It seems that the pressure on mr. Alexander Boris Johnson is mounting from all sides.

Apparently, Johnson said: let the bodies pile high. He allegedly prefered thousands of deaths to another lockdown over the Coronavirus. Of course, he denied ever saying that, but the Guardian says it has 3 sources confirming that he actually said it.

This, of course, is another scandal for Johnson, after: Boris Johnson told Sir James Dyson by text he would 'fix' tax issue.

Boris Johnson assured Sir James Dyson his employees would not have to pay extra tax if they came to the UK to make ventilators during the pandemic.
Sir James, whose firm is now based in Singapore, wrote to the Treasury to ask for no change in tax status for staff.

Of course, the "funny" thing is that Dominique Cummings is questioning the integrity of mr. Johnson. Something like the proverbial pot calling the kettle black, springs to mind.

So is Michael Gove the one to benefits from this and might be the next occupant of number 10?

Interesting times in UK politics.

It is unlikely to see the end of his tenure. Most people seem to not really care about the allegations.

Vaccine success is still seeing the Conservatives poll very highly. Plus we lack any degree of a credible opposition.

Local elections coming up. I cannot see there being too much of a disaster for the Conservatives.

But time will tell.

I remain unconvinced he’ll be PM by the time the next General Election comes around. But that is gut instinct.

It amazes me that people tent to forgive Johnson just about anything it seems. These are quite serious acquisations, don't you think.

I subscribe to the point of view that Alexander Boris Johnson will not be PM when the next election cycle is there.

Not paying tax while temporarily coming to the UK to make ventilators sounds like a reasonable compromise when compared to "don't come to the UK to make ventilators, we'll do without". The pile the bodies high... even if true (The Guardian has some sources... I guess it MUST be true then) is possibly what many of the population want considering the anti-mask, anti-lockdown proponents. It's hardly a crime worth of hanging and possibly not even losing his job.

I'm not really a fan of BJ by the way but who in the world to replace him? Gove? We'd be laughed out of whatever world platforms may still be open to us.

Slow news week in world politics?

By the way, if your attack on Boris was based on his leading part in the Leave the EU campaign then I'd be very much on side.

Cummings was the tail that tried to wag the dog and got booted out. Not all the surprising he wants revenge. Says more about him than the one with the ridiculous hair.

Virtual737 wrote:

Not paying tax while temporarily coming to the UK to make ventilators sounds like a reasonable compromise when compared to "don't come to the UK to make ventilators, we'll do without". The pile the bodies high... even if true (The Guardian has some sources... I guess it MUST be true then) is possibly what many of the population want considering the anti-mask, anti-lockdown proponents. It's hardly a crime worth of hanging and possibly not even losing his job.

I'm not really a fan of BJ by the way but who in the world to replace him? Gove? We'd be laughed out of whatever world platforms may still be open to us.

Slow news week in world politics?

As I understand it, Johnson chose to keep his old mobile number, while in number Ten. This was against the most strong advice of officials. That means that a lot of people have the mobile number of the British PM, thus direct access. And I think that is quite problematic because it seems that Johnson has no problem with fixing things on an individual case, without transparency, without oversight.

Dutchy wrote:

As I understand it, Johnson chose to keep his old mobile number, while in number Ten. This was against the most strong advice of officials. That means that a lot of people have the mobile number of the British PM, thus direct access. And I think that is quite problematic because it seems that Johnson has no problem with fixing things on an individual case, without transparency, without oversight.

To the gallows with him!

Virtual737 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

As I understand it, Johnson chose to keep his old mobile number, while in number Ten. This was against the most strong advice of officials. That means that a lot of people have the mobile number of the British PM, thus direct access. And I think that is quite problematic because it seems that Johnson has no problem with fixing things on an individual case, without transparency, without oversight.

To the gallows with him!

Don't you think that that is problematic? A PM fixing things on his own, on behalf of people who happened to have access?

Dutchy wrote:

Virtual737 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

As I understand it, Johnson chose to keep his old mobile number, while in number Ten. This was against the most strong advice of officials. That means that a lot of people have the mobile number of the British PM, thus direct access. And I think that is quite problematic because it seems that Johnson has no problem with fixing things on an individual case, without transparency, without oversight.

To the gallows with him!

Don't you think that that is problematic? A PM fixing things on his own, on behalf of people who happened to have access?

Potentially and I think it happens everywhere all the time. Nothing specific to the one with the hair of a muppet. Trying to tie that down to him keeping his old mobile number ignores the likelihood that anyone with the pull to force his hand would have absolutely no problem getting hold of his new number anyway.

I have an ingrained distrust of all politicians, partly down to the fact that the financial cost of getting elected is huge, and only those who sell their souls to the corporates based on some pre-election agreement, have any real chance of being in the race.

Is BJ anywhere near the top of my worry list? Nah.

Virtual737 wrote:

Cummings was the tail that tried to wag the dog and got booted out. Not all the surprising he wants revenge. Says more about him than the one with the ridiculous hair.

There'd be no PM Boris without Cummings so in a way he has a point.

That the ripples of a feud between two unelected but nevertheless influential people like Cummings and Symonds end up shaking the PM chair says a lot about the current state of politics, especially in post-Brexit UK.

