the next election. This is exactly the ground the tories want to fight on. Why gift them that advantage?
Where's the evidence that the main opposition party is moving the argument elsewhere? What are Labour doing to change the ground?

[hibsbollah]

OK, but I want them out, so the real victory is winning the next election. This is exactly the ground the tories want to fight on. Why gift them that advantage?

Because instead you can easily make the case for genuine policies that would deal with the small boats crisis. WITHOUT playing wolf whistle with the racists.You could start with 1. Reopen asylum claim processing centres in Eastern Europe that were closed down and not reopened after Covid, so there is a safe and quick route to assessing claims. 2. Provide funding to employ and train 100 new claims handlers within the Home office, to speed up the backlog.
3. Get intel that is accurate; eg-the Albanian economic asylum seekers all using the same ‘blood feud’ justification for claiming asylum was clearly without merit, so rewrite the guidance.

You don’t have to make ‘difficult’ arguments about the intrinsic benefits to the economy of welcoming Syrian or Eritrean doctors or engineers fleeing war, or the usefulness in showing regimes we don’t like and that we’re trying to influence, (that human rights and the rule of law actually exist here and we’re not making demands on China and Russia from a position of total hypocrisy), you just need to make a few workable practical policy suggestions.

[Bristolhibby]

How many immigrants were desperate to make a new life in Nazi Germany?

They just turned on their own population first, the German Jews.

The final solution didn’t just magically appear at the Wannsee Conference in 1942. It took years to get to that point.

Snuffing out policies that are clearly similar to policies and language employed in Germany in the 30s is our duty.

Calling them out for what they are is sooo important less they become normalised. (Like what happened in 30s Germany).

J

[archie]

Where's the evidence that the main opposition party is moving the argument elsewhere? What are Labour doing to change the ground?

They need to win the election and avoid the booby traps.

[grunt]

Because instead you can easily make the case for genuine policies that would deal with the small boats crisis. WITHOUT playing wolf whistle with the racists.
:aok:

But why don't Labour suggest these things?

[Ozyhibby]

Tories official twitter seems all proud of the lefty lawyer line towards Starmer. I think the lawyer part is most interesting. They are going down the route of saying people who disagree with the legality of their decisions have a political agenda, it's a similar route trodden by the Republicans in the US

https://mobile.twitter.com/Conservatives/status/1633462282020696064

@Conservatives
Labour won’t stop the boats. Keir Starmer is just another lefty lawyer

You have to get the public to turn on the judiciary for us to get to where they want to take us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pretty Boy]

You have to get the public to turn on the judiciary for us to get to where they want to take us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That is by far and away the most worrying aspect.

There is forceful rhetoric against the ECHR and a deliberate ploy to allow ignorant equation of it with the EU to become almost accepted as fact. We now have a policy that quite evidently breaches international law but the aim isn't really to pass the policy, it's to create an environment in which 'we can't control our borders because the unelected bureaucratic judiciary aided by lefty lawyers says we can't'.

Very few people believe there should be no control over the borders. 'Controlling our borders' isn't the really troubling rhetoric albeit context is important and it currently carries some pretty sinister tones. It's the erosion of trust in international law and the judiciary, describing asylum seekers as a 'swarm' or 'an invasion' and blatant victim blaming when something as tragic as the boat sinking last week happens. It's the first steps on a very dangerous path, once people lose respect for basic standards of human rights and the institutions that uphold them then you can basically do what you want as a government. Throw in the all too easy dehumanising language used to describe actual people and you can see the problem. That's where comparisons to the formative years of Nazism become valid.

[archie]

Because instead you can easily make the case for genuine policies that would deal with the small boats crisis. WITHOUT playing wolf whistle with the racists.You could start with 1. Reopen asylum claim processing centres in Eastern Europe that were closed down and not reopened after Covid, so there is a safe and quick route to assessing claims. 2. Provide funding to employ and train 100 new claims handlers within the Home office, to speed up the backlog.
3. Get intel that is accurate; eg-the Albanian economic asylum seekers all using the same ‘blood feud’ justification for claiming asylum was clearly without merit, so rewrite the guidance.

