UK Politics Thread

[Furunculus]

Russians Offered Business Deals to Brexit?s Biggest Backer

In related, more recent news, Alexander Lebedev has been sanctioned by Canada as one of Putin's inner circle, while the UK government has taken steps to protect him. NB. his son Evgeny was made a Lord by Boris Johnson against the advice of the security services.

Does it matter what Banks did or not do, other than legal and reputational consequences to himself?

He ran [a] campaign in the brexit referendum, much like the dozens of other campaigns all seeking to achieve there own objectives.

He did not run the officially recognised Leave campaign, that was Vote Leave under Cummings (not Leave.eu which he ran).

Vote Leave famously wanted nothing to do with Leave.eu.

[Montmorency]

This time next year the pound will be materially stronger, in all dimensions. One thing I?ve always remained steadfast on is that there will be an eleventh hour deal to avoid a no-deal Brexit? and the pound will then gap up ? to 1.3 against the euro and 1.6 against the dollar. That?s just using back-of-the envelope, econ 101 calculations.

This was published June 26 2020. At the time the exchange to USD, according to Google, was 1.26 and to Euro 1.1. For the past month those have been around the same against USD and over the past year between 1.15 and 1.2 against Euro.

I have no idea of British monetary economics, but I do like concrete predictions.

[Pannonian]

‘On Tuesday, Lord Geidt revealed that he believes that Johnson may have broken the Ministerial Code during the Partygate scandal. But rather than trigger an investigation into the Prime Minister, Lord Geidt revealed that he is unable to do so – due to Johnson’s blunt refusal to refer himself for investigation.

‘Absurdly, Lord Geidt also revealed that he is not even able to advise Johnson on how to better follow the Ministerial Code – because such advice would simply be ignored, thereby forcing his resignation.

“I have attempted to avoid the Independent Advisor offering advice to a Prime Minister about a Prime Minister’s obligations under his own Ministerial Code”, Lord Geidt said.

“If a Prime Minister’s judgement is that there is nothing to investigate or no case to answer, he would be bound to reject any such advice, thus forcing the resignation of the Independent Advisor. Such a circular process could only risk placing the Ministerial Code in a place of ridicule.”

What checks and balances are there on the UK executive?

[Pannonian]

Boris Johnson wins a vote of confidence within the Parliamentary Conservative Party, 211 votes to 148.

[Furunculus]

In the last decade there has been a complete disappearance of 'calibration' in UK political discourse.
Every failing, regardless of severity, immediately results in shrill outrage broadcast and amplified.
There is no distinction, no sober consideration, and absolutely no attempt to do anything but impute the worst possible motive for any deviancy from the norm.
Just volume. Immediate volume. A Pavlovian response to crowd source 120 decibels of rage.

The sheer visceral rage that surrounded party-gate's big reveal - that boris had been presented a cake during a ten minute interlude - was frankly absurd. It lacked calibration.

On this subject:
https://www.spiked-online.com/2022/0...-bias-anymore/

[rory_20_uk]

You seem to be conflating one symptom with the underlying pathology.

He was fined over one cake as the Police initially refused to do anything then did the bare minimum - apparently accepting his excuse for being at other events that as the Leader he had to be there as opposed to as the Leader he was jointly and severally responsible for everything that happens. There's another party his wife held at home that Plod also chose to not look into.

Deleting emails regarding his affair whilst Mayor which again was not allowed.

And even this massively lengthened list is merely further symptoms, not the disease, as these happen to be criminal breaches rather than purely incompetence - such as the Norther Ireland bodge.
He has taken the statistical gymnastics at PMQs (which I always have disliked) to just lying.
His head of Ethics quit!

To reiterate - no other PM in history has remained in post after breaching the law. Few have continued after such a poor confidence vote. Not long ago even getting caught telling a direct lie to Parliament mattered, not merely a grunt post hoc as the records are updated.

And just to be sure he's had the rules rewritten so lying is no longer a resigning matter.

This isn't normal. This isn't merely about a cake. But the longer he continues the greater liklihood that the ediface kept up by the illusion of "historic norms" will cease to work.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

...But the longer he continues the greater likelihood that the edifice kept up by the illusion of "historic norms" will cease to work.

Heavens but we have lived through that/are continuing to deal with that sort of politiculture diminution on this side of the pond.

