Political round up.............

First topic message reminder :

Duty281 wrote:Sunak speaks for a grand total of 84 seconds and then scuttles away to get his orders.

Crackpot.

It's funny. Duty is rapid quick when it comes to posting about his, albeit bogus, claims of an impending Republican majority in both the House and the Senate but when Brexit needs someone to stick up for it, he's nowhere to be seen these days.

So, rather predictably, the ultra-wealthy made it through today unscathed.

An unprecedented cost of living crisis, strikes up and down the country and a growing resentment of the people in charge to the point the Tories are facing an election wipe out.

Call me a cynic or a pessimist, but I cant shake the feeling that the Tories are going to do as little as possible to sort this mess out because they know the jig is up, so they'll just leave as big a mess as possible for the incoming Labour government.

It's still recoverable for the Tories, but they'll need a year of political stability (ha!) and for Russia to be defeated. Russia being defeated could lead to a mood of national optimism in the UK, with inflation and energy bills coming down. Sunak will be hoping this winter was the worst of everything and that the national picture will look sunnier in 2024. He'd probably be done for if there needed to be an election by May 2023, but he's got another two years (almost) for things to improve.

The polls are very interesting because of the amount of don't knows and Reform UK voters that can be squeezed by the Tories.

Techne - 14% Labour lead, 11% don't know, 5% Reform.
YouGov - 14% Labour lead, 17% don't know, 5% Reform.
Opinium - 16% Labour lead, 18% don't know, 4% Reform.

Many of the don't knows are 2019 Tory voters, presently hesitant because of the ineptitude of Starmer, who has failed to win over enough ex-Tory voters (so far) in order to make it a slam dunk. Currently Starmer is only leading Sunak by a few % points in the h2h polling.

Sunak just doesn't feel like a leader. He comes across more as some KPMG administrator that's been brought in to sell off the assets of a company that's gone bust.

Quiet weekend for the Tories.

Sunak gets a second FPN, this time for not wearing a seatbelt. Not the most severe offence but its remarkable he’s managed to get two while holding the two most powerful offices in Government.

Nadhim Zahawi was investigated for potential tax fraud, and had to pay a multi-million pound settlement fee - whilst Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Boris Johnson used millionaire pal and Tory donor Richard Sharp as a guarantor on a loan for £800k, weeks before he recommended him for the vacant BBC director general position. And old habits die hard for Johnson, as soon as this bad news broke he buggered off to Ukraine.

And finally, whistleblowers have revealed a terrifying level of child abductions by traffickers happening in the south coast at Home Office designsted migrant hotels. One in Sussex has seen over 600 unaccompanied child migrants pass through in the past 18 months. Of that, 136 have been reported missing - with 79 still unaccounted for.

Pr4wn wrote:Sunak just doesn't feel like a leader. He comes across more as some KPMG administrator that's been brought in to sell off the assets of a company that's gone bust.

No idea how truthful but saw a rumor that he asked Zahawi to resign and Zahawi said no.

It shows how weak Sunak is within the parliamentary party that he doesn't feel he can sack Zahawi. He needs all the friends he can get (see also: Suella Braverman).

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:It shows how weak Sunak is within the parliamentary party that he doesn't feel he can sack Zahawi. He needs all the friends he can get (see also: Suella Braverman).

Presumably, you'd expect there to be an investigation proving he'd actually done something wrong (as opposed to news stories, no matter how 'believable') before the PM gives him the heave-ho?

navyblueshorts wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:It shows how weak Sunak is within the parliamentary party that he doesn't feel he can sack Zahawi. He needs all the friends he can get (see also: Suella Braverman).

Presumably, you'd expect there to be an investigation proving he'd actually done something wrong (as opposed to news stories, no matter how 'believable') before the PM gives him the heave-ho?

Surely that’s a phone call to HMRC asking if he did pay a 7 figure penalty as reported. If the answer is yes, the details can wait and he needs booting.

It's an intriguing one, isn't it? Did he or didn't he try and avoid paying tax? I should imagine that it would need a writer with the labyrinthine plotting abilities of Agatha Christie or Le Carre' to do justice to this story.