You don’t have to make ‘difficult’ arguments about the intrinsic benefits to the economy of welcoming Syrian or Eritrean doctors or engineers fleeing war, or the usefulness in showing regimes we don’t like and that we’re trying to influence, (that human rights and the rule of law actually exist here and we’re not making demands on China and Russia from a position of total hypocrisy), you just need to make a few workable practical policy suggestions.

All good ideas. I don't know how Labour will play it - I'm not a party member. But your response has also highlighted an issue. You acknowledge that some claims for asylum are 'clearly without merit'. If you were a politician that would be the message that opponents would trumpet - 'prominent opponent of Govt small boats plan admits asylum claims are without merit. And that would be the result. You would be pertayed as defending the indefensible.

Now I think what you are saying is credible and grounded in realism. But the issue isn't really about small boats, as we can see from the messaging about lefty lawyers and being soft on immigration.

[CropleyWasGod]

Not sure if this has been discussed. Sorry if I have missed it.

Did I read correctly that, if a migrant has been trafficked for the purposes of (amongst others) working in agriculture, constructiuon, sex work, domestic service, they won't be protected by the UK's Modern Slavery laws?

[One Day Soon]

They just turned on their own population first, the German Jews.

The final solution didn’t just magically appear at the Wannsee Conference in 1942. It took years to get to that point.

Snuffing out policies that are clearly similar to policies and language employed in Germany in the 30s is our duty.

Calling them out for what they are is sooo important less they become normalised. (Like what happened in 30s Germany).

J


Absolutely correct. Democracy to fascism isn't a switch that has just two defaults. It's a spectrum with two extremes and quite a bit of ground in between. If you don't fight for each millimetre of ground then one day you wake up and find that the fascist wolf is right outside the door.

Yesterday I watched an academic arguing that populists across the globe have been re-engineering and re-using the nazi playbook, core to which was the use of crassly simplified messages and the articulation of arguments which set out and 'us and them' internal divides within society and nation. I don't think that politicians within the UK using these techniques now and in recent years are fascists but I do think that the longer it goes on and the more successful it is then the more they are paving the way for the real fascists.

[Andy Bee]

Not sure if this has been discussed. Sorry if I have missed it.

Did I read correctly that, if a migrant has been trafficked for the purposes of (amongst others) working in agriculture, constructiuon, sex work, domestic service, they won't be protected by the UK's Modern Slavery laws?

Not only that, they'll be locked up in a migrant jail for upto 28 days without any form of appeal then apparently by that time this new system will have processed them and then deport them to another country. Whether that's Rwanda or some other place hasn't been determined. It's just all a load of bull**** that is never going to be legal.

[grunt]

Not sure if this has been discussed. Sorry if I have missed it. Did I read correctly that, if a migrant has been trafficked for the purposes of (amongst others) working in agriculture, constructiuon, sex work, domestic service, they won't be protected by the UK's Modern Slavery laws?I'm afraid you'll have to decide for yourself what the PM's reply meant.

https://twitter.com/theSNP/status/1633454453360607233?s=20

[One Day Soon]

I'm afraid you'll have to decide for yourself what the PM's reply meant.

https://twitter.com/theSNP/status/1633454453360607233?s=20


Not bad from Flynn, not bad at all.

[Stairway 2 7]

I'm afraid you'll have to decide for yourself what the PM's reply meant.

https://twitter.com/theSNP/status/1633454453360607233?s=20

He's clearly better than Humza or Forbes, he needs a Scottish seat for when the winner gets bombed out in a years time

[Santa Cruz]

He's clearly better than Humza or Forbes, he needs a Scottish seat for when the winner gets bombed out in a years time

Agree. I suspect he might stand in the FM or DFM's seat. Got to be a reason they're not resinging as MSP's? He would only stand in a safe seat.

[One Day Soon]

He's clearly better than Humza or Forbes, he needs a Scottish seat for when the winner gets bombed out in a years time


My cat is better than Yousaf or Forbes.

It's entirely likely the SNP will be a ten year rebuild project in a year's time and that's assuming that the only public damage that's been done by that stage is political...

[hibsbollah]

All good ideas. I don't know how Labour will play it - I'm not a party member. But your response has also highlighted an issue. You acknowledge that some claims for asylum are 'clearly without merit'. If you were a politician that would be the message that opponents would trumpet - 'prominent opponent of Govt small boats plan admits asylum claims are without merit. And that would be the result. You would be pertayed as defending the indefensible.