JJJ wrote:

There'd be no PM Boris without Cummings so in a way he has a point.

Assuming he was paid (well) for his work then why would he have a claim to anything in perpetuity?

JJJ wrote:

That the ripples of a feud between two unelected but nevertheless influential people like Cummings and Symonds end up shaking the PM chair says a lot about the current state of politics, especially in post-Brexit UK.

Yep, although we also like making a big deal about anything... much ado about nothing if you like. I expect there is some truth hidden away in there somewhere, but even the sniff of any wrongdoing always gets exaggerated, quickly followed by calls for an ousting. Another reason I detest politics.

Virtual737 wrote:

JJJ wrote:

There'd be no PM Boris without Cummings so in a way he has a point.

Assuming he was paid (well) for his work then why would he have a claim to anything in perpetuity?

Not perpetuity, but at least the general election cycle. Boris owes a lot to Cummings in getting him to power which was, let's not forget, less than 2 years ago.

There's no question that Cummings is a confrontational figure, but the idea that his sacking is a result of power struggles within the PM's unelected inner circle doesn't look well any way you want to look at it.

He said (and this was recorded), in a flippant way about Libya being good for investment once the bodies have been cleared away. To laughter from his cronies.
As for tax dodger, offshoring all his UK activities 'Brexit Patriot' Dyson, there were UK based firms wanting to build, with the capacity to do so and fast, who do the work here and pay their taxes, who did not get a look in when this thought to be need emerged. But not on the Buffoon's speed dial.
Nor were they Tory donors, in fact the one part of Covid the government have got right had nothing to with his friends from the swamp, unlike the 37 billion Track and Trace.
(Another is Ratcliff, tax dodger who promised to build a new SUV in Wales but being a Brexit Patriot, is obviously doing so in France).

Johnson has been careless more than once that he might be caught on tape, as he was when on a Zoom call he put the success of the vaccine effort down to 'greed and capitalism'. An odd way to look at the 97% government funding for initial research and the NHS for it's distribution and application. Just him being typically thick or a future statement of intent? Given that his Cabinet of incompetent yes people include three who wrote a book some years back calling for it's dismantling and the British people the 'laziest in the world', two of which are no surprise, Raab and Patel. Equally thick and nasty.
So he better hope that Cummings is full of BS when it is mooted he may have recordings.

Ironically, even before he became a MP Johnson was caught on a phone recording, when one of his old school chums, a fraudster called, wait for it......Darius Guppy, who was telling Johnson about his plans to beat up a journalist who was exposing his crimes, fun 'Boris' did not exactly discourage his old friend here. Guppy was later convicted.

Would Johnson really react to pressure for another lockdown (after ending the first too early), with shouting that he would rather see 'fucking bodies pile up'.
Same bloke when one of his wives contracted cancer, left her, when he got his secretary knocked up, very wealthy Johnson got her to pay for the abortion, who has been sacked for lying as a journalist, shadow minister, left being Foreign Sec as he was about to be sacked.

Then there is his usual refusal to pay for anything, this time however he let his latest go and splash out to renovate the already recently renovated Downing Street flat;
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... lat-refurb

Edit; Breaking News;
https://news.sky.com/story/boris-johnso ... e-12289269

Dutchy wrote:

So is Michael Gove the one to benefits from this and might be the next occupant of number 10?

Oh, please no, not him.

I mean, this is one person who's entire career in politics has been centered around moving up towards nr 10 and doing/saying whatever suits that goal.
He may not be as blunt and irresponsible in his public statements as BoJo, but the 2 think very much alike.

Surely there must be somebody qualified within the Conservatives to do a more or less proper job as PM?
1- get the pandemic under control,
2- protect ordinary people from its financial fall out,
3- kickstart the economy again,
4- move beyond Brexit and settle the remaining issues with Europe (NI, GFA, expand on the FTA with the EU to possibly a pseudo custom union again etc...)

Rishi Sunak maybe?

I guess Tory MPs will reserve their judgement on the PM till after the regional elections: if he does reasonably well (outside of Scotland), they'll let him carry on for now and wait for a more appropriate time to ditch him (before the next GE, I agree); if not, he's out before summer...

In any case, I feel this scandal justifies a GE on its own: in any democracy with a coalition government, revelations like these would mean the fall of that government and new elections and rightfully so. A leadership which thinks and acts like this, is not fit for the job!

In any case, the SNP is Scotland is alreay counting their blessings, as if they'd need any more still...

BoJo seems to be willing to go down in history books as the British PM who first took the UK out of the EU and then took the UK apart too, is he?

The Tories do not want oust Boris. He's popular, especially compared to Cameron and May, and way ahead of Starmer in the polls. The vaccine roll out has been a success, so people are already forgetting the less than stellar start the UK made at the beginning of the crisis. People actually have very short memories, particularly when the main focus is now is on recovery and getting back to normal. They will do fine in local elections.

As for the UK breaking up, apart from some in the EU that would like to see it happen, it's not going to. It's a fantasy that the Republic of Ireland would like the 6 counties back. They wouldn't want the cost or sectarian aggro that comes with it´. When push comes to shove, Scots will vote for the SNP but not independence, and Wales is hardly viable as an independent nation.. If Brexit has proven anything, it has shown that if anyone thought very little would change and things such as the free flow of goods,would be unaffected, they would have been quite wrong. Be careful what you wish for.