HMRC has already said that "careless mistakes" don't require a settlement like that.

JDizzle wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:It shows how weak Sunak is within the parliamentary party that he doesn't feel he can sack Zahawi. He needs all the friends he can get (see also: Suella Braverman).

Presumably, you'd expect there to be an investigation proving he'd actually done something wrong (as opposed to news stories, no matter how 'believable') before the PM gives him the heave-ho?

Surely that’s a phone call to HMRC asking if he did pay a 7 figure penalty as reported. If the answer is yes, the details can wait and he needs booting.

Maybe, but like any other workplace, presumably there's a process that needs to be followed? I presume we think that should be the case? I'm not bothered about him not getting the boot, I'm suggesting that the PM needs to be seen to follow due process and he shouldn't get knee jerk pelters for so doing.

Pr4wn wrote:HMRC has already said that "careless mistakes" don't require a settlement like that.

? I'm missing something. I thought HMRC said exactly that he was "careless" and therefore he had a penalty to pay?

navyblueshorts wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:HMRC has already said that "careless mistakes" don't require a settlement like that.

? I'm missing something. I thought HMRC said exactly that he was "careless" and therefore he had a penalty to pay?

My apologies. The exact quote is that there are "no penalties for innocent errors". He also said that HMRC does not penalise taxpayers who were deemed to have taken "reasonable care".


Carelessness, it seems, has quite a wide spectrum.

The point, however, is that a strong leader would not want someone who was "careless" to the tune of goodness knows how many millions with his own money as the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Sure, an inquiry can find out exactly how bad the situation is, but to suggest that he shouldn't be removed while the inquiry is ongoing is a bit depressing, to be honest.

They didn't say much, just that you don't get that kind of 'settlement' just for being careless. There are plenty of questions over his finances. I think the main problem is that he was the chancellor of the exchequer. Its a bit like putting someone accused of a crime in charge of the judges.

Well Zahawi becomes the first major casulty of the Sunak premiership after he is finally sacked for “gross breaches of the ministerial code”.

Samo wrote:Well Zahawi becomes the first major casulty of the Sunak premiership after he is finally sacked for “gross breaches of the ministerial code”.

Sickeningly self obsessed letter to Sunak as well. No apology, no contrition. Plenty of blame for the 'Fourth State'. Essentially Andrew Tate in an expensive suit. Stop blaming others, you're a f*cking crook and you got caught.

This party is so consumed by its own corruption, it can't see the wood for the trees.

When everyone is corrupt, the one person who is not corrupt, finds themselves mistrusted, isolated and hated.  

Interesting to learn that the Chair of the BBC allegedly got his job because he managed to help the then prime-minister Boris Johnson out of a certain Financial Difficulty.  Meanwhile it seems the Chairperson of the Conservative Party may have allegedly defrauded the British taxpayer, while the current Prime Minister won't tell us whether he holds shares in a Pharmaceutical Company that has or will be receiving large amounts of British Taxpayers monies.

I have said in the past I believe there is a crisis in the quality and competency of our political class both here and it seems also true for across the pond as well as in the EU.  What I hadn't properly realized was that there is also a crisis in the integrity of the political class.  How anyone can believe anything they say and do especially when it involves foreign policy I find quite amazing.

Pr4wn wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:HMRC has already said that "careless mistakes" don't require a settlement like that.

? I'm missing something. I thought HMRC said exactly that he was "careless" and therefore he had a penalty to pay?

My apologies. The exact quote is that there are "no penalties for innocent errors". He also said that HMRC does not penalise taxpayers who were deemed to have taken "reasonable care".


Carelessness, it seems, has quite a wide spectrum.

The point, however, is that a strong leader would not want someone who was "careless" to the tune of goodness knows how many millions with his own money as the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Sure, an inquiry can find out exactly how bad the situation is, but to suggest that he shouldn't be removed while the inquiry is ongoing is a bit depressing, to be honest.

Fair point. Not sure how practical, over a short period though.

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

Samo wrote:Well Zahawi becomes the first major casulty of the Sunak premiership after he is finally sacked for “gross breaches of the ministerial code”.

