Monday 12th April 2021

[refitman]

Morning all.

[Willow904]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-56713017" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

NHS Covid-19 app update blocked for breaking Apple and Google's rules

Sheer incompetence.

And the spin the BBC article puts on this at the end - trying to blame Google and Apple - is completely at odds with the fact that earlier in the article it describes how Scotland easily worked out a simple solution to achieve the same end without the need to try to break contractual rules as England arrogantly tried to do.

I'm a bit today with everything I'm reading relating to this government, they're going beyond taking the piss now. Like this:

https://mobile.twitter.com/tnewtondunn/ ... 1805184000" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tom Newton Dunn
@tnewtondunn
Replying to
@tnewtondunn
Sir Bernard also calls for the Prime Minister’s independent advisor on ministerial standards to lead that inquiry... if only there was one. Sir Alex Allen resigned six months ago after the PM ignored his findings on Priti Patel, and he still hasn’t been replaced.

[AnatolyKasparov]

Re last night's conversation - the real question is surely how much Starmer's current lack of impact is actually his fault.

Or, maybe, a lot of it is down to a media that has become much worse than it was even in the 1990s?

[gilsey]

That's one real question.

The question he was asked, is the MSM's treatment of Meghan racist, to which he answered no, is also a real question. He's supposed to be a clever lawyer. We're entitled to query whether he's mislaid any principles he ever had along the way.

[RogerOThornhill]

Good morning/afternoon (delete as applicable)

One of the Commissions of that report was asked a simple question.

https://twitter.com/ajjolley/status/1381364200769998852" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So she fed back the standard response, but then was asked a specific question.

Andy Jolley
@ajjolley
Replying to
@5Naureen
Thanks

So just to be clear, you were sent the full and final version, including the introduction, before it was published?
10:56 PM · Apr 11, 2021·Twitter for iPad

No answer.

Do we draw our own conclusions from this?

[AnatolyKasparov]

But why ask Starmer such a pointless "gotcha" question in the first place?

[Willow904]

I didn't know a lot about Ed Miliband before he was elected leader. My impression of him was greatly shaped by the speeches he made to conference.

Likewise my impression of Jeremy Corbyn was irretrievably sealed by the woeful speech he made directly after the EU referendum.

Starmer has made some speeches since becoming leader, of course, but I'm not sure he's made any similar in prominence to the above and I find he is still yet to make a lasting impression one way or another. Perhaps he never will. He certainly lacks charisma, but what are the alternatives?

I think it's sometimes unfair to judge caution given the nature of our press. While the attacks on Meghan Markle may well have been motivated by racism, he was asked if they were racist, not whether they were potentially motivated by racism. Were they explicitly racist? Could that be proved in a court of law? The press were absolutely horrible to her, there's no doubt of that and certainly Starmer could have shown more disgust at the way she was treated but I can't really judge him for refraining from being drawn into making what is, at the end of the day, a very serious allegation that could be hard to definitively prove.

[AnatolyKasparov]

Starmer has made a few speeches, but of course hasn't been able to campaign in the way an opposition leader normally would. This has to be remembered.

[refitman]

Re last night's conversation - the real question is surely how much Starmer's current lack of impact is actually his fault.

Or, maybe, a lot of it is down to a media that has become much worse than it was even in the 1990s?

It's not just "lack of impact" though. For me, it's things like describing BLM as "a moment, not a movement", not backing the NHS payrise, promoting a church that carries out conversion therapy on LGBTQ people.

[AnatolyKasparov]

Ah yes, it was obvious to me that he meant "moment" as in "defining moment" rather than "inconsequential soon to be gone moment".

(though that should have been clarified right away)

NHS payrise - again why do they have to specify a particular figure, another pointless gotcha question given THE TORIES ARE ACTUALLY IN GOVERNMENT.

The church thing - an inevitable consequence of being "terminally offline" (and boasting to the press about it) That it took them so long to clear things up - and they even sent Rachel Reeves out to dissemble about it days later - is I agree rather less defensible.