Dutchy wrote:

It amazes me that people tent to forgive Johnson just about anything it seems. These are quite serious acquisations, don't you think.

I subscribe to the point of view that Alexander Boris Johnson will not be PM when the next election cycle is there.

Check the polling in a week or so to see if people are concerned with the PM.

Westminster voting intention:

CON: 44% (-)
LAB: 34% (-)
LDEM: 8% (-2)
GRN: 4% (-)
REFUK: 3% (-)

via @RedfieldWilton, 26 Apr
Chgs. w/ 19 Apr


https://twitter.com/britainelects/statu ... 05604?s=21

Virtual737 wrote:

Not paying tax while temporarily coming to the UK to make ventilators sounds like a reasonable compromise when compared to "don't come to the UK to make ventilators, we'll do without". The pile the bodies high... even if true (The Guardian has some sources... I guess it MUST be true then) is possibly what many of the population want considering the anti-mask, anti-lockdown proponents. It's hardly a crime worth of hanging and possibly not even losing his job.

I'm not really a fan of BJ by the way but who in the world to replace him? Gove? We'd be laughed out of whatever world platforms may still be open to us.

Slow news week in world politics?

The main issue with the Dyson deal, but that will never make the news, is that the UK has ventilator manufacturers that were never called and ended up exporting their production, Dyson never made a single ventilator, and the UK ended up buying Chinese crap for 3-4 times the price of the usual quality ones. The Chinese ones are almost all out of service...

The tax thing, that's the Tories for a decade now, if people haven't woken up by now, they will never wake up.

Virtual737 wrote:

Not paying tax while temporarily coming to the UK to make ventilators sounds like a reasonable compromise when compared to "don't come to the UK to make ventilators, we'll do without".

Dyson and JCB's ventilator programs were both PR stunts according to everyone in the relevant industry. There was never any interest from them to make existing (aka proven) ventilator designs, only to try and reinvent the wheel and become heroes. Meanwhile, whilst Boris was trying to get one of his mates some favourable tax treatment, actual companies that make ventilators weren't getting their calls answered by the government until months later.

I'm a little surprised Weatherspoons didn't get on this too.

If he's done anything illegal then prosecute the hell out of him. I'm all for people in a position of power being subject to double the standard sentence (I'd even go for treble). That would go for police officers just as much as politicians.

Whatever the reality of what's happened, it will be the perception of the reality which seals BJs fate, either way.

sabenapilot wrote:

Surely there must be somebody qualified within the Conservatives to do a more or less proper job as PM?
1- get the pandemic under control,
2- protect ordinary people from its financial fall out,
3- kickstart the economy again,
4- move beyond Brexit and settle the remaining issues with Europe (NI, GFA, expand on the FTA with the EU to possibly a pseudo custom union again etc...)

All the moderates got kicked out of the party in 2019....

noviorbis77 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

It amazes me that people tent to forgive Johnson just about anything it seems. These are quite serious acquisations, don't you think.

I subscribe to the point of view that Alexander Boris Johnson will not be PM when the next election cycle is there.

Check the polling in a week or so to see if people are concerned with the PM.

Westminster voting intention:

CON: 44% (-)
LAB: 34% (-)
LDEM: 8% (-2)
GRN: 4% (-)
REFUK: 3% (-)

via @RedfieldWilton, 26 Apr
Chgs. w/ 19 Apr


https://twitter.com/britainelects/statu ... 05604?s=21

Guess the UK electorate really doesn't care about any actual results, or anything else for that matter. Good for the Conservatives I guess

Dutchy wrote:

Guess the UK electorate really doesn't care about any actual results, or anything else for that matter. Good for the Conservatives I guess

That almost appears provocative just for the sake of it.

Maybe they are still the best on offer? Perhaps with the pandemic, the hit on jobs, freedoms and the economy it's not top of their worry list right now. I'd imagine the good job that's been done on vaccinations might have made the electorate slightly more tolerant?

Lots of possibilities other than they just don't care.

How's things in Holland? Everything perfect?

zkojq wrote:

Virtual737 wrote:

Not paying tax while temporarily coming to the UK to make ventilators sounds like a reasonable compromise when compared to "don't come to the UK to make ventilators, we'll do without".

Dyson and JCB's ventilator programs were both PR stunts according to everyone in the relevant industry. There was never any interest from them to make existing (aka proven) ventilator designs, only to try and reinvent the wheel and become heroes. Meanwhile, whilst Boris was trying to get one of his mates some favourable tax treatment, actual companies that make ventilators weren't getting their calls answered by the government until months later.

I'm a little surprised Weatherspoons didn't get on this too.

Everything Johnson goes near is a stunt, that often the taxpayers ends up with the bill for.
His buses, overpriced, disliked by pax, company that made them went bust.
The 'Garden Bridge', in a place in London no one wanted it, except him and Joanna Bleedin' Lumley, all to be paid for by private money. Nope. Not practical, no real work done but London taxpayers ended up with 40-50 million in lawyers/consultants - his mates included no doubt.
'Boris Island', an airport idea rejected as impractical in 1973, when he was 9.
Shagging Jenny Arcuri when married is his business, it is not when he uses public money for his fuckfests with her and she gets more public money for 'business'.

