Page 1 of 1

Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 6:50 am
by refitman
Morning all.

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 9:10 am
by RogerOThornhill
Morning all.
Matthew O'Toole
@MatthewOToole2
·
10h
Saturday: Gove - civil service leadership needs qualifications in data analysis, understanding risk, mathematical excellence

Sunday night: Johnson - head of civil service must have voted leave

What shabby little mob of charlatans they are.
and

Friday: We're going to have the people with the most experience in their field and with deep, in-depth subject knowledge

Sunday: I know, let's appoint a chap who has only worked in economics and trade policy as National Security Adviser!

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 9:29 am
by RogerOThornhill
Looks like I'm not the only one who thinks this s is the first stage in making government look like the US in having politicians bring in their own teams.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 9:32 am
by RogerOThornhill
And this is a sub-tweet from the above.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 9:47 am
by RogerOThornhill
Andrew Sentance
@asentance
·
15h
Michael Gove’s speech yesterday seems to be a platform for putting the boot into the Civil Service, making politically motivated changes to gov’t depts and even more centralisation of power. This is an agenda for undermining the machinery of gov’t, not constructive reform.
Yep.

And the right wingers will love it. Scorched earth policy too making it difficult to come back from a few years down the line. It'll be like academies all over again.

Just on that I looked at the latest figures the other day.

Only 42% of schools are academies. 10 years down the line and we've got a mess. Weren't they expecting all school to have converted by now?

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 10:07 am
by Willow904
They were going to force all remaining schools to become acadamies at one point, weren't they. I think they would have to because many primary schools are too small to go it alone and too small for academy chain chiefs to profit from and therefore be very interested in. Our local junior school is an outstanding school and many of the others here are very good. The local reaction to the proposal was "if it's not broke, don't fix it" and I get the impression quite a lot of constituents took the time to tell Jacob Rees-Mogg what they thought. There was quite a fuss in the local paper. So I assume this was repeated in Tory constituencies everywhere, because they backed down. The policy is still creeping forward, though, the academy that runs the secondary schools is steadily taking primary schools on and building a new one. They'll get there, I think, but by stealth, as the policy remains pretty unpopular.

I just hope the politicization of the civil service meets as much resistance.

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 10:29 am
by gilsey
Willow904 wrote: I just hope the politicization of the civil service meets as much resistance.
It's unlikely that it will, as it's a long way removed from people's day-to-day experiences, unlike schools.

Either they think they're going to be in power forever, or they're confident they can asset-strip the UK entirely in 4 years, because they don't stop to think about what the opposition could do with these powers. Everything like this that they do, you can ask what they'd say if it was Corbyn doing it, and see how outrageous it is.

I'm not for a moment suggesting that Labour under JC or KS would do anything nefarious with such powers, of course.

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 10:40 am
by gilsey
We're not likely to see anything critical from the media either.

Just like their reporting of the £1bn over 10 years for schools, it's just reported in the govt's words with no context, as if it was a lot of money.

I was actually taken aback by the distance between the rhetoric and the facts. I couldn't quote the figures for Building Schools for the Future off the top of my head but the media could look it up, couldn't they?

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 10:40 am
by RogerOThornhill
And for all of the "Oh Blair and Brown did it first" line that I've seen about politicizing the civil service, they definitely didn't have the same approach - Blair's "soft government" style was undone by Brown. I remember a DT article where FCO officials spoke approvingly of changes and appointments that GB made when he took over.

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 10:43 am
by gilsey
You'll be 'surprised' to learn that Johnson says now is not the right moment to hold an inquiry into what the government has done wrong during the pandemic.

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 10:54 am
by RogerOThornhill
Another one?

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 11:14 am
by gilsey
Very interesting thread, I wonder if the book will be worth reading.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Jonathan Hopkin
@jrhopkin
I argue that the rise of the authoritarian right is actually the result of political parties not representing voters on *economic* issues (yes, the issues where voters are closer to Labour). The same reason anti-system left movements are also surging at the moment.