[RogerOThornhill]

Greensill: Government to investigate David Cameron's lobbying

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics- ... 484D484DA4" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Mr Cameron has said he has not broken any codes of conduct or lobbying rules.

But in a statement on Sunday weeks after reports of his lobbying emerged, the former Tory leader said that he should have contacted ministers through "formal" channels.

It is not yet known who will carry out the inquiry or how wide its scope will be - with further details likely to emerge in the next few hours.

Munira Mirza probably..."it was all fine. Nothing to see here. Move along please..."

[gilsey]

the attacks on Meghan Markle may well have been motivated by racism, he was asked if they were racist, not whether they were potentially motivated by racism.

You can have a racist motive but not be a racist?

[gilsey]

Ah yes, it was obvious to me that he meant "moment" as in "defining moment" rather than "inconsequential soon to be gone moment".

(though that should have been clarified right away)

NHS payrise - again why do they have to specify a particular figure, another pointless gotcha question given THE TORIES ARE ACTUALLY IN GOVERNMENT.

The church thing - an inevitable consequence of being "terminally offline" (and boasting to the press about it) That it took them so long to clear things up - and they even sent Rachel Reeves out to dissemble about it days later - is I agree rather less defensible.

1. It was obvious to me that when JC said 'we must activate A50 now', he meant 'now that the country's voted to leave' rather than 'now this minute', but it was clearly open to misinterpretation. I say again, SKS is supposed to be a clever lawyer.

2. Tend to agree on that one, but I can't see that it would have done any more harm to have said 'at least 5%' rather than 2%.

3. Looks like carelessness, we get enough of that from Johnson.

[gilsey]

I think my general point is that he's very, very careful about what he says when considering possible attacks from the right, not so much the left.
Not a good look for a Labour leader imo.

[Willow904]

the attacks on Meghan Markle may well have been motivated by racism, he was asked if they were racist, not whether they were potentially motivated by racism.

You can have a racist motive but not be a racist?

A racist motive obviously makes you a racist. I'm just making the point that motive is difficult to prove if nothing said is specifically racist. Indeed, being American and an actress probably went against her too, not to mention the media treats all women far more unfairly and harshly than men. They were awful to her and yes, of course I suspect that racism was a large part of why, but how do you prove that?

[AnatolyKasparov]

Shirley Williams has died.

Can't say I entirely approve of her later political trajectory, but she had a very interesting career and life nonetheless. RIP.

[Willow904]

Meanwhile, Prince Philip frequently said things that were explicitly racist. As indeed has Boris. Will anyone in the press ask Keir Starmer his opinion on this, I wonder? And would he dare answer?

https://mobile.twitter.com/AdamBienkov/ ... 3658290177" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Adam Bienkov
@AdamBienkov
Boris Johnson defends Prince Philips' racist comments, saying people "understood he was trying to break the ice, to get things moving, to get people laughing."
2:48 PM · Apr 12, 2021

I think what he meant to say is everyone understood he was very, very privileged and not very bright. And also a bit (lot) racist. Provably so.

[AnatolyKasparov]

So.......any of you been to the pub today?

[refitman]

So.......any of you been to the pub today?

Not a chance

And never mind the pubs, you should see the queues for hair dressers/barbers round my way/

[Willow904]

Way too cold for the pub. Might have to brave Primark though, my daughter is getting low on clothes.

[tinyclanger2]

Hello

[refitman]

Hello

*waves*

[gilsey]

Musa Okwonga: ‘Boys don’t learn shamelessness at Eton, it is where they perfect it’

I think a great deal about the English concept of fair play: the idea that there are some things that are simply not done. The older I get, the more I wonder how much that concept was created to keep people of a certain social class in their place. I look at the most confident people in my year and I realise that the greatest gift that has been bestowed upon them is that of shamelessness. Shamelessness is the superpower of a certain section of the English upper classes. While so many other people in the country are hamstrung by the deference and social embarrassment they have been taught since birth, the upper classes calmly parade on through the streets and boardrooms to claim the spoils. They don’t learn shamelessness at Eton, but this is where they perfect it.