His previous employers thought him untrustworthy with both their money and wives.

Ah yes, Weatherspoons, whose boss really did not think a mere global pandemic should interfere with his bottom line, until forced to, he didn't like that either, those he's not really much of a player in our very own low rent version of a Trumpian swamp.

But Johnson really should not lose his rag like he did at PMQ's today, simple enough questions after all.

Virtual737 wrote:

If he's done anything illegal then prosecute the hell out of him. I'm all for people in a position of power being subject to double the standard sentence (I'd even go for treble). That would go for police officers just as much as politicians.

Whatever the reality of what's happened, it will be the perception of the reality which seals BJs fate, either way.

If the party in power doesn't want to prosecute him, it doesn't seem like anything can happen to him in the UK. He has control over police investigations for starters.

Aesma wrote:

Virtual737 wrote:

If he's done anything illegal then prosecute the hell out of him. I'm all for people in a position of power being subject to double the standard sentence (I'd even go for treble). That would go for police officers just as much as politicians.

Whatever the reality of what's happened, it will be the perception of the reality which seals BJs fate, either way.

If the party in power doesn't want to prosecute him, it doesn't seem like anything can happen to him in the UK. He has control over police investigations for starters.

Without wanting to sound too naive I would think (and hope) that the Met and CPS are more autonomous than that.

Dutchy wrote:

It amazes me that people tent to forgive Johnson just about anything it seems. These are quite serious acquisations, don't you think.

I subscribe to the point of view that Alexander Boris Johnson will not be PM when the next election cycle is there.

As someone else pointed out there is no credible opposition to the Conservative party. The Labor opposition are abysmal, they need a new Blair or similar, they haven’t worked out that old school Labor politics won’t win them an election.

GDB wrote:

But Johnson really should not lose his rag like he did at PMQ's today, simple enough questions after all.

Just more bluster - it’s all he’s ever had.

It seems to me that the refurbishment of the PM’s apartment was paid for illegally. At some point, someone has realised and told Johnson that he would have to stump up for it. Hence his “robust” claims in Parliament. However, that doesn’t change the fact that the initial payment was illegal - which would explain Starmer’s very specific question to Johnson.

GDB wrote:

'Boris Island', an airport idea rejected as impractical in 1973, when he was 9.

In fairness to him, the "Boris Island" airport is probably the only good idea hes even had.

GDB wrote:

Shagging Jenny Arcuri when married is his business, it is not when he uses public money for his fuckfests with her and she gets more public money for 'business'.

Can you imagine just how angry the people that constantly defend him for corruption like this would be if Nicola Sturgeon did the same? The Sun would be running its "Nicola must go" headlines for six months straight!

GDB wrote:

But Johnson really should not lose his rag like he did at PMQ's today, simple enough questions after all.

What happened?

zkojq wrote:

GDB wrote:

'Boris Island', an airport idea rejected as impractical in 1973, when he was 9.

In fairness to him, the "Boris Island" airport is probably the only good idea hes even had.

GDB wrote:

Shagging Jenny Arcuri when married is his business, it is not when he uses public money for his fuckfests with her and she gets more public money for 'business'.

Can you imagine just how angry the people that constantly defend him for corruption like this would be if Nicola Sturgeon did the same? The Sun would be running its "Nicola must go" headlines for six months straight!

GDB wrote:

But Johnson really should not lose his rag like he did at PMQ's today, simple enough questions after all.

What happened?

The exchange and the issues behind it are summarised here;
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... rtains-row

The bigger issue is that he (to no surprise to anyone who has the slightest clue about him), has a history of dishonestly with money.

noviorbis77 wrote:

It is unlikely to see the end of his tenure. Most people seem to not really care about the allegations.

Vaccine success is still seeing the Conservatives poll very highly. Plus we lack any degree of a credible opposition.
.

I think these allegations are actually probably the least serious of the tenure. But the easiest to prove and it has teeth. The other things are boring, like his party being responsbile for the run down of the NHS, current hidden take overs of huge local Doctor surgeries by a US company, a completely botched Brexit deal, massive risk to the Good Friday Agreement, the near breakup of the UK (to save itself) the most deaths from Covid in Europe, billions wasted on track and trace, hundreds of millions given to friends and family members for PPE with no tenders and companies with no trading history or specialism in the field, ventalators not purchased from already approved NHS suppliers but deals made with friends (Dyson), with no product delivered, massive cuts to local council budgets (so much they are selling off assets left right and centre), tens of thousands of Police made redundant, closure of dozens of Police stations. The list goes on.

The sucess of the vaccine rollout is almost entirely down to the AZ contract, and the NHS. The UK government did almost everything wrong in regard to covid every step of the way. The only thing they did right was to hedge their bets on vaccines, and order a lot, early from many different suppliers. The sucess of the rollout, is entirely down to the NHS. And considering half the Tories want to privatise the NHS, it's rather amusing.

I actually have to ask, what would it take for many Johnson supporters for them not to vote Tory any more. And I'm not just saying therefore vote for the opposition..but not vote for them (because that is always an option).


