General Discussion of UK Politics

[AlexO]

Yes, the UK Parliament seems a bit light on diversity:

One in ten of the 650 MPs elected this year are non-white. Ten years ago just one in 40 MPs was non-white, according to research by the independent think tank British Future. There are 13 more non-white MPs than in the last Parliament, but all represent English seats. There are no black, Asian and minority ethnic MPs in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland.

https://www.bbc.com/news/election-2019-50808536

I think the UK has sunk really low under Johnson. Fingers crossed the only direction from here is up. Johnson will, of course, forever be tagged with the Brexit catastrophe.

Given that the percentage of ethnic minorities in the UK is around 14.4% with a large part of that percentage still at school or pre school age then a 10% representation is not that outrageous, and as Tamada points out you are totally wrong about Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Given that three of the highest positions in British Government are held by ethnic minority politicians also tends to poo poo your typically anti British arguments again. Keep banging on about the "Brexit catastrophe", people need a bit of humour in these difficult days. Just as an aside how many Aborigines and Native New Zealanders are in these respective parliaments.

[stattointhailand]

With cucumber and the crusts cut orf.

I can honestly say that during my whole 67 years I have only eaten cucumber sandwiches with the crusts cut orf ONCE

Not the sort of thing you forget

[Earnest]

Was that the time you got a blue rinse at your hairdressers, joined the Conservative club and pledged to vote Tory?

[stattointhailand]

More like Blue Blood than Blue Rinse ......... Garden Party Buck House

[AlexO]

More like Blue Blood than Blue Rinse ......... Garden Party Buck House

Palace in Edinburgh, another one. Maybe Diane Abbot and the headcase Lammy would rather you ate pulled pork in Isslington. Bitter twisted wee insignificant people.

[Drunk Monkey]

YCMTSU ... just read former Labour leader and PM Tony "weapon of mass distruction" Blair is now SIR Tony Blair.

First hard done by woke zillionaire Lewis Hamilton now Blair who really should be banged up on war crimes NOT becoming a Sir..makes my piss boil.

DM

[GT93]

Given that the percentage of ethnic minorities in the UK is around 14.4% with a large part of that percentage still at school or pre school age then a 10% representation is not that outrageous, and as Tamada points out you are totally wrong about Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Given that three of the highest positions in British Government are held by ethnic minority politicians also tends to poo poo your typically anti British arguments again. Keep banging on about the "Brexit catastrophe", people need a bit of humour in these difficult days. Just as an aside how many Aborigines and Native New Zealanders are in these respective parliaments.

14.4% is very low. It's easy for foreigners to overlook how white the UK is given the endless complaints about immigrants. I note the UK now seems to recognize that foreigners do important work. I never understood why the British were so ignorant on this. In many countries foreigners are seen as really hard workers.

And yes, Brexit looks like being a total disaster. It was a predictable disaster when the UK has one of its worst PMs in modern times. I don't think it's a laughing matter. The standard of living of ordinary Brits is taking quite a hit. And perversely the UK is now subject to even more EU restrictions than when it was a member of the EU. No surprise there. Dealing with the EU has been a nightmare for outsiders for decades.

There's a higher percentage of Maori MPs in the NZ Parliament than there are Maoris in the general population. Some ethnic groups are under-represented but our European electoral system pushes the major parties to offer a diverse range of candidates.

[tamada]

YCMTSU ... just read former Labour leader and PM Tony "weapon of mass distruction" Blair is now SIR Tony Blair.

First hard done by woke zillionaire Lewis Hamilton now Blair who really should be banged up on war crimes NOT becoming a Sir..makes my piss boil.

DM

What did you expect after his last assignment as special 'Middle East Peace Envoy"?

At least Lewis can drive pretty fast.

[stattointhailand]

Better off giving the gong to Lionel Blair & Hamilton the musical ..... far more deserving

[GT93]

I understand that Blair is one of the least popular ex-British Prime Ministers. Yeah, Blair, what are you doing?

Blair might look a bit better when Johnson joins the ex-Prime Ministers Club.

[Udon Map]

Boris Johnson Is Revealing Who He Really Is

From The New York Times

LONDON — Prime Minister Boris Johnson of Britain, bruised by scandal and faced with an alarming rise in coronavirus cases,is refusing to change course. “We have a chance,” he bullishly proclaimed on Jan. 4 , “to ride out this Omicron wave without shutting down our country once again.”