[Pannonian]

You seem to be conflating one symptom with the underlying pathology.

He was fined over one cake as the Police initially refused to do anything then did the bare minimum - apparently accepting his excuse for being at other events that as the Leader he had to be there as opposed to as the Leader he was jointly and severally responsible for everything that happens. There's another party his wife held at home that Plod also chose to not look into.

Deleting emails regarding his affair whilst Mayor which again was not allowed.

And even this massively lengthened list is merely further symptoms, not the disease, as these happen to be criminal breaches rather than purely incompetence - such as the Norther Ireland bodge.
He has taken the statistical gymnastics at PMQs (which I always have disliked) to just lying.
His head of Ethics quit!

To reiterate - no other PM in history has remained in post after breaching the law. Few have continued after such a poor confidence vote. Not long ago even getting caught telling a direct lie to Parliament mattered, not merely a grunt post hoc as the records are updated.

And just to be sure he's had the rules rewritten so lying is no longer a resigning matter.

This isn't normal. This isn't merely about a cake. But the longer he continues the greater liklihood that the ediface kept up by the illusion of "historic norms" will cease to work.

Prior to that he'd told HMQ that he wasn't going to prorogue Parliament, before doing just that. I remember Major being apoplectic about a serving PM lying to HMQ,

[Pannonian]

Ken Clarke (Tory left) and Michael Howard (Tory right) have said that the Lords will oppose the government's line on the Northern Ireland protocol. Goodness knows how the unelected Lords think they have the legitimacy to challenge the elected Commons. According to the two Tory peers, they think it's a good idea for this country to observe international law and keep agreements it has made. This runs counter to what the top government lawyer in the Commons has ruled, which is that UK sovereignty means that it can unilaterally go back on its agreement with the EU.

When will we get rid of the Lords and their jumped up pretensions? They're neither representative nor accountable, and thus they do not have legitimacy, and have no business challenging the elected Commons on this.

In other unrelated news, the equally unelected Prince Charles has described the plan to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda as "appalling".

[Furunculus]

Northern Ireland cannot form a government right now, and the NIP is damaging the Belfast agreement – because the EU forgets that consent of [both] communities matters, and that east/west links matter every smidge as much as north/south.

There needs to be accomodation from [both] parties if the issue is to be satisfactorily answered.

https://twitter.com/TomMcTague/statu...34366234972160

“Both the British government and the EU should have known, and probably did know, that this Protocol if implemented strictly.. was never going to work for N Ireland.” - Mandelson 2022

[Pannonian]

Northern Ireland cannot form a government right now, and the NIP is damaging the Belfast agreement – because the EU forgets that consent of [both] communities matters, and that east/west links matter every smidge as much as north/south.

There needs to be accomodation from [both] parties if the issue is to be satisfactorily answered.

https://twitter.com/TomMcTague/statu...34366234972160

And there is video evidence (I've seen it) of Boris Johnson, the PM who'd signed the agreement, telling DUP reps not to worry about the details of the agreement because he had no intention of keeping them.

[Furunculus]

And there is video evidence (I've seen it) of Boris Johnson, the PM who'd signed the agreement, telling DUP reps not to worry about the details of the agreement because he had no intention of keeping them.

No doubt, both parties seemed to understand that the NIP would not achieve its stated aim of protecting the Belfast agreement.

[Pannonian]

Boris Johnson?s Brexit team has been ordered to draw up plans to ?get around? the Northern Ireland protocol in the Brexit withdrawal agreement so the prime minister can play hardball with Brussels over trade.

Officials in Taskforce Europe, run by Johnson?s EU negotiator David Frost, are working in secret on proposals to ensure that there do not need to be checks on goods passing from Britain to Northern Ireland.

They believe the new attorney-general, Suella Braverman, might have to give new legal advice to justify the move. Insiders say she was appointed because her predecessor Geoffrey Cox was not willing to countenance action that will be seen in Brussels as a breach of the exit agreement.

Brexit team seeks to evade Irish Sea checks on goods

Article dated 23rd Feb 2020. Note: Brexit withdrawal agreement (signed 24th Jan 2020).

Less than a month after signing the agreement, and the UK government were already looking to get out of it. And yet the UK government and its supporters persist in blaming the EU on this. Probably because they know that fighting the EU wins votes, which is all that matters.