Also disagree with the point of credible opposition. The UK desperately needs to get away from the obsession with having a PM based almost soley on character. Johnson is seen by so many people as the fun, lovable rouge who sometimes says the wrong thing, want to have a pint with him. It actually does need someone a bit boring but entirely more competent. Johnson is entirely incompetent and clearly changes his mind to go with the most popular decision at the time. It's dangerous, and costs lives.


If you listen to any of the comittee hearings the likes of Hilary Benn and Yvette Cooper wipe the floor with the Tory members, and most ministers and MPs giving evidence.

The UK has a massive list of long problems right now the Tory party has either caused directly or has no interest or ability to fix.

Starmer isn't the perfect Labour leader, but he's head and shoulders above Johnson and he's not suggesting or pushing a full socialist agenda like his predecessor tried because he knows you can't get elected that way. You win from getting the votes of the centre, centre left/ right. Which is why the far left of the Labour party hate him. But they can be ignored because they are a minority who will be in eternal opposition because you cannot have full Socialism because it doesn't work. Starmers problem is to show that to enough people to make them sway from the Tories, and to perhaps try and get a coalition with the Lib Dems and Greens. Then try and get some electoral reform done because this rediculous voting system cannot carry on.

Reinhardt wrote:

And I'm not just saying therefore vote for the opposition..but not vote for them (because that is always an option).

In a democracy, which almost always ends up with 2 main parties, not voting for party 1 is almost the same as voting for party 2.

Virtual737 wrote:

Reinhardt wrote:

And I'm not just saying therefore vote for the opposition..but not vote for them (because that is always an option).

In a democracy, which almost always ends up with 2 main parties, not voting for party 1 is almost the same as voting for party 2.

Democracy will only end up with 2 main parties if you have a first past the post system.

Totally agree Reinhardt, I would add that in this pandemic with limited access to Parliament, restrictions through much of the year in normal political life/campaigning, we are in a rather unprecedented situation.
Then again, a certain former US President mocked his likely opponent for 'hiding' during lock down, well his opponent is now President.

Beneath that not well concealed mask, obvious to most surely? With Johnson roughing up his hair prior to any press/TV exposure, is a very nasty piece of work, incompetent too.

Worth also noting to the 'what has this got to do with Covid now?' What is being investigated happened last year, when the virus was heading our way, while the PM and his latest obsessed over redecoration, those 5 meetings of the Government Emergency committee that he avoided was in part due to him being being down at a PM's country retreat.
Then only emerging to resist any suggestion of a lockdown, being a super spreader himself and allowing other far worse events, such as the race meeting run by the incompetent who is now 'running' the 37 Billion Track and Trace program, widely seen as a failure but hey, public bungs to our friends and donors.
Only when confronted with stark reality did he belatedly order a lockdown.

On two further occasions did he then override advice, in the summer and in the farce of late last year with his raging at Starmer for wanting to 'cancel Christmas', the leader of the opposition was questioning again whether scientific advice was being ignored again, only for the PM to do a complete u-turn within days, the disruption to the plans of many after the PM's assurances being the least of the problems it created. The main one being yet more dead, way above what was inevitable.

The frontline staff of Covid, as nurses have found, with their reward being an effective pay cut. While the friends and relatives of Boris and co with all those dodgy, often useless contracts, got richer.
Did those who 'clapped for carers' (which was not started by the government but they got in on it for PR), really think Johnson was not going to throw them under the bus?
He's done it to just about everyone in his life, after all.

Dutchy wrote:

Virtual737 wrote:

Reinhardt wrote:

And I'm not just saying therefore vote for the opposition..but not vote for them (because that is always an option).

In a democracy, which almost always ends up with 2 main parties, not voting for party 1 is almost the same as voting for party 2.

Democracy will only end up with 2 main parties if you have a first past the post system.

Exactly my point, which Virtual737 missed as I commented on it further down. The system needs changing. More than 50% of the population did not vote for the Tories, yet they have an 80 seat Majority and are basically able to do what they want.

Reinhardt wrote:

Exactly my point, which Virtual737 missed as I commented on it further down. The system needs changing. More than 50% of the population did not vote for the Tories, yet they have an 80 seat Majority and are basically able to do what they want.

What are you proposing?

Proportional representation? Isn't that just governing by committee and so achieving nothing? Or just another general election so that there's a different party in power that still didn't wasn't voted for by most?

I'm all for holding politicians to account and if BJ should go then fine. What I don't want is another government that changed the immigration laws so much that the shape of the electorate changed irreversibly. The Labour Party of Blair and Brown did that yet the Tories still managed to get back in, which shows what shape Labour was in.

I have no idea who KS is. Perhaps that's my fault, but it's their job to make themselves known as much as it's my obligation to understand all the choices before voting. Labour still means JC to me and there was no way in hell he could ever get my vote. KS has been the leader of the opposition for just a year. Maybe he is the way forward,. but at the moment it's better the devil you know. Upthread I mentioned that I detest BJ because of his actions on the EU, so it says something that I might still vote for him over and above the other choices.

Some sort of PR.