Public health experts may disagree . Yet Mr. Johnson is at least being consistent — not only with his conduct throughout the pandemic, where lockdowns were a last resort and restrictions were to be shelved as soon as possible, but also with the political platform that elevated him to the highest office. After all, this is the man who rose to power — bringing about Brexit in the process — on the promise to restore “freedom” and “take back control.”

Undeterred by the pandemic, Mr. Johnson has been quietly pursuing that agenda. But instead of reforming the country’s creaking democracy and shoring up Britons’ rights, he and his lieutenants are doing the opposite: seizing control for themselves and stripping away the freedoms of others. A raft of bills likely to pass this year will set Britain, self-professed beacon of democracy, on the road to autocracy. Once in place, the legislation will be very hard to shift. For Mr. Johnson, it amounts to a concerted power grab.

It’s also an answer. A political chameleon, Mr. Johnson’s true ideological bent — liberal? one-nation Tory? English nationalist? —has long been a subject of speculation. Now he has, beyond any doubt, revealed who he really is: a brattish authoritarian who puts his personal whims above anything else. And whatever his future, Britain will be remade in his image.

Amid the chaos wrought by the pandemic, Brexit tumult and increasing questions about the stability of Mr. Johnson’s individual position, the full scale of the impending assault on civil liberties has — understandably — not yet come into focus for much of the British public. The list of legislation is long and deliberately overwhelming. But pieced together, the picture is bleakly repressive.

First, there’s the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, a draconian and broad piece of legislation that effectively bans protest in England and Wales. The police would be equipped to shut down demonstrations that create “serious disruption.” Those who break this condition, which could be done just by making noise, would face prison sentences or hefty fines. Combined with other measures, such as outlawing traditional direct-action tactics like “locking on,” the bill could eventually make it almost impossible to attend a demonstration without committing an offense.

Yet it goes beyond protest, putting minority groups in the cross hairs. New trespass provisions, which make “residing on land without consent in or with a vehicle” a criminal offense, would essentially erase nomadic Gypsy, Roma and Traveler communities from public life. And the expansion of police powers would not only allow officers widespread access to private education and health care records, but also pave the way for suspicionless stop and search. Ethnic minority communities, disproportionately singled out for police attention, are likely to bear the brunt of such overreach.

Similarly punitive is the Nationality and Borders Bill. Stiffening Britain’s already hawkish immigration policy, it seeks to criminalize asylum seekers who take unsanctioned routes: Refugees who arrive by boat, for example, could face up to four years in prison, regardless of the validity of their claim for safe haven. And if claimants escape traditional jail, they would be kept in concentration camp-style housing and offshore processing centers, sites long denounced by human rights activists.

Not even British citizens are safe from the dragnet. A provision slipped into the bill in November by its architect, the home secretary, Priti Patel, would endow the government with the power to remove British citizenship from dual nationals without notice. Those singled out might not even have recourse to the law: Proposed reform of the Human Rights Act would make it easier for the government to deport foreign nationals and deny them claims of mistreatment.

Such draconian measures, in time, are sure to be contested. But the government has a plan for that: draining the life blood from democracy. There’s the Elections Bill, which — alongside potentially disenfranchising millions through the introduction of mandatory voter ID — aims to furnish the government with new powers over the independent elections regulator, sealing up the political process. Unless substantially amended, the bill’s consequences could be constitutionally far-reaching.

The urge to centralize power also underlies the Judicial Review and Courts Bill, which would enable Mr. Johnson and his ministers to overrule judicial review findings that challenge their agenda. The Online Safety Bill, ostensibly designed to regulate Big Tech, is yet to be introduced to Parliament. But many free-speech advocates fear that it could be used to silence critics on social media, censoring those reporting details Mr. Johnson’s government would rather keep from public view. No more pesky judges or overly inquisitive journalists interfering with government business.

It’s a truism that nations sleepwalk into tyranny, and England — the most politically powerful of the nations comprising Britain— is no exception. For decades it has possessed all the necessary ingredients: ever more spiteful nationalism, press fealty sold to the highest bidder and a fervent, misplaced belief that authoritarianism could never set up shop here, because we simply wouldn’t let it.

In this event, though, concerted opposition to Mr. Johnson’s plans has not materialized. Establishment politics have been nomatch for the determination of Mr. Johnson and his allies: A hefty and largely supportive Conservative majority means that even when the Labour Party has decided to oppose legislation, its votes have barely counted. And despite valiant efforts by a coalition of grass-roots groups and the initial groundswell of the “Kill the Bill” protests, a mass movement opposing these bills has failed to come together. Instead, a miasma of grim inevitability has settled in.