Sickeningly self obsessed letter to Sunak as well. No apology, no contrition. Plenty of blame for the 'Fourth State'. Essentially Andrew Tate in an expensive suit. Stop blaming others, you're a f*cking crook and you got caught.

This party is so consumed by its own corruption, it can't see the wood for the trees.

Agree w/ this.
Interesting comment in the report on NZ's failure to, basically, be honest in comments made to various people. A problem with, basically, pretty much all politicians these days.

No name Bertie wrote:...What I hadn't properly realized was that there is also a crisis in the integrity of the political class.  How anyone can believe anything they say and do especially when it involves foreign policy I find quite amazing.

I think the issue w/ integrity, humility, respect etc w/ the politicians of this country (and elsewhere) has been apparent, and becoming worse, for some time. I suspect it's always been this way, but the ways the public have for hearing about their politicians' failings are something those of earlier eras didn't have to cope with. Probably not surprising that politicians are simply a cross-section of wider society and show similar failings, even if magnified. Our problem is, perhaps, that we find it shocking when any random MP gets found out? They should be better, but I'm not surprised. Guess they need better vetting and enforcement policies.

This talk of "pretty much all politicians" is exactly what the crooks what, though. Let's face it. No party in UK politics is anywhere near as mired in sleaze, corruption, bullying as the Tories are.

This chat of "all politicians are crooked" isn't just incorrect, it's dangerous.

Both the main two parties are disgraceful entities, mired in corruption, criminality and racism. Of course the Tories are more corrupt at the moment because they're the ones in power, but no doubt that'll revert back to Labour when they get back in.

With Labour set to gain a lot of new MPs at the next GE, I hope their party vetting procedures have been improved because some of their intake from 2017 were 'interesting' to say the least.

Duty281 wrote:Both the main two parties are disgraceful entities, mired in corruption, criminality and racism. Of course the Tories are more corrupt at the moment because they're the ones in power, but no doubt that'll revert back to Labour when they get back in.

With Labour set to gain a lot of new MPs at the next GE, I hope their party vetting procedures have been improved because some of their intake from 2017 were 'interesting' to say the least.

Q.E.D.

No less out-there than the swivel eyed loons and disaster capitalists that have been accepted into Parliament over the last decade? The ultimate irony, of course, is that after all the cold war cliches that have influenced many election results , we have had a Prime Minister with clear links to Russia and we're all looking the other way...at those ruddy boats coming over the White cliffs.

Integrity and accountability were sacrficed on the altar of Brexit years ago. The amount of Poopie Johnson got away with because he was “getting Brexit done” makes your head spin. If any other leader intentionally lied to Queen to pass something through Parliament without proper scrutiny would have been hung (figuratively by the media) for treason, but they managed it because it was to “get Brexit done”. Any talent had long left the party, so they were left to scrape the bottom of the barrel in 2019 which brought about the worst calibre of MP I think I have seen. The rot is so deeply ingrained in our politics because of this it will take years to recover.

The only saving grace is the Tories are heading for an election wipeout, and despite what the media tries its best to tell you Starmer is head and shoulders above the rest of them when it comes to integrity. He’s far from perfect, but I wont accept any arguments that even try to say “they’re all as bad as each other” because they just arent.

Pr4wn wrote:This talk of "pretty much all politicians" is exactly what the crooks what, though. Let's face it. No party in UK politics is anywhere near as mired in sleaze, corruption, bullying as the Tories are.

This chat of "all politicians are crooked" isn't just incorrect, it's dangerous.

I agree, but then I didn't say that.

Boris Johnson, who is still a Conservative MP, has been spending all his time lobbying for Ukraine, saying Britain and America must send Ukraine everything they want: tanks, fighter jets, long range missiles in order to fight Russia. He says Russia must be defeated and there is no chance of WWIII.

It has been said that while Boris Johnson was the Prime Minister he told Zelensky that Britain and the Americans would be behind Ukraine all the way and that he should not accept any peace deal (April of last year). The way Boris Johnson has acted since then seems to confirm that. I had thought Boris Johnson main focus should have been trying to get Brexit to work by seeking peace and trade deals but it seems he was never interested in Brexit at all - he just used it as a vehicle to get into power.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/boris-johnson-west-give-ukraine-all-need-as-fast-possible

I believe that there is a concerted campaign to push the ideas that Labour are no better than the Tories/ not socialist enough.