No it's not by committee. It limits a parties ability to implement extreme measures because the chances of having a coalition is much higher. I would rather a government had to take into account the views of many than those of the few. Yes there is a risk you can end up with unstable coalitions and there is a risk it can make it harder / longer to get "change" , but I would rather that, than having a single party being able to completely change the direction of a country put in power not by the majority of voters. There is far too much short term legislation and knee jerk reactions. Having someone run the country who didn't go to Eaton or Harrow, isn't a 'character', who actually had to work to pay bills would be a nice start.

What part of the immigration law change are you refering to? EU immigration or external?


I think Covid and Brexit have dominated most news cycles for so long, that Starmer has had a hard time getting an introduction into many people. If you followed any of the Brexit debates in the HOC you'd know him, because he was one of the few who understood the rammifications of the vote and the legal side. The others that did all got voted out because they were not Brexiteers. Anyway, we can't veer to Brexit talk else the thread will get locked.

Re Starmer.. have a read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keir_Star ... nce%202015.

Latest polls are out

Westminster Voting Intention:

CON: 44% (=)
LAB: 33% (-1)
LDM: 7% (+2)
GRN: 7% (=)
SNP: 4% (-1)
RFM: 3% (+1)

Via @YouGov, 27-28 Apr.
Changes w/ 21-22 Apr.

https://twitter.com/electionmapsuk/stat ... 35144?s=21

noviorbis77 wrote:

Latest polls are out

Westminster Voting Intention:

CON: 44% (=)
LAB: 33% (-1)
LDM: 7% (+2)
GRN: 7% (=)
SNP: 4% (-1)
RFM: 3% (+1)

Via @YouGov, 27-28 Apr.
Changes w/ 21-22 Apr.

https://twitter.com/electionmapsuk/stat ... 35144?s=21

yougov

Survation:

CON 39% (-1)
LAB 38% (+4)
LD 9% (-)
GRN 6% (-1)
SNP 4% (-)
OTH 5% (-2)

27-29 April 2021, Change vs 22 April


Polls are polls, so who knows the reality. But it isn't double digits, no other poll has that kind of lead. It's all sub 10%, and they are showing a narrowing. How it isn't much closer I have no idea, but I stopped trying to understand British voters years ago.

Virtual737 wrote:

Reinhardt wrote:

Exactly my point, which Virtual737 missed as I commented on it further down. The system needs changing. More than 50% of the population did not vote for the Tories, yet they have an 80 seat Majority and are basically able to do what they want.

What are you proposing?

Proportional representation? Isn't that just governing by committee and so achieving nothing? Or just another general election so that there's a different party in power that still didn't wasn't voted for by most?

I'm all for holding politicians to account and if BJ should go then fine. What I don't want is another government that changed the immigration laws so much that the shape of the electorate changed irreversibly. The Labour Party of Blair and Brown did that yet the Tories still managed to get back in, which shows what shape Labour was in.

I have no idea who KS is. Perhaps that's my fault, but it's their job to make themselves known as much as it's my obligation to understand all the choices before voting. Labour still means JC to me and there was no way in hell he could ever get my vote. KS has been the leader of the opposition for just a year. Maybe he is the way forward,. but at the moment it's better the devil you know. Upthread I mentioned that I detest BJ because of his actions on the EU, so it says something that I might still vote for him over and above the other choices.

I've brought this up previously, the first past the post electoral system is not democratic, its outdated, there are better methods available, the results of the last UK election are proof of this. The UK should do what NZ did 20 odd years ago dump FPP and move to Mixed Member Proportions voting, its inherently fairer and therefore more democratic.

MMP would have reduced the domination of the Tories nationwide and the SNP in Scotland.

Reinhardt wrote:

Some sort of PR.

Having someone run the country who didn't go to Eaton or Harrow, isn't a 'character', who actually had to work to pay bills would be a nice start.

Re Starmer.. have a read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keir_Star ... nce%202015.

He didn't to to Eaton or Harrow but he still went to an expensive private school, Reigate Grammar isn't a school families of the great unwashed could afford to send there children to at 6000 plus pounds per term. I doubt Starmer has ever had to work to pay his bills or wonder how hes going to feed his family.

I see the UK government have again done something early to try and deflect from the problems they find themselves in.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56966731

I seem to remember they did this before - brought forward some lockdown lifting to try and take the spotlight in a different direction

Kiwirob wrote:

the results of the last UK election are proof of this...

Are they? The figures you quote ignore the devolved powers given to Scotland and NI (I'm ignoring Wales just for the moment) where neither of the 2 main parties are really in the running and large portions of the Union have most of the day to day running of their population in their own hands - so a good portion of that >50% that didn't vote blue still have a huge say in their own politics. The popular vote between red and blue was approximately 14 million to 10 million in the Tories favour. It was a huge swing away from an already out of power Labour party and a major overall landslide which resulted in a healthy majority for the Blues... which did surprise me coming off the back of a BJ led Brexit. Just goes to show how much JC was loathed even by his own party. That he didn't immediately resign says everything.

For the smaller parties such as the LibDems I guess you could argue it's unfair, but the last election isn't the best barometer to use as even their own leader was defeated in her own local seat. If your own leader is so lacking that they cannot win their own seat then your party has a bigger problem than fairness of seat allocation.

Kiwirob wrote:

Reinhardt wrote:

Some sort of PR.