[Furunculus]

Brexit team seeks to evade Irish Sea checks on goods

Article dated 23rd Feb 2020. Note: Brexit withdrawal agreement (signed 24th Jan 2020).

Less than a month after signing the agreement, and the UK government were already looking to get out of it. And yet the UK government and its supporters persist in blaming the EU on this. Probably because they know that fighting the EU wins votes, which is all that matters.

No doubt, both parties seemed to understand that the NIP would not achieve its stated aim of protecting the Belfast agreement.

[Pannonian]

UK police refuse to investigate 600k donation to Tory party. Barclays flagged it as suspicious, the New York Times investigated it and found it to have come from a Russian bank account (500 is the limit for a non-UK citizen, and that's 500, not 500k). The UK police says it's ok. And thus the Tories continue to take Russian money, and they'll continue to be elected on Russian money.

Let's not forget, of course, that the Commons committee found that the authorities saw nothing wrong in the Leave campaign taking Russian money, because they'd been instructed to look away to allow for exactly that argument. The police and the Tory party are in cahoots.

[Pannonian]

No doubt, both parties seemed to understand that the NIP would not achieve its stated aim of protecting the Belfast agreement.

It was something the UK government signed up to. At the time of that article, the UK PM, Boris Johnson, had signed the document not one month before, and he was already undermining it. Clarke and Howard, Europhile and Eurosceptic, think that this goes beyond the micro-argument that the UK government and its supporters would like to reduce it to. It's a matter of the UK keeping its agreements, rather than abandoning them unilaterally.

[Furunculus]

It was something the UK government signed up to. At the time of that article, the UK PM, Boris Johnson, had signed the document not one month before, and he was already undermining it. Clarke and Howard, Europhile and Eurosceptic, think that this goes beyond the micro-argument that the UK government and its supporters would like to reduce it to. It's a matter of the UK keeping its agreements, rather than abandoning them unilaterally.

It was something the EU negotiators signed up to, too.

"both parties seemed to understand that the NIP would not achieve its stated aim of protecting the Belfast agreement"

[Furunculus]

UK police refuse to investigate 600k donation to Tory party. Barclays flagged it as suspicious, the New York Times investigated it and found it to have come from a Russian bank account (500 is the limit for a non-UK citizen, and that's 500, not 500k). The UK police says it's ok. And thus the Tories continue to take Russian money, and they'll continue to be elected on Russian money.

Let's not forget, of course, that the Commons committee found that the authorities saw nothing wrong in the Leave campaign taking Russian money, because they'd been instructed to look away to allow for exactly that argument. The police and the Tory party are in cahoots.

I took this quote from a Guardian article looking at russian donations to the tories:

Under electoral laws for Great Britain – they vary slightly in Northern Ireland – donations to parties can be made only by people on the UK electoral register, or from UK-registered companies and other organisations such as unions.

The only people allowed to go on the electoral register in England are British citizens, people with EU citizenship living in the UK, and Commonwealth citizens who can live in the UK.

Are the police refusing to investigate something that is not a crime?
Or is there a crime that they are refusing to investigate?

The difference seems useful to distinguish. throwing poop at the wall in the hope that some sticks.

[Pannonian]

So the Northern Ireland government has strongly rejected the UK government's NI protocol bill. Who is this readjustment meant to serve again? If the EU and Northern Ireland are happy with the agreement, why is it being unilaterally changed by the UK, and on what authority?

[Furunculus]

So the Northern Ireland government has strongly rejected the UK government's NI protocol bill. Who is this readjustment meant to serve again? If the EU and Northern Ireland are happy with the agreement, why is it being unilaterally changed by the UK, and on what authority?

What government?
Do you mean a collection of members from the NI Assembly?
But there is no executive (read: government) as the Unionist Party refuses to to help co-create one.

And this matters in NI (where it would not in most other jurisdictions), because:

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...fast-agreement

"the principle of consent underpinning Northern Ireland’s constitutional status"

Northern Ireland cannot form a government right now, and the NIP is damaging the Belfast agreement – because the EU forgets that consent of [both] communities matters, and that east/west links matter every smidge as much as north/south.

The consent of both communuties; loyalist and unionist.

[Pannonian]

What government?
Do you mean a collection of members from the NI Assembly?
But there is no executive (read: government) as the Unionist Party refuses to to help co-create one.