Now I think what you are saying is credible and grounded in realism. But the issue isn't really about small boats, as we can see from the messaging about lefty lawyers and being soft on immigration.

Well I’m speaking with confidence on the Albanian matter because I have a close family member who works as a civil servant right at the front line of this system and she’s told me. (If I was standing as an elected representative making a positive case for immigration instead of spraffing nonsense on a message board I probably would keep quiet about it :greengrin). But yeah, there ARE undoubtedly fraudulent asylum claims, that a genuine debate should engage with, and these claims overwhelmingly came from a few geographies. The Albanians weren’t overwhelmingly criminal gangs as the Tories scandalously claimed, they were just economic migrants trying for a better life away from a failed state. But they WERE lying on their forms in large numbers, and were competing against GENUINE refugees fleeing war and terror from Syria, Afghanistan (the most numerous nationality that are on the small boats currently), Eritrea, and increasingly Muslims from occupied Kashmir that are experiencing largely unreported terror from the fascist (yes, fascist) Indian government. And so, problematic for those civil servants having to assess their claims.

But yes, I agree broadly with the point you’re making.

[archie]

Well I’m speaking with confidence on the Albanian matter because I have a close family member who works as a civil servant right at the front line of this system and she’s told me. (If I was standing as an elected representative making a positive case for immigration instead of spraffing nonsense on a message board I probably would keep quiet about it :greengrin). But yeah, there ARE undoubtedly fraudulent asylum claims, that a genuine debate should engage with, and these claims overwhelmingly came from a few geographies. The Albanians weren’t overwhelmingly criminal gangs as the Tories scandalously claimed, they were just economic migrants trying for a better life away from a failed state. But they WERE lying on their forms in large numbers, and were competing against GENUINE refugees fleeing war and terror from Syria, Afghanistan (the most numerous nationality that are on the small boats currently), Eritrea, and increasingly Muslims from occupied Kashmir that are experiencing largely unreported terror from the fascist (yes, fascist) Indian government. And so, problematic for those civil servants having to assess their claims.

But yes, I agree broadly with the point you’re making.

I'm not doubting for a second what you are saying, nor that it comes from a good place. I'm simply trying to move the discussion on to what I think it's actually about, which in turn shapes how Labour in particular should respond.

[hibsbollah]

I'm not doubting for a second what you are saying, nor that it comes from a good place. I'm simply trying to move the discussion on to what I think it's actually about, which in turn shapes how Labour in particular should respond.

Yeah I don’t disagree. And additionally I’d like to see the Labour front bench articulate an alternative way as I’ve suggested above.

[archie]

Yeah I don’t disagree. And additionally I’d like to see the Labour front bench articulate an alternative way as I’ve suggested above.

As an aside, I had a family member who was involved in housing refugees. I was out with them one day and they said to me: 'I'm so ashamed, after all these poor people have been through this is how we treat them' I was pretty startled and asked him what he meant. He offered to show me the property as it was 5 mins away. I went with them, all burning indignation. Then they showed me the offending building- it was flats overlooking the pitch at Firhill! I think they were laughing at me for the rest of the day.

[He's here!]

The circumstances of the people being targeted by fascist rhetoric is immaterial, its the targeting that is abhorrent.

Trying to negate people's opinion because of their fame or otherwise is pretty sinister.

Who else do you want to shut up because you disagree with them?

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

I'm not trying to negate his opinion. He's as entitled to it as I am to mine. I'm just disagreeing with what he said and questioning whether, with Lineker as the BBC's most high-profile presenter (except maybe Sir David Attenborough?), they can maintain a veneer of impartiality by allowing him to wade into such controversies unchecked. I've seen folk claim that because he didn't make the comments in his role as a sports pundit it's all well and good, but for the viewing public he's unquestionably the BBC's Mr Match of the Day.

They'll be loathe to pull him up for fear of him moving on, sure, but I suspect this has the potential to lead to a parting of ways.

[grunt]

I'm not trying to negate his opinion. He's as entitled to it as I am to mine. I'm just disagreeing with what he said and questioning whether, with Lineker as the BBC's most high-profile presenter (except maybe Sir David Attenborough?), they can maintain a veneer of impartiality by allowing him to wade into such controversies unchecked. I've seen folk claim that because he didn't make the comments in his role as a sports pundit it's all well and good, but for the viewing public he's unquestionably the BBC's Mr Match of the Day.