Having someone run the country who didn't go to Eaton or Harrow, isn't a 'character', who actually had to work to pay bills would be a nice start.

Re Starmer.. have a read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keir_Star ... nce%202015.

He didn't to to Eaton or Harrow but he still went to an expensive private school, Reigate Grammar isn't a school families of the great unwashed could afford to send there children to at 6000 plus pounds per term. I doubt Starmer has ever had to work to pay his bills or wonder how hes going to feed his family.

From Wikipedia:

He was born second of the four children of Josephine (née Baker), a nurse, and Rodney Starmer, a toolmaker. His mother had Still's disease His parents were Labour Party supporters, and named him after the party's first parliamentary leader, Keir Hardie.He passed the 11-plus examination and gained entry to Reigate Grammar School, then a voluntary aided selective grammar school, although it converted into an independent fee-paying school in 1976 while he was there.Among his classmates were musician Norman Cook, alongside whom Starmer took violin lessons, Andrew Cooper, who went on to become a Conservative peer, and future conservative journalist Andrew Sullivan: according to Starmer, he and Sullivan "fought over everything... Politics, religion. You name it."

What the country needs is more people given the opportunies that Starmer did, to get a good education and make something of themselves. His parents were not rich (far from it).

Reinhardt wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

Reinhardt wrote:

Some sort of PR.

Having someone run the country who didn't go to Eaton or Harrow, isn't a 'character', who actually had to work to pay bills would be a nice start.

Re Starmer.. have a read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keir_Star ... nce%202015.

He didn't to to Eaton or Harrow but he still went to an expensive private school, Reigate Grammar isn't a school families of the great unwashed could afford to send there children to at 6000 plus pounds per term. I doubt Starmer has ever had to work to pay his bills or wonder how hes going to feed his family.

From Wikipedia:

He was born second of the four children of Josephine (née Baker), a nurse, and Rodney Starmer, a toolmaker. His mother had Still's disease His parents were Labour Party supporters, and named him after the party's first parliamentary leader, Keir Hardie.He passed the 11-plus examination and gained entry to Reigate Grammar School, then a voluntary aided selective grammar school, although it converted into an independent fee-paying school in 1976 while he was there.Among his classmates were musician Norman Cook, alongside whom Starmer took violin lessons, Andrew Cooper, who went on to become a Conservative peer, and future conservative journalist Andrew Sullivan: according to Starmer, he and Sullivan "fought over everything... Politics, religion. You name it."

What the country needs is more people given the opportunies that Starmer did, to get a good education and make something of themselves. His parents were not rich (far from it).

Certainly Eton produces more than it's fair share of entitled idiots and the contacts to enable a lifetime of failing upwards.
Though even they wrote to Johnson's dad about how over entitled they found him.
Starmer's background is nothing like Johnson's. He's also not been sacked from every job he's ever had.
As for the polls, well the most recent ones show a marked Tory dip, to little surprise really, the idea that the revelations / scandals have an effect the next day or so later is silly, it takes time to filter through.

GDB wrote:

Certainly Eton produces more than it's fair share of entitled idiots and the contacts to enable a lifetime of failing upwards.
Though even they wrote to Johnson's dad about how over entitled they found him.
Starmer's background is nothing like Johnson's. He's also not been sacked from every job he's ever had.
As for the polls, well the most recent ones show a marked Tory dip, to little surprise really, the idea that the revelations / scandals have an effect the next day or so later is silly, it takes time to filter through.

I just don't think they have any idea of real world knowledge and experience. It's high time we had a properly experienced either legal expert, manager of people, numbers person running the country with genuine ethics. And that person should have worked for what they have instead of being handled it on a silver platter and without any of the Tory buddy / Tufton street/ press relationships that seemingly all of the last few PMs have had. What is completely lacking is any kind of proper empathy from a PM. Real understanding of people's problems. If they did, then their policies would not be what they are. And exactly as you say, Boris is a chancer, follow others not lead. He spent half his working life making up stories about the EU when it suited him and his employers, then changed his mind, then changed again when there was a clear route for him to be a PM. His Brother is massively more suited to a role in public office than Boris, but the bar is so low right now that doesn't say too much.

Yes indeed, it will take some time for people to truely understand how useless Johnson is and what happened before is happening again. Not helped by the press though, it's taken this long for any of them mainstream papers to start to understand exactly what he is messing up. BBC is still almost oblivious to it, with the exception of the odd newsnight story.

By the way, what happened to the Russia investigation that the Tories were taking forever to release? That's still not come out right?

But if he did go, who would replace him? Gove (seriously?!), Patel? (shouldn't be anywhere near Parliament), Sunak (people like because he can deliver a written statement without screwing up) and threw money at people (not enough).

Reinhardt wrote:

By the way, what happened to the Russia investigation that the Tories were taking forever to release? That's still not come out right?

But if he did go, who would replace him? Gove (seriously?!), Patel? (shouldn't be anywhere near Parliament), Sunak (people like because he can deliver a written statement without screwing up) and threw money at people (not enough).

The Russia report came out some time ago (and the election for the leadership of the committee was hilarious, seeing Chris Grayling lose a vote that was effectively an open goal): -

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53484344

https://news.sky.com/story/chris-grayli ... e-12029221

As for replacing Boris Johnson, it's a good point. All good and well calling for him to go, but who would replace him? I'm not saying Boris shouldn't go if he is proven to have done serious wrongdoing, but somebody has to replace him.