That’s dangerous, not least because this authoritarian assault is so comprehensive that once settled as law, it will prove very tricky to unpick. Like many leaders who seek to transcend the constraints of democracy, Mr. Johnson may not foresee a future where he isn’t the one calling the shots. But the miserable shadow his power grab will cast over Britain is likely to last far longer than the tenure of the would-be “world individual” himself.

His place in the history books, however, is secured. He will forever be the libertine whose pursuit of personal freedom and “control” saw his countrymen robbed of theirs.

[jackspratt]

Boris Johnson Is Revealing Who He Really Is

From The New York Times

... It’s also an answer. A political chameleon, Mr. Johnson’s true ideological bent — liberal? one-nation Tory? English nationalist? —has long been a subject of speculation. Now he has, beyond any doubt, revealed who he really is: a brattish authoritarian who puts his personal whims above anything else. And whatever his future, Britain will be remade in his image.....

....His place in the history books, however, is secured. He will forever be the libertine whose pursuit of personal freedom and “control” saw his countrymen robbed of theirs.

A complete skewering of the tousled tossser - well worth the read.

I await Alex's comments with interest.

[tamada]

^ Indeed, essential reading for Alex.

This is PRECISELY how my sister explained Tory rule under Johnson would be right after the election win. She's not a socialist either.

Also note The Grauniad wasn't the source or even mentioned.

[AlexO]

Boris Johnson Is Revealing Who He Really Is

From The New York Times

LONDON — Prime Minister Boris Johnson of Britain, bruised by scandal and faced with an alarming rise in coronavirus cases,is refusing to change course. “We have a chance,” he bullishly proclaimed on Jan. 4 , “to ride out this Omicron wave without shutting down our country once again.”

Public health experts may disagree . Yet Mr. Johnson is at least being consistent — not only with his conduct throughout the pandemic, where lockdowns were a last resort and restrictions were to be shelved as soon as possible, but also with the political platform that elevated him to the highest office. After all, this is the man who rose to power — bringing about Brexit in the process — on the promise to restore “freedom” and “take back control.”

Undeterred by the pandemic, Mr. Johnson has been quietly pursuing that agenda. But instead of reforming the country’s creaking democracy and shoring up Britons’ rights, he and his lieutenants are doing the opposite: seizing control for themselves and stripping away the freedoms of others. A raft of bills likely to pass this year will set Britain, self-professed beacon of democracy, on the road to autocracy. Once in place, the legislation will be very hard to shift. For Mr. Johnson, it amounts to a concerted power grab.

It’s also an answer. A political chameleon, Mr. Johnson’s true ideological bent — liberal? one-nation Tory? English nationalist? —has long been a subject of speculation. Now he has, beyond any doubt, revealed who he really is: a brattish authoritarian who puts his personal whims above anything else. And whatever his future, Britain will be remade in his image.

Amid the chaos wrought by the pandemic, Brexit tumult and increasing questions about the stability of Mr. Johnson’s individual position, the full scale of the impending assault on civil liberties has — understandably — not yet come into focus for much of the British public. The list of legislation is long and deliberately overwhelming. But pieced together, the picture is bleakly repressive.

First, there’s the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, a draconian and broad piece of legislation that effectively bans protest in England and Wales. The police would be equipped to shut down demonstrations that create “serious disruption.” Those who break this condition, which could be done just by making noise, would face prison sentences or hefty fines. Combined with other measures, such as outlawing traditional direct-action tactics like “locking on,” the bill could eventually make it almost impossible to attend a demonstration without committing an offense.

Yet it goes beyond protest, putting minority groups in the cross hairs. New trespass provisions, which make “residing on land without consent in or with a vehicle” a criminal offense, would essentially erase nomadic Gypsy, Roma and Traveler communities from public life. And the expansion of police powers would not only allow officers widespread access to private education and health care records, but also pave the way for suspicionless stop and search. Ethnic minority communities, disproportionately singled out for police attention, are likely to bear the brunt of such overreach.

Similarly punitive is the Nationality and Borders Bill. Stiffening Britain’s already hawkish immigration policy, it seeks to criminalize asylum seekers who take unsanctioned routes: Refugees who arrive by boat, for example, could face up to four years in prison, regardless of the validity of their claim for safe haven. And if claimants escape traditional jail, they would be kept in concentration camp-style housing and offshore processing centers, sites long denounced by human rights activists.