They'll be loathe to pull him up for fear of him moving on, sure, but I suspect this has the potential to lead to a parting of ways.
But it was ok for Andrew Neil to spout his right wing views day in, day out when he was actually employed by the BBC?

[He's here!]

They just turned on their own population first, the German Jews.

The final solution didn’t just magically appear at the Wannsee Conference in 1942. It took years to get to that point.

Snuffing out policies that are clearly similar to policies and language employed in Germany in the 30s is our duty.

Calling them out for what they are is sooo important less they become normalised. (Like what happened in 30s Germany).

J

Difference being we live in a democracy, not a dictatorship. This policy (should it ever get off the ground) will be put to the test at the next general election, where polling shows Labour look all but certain to regain power. They would then be tasked with finding a way of managing immigration that's more palatable with the voting public. I remain wholly unconvinced, though, that the UK is heading towards a normalisation of Nazism.

[archie]

But it was ok for Andrew Neil to spout his right wing views day in, day out when he was actually employed by the BBC?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/mar/09/gary-lineker-ministers-refugees-bbc-tweet-chair

[He's here!]

But it was ok for Andrew Neil to spout his right wing views day in, day out when he was actually employed by the BBC?

If he did then, again, you could question the BBC's supposed impartiality. I didn't used to watch much of Neil as I found him too abrasive (and not just the brillo pad on his head) but it seemed to me that in general he gave Tory politicians as tough a grilling as anyone.

The only time I recall him completely departing from script was when he opened his show with a tirade against the Bataclan bombers.

[ElginHibbie]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/mar/09/gary-lineker-ministers-refugees-bbc-tweet-chair

"the BBC will keep on resisting external pressure, report the facts and ask the difficult questions, in an impartial manner"

They need to start doing this first before they could keep doing it surely? I am sure Lineker still being the main headline on BBC News website has nothing to do with "external pressure"

[McD]

I don't necessarily agree with the government's proposals, but I do agree with Labour's Yvette Cooper that Lineker was wrong to use such rhetoric. Comparing a non-violent, if controversial, plan to control illegal immigration with one of the most barbaric, criminal regimes in history trivialises the horrors of Nazism and exemplifies today's Young Ones-style trend to tar anyone you disagree with as a fascist. I'm not sure I even get which language Lineker is referring to. Pretty much every nation in the world which is striving to curb illegal immigration talks about 'controlling' it. I'm quite surprised the supposedly impartial BBC is prepared to allow someone like Lineker, who has built his clout via that platform, to express such views publicly.


I'm pretty certain Gary Lineker was fairly well known before he started working for the BBC

[Rumble de Thump]

If he did then, again, you could question the BBC's supposed impartiality. I didn't used to watch much of Neil as I found him too abrasive (and not just the brillo pad on his head) but it seemed to me that in general he gave Tory politicians as tough a grilling as anyone.

The only time I recall him completely departing from script was when he opened his show with a tirade against the Bataclan bombers.

The BBC has no intention of being impartial and the Government has no intention of allowing it to be. With people heavily linked to the Conservative party in prominent positions at the top of the organisation there's no point even pretending it's got a chance of being impartial. These partisan people weren't put in place because they're great at managing media companies.

The complaints aimed at someone who talks about people kicking a football around aren't actually about his lack of impartiality. It wasn't even about him giving the 'wrong' opinion. It's about him stating some facts that the Conservatives don't want to be publicly stated.

[He's here!]

I'm pretty certain Gary Lineker was fairly well known before he started working for the BBC

For those of us old enough to remember him as a terrific striker sure, but he retired from playing circa 30 years ago. He's undoubtedly built a significantly greater public profile via punditry.

[Rumble de Thump]

Difference being we live in a democracy, not a dictatorship. This policy (should it ever get off the ground) will be put to the test at the next general election, where polling shows Labour look all but certain to regain power. They would then be tasked with finding a way of managing immigration that's more palatable with the voting public. I remain wholly unconvinced, though, that the UK is heading towards a normalisation of Nazism.

The Germans also lived in a democracy.