Of course there are people who have these views, for lots of reasons, but there is almost certainly an effort to magnify them. It is the only thing the Conservatives have left.

Big fan of Boris Johnson saying that Ukraine should join the EU.

Surprising lack of posts from the Tory defence league lately, I do so miss their pearls of wisdom

This is something that the Daily Mail et al would be all over if it was happening under a Labour government:

'The army would... run out of ammunition within a few days if called upon to fight and would take up to 10 years to field a modern warfighting division of some 25,000 to 30,000 troops.

'The army's holes have been exacerbated because Mr Sunak is giving much of its remaining warfighting capabilities, including tanks and artillery guns, to the Ukrainian military to help in their offensive operations against Russia.

'The bareness of UK defence cupboards could become more apparent to NATO allies at a summit of leaders in Lithuania this summer.

'A key focus will be on a new force model, which aims to have more than 300,000 military personnel across the alliance on a much higher state of readiness as part of a major reshaping of NATO's ability to defend itself and deter threats in the wake of Russia's war.

'But Mr Sunak will only be able "credibly" to offer a brigade - between 5,000 and 10,000 soldiers backed by weapons, armoured vehicles and helicopters - when expectations from a leading ally like the UK will be for a division of up to 30,000 soldiers or even more, defence sources said.'

https://news.sky.com/story/treasury-signals-no-new-money-for-defence-despite-recognising-need-to-rearm-amid-ukraine-war-defence-sources-say-12804037

Yeah, I'm sure they would. I imagine The Mirror et al will be all over this as it is, no?

As for:

"...and would take up to 10 years to field a modern warfighting division of some 25,000 to 30,000 troops."

Seriously?? "...up to 10 years..." could be anything from seconds to 10 years. Someone's agitating for money from the Treasury. I don't believe this for a second, notwithstanding the fact that the UK is clearly FUBAR and our armed forces are a pale shadow of what they were, and what is often claimed.

It's just the contrast for me between the perception of the UK (or the UK's perception of itself) and the state of the army in real life.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:It's just the contrast for me between the perception of the UK (or the UK's perception of itself) and the state of the army in real life.

Yep. Pretty much sums up all of the UK:

Armed Forces
Roads
Police
Education
Health services
Industry
Politics
Global influence

Decline of Empire. Bit like the headless chicken - running around for a few seconds before the body knows it's actually dead...

Sunak going to have a wee cabinet reshuffle later today.

Like scrapping the burnt bits of food stuck to the bottom of the pan. You can move them about but its still burnt.

Lee Anderson is deputy chairman of the party.

Deputy chairman.

Lee f*cking Anderson.

Samo wrote:Sunak going to have a wee cabinet reshuffle later today.

Like scrapping the burnt bits of food stuck to the bottom of the pan. You can move them about but its still burnt.

Oh, I dunno. Could de-glaze in a nice bit of wine, Port or Madeira and make something pretty tasty of them. Not sure Sunak has access to anyone of that calibre though....

Meanwhile, over at BP, their CEO (Bernard Looney 🤪; yes, he of the 'cash machine' comments) is trying to explain why they're reducing their greenhouse targets and giving an extra 10% to shareholders...

Sturgeon resigns and Corbyn's not coming back as a Labour MP. Quiet day.

Makes a change that we're not hearing about a Tory scandal, to be honest. Feels odd.

I didnt think Sturgeon would be leading the SNP into the next elections, so Im not entirely surprised. Maybe a bit at the timing.

8 years is a long time, so I dont blame her for wanting to step back. Especially with the rumours of Rishi Sunak planning on stoking a full blown culture war during the election campaign to distract from Tory economic failings. I wouldnt want to be a part of that, especially with all the controversies of the GRR bill.

Interesting times, got to fancy John Swinney to be elected next, although there are a few rising stars worth keeping an eye on, such as Kate Forbes and Stephen Flynn.

Samo wrote:8 years is a long time, so I dont blame her for wanting to step back. Especially with the rumours of Rishi Sunak planning on stoking a full blown culture war during the election campaign to distract from Tory economic failings.