Not even British citizens are safe from the dragnet. A provision slipped into the bill in November by its architect, the home secretary, Priti Patel, would endow the government with the power to remove British citizenship from dual nationals without notice. Those singled out might not even have recourse to the law: Proposed reform of the Human Rights Act would make it easier for the government to deport foreign nationals and deny them claims of mistreatment.

Such draconian measures, in time, are sure to be contested. But the government has a plan for that: draining the life blood from democracy. There’s the Elections Bill, which — alongside potentially disenfranchising millions through the introduction of mandatory voter ID — aims to furnish the government with new powers over the independent elections regulator, sealing up the political process. Unless substantially amended, the bill’s consequences could be constitutionally far-reaching.

The urge to centralize power also underlies the Judicial Review and Courts Bill, which would enable Mr. Johnson and his ministers to overrule judicial review findings that challenge their agenda. The Online Safety Bill, ostensibly designed to regulate Big Tech, is yet to be introduced to Parliament. But many free-speech advocates fear that it could be used to silence critics on social media, censoring those reporting details Mr. Johnson’s government would rather keep from public view. No more pesky judges or overly inquisitive journalists interfering with government business.

It’s a truism that nations sleepwalk into tyranny, and England — the most politically powerful of the nations comprising Britain— is no exception. For decades it has possessed all the necessary ingredients: ever more spiteful nationalism, press fealty sold to the highest bidder and a fervent, misplaced belief that authoritarianism could never set up shop here, because we simply wouldn’t let it.

In this event, though, concerted opposition to Mr. Johnson’s plans has not materialized. Establishment politics have been nomatch for the determination of Mr. Johnson and his allies: A hefty and largely supportive Conservative majority means that even when the Labour Party has decided to oppose legislation, its votes have barely counted. And despite valiant efforts by a coalition of grass-roots groups and the initial groundswell of the “Kill the Bill” protests, a mass movement opposing these bills has failed to come together. Instead, a miasma of grim inevitability has settled in.

That’s dangerous, not least because this authoritarian assault is so comprehensive that once settled as law, it will prove very tricky to unpick. Like many leaders who seek to transcend the constraints of democracy, Mr. Johnson may not foresee a future where he isn’t the one calling the shots. But the miserable shadow his power grab will cast over Britain is likely to last far longer than the tenure of the would-be “world individual” himself.

His place in the history books, however, is secured. He will forever be the libertine whose pursuit of personal freedom and “control” saw his countrymen robbed of theirs.

On a paragraph by paragraph response.
P1 yet to be proved wrong on the response to Omnicrom.
P2, Brexit was always going to be difficult breaking away from the Dictatorship. The fact they use the Good Friday Agreement which they had absolutely no input into proves just how pathetic they are.
P3 Give us an example of peoples rights being stripped away with this new legislation.
P4 Uk Gov is not just a one man show. There are many consultations with Cabinet members and MP's before anything is done. They are not just a bunch of robots.
P5 Note the word serious, given that the USA think it is acceptable to shoot dead unarmed protesters perhaps you need to rethink that statement.
P6 Explain to me why you think it is fine for a bunch of nomads to invade someone's land, totally destroy it and then move on to another site to repeat the same actions.
P7 Absolutely agree with this, the rape gangs and career criminals should have absolutely no right to maintain their British Citizenship if they cannot abide by the laws of the land.
P8 Again explain to me how I need to have a passport, a National Insurance Number, a NHS number, a driving license but it is against someone's democratic rights just to turn up at a polling station with a dead persons ID or just totally false ID to vote for the Government of the UK.
P9 Compare the EU to the devolved administrations in the UK and tell me how you can justify that statement.
P10/11/12 Just left wing political statements with no substance. All in all expected better from you.

[GT93]

Thank you to The New York Times. Johnson is a shocker. I think the Brits need to be in the EU to get some protection from their own politicians.

[AlexO]

Thank you to The New York Times. Johnson is a shocker. I think the Brits need to be in the EU to get some protection from their own politicians.

What a load of absolute verbal garbage. The UK is not a dictatorship but is run on a cabinet decision making process and approval by elected MP's who have the final say in any legislation being passed. If you are looking for any real abuse of power you only need to go back to when Blair would crawl up any EU orifice to ensure he was given the money making jobs after his tenure as UK PM.