[Stairway 2 7]

For those of us old enough to remember him as a terrific striker sure, but he retired from playing circa 30 years ago. He's undoubtedly built a significantly greater public profile via punditry.

Hardly significantly. The same people who watch match of the day know England's world cup golden Boot winner. Everyone in England watched the 1990 world cup. He's hardly a league 2 player that made it big on the TV. He was the face of walkers and they had called their crisps salt and Lineker for a year, years before he joined match of the day

[grunt]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/mar/09/gary-lineker-ministers-refugees-bbc-tweet-chair
:confused: This article doesn't mention Andrew Neil?

[archie]

:confused: This article doesn't mention Andrew Neil?

No. But it's a reasoned argument about a strategic approach to defending the BBC that argues he should delete and not double down. Now I suspect you wouldn't care if the BBC was closed. But there are bigger issues at play.

[grunt]

No. But it's a reasoned argument about a strategic approach to defending the BBC that argues he should delete and not double down. Now I suspect you wouldn't care if the BBC was closed. But there are bigger issues at play.
Seemed strange to reply to my question about why Neil was not given the same treatment as Lineker for showing political bias by posting an article that doesn't mention him.

It won't surprise you that I don't agree it's a "reasoned argument". For a start, I disagree that Lineker has done anything to "bring the BBC into disrepute". If anything, this OTT backlash against his tweet is IMO doing more damage to the BBC's reputation. Bolton says that the public needs to know that the BBC will resist external pressure, but here he is putting external pressure on Lineker to take his words back. And why does Lineker have to recant before we can turn our attention to Sharp? Why doesn't Sharp resign and then we can discuss Lineker's tweet?

The Bolton article is complete rubbish.

[grunt]

We're talking about a football player's reaction to an awful Government policy instead of talking about the Tory Government's awful policy.

[archie]

Seemed strange to reply to my question about why Neil was not given the same treatment as Lineker for showing political bias by posting an article that doesn't mention him.

It won't surprise you that I don't agree it's a "reasoned argument". For a start, I disagree that Lineker has done anything to "bring the BBC into disrepute". If anything, this OTT backlash against his tweet is IMO doing more damage to the BBC's reputation. Bolton says that the public needs to know that the BBC will resist external pressure, but here he is putting external pressure on Lineker to take his words back. And why does Lineker have to recant before we can turn our attention to Sharp? Why doesn't Sharp resign and then we can discuss Lineker's tweet?

The Bolton article is complete rubbish.

No validity in the article at all? Really?

[silverhibee]

Get used to this because we are going to be on a diet of it and equivalents across other policy areas all the way to the next general election. They are a busted flush with no economic bullets left to fire, detested by a significant volume of the electorate after Johnson, Partygate, the widespread corruption and then Truss.

There is only one cure for this and that is turfing them out at the next election. Fail to do that and we'll see nakedly authoritarian government and the complete erosion of any remaining capacity of our public institutions and legal system to hold them to account. This is a brutally cynical attempt to bait the opposition and the British public in order to drag the terms of debate in the next election onto 'us and them' ground in a way that does **** all to address the policy issue and is all about trying to enrage the debate to two apparently incompatible extreme polar opposites so that people have to pick a side. They're betting on scaremongering and the Brexit zeitgeist delivering for hard right.

:top marks

[He's here!]

The Germans also lived in a democracy.

Not after Hitler came to power.

[grunt]

https://bylinetimes.com/2023/03/09/gary-lineker-andrew-neil-and-the-bbcs-real-impartiality-crisis/


Ultimately it is this imbalance in its coverage, rather than the views of any one particular individual, which represents the real crisis of impartiality at the BBC.

[archie]

https://bylinetimes.com/2023/03/09/gary-lineker-andrew-neil-and-the-bbcs-real-impartiality-crisis/

OK. But it has allowed Gary Lineker and the BBC to be the focus, rather than the issue. But I accept that it maybe keeps it in the public eye by making it more relatable.

[grunt]

No validity in the article at all? Really?I'm not going back to look again at the article. I gave you my thoughts on it.

[grunt]

OK. But it has allowed Gary Lineker and the BBC to be the focus, rather than the issue. But I accept that it maybe keeps it in the public eye by making it more relatable.
What's the "it" in this sentence?