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 11:43 am
by Willow904
With the pandemic we've had an interesting wake-up call about which jobs are most essential and they have predominantly been the lower paid and least regarded, including many public service roles that the Tories accused the Blair government of expanding and pampering and ruthlessly attacked, both financially and reputationally, since they took power in 2010.
Remember Teresa May's triumph in putting the police "in their place" when Home Secretary? If they had forgotten, I suspect they're remembering now why the police had formally always been so well paid and so well resourced.
Meanwhile, comfortably off pensioners, with little time for the issues of the working age such as high private rents and insecure work, are getting a reminder of how necessary the working age are in terms of emptying their bins and delivering their food while they shelter from coronavirus in their over-inflated homes. Rising house prices don't put food on the table or clear away the leftovers.
So there are definitely opportunities to reset our priorities, but it requires politicians on the left who are willing and able to lead the public rather than follow where those with the most money, and therefore most media and internet influence, are currently taking them.

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 11:44 am
by AnatolyKasparov
gilsey wrote:
Willow904 wrote: I just hope the politicization of the civil service meets as much resistance.
It's unlikely that it will, as it's a long way removed from people's day-to-day experiences, unlike schools.

Either they think they're going to be in power forever, or they're confident they can asset-strip the UK entirely in 4 years, because they don't stop to think about what the opposition could do with these powers. Everything like this that they do, you can ask what they'd say if it was Corbyn doing it, and see how outrageous it is.

I'm not for a moment suggesting that Labour under JC or KS would do anything nefarious with such powers, of course.
It will meet a lot of resistance from within the civil service.

There is also the question of how much all this rhetoric will be backed up - our PM is the classic type who gets bored and wants new "toys" after a while.

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 11:54 am
by Willow904
From the G live blog:

5 - Johnson revealed that he still has doubts about introducing a “sugar tax” - even though he has now changed his thinking about obesity. He said that he used to take a “very libertarian stance” on obesity. But he said that now, as a result of his experience in his hospital (being overweight increases the risk from coronavirus, and Johnson believes his weight contributed to him ending up in intensive care), he was more persuaded of the need for government to address this problem. He said:

We certainly must have a care for the health of our population and we will be happier and fitter and more resistant to diseases like Covid if we can tackle obesity.

But, when asked specifically about the sugar tax, he demurred, implying he still had his doubts about this proposal.
Pretty much perfect example of how Boris Johnson is all talk and no trousers.

He will never change and he will never do anything of note, just preside over destruction and decay.

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 11:56 am
by Willow904
Oh yay!

Michael Rosen is on the telly! And at home.

:dance:

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 11:57 am
by AnatolyKasparov
Oh, that's nice :)

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 1:50 pm
by gilsey
Willow904 wrote:comfortably off pensioners, with little time for the issues of the working age such as high private rents and insecure work, are getting a reminder of how necessary the working age are in terms of emptying their bins and delivering their food while they shelter from coronavirus in their over-inflated homes.
You talking to me? :lol:

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 2:29 pm
by frog222
Can a school or hospital manager refuse entrance to any politician ?

We all know they are, usually, there for the photo op ?

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 2:47 pm
by frog222
Breathtaking ignorance of history, part 1556744 -

149222 @ JoAverage
Bring it on, I say:
"" The Revenue Act of 1935, 49 Stat. 1014 (Aug. 30, 1935), raised federal income tax on higher income levels, by introducing the "Wealth Tax".

It was a progressive tax that took up to 75 percent of the highest incomes (over $1 million per year.)

It was signed into law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt over strong opposition from business, the rich, and conservatives from both parties. The 1935 Act also was popularly known at the time as the "Soak the Rich" tax.

To solve the problem of tax evasion through loopholes, the Revenue Act of 1937 revised tax laws and regulations to increase the efficacy of the tax. ""
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue_Act_of_1935" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Also IIRC the marginal rate was far higher by 1945, something like 95% !

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 2:48 pm
by frog222
Duplicate

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 2:53 pm
by gilsey

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 3:21 pm
by AnatolyKasparov
Football, bah humbug.

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 3:36 pm
by Willow904
gilsey wrote:
Willow904 wrote:comfortably off pensioners, with little time for the issues of the working age such as high private rents and insecure work, are getting a reminder of how necessary the working age are in terms of emptying their bins and delivering their food while they shelter from coronavirus in their over-inflated homes.
You talking to me? :lol:
Oops :oops:

Sorry about that! It came out more critical - and more demographically specific - than I meant.

What I'm trying to get across is that we think our quality of life is dependent on money and wealth but in fact it's far more dependent on the people we pay with our money and our wealth to do the things we don't want, or are unable, to do ourselves. The pandemic has been a tiny, little insight into the old adage that you can't eat money. We all sort of know it but in that moment when we were faced with empty supermarket shelves we all felt it a little. We became far more aware than we usually are of how utterly vdependant we are on other people.