And this matters in NI (where it would not in most other jurisdictions), because:

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...fast-agreement


Northern Ireland cannot form a government right now, and the NIP is damaging the Belfast agreement – because the EU forgets that consent of [both] communities matters, and that east/west links matter every smidge as much as north/south.

The consent of both communuties; loyalist and unionist.

Sorry, not a government as per your technical definition. A majority of representatives from the Northern Ireland assembly. In UK terms, this might be the definition of a government (a majority of representatives from the UK Parliament).

And typically, you blame the EU despite a majority of NI reps taking their side, that the agreement the UK government signed should be kept by the UK government.

[Furunculus]

And yet in NI it doesn't matter a whit, as the central principle of governance is the need to do so with the consent of both communities. Northern Ireland cannot form a government right now, and the NIP is damaging the Belfast agreement – because the EU forgets that consent of [both] communities matters, and that east/west links matter every smidge as much as north/south. Does the Unionist community assent to the current arrangements?

For sure, there was the EU's chosen way to 'fix' NI which was Single Market and customs union, where the UK becomes a passive follower of regulation made elsewhere. Surprisingly, it wasn't seen as acceptable to the UK Gov't. And in the EU's clever leveraging of its position (and Theresa May's weakness) it insistsed on sequencing the negotiations so that the withdrawal agreement (and NI) happened before any consideration was given to the future economic arrangement.

[Montmorency]

On this subject:
https://www.spiked-online.com/2022/0...-bias-anymore/

As I said previously, pretending the backlash itself - we're not even translating to voting behavior yet - is about a party is like complaining that the 2020 BLM movement was overplayed for the sake of a single man. Separately regarding media bias, I haven't been witness to how Johnson is covered in British broadcast media, let alone in comparison to print media (I do wonder if British media are even constituted to be able to generate bias against a Conservative PM) but *coughs*

This research project provides a sound and theoretically informed analysis of the various (or unison) media representations of the rise of Jeremy Corbyn as a candidate for the Labour leadership and of him as the new leader of the largest opposition party in the UK. Furthermore, this project also aims to make a contribution to the ongoing public debate regarding the role of mainstream media and of journalists in a media-saturated democracy.

We set out to recognise and acknowledge the legitimate role of the press to critique and challenge the powers that be, which is often encapsulated by the metaphor of the watchdog. Our systematic content analysis of a representative sample of newspaper articles published in 8 national newspapers between 1 September and 1 November 2015, however, shows that the press reacted in a highly transgressive manner to the new leader of the opposition, hence our reference to the attackdog metaphor.

Our analysis shows that Corbyn was thoroughly delegitimised as a political actor from the moment he became a prominent candidate and even more so after he was elected as party leader, with a strong mandate. This process of delegitimisation occurred in several ways: 1) through lack of or distortion of voice; 2) through ridicule, scorn and personal attacks; and 3) through association, mainly with terrorism.

All this raises, in our view, a number of pressing ethical questions regarding the role of the media in a democracy. Certainly, democracies need their media to challenge power and offer robust debate, but when this transgresses into an antagonism that undermines legitimate political voices that dare to contest the current status quo, then it is not democracy that is served.

Further on the subject of media-driven public attitudes, this is always worth looking into:
https://www.ft.com/content/f2d72f42-...b-f50a32f37afc





The entirety of the shift was driven by Leavers. It's worth asking what the data for other news purveyors show.

[Pannonian]

As a comparison, see how easy a ride the Tories have had with dodgy Russian money and connections, even after the actual security services have explicitly warned about the individuals various Tory ministers (right up to and including the PM) and supporters have been consorting with. With one Russian being ennobled after the head of MI5 declined a meeting with him, set up by Tory supporters, because of suspicions about his intentions and wanting to keep the UK security institutions clean of foreign (and specifically Russian) influence. Nothing about that from the Tory media though. Nor the 600k that Barclays flagged and that the NY Times traced to a Russian account. Even when foreign media have done the legwork, even when the services officially protecting our country express concerns, our right wing media will still look the other way, thus allowing them to shape voter opinion to continue supporting their dodgy politicians.

About the immigration to Leave switch: I can't remember if I've posted it here, but there's a record of UK national issues polls, either by yougov or someone equally credible, which asked people what their main concerns were at that particular time. Immigration was in the top 1 or 2, averaging 20-30% (the other top 3 concerns being economy and NHS also averaging similar numbers), with the EU being nowhere (averaging around 1-3%), right up until around Feb 2016, when the EU jumped up to 1st with around 30-40%, and immigration disappearing as an issue.