[archie]

What's the "it" in this sentence?

The tweet.

[grunt]

The tweet.
Are you suggesting no one should tweet anything critical of the Government in case the Tories use it to divert attention? I'm not sure what else he could have done. It needed to be said by someone high profile, otherwise they get away with it.

[Kato]

Not after Hitler came to power.Yes there was. 1936 General Election.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[archie]

Yes there was. 1936 General Election.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Not in the proper sense.

[Stairway 2 7]

I know Timothy Snyder from his history of Ukraine. He sees parallels from modern right wing governments and the nazis

https://mobile.twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1181893731114524672

@Channel4News
"It's patently clear that some of the people who're involved in current politics…are borrowing some of the tactics of the 1920s and 1930s."

Yale History professor Timothy Snyder says some of today's politicians have learned propaganda techniques from twentieth century fascists

[Stairway 2 7]

Didn't actually know about this so it mustn't have made a news furore. Previously the bbc presenter Alan sugar shared a mock up of Hitler and Jeremy Corbyn side by side at Nuremberg.

https://mobile.twitter.com/Yojimbo56/status/1633738216296660992

[Bristolhibby]

Not in the proper sense.

Illustrating the point brilliantly. You don’t go from democracy to fascism over night. Eroding democracy is one of those steps.

Cough, prologuing Parliament, Boyer suppression / ID, boundary changes.

J

[archie]

Illustrating the point brilliantly. You don’t go from democracy to fascism over night. Eroding democracy is one of those steps.

Cough, prologuing Parliament, Boyer suppression / ID, boundary changes.

J

Well they did. After the 1933 election there was a sham election in 1936. Only Nazis and associates could stand and certain groups were disenfranchised.

[Iain G]

Because instead you can easily make the case for genuine policies that would deal with the small boats crisis. WITHOUT playing wolf whistle with the racists.You could start with 1. Reopen asylum claim processing centres in Eastern Europe that were closed down and not reopened after Covid, so there is a safe and quick route to assessing claims. 2. Provide funding to employ and train 100 new claims handlers within the Home office, to speed up the backlog.
3. Get intel that is accurate; eg-the Albanian economic asylum seekers all using the same ‘blood feud’ justification for claiming asylum was clearly without merit, so rewrite the guidance.

You don’t have to make ‘difficult’ arguments about the intrinsic benefits to the economy of welcoming Syrian or Eritrean doctors or engineers fleeing war, or the usefulness in showing regimes we don’t like and that we’re trying to influence, (that human rights and the rule of law actually exist here and we’re not making demands on China and Russia from a position of total hypocrisy), you just need to make a few workable practical policy suggestions.

You need to come up with a way to "stop the boats" before there are even thoughts of boats, as you say set up processing centres at source and let people into the UK who are genuine as a start, reduce the need for people to pay traffickers and then risk their life on a small boat across the channel.

The government seem to be so inhumane about this. We need trained and skilled migrants for the benefit of the economy and businesses.

[Kato]

Not in the proper sense.It's wrong to say there wasn't an election after Hitler came to power.

Whether that election was valid or not or run along lines which would satisfy everyone is neither here nor there.

We had a referendum on our place in the EU, not in the proper sense, but the election took place.



Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[archie]

It's wrong to say there wasn't an election after Hitler came to power.

Whether that election was valid or not or run along lines which would satisfy everyone is neither here nor there.

We had a referendum on our place in the EU, not in the proper sense, but the election took place.



Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

This is getting silly now. The election in 1936 (also a plebiscite) was only open to Nazis and associates to stand. It was a smoke screen. Here's the background. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1936_German_parliamentary_election_and_referendum

There is no comparison to the EU referendum whatsoever. I don't know if you noticed but even mainstream party supported remain.

[Stairway 2 7]

When uk public are asked they are always up there near the top compared to other nations when it comes to positive views of immigrants. Voters put it way behind the importance of the cost of living, the Tories don't want us talking about the economic sh show though

https://inews.co.uk/opinion/rishi-sunak-polls-cost-of-living-small-boats-2196591

Keiran Pedley
Rishi Sunak needs to look at the polls: voters care far more about the cost of living than small boats
Polling evidence currently suggests that it is the economy, cost of living and public services that matter more to voters overall

[Jack]

We're talking about a football player's reaction to an awful Government policy instead of talking about the Tory Government's awful policy.