Forget about an imminent General Election. The majority is big enough to see off that prospect until December 2024 unless the entire opposition pushes for one and enough Tory MP's join forces with them - the Fixed Term Parliament Act calls for a 2/3 majority, although the last GE was called when it was included into another bill that passed. Even then, the current polling indicates Labour remaining in opposition, so it would just effect how much the Tories' majority goes up or down by. If I was Sir Keir Starmer, I would be using this time to demonstrate to the electorate why they are credible government-in-waiting and why the electorate should vote for them (saying they are not the Tories isn't a good enough reason).

Reinhardt wrote:

I think Covid and Brexit have dominated most news cycles for so long, that Starmer has had a hard time getting an introduction into many people. If you followed any of the Brexit debates in the HOC you'd know him, because he was one of the few who understood the rammifications of the vote and the legal side. The others that did all got voted out because they were not Brexiteers. Anyway, we can't veer to Brexit talk else the thread will get locked.

Re Starmer.. have a read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keir_Star ... nce%202015.

I feel Starmer had his hands tied to his back before becoming leader due to Corbyn (and others within Labour) being all over the place on his Brexit stance.

Reinhardt wrote:

Starmer isn't the perfect Labour leader, but he's head and shoulders above Johnson and he's not suggesting or pushing a full socialist agenda like his predecessor tried because he knows you can't get elected that way. You win from getting the votes of the centre, centre left/ right. Which is why the far left of the Labour party hate him. But they can be ignored because they are a minority who will be in eternal opposition because you cannot have full Socialism because it doesn't work. Starmers problem is to show that to enough people to make them sway from the Tories, and to perhaps try and get a coalition with the Lib Dems and Greens. Then try and get some electoral reform done because this rediculous voting system cannot carry on.

The far left within Labour will be back in about 25-30 years or so, if the period leading to Corbyn becoming leader is anything to go by. Some of their MP's that fall into that category (including a few that lost their seats in 2019) are young enough to still be around then in much the same way those that were around during the 1980's were back in 2015.

As for Labour forming a coalition, the problem with trying to forge one with the Lib Dems or the Greens is that their collective performance in the last few elections won't go far enough unless Labour and the Tories are neck-and-neck for seats and if they can up their game. The Lib Dems don't appear to have been forgiven for joining with the Tories in 2010 and the Greens can't really attract enough votes outside of the Brighton Pavilion constituency to be a credible alternative elsewhere. Plaid Cymru probably won't get enough seats and we saw the reaction towards forming a pact with the DUP in 2017. Sinn Fein won't be able to help for as long as they continue to abstain from Westminster. I also think talk of a so-called "Progressive Alliance" and pacts where parties involved stand aside in some seats won't work, especially if supporters of parties that are no longer standing simply don't vote. Starmer and Labour won't countenance standing aside in some seats to give the likes of the Lib Dems a clear shot at a Tory marginal. The only other option providing they continue to do well in UK General Elections and are running Holyrood at that time is the SNP, but no doubt the price for that will be a Section 30 order for another independence referendum. How does Starmer square that up with Anas Sarwar?

Therefore, the only viable option is for Labour to win back support it has hemorrhaged over the last 15 years, particularly in places it has historically done well such as cities and in Scotland.

All this reminds me why I'm in favour of a PR voting system!

The Conservatives are on course to gain the Hartlepool seat in the by election.

Local elections today. Be interesting to see how they pan out.

Boeing74741R wrote:

The Russia report came out some time ago (and the election for the leadership of the committee was hilarious, seeing Chris Grayling lose a vote that was effectively an open goal): -

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53484344

https://news.sky.com/story/chris-grayli ... e-12029221

Yup, I didn't notice anything was actually done about the reports findings so actually forgot it was published in the end. Head in the sand 'cos we won' i suspect is the order of the day.

noviorbis77 wrote:

The Conservatives are on course to gain the Hartlepool seat in the by election.

Local elections today. Be interesting to see how they pan out.

I suspect in area's like Hartlepool Tories will win the seat. Tories will say it shows what they are offering is working "we got Brexit done", "we're investing in Britain" bla bla bla, Far Left Labour will blame Starmer. Actual reason is it's a 70% Brexit voting area so no way are they voting for Labour right now. It's going to take some time for areas like this to come back to Labour until Brexit is slap in their face a mistake. I wonder how the local fishermen will vote.

Reinhardt wrote:

noviorbis77 wrote:

The Conservatives are on course to gain the Hartlepool seat in the by election.

Local elections today. Be interesting to see how they pan out.

I suspect in area's like Hartlepool Tories will win the seat. Tories will say it shows what they are offering is working "we got Brexit done", "we're investing in Britain" bla bla bla, Far Left Labour will blame Starmer. Actual reason is it's a 70% Brexit voting area so no way are they voting for Labour right now. It's going to take some time for areas like this to come back to Labour until Brexit is slap in their face a mistake. I wonder how the local fishermen will vote.

Labour have held Hartlepool for decades.

Now Brexit has been delivered, I am surprised the Conservatives are going to win there.