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 3:44 pm
by GetYou
The last word on press ups:

[youtube]x9Pdh38amwE[/youtube]

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 5:14 pm
by RogerOThornhill
Bloody hell, these people are deluded. Take a look at the final paragraph...

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 6:07 pm
by PorFavor
Good morfternoon.
Labour says bringing back benefits sanctions now 'incomprehensible'

Thérèse Coffey, the work and pensions secretary, told MPs during DWP questions in the Commons this afternoon that sanctions will start to apply again to claimants who fail to turn up for jobcentre appointments after the jobcentres reopen in July. Explaining the decision, she said:

It is important that, as the jobcentres fully reopen this week, we do reinstate the need for having the claimant commitment and it is an essential part of the contract to help people start to reconsider what vacancies there may be. (Politics Live, Guardian)

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 6:13 pm
by AnatolyKasparov
She did go on to say that staff should "use their judgement" on this. Which maybe should be reassuring, but on past experience might not be.

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 6:57 pm
by frog222
Batshitcrazy Coffey ! Crace --

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... tame-debut" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 7:49 pm
by RogerOThornhill
This is kinda sad...but interesting to see the numbers of Brexiters whose only comment is "It's made up" or "on't believe it" - the refusal of people to accept that things might just be more complicated than they've been led to believe is revealing.

I notice the Hartley-Brewer barging her way in...

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 7:58 pm
by RogerOThornhill
Laura Kuenssberg
@bbclaurak
Meeting btw Health Sec + Leicester leaders STILL going on - was originally meant to be done + dusted in time for a statement this afternoon - but still going on - statement now expected at about 9, but it's clear agreeing local lockdown has been less than straightforward
7:46 PM · Jun 29, 2020·Twitter Web App
Local lockdown less than straightforward?

No, I can't believe that...

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 8:49 pm
by frog222
Excellent piece on the Evils of DFID --
The utterly shameless David Miliband, Chief Executive of the International Rescue Committee, gets an eye watering US $911,000 a year for his work for a “charity” that gets £100 million a year from DFID.

So when you hear the UK aid sector screaming at the threat to DFID, do not be shocked. Thousands of luxurious lifestyles across London are potentially at threat.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives ... d/#respond" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 9:47 pm
by frog222
:clap: :clap: :clap: Crazy ENGLISH government on hairdressing, no masks at all and hairdresser to wear a vizor only !

Had mine cut on the Saturday 16th May after we reduced lockdown on Monday the 11th.

I wore a mask , she had mask, a visor and disinfected the chair when I left .

Definitely rocket-science ! :clap: :clap: :clap:

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 10:16 pm
by adam
gilsey wrote:We're not likely to see anything critical from the media either.

Just like their reporting of the £1bn over 10 years for schools, it's just reported in the govt's words with no context, as if it was a lot of money.

I was actually taken aback by the distance between the rhetoric and the facts. I couldn't quote the figures for Building Schools for the Future off the top of my head but the media could look it up, couldn't they?
£47billion over 15 years (15 because there were budgets allocated that 'played through' the election of the coalition after 2010). And that's £47billion in 1997 to 2012 money. Compared to £1bn now over 10 years.

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 10:48 pm
by refitman
Apparently Starmer had picked a position on Black Lives Matter, that Farage agrees with? *Slow hand clap*

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Mon 29 Jun, 2020 11:07 pm
by AnatolyKasparov
Farage is trolling, just as when he "praised" Corbyn for his Euroscepticism.

(and of course, David Duke and Nick Griffin "supported" Jezza as well)

There are lots of people who have critiqued what Starmer said today legitimately, he is not one of them.

Don't fall for it.

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Tue 30 Jun, 2020 12:24 am
by PorFavor
[youtube]8BpTBLPQUFo[/youtube]

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Tue 30 Jun, 2020 12:57 am
by PorFavor
[youtube]TpXkk19HQ4s[/youtube]

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Tue 30 Jun, 2020 1:03 am
by AnatolyKasparov
Were once rumoured to be the (reformed) Beatles, that lot.

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Tue 30 Jun, 2020 1:19 am
by PorFavor
[youtube]jhLo1Ib6ym0[/youtube]

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Tue 30 Jun, 2020 5:16 am
by citizenJA
hello

Re: Monday 29th June 2020

Posted: Tue 30 Jun, 2020 6:43 am
by frog222
citizenJA wrote:hello
Bonjour / Morning Citoyenne !