That's the tory policy.

Say they're going to do something good, turn it into something awful, demonise those that call them out. Job done.

[Kato]

Well they did. After the 1933 election there was a sham election in 1936. Only Nazis and associates could stand and certain groups were disenfranchised.The FPTP system doesn't allow for a "proper" General Election. It allows a party with the most votes to be forced into opposition. But those elections are still held, as was the 1936 German election.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Kato]

This is getting silly now. The election in 1936 (also a plebiscite) was only open to Nazis and associates to stand. It was a smoke screen. Here's the background. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1936_German_parliamentary_election_and_referendum

There is no comparison to the EU referendum whatsoever. I don't know if you noticed but even mainstream party supported remain.Stop being silly then, archie.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Kato]

BBC's version impartiality revealed to be a fiction.


https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1633531983321001984?t=4ny1PusXPOOzxcTxE3NR1w&s=19

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[archie]

Stop being silly then, archie.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

How am I being silly?

[archie]

The FPTP system doesn't allow for a "proper" General Election. It allows a party with the most votes to be forced into opposition. But those elections are still held, as was the 1936 German election.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

No other party was allowed to stand and large parts of the electorate were disenfranchised. You'll be arguing next that the Von Stauffenberg plotters got a trial so what was the problem?

[archie]

That's the tory policy.

Say they're going to do something good, turn it into something awful, demonise those that call them out. Job done.

So don't walk into it!

[grunt]

So don't walk into it!... by keeping quiet about it?

[Rumble de Thump]

No other party was allowed to stand and large parts of the electorate were disenfranchised. You'll be arguing next that the Von Stauffenberg plotters got a trial so what was the problem?

The Germans had democracy until they didn't. And it was too late to do anything about it.

[archie]

... by keeping quiet about it?

Strategy isn't really your thing is it? The Tories announce appalling proposals. Gary Lineker tweets about it. So the discussion is quickly shifted on to that and the BBC rather than the issue in hand. Job done for the Tories wouldn't you say?

[archie]

The Germans had democracy until they didn't. And it was too late to do anything about it.

So what is your point? Are you seriously saying that the Tories, if they win the next election, will pass an Enabling Act that outlaws other parties and appoints Sunak as Chancellor?

[Pretty Boy]

The Germans had democracy until they didn't. And it was too late to do anything about it.

Yep I think the 1936 elections just proves the point rather than the opposite.

Fascism didn't just appear in Germany sometime around that election. The seeds had been sown for years and the process was long since started prior to 1936. And that brings us back to the point being made now. No one is saying 'stop the boats' is directly equatable to the 'final solution'. It's about that process of undermining the law, undermining democracy, dehumanising people, othering groups, creating an us and them mentality, gaslighting, wrapping policy up in national flags and national identity etc etc. That's the problem now and that's how you start on a path towards sham elections and whatever comes next. No one is saying we will definitely reach that point but there are uncomfortable parallels with situation that have ended up in very unfortunate places.

[ElginHibbie]

See Braverman has jumped all the way to say Lineker diminished the Holocaust with his comments... she is desperate to keep attention on him and away from her!

[Rumble de Thump]

So what is your point? Are you seriously saying that the Tories, if they win the next election, will pass an Enabling Act that outlaws other parties and appoints Sunak as Chancellor?

I'm not seriously suggesting anything you've just plucked out of your backside. I don't work for the Tories. I could understand people being ignorant of the tactics the Tories are using if they weren't well documented tactics that have been used by fascist governments for generations. But they are. It's textbook stuff. Ignoring it and pretending it's not happening would be very problematic. History tells us what can happen if we do.

[archie]

Yep I think the 1936 elections just proves the point rather than the opposite.

Fascism didn't just appear in Germany sometime around that election. The seeds had been sown for years and the process was long since started prior to 1936. And that brings us back to the point being made now. No one is saying 'stop the boats' is directly equatable to the 'final solution'. It's about that process of undermining the law, undermining democracy, dehumanising people, othering groups, creating an us and them mentality, gaslighting, wrapping policy up in national flags and national identity etc etc. That's the problem now and that's how you start on a path towards sham elections and whatever comes next. No one is saying we will definitely reach that point but there are uncomfortable parallels with situation that have ended up in very unfortunate places.