[Furunculus]

As I said previously, pretending the backlash itself - we're not even translating to voting behavior yet - is about a party is like complaining that the 2020 BLM movement was overplayed for the sake of a single man.

The entirety of the shift was driven by Leavers. It's worth asking what the data for other news purveyors show.

An endless argument that is at least quasi-religious in our inability to decypher fact from faith:
Does the media lead the public or the public the media?

Perhaps a sign of my optimism in mankind i tend to the latter view - by which we can understand that in achieving control (by voting to leave), immigration became an issue with lower salience.

About the immigration to Leave switch: I can't remember if I've posted it here, but there's a record of UK national issues polls, either by yougov or someone equally credible, which asked people what their main concerns were at that particular time. Immigration was in the top 1 or 2, averaging 20-30% (the other top 3 concerns being economy and NHS also averaging similar numbers), with the EU being nowhere (averaging around 1-3%), right up until around Feb 2016, when the EU jumped up to 1st with around 30-40%, and immigration disappearing as an issue.

Yes, in polling parlence 'Europe' was a low salience issue, in that it generated strong opinions in either way but also a low degree of concern. They had bigger fish to fry.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, when the EU referendum came up as a political issue in 2012'ish the salience of 'Europe' started to rise. It was in their face, so it concerned them more.

[Pannonian]

Jacob Rees Mogg (Brexit opportunities minister) infamously left notes on civil servants' desks commenting on their lack of physical attendance. Jacob Rees Mogg also blocks proposal to show how many times MPs have attended Parliament.

One rule for us, no rules for them. Classic Tory.

[Pannonian]

A second ethics adviser quits, saying that the PM was pushing him to endorse a position of disregarding the ministerial code of conduct. Downing Street considers scrapping role.

So the ministers, up to and including the PM, do not observe customs regarding ministerial conduct. The PM has changed rules so that lying is no longer a resignable offence according to the code (and he'd ignored the customary action on that front anyway). The supposedly semi-independent advisers on ethics have quit.

What checks and balances are there on this government?

[Furunculus]

The PM has changed rules so that lying is no longer a resignable offence according to the code (and he'd ignored the customary action on that front anyway)

You must stop this:
Flinging out wild assertions, and then ignoring all response that would attempt to correct innacuracy found in those assertions.
Particularly, when it appears that ignoring the response causes you to repeat them after they have been demonstrated to be false.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...post2053833896

I got something stupidly WRONG. As @timd_IFG has pointed out. Willingly lying to parliament is still an offence where resignation is expected. That paragraph in the code has not been changed. Here it is: ? It is of paramount importance that Ministers give accurate nd truthful information to Parliament, correcting any inadvertent error at the earliest opportunity. Ministers who knowingly mislead Parliament will be expected to offer their resignation to the Prime Minister ?. So if the PM were found to have ? knowingly mislead MPs, he would have to offer his resignation to himself. Sorry for getting that wrong.

[rory_20_uk]

You must stop this:
Flinging out wild assertions, and then ignoring all response that would attempt to correct innacuracy found in those assertions.
Particularly, when it appears that ignoring the response causes you to repeat them after they have been demonstrated to be false.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...post2053833896

He attended one or more events with quiz questions, people wearing tinsel, out of work hours and one on his birthday where he was given cake and at no point did he think he was attending a gathering that was not allowed - when almost all gatherings for any reason were not allowed?

He's either lying or has an IQ in double digits.

As long as he believes that what he did was OK then it is OK - and as long as the record is corrected then no foul, move along. This leniency wasn't shown to anyone else in any walk of life. Why on earth should this be the case with him?

[Furunculus]

He attended one or more events with quiz questions, people wearing tinsel, out of work hours and one on his birthday where he was given cake and at no point did he think he was attending a gathering that was not allowed - when almost all gatherings for any reason were not allowed?

He's either lying or has an IQ in double digits.

As long as he believes that what he did was OK then it is OK - and as long as the record is corrected then no foul, move along. This leniency wasn't shown to anyone else in any walk of life. Why on earth should this be the case with him?

totally agreed, no issue with him facing every political consequence that befalls him.
but separate issue entirely from that which is being discussed in the quotes, no?