Think this more likely to be an internal SNP conflict boiling up to the surface myself. Perhaps even some backers threatening to stay on the sidelines if she didn't go, given the talk of a police investigation into their finances.

Pr4wn wrote:Makes a change that we're not hearing about a Tory scandal, to be honest. Feels odd.

Sarcasm noted, but you'd have to concede that it's much more the norm to have scandals reported re. the party of Government, rather than opposition etc? Or is it the norm to take the majority of potshots re. scandals at those that are not the Government of the day?

There were no scandals associated w/ the Blair/Brown Governments? No cash for Honours? No Iraq & WMD? Ecclestone? Mandelson? David Kelly? Keith Vaz? Etc...

This lot aren't that great, but I'm sure you can do better .

navyblueshorts wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Makes a change that we're not hearing about a Tory scandal, to be honest. Feels odd.

Sarcasm noted, but you'd have to concede that it's much more the norm to have scandals reported re. the party of Government, rather than opposition etc? Or is it the norm to take the majority of potshots re. scandals at those that are not the Government of the day?

There were no scandals associated w/ the Blair/Brown Governments? No cash for Honours? No Iraq & WMD? Ecclestone? Mandelson? David Kelly? Keith Vaz? Etc...

This lot aren't that great, but I'm sure you can do better .

You think that the last couple of years are "the norm"? I actually feel sorry for you.

In line with NZ Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern sudden and unplanned resignation, Nicola Sturgeon also suddenly resigns as First Minister of Scotland, saying it is time to take a step back, but saying that Politics is brutal. It has been suggested that her sudden resignation was brought on by the enormous flack and pressure brought upon her following her inability to define the difference between a man and a woman in a live interview - certainly a question that most five year olds would have no difficulty answering until they get state educated. Of course this would have acted as a tipping point on top of other workplace pressures.

Lowlandbrit wrote:

Samo wrote:8 years is a long time, so I dont blame her for wanting to step back. Especially with the rumours of Rishi Sunak planning on stoking a full blown culture war during the election campaign to distract from Tory economic failings.

Think this more likely to be an internal SNP conflict boiling up to the surface myself. Perhaps even some backers threatening to stay on the sidelines if she didn't go, given the talk of a police investigation into their finances.

Thats also entirely possible. We wont know until we know. Tough times ahead for the SNP. The party was riding on a high when she first took office, and it was blatantly obvious she was going to succeed Salmond. There isnt really that obvious successor now, and the momentum is dying down - especially as it seems another Independence referedum isnt going to be on the cards anytime soon.

Might be time to put that on the back burner, and focus on the here and now. Big chance for Labour to step up and become a force in Scotland again.

Pr4wn wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Makes a change that we're not hearing about a Tory scandal, to be honest. Feels odd.

Sarcasm noted, but you'd have to concede that it's much more the norm to have scandals reported re. the party of Government, rather than opposition etc? Or is it the norm to take the majority of potshots re. scandals at those that are not the Government of the day?

There were no scandals associated w/ the Blair/Brown Governments? No cash for Honours? No Iraq & WMD? Ecclestone? Mandelson? David Kelly? Keith Vaz? Etc...

This lot aren't that great, but I'm sure you can do better .

You think that the last couple of years are "the norm"? I actually feel sorry for you.

I'm touched by your concern. However, I didn't say the last couple of years were the norm. I said it was understandably the norm for the Government of the day to be investigated and have scandals reported etc.

I mean, that goes without saying.

My point is that this government has been particularly mired in scandal, much more so than the previous Labour government.

Kwasi Kwarteng, the proponent of the "True Tory Budget" that cost the £30m, who lasted only 38 days as chancellor, has been offering his pearls of wisdom on Nicola Surgeon's 8 year stint as First Minister of Scotland.

Top stuff.

Kate Forbes throwing a hand grenade into her chances of being FM about 10 minutes after announcing her candidancy by saying if she was an MSP in 2014 she would have voted against gay marriage. Way to read the room.

Shamina Begum citizanship bid rejected again.

Good. She made her bed she can lie in it.