Fascism didn't start Iin 1936. It took a hold after the 1933 election. The 1936 elections were a sham. They happened. But you could only vote for nazi approved candidates.

[One Day Soon]

So what is your point? Are you seriously saying that the Tories, if they win the next election, will pass an Enabling Act that outlaws other parties and appoints Sunak as Chancellor?

What they would do is continue to erode the underpinnings of a democratic state as they have started to do with eg voter ID, attempting to change House of Commons custom and practice to prevent the legislature holding the executive to account, amending the law to stop the executive from being open to legal challenge...

Right now I'd guess that the majority of Tory MPs think they are doing these things for good reasons rather than with actively malign intent to create a fascist state. Every time they do they move the centre of polarity of our politics more to the right and closer to the hands of deeply unprincipled people like Johnson and Farage. What is the political distance from Johnson to Braverman to Francois to Tommy Robinson? I don't know, but if we want to avoid finding out we'd better realise that they need to be fought on everything, all the time - but deftly, not in ways that give flesh to their paper tigers. And especially on freedom of speech.

[hibsbollah]

When uk public are asked they are always up there near the top compared to other nations when it comes to positive views of immigrants. Voters put it way behind the importance of the cost of living, the Tories don't want us talking about the economic sh show though

https://inews.co.uk/opinion/rishi-sunak-polls-cost-of-living-small-boats-2196591

Keiran Pedley
Rishi Sunak needs to look at the polls: voters care far more about the cost of living than small boats
Polling evidence currently suggests that it is the economy, cost of living and public services that matter more to voters overall

I’ve seen you reference these stats before but I think they are misleading. It’s easy for a respondent to say they have positive views of migrants, they don’t want to be perceived as racist, that’s something to be avoided at all costs for most people as a label. It’s much more instructive to ask people who might be victims of prejudice to give THEIR views on how welcoming our society is ; (they may very well say positive things too, I have no idea). A good analogy might be; Very few bad drivers think they are bad drivers.

[archie]

I'm not seriously suggesting anything you've just plucked out of your backside. I don't work for the Tories. I could understand people being ignorant of the tactics the Tories are using if they weren't well documented tactics that have been used by fascist governments for generations. But they are. It's textbook stuff. Ignoring it and pretending it's not happening would be very problematic. History tells us what can happen if we do.

No need to be rude. Are you saying that the Tories are moving to some sort of fascist putsch?

[archie]

What they would do is continue to erode the underpinnings of a democratic state as they have started to do with eg voter ID, attempting to change House of Commons custom and practice to prevent the legislature holding the executive to account, amending the law to stop the executive from being open to legal challenge...

Right now I'd guess that the majority of Tory MPs think they are doing these things for good reasons rather than with actively malign intent to create a fascist state. Every time they do they move the centre of polarity of our politics more to the right and closer to the hands of deeply unprincipled people like Johnson and Farage. What is the political distance from Johnson to Braverman to Francois to Tommy Robinson? I don't know, but if we want to avoid finding out we'd better realise that they need to be fought on everything, all the time - but deftly, not in ways that give flesh to their paper tigers. And especially on freedom of speech.

You see there's a lot I agree with in what you say. It's just that the use of the term fascist/nazi has become so debased as to make it meaningless. I've seen it used to describe: immigration policies, covid restrictions, section 35, JK Rowling, gun control, For Women Scotland and so on. It's losing it's value as a descriptor of politics. Fascism is a distinct political philosophy. It's malign and dangerous. Throwing the term about loosely helps nobody.

[One Day Soon]

Fascism didn't start Iin 1936. It took a hold after the 1933 election. The 1936 elections were a sham. They happened. But you could only vote for nazi approved candidates.

It took hold well before 1933, step by step. 1933 was just the first stage of formalising their power. The German fascist movement grew from a handful of men to over a million in relatively short order precisely because in various institutions throughout Germany there were fascist sympathisers who smoothed the way, echoed the hatred and endorsed the demands despite not being card carrying Nazi party members themselves.

It's like building a house. It isn't a house until its finished, but you know what it is struggling to become from the moment the first foundations are dug or brick laid.