[tamada]

I recall there were protests when the first round of Commons debate over the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill got underway. The media seemed to paint these protesters as a rowdy, disorganized and somewhat salubrious group "illegally" assembling and beating up on hard-pressed, tired and unappreciated British (mostly English) bobbies.

Anyway, evidence has arisen of an email penned by Johnson's aide inviting about 100 staff to a(nother) BYOB party at #10. Apparently this email was sent within hours of a government minister doing the national television advisory for plebs to only socialize with one person from one other household. This chronology suggests this social event appears to be in addition to the one captured on camera earlier.

How many more torpedoes do we need?

Spoiler alert for Alex: the following link unashamedly lifted from your favourite, red-button media source.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... s-defences

[tamada]

Note that the 'but Blair' deflection has now been exercised on two threads. I guess that's what happens when the 'but Corbyn' excuse loses traction before strutting about with a gilt framed picture of the 'Iron Lady'.

With regard to the abomination of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill as portrayed by the NYT, maybe our resident Bojo cheerleader can tell us what the good bits of it are and what the gormless Brits can look forward to?

[stattointhailand]

So something is "acceptable" provided it is NOT AS BAD AS IN AMERICA?

[tamada]

Boris Johnson Is Revealing Who He Really Is

From The New York Times

LONDON —
...
Undeterred by the pandemic, Mr. Johnson has been quietly pursuing that agenda. But instead of reforming the country’s creaking democracy and shoring up Britons’ rights, he and his lieutenants are doing the opposite: seizing control for themselves and stripping away the freedoms of others. A raft of bills likely to pass this year will set Britain, self-professed beacon of democracy, on the road to autocracy. Once in place, the legislation will be very hard to shift. For Mr. Johnson, it amounts to a concerted power grab.
...

...
P3 Give us an example of peoples rights being stripped away with this new legislation.
...

The fact that it's co-sponsored by the sociopath Priti Patel should give you a good clue. But here's your starter for 10.

Part 2: Serious violence duty, which would allow the police to demand information about individuals (including victims and children) from a range of public bodies. Despite purporting to be a ‘public health’ approach to the issue of violence, it represents a new iteration of enforcement driven policy akin to the Gangs Violence Matrix and the PREVENT programme. Moreover, the duty would weaken important data protection principles and confidentiality obligations.

Part 3: Increased powers for police to impose restrictions on peaceful procession, assembly, and protest, which would expand the circumstances in which police can impose conditions on a range of activities. For example, religious festivals, community gatherings (from Notting Hill Carnival to firework nights, such as those in Lewes), football matches, LGBT+ Pride marches, vigils/remembrance ceremonies, and so on. The Bill also removes the need to knowingly breach police-imposed conditions in order to commit an offence and introduces a broad statutory offence of public nuisance with a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison. These changes risk breaching rights to freedom of expression and assembly and the requirement for legal certainty.

Part 4: Increased powers for police to respond to ‘unauthorised encampments’, which would create a new offence of residing or intending to reside on land with a vehicle where it causes, or is likely to cause “significant disruption, damage, or distress”. It also increases the existing period of time in which trespassers directed from land would be unable to return from three to 12 months, and grant private landowners’ significant powers to trigger a criminal offence with respect to what is ordinarily a civil dispute. These measures would likely indirectly discriminate against Gypsy, Roma and Traveller people, breach their rights to privacy and the home and be in breach of the public sector equality duty.

Part 7: Blanket changes to early release and increased tariffs, which would increase the amount of time those detained must spend in prison before being released on license to serve the rest of their sentence in the community for certain offences. These changes would disproportionally impact Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic people, undermine the rehabilitation of those detained, and incur significant financial costs through unduly extended periods of imprisonment.

Part 7: Greater powers for the Secretary of State for Justice to determine which prisoners can and cannot be automatically released, which would put pressure on the capacity of the Parole Board and risk breaching prisoner’s right to liberty under Article 5 of the ECHR, Article 6 ECHR right to a fair trial, and Article 7 ECHR right against retrospective punishment.

Part 10: Serious Violence Reduction Orders, which would give the police the power to stop and search anybody subject to this order without the need for reasonable grounds to suspect them of having committed a crime. Like all other types of stop and search power, it is likely that SVROs would be used disproportionally against ethnic minorities – especially Black men. This would further damage police relations with minority communities and risk violating an individual’s Article 8 ECHR rights to privacy.

https://justice.org.uk/police-crime-sen ... urts-bill/