Oh dear. Farage couldn’t help but throw some irrelevant shit in the air.lol
Was that Bercow he was having a pop at?
Cruella holds views that even most Reform voters probably find a bit much. We're getting into proper EDL Tommy Robinson territory here. What she's saying today is sailing close to her being able to be charged with hate speech. I'm sure she'd absolutely love that and wear it as a badge of honour about her being silenced by the 'woke mob' or something.
The problem for the Tories is, as the truce before the leadership bids dissolves, the Tory mebership all asolutely love her and agree with what she's saying. If she ends up on the final ballot, she's in with a real shot of the leadership. Add to that the fact that Badanoch and Jenrick are only slightly less extreme in their views, they're just a bit more coy about voicing them
Good noises coming out from the doctors/Streeting meeting. :good:
(Oh lord, those emojis! I must apologise to all concerned. Lol)
Question!
Is the house speaker obliged to give a question to every pussy at PMQ's... you all know why I'm asking. Lol
I think Braverman believes in every thing she says.
So do I. I still can't quite believe that someone as obviously unhinged as that was enywhere near one of the most senior offices of state. Twice! That in itself stands as a testement to how insane this present incarnation of the tory party is
Who determines when something becomes an Ideology?
good question. I love it when I get questions like that 🙂
Poopscoop
Full Member
Question!Is the house speaker obliged to give a question to every p* at PMQ’s… you all know why I’m asking. Lol
I mean, party, party, not **. Sorry mods!
That is an amazing typo poopscoop
Was that Bercow he was having a pop at?
^ Yep.
Ah of course. Brexit. I forgot.
I was watching it with subtitles of and sound off and at at the end of his "speech" the subtitle "CHUNTERING" popped up.
CHUNTERING
Lol, nice word.
Is this the under promise / over deliver the Starmer fans were saying would happen?
I hope so. The advantage of being vague and not saying much is that you can do loads of things that weren't mentioned during the campaign without breaking any promises.
Is the house speaker obliged to give a question to every p**** at PMQ’s… you all know why I’m asking. Lol
No, IIRC the precedent is:
1st MP's question
6 questions from the LOTO if the 1st question was asked from the governments benches, if not the 2nd MP's question gets asked, then it's LOTO
The remaining 13 questions, alternating sides.
If the random ballot doesn't produce an even number the speaker selects from the MP's who stand after the PM has finished speaking.
2 questions from the 3rd largest party (so this time the SNP won't automatically get a question)
I've no idea if some other horse trading goes on behind the scenes to establish which other questions get asked, they have to submitted the week before so I presume there must be some way to ensure that some current questions get added.
Who determines when something becomes an Ideology?
Are you new here?
I presume there must be some way to ensure that some current questions get added.
I guess that falls under 'urgent questions' https://www.parliament.uk/about/how/business/urgent-questions/ but I don't know if there is any other mechanism.
When people say this, they mean: He does not share the same ideology with me.
It's pretty arrogant to assume that you know what others are thinking.
BBC wasting no excuse to feature Farridge on the 6 o’clock news
Time for this thread to be closed and, possibly, a new one - Labour Government 2024 onwards or similar - to be opened.
Displaying the high levels of competency for which they've become renowned, the tories managed to cock--up the election of a new leader of the 1922 committee. The notification sent out by the whips showed the wrong times with the actual cut-off earlier than that notified which meant that hunt, françois and others turned up too late to vote; the general was most unhappy.
Displaying the high levels of competency for which they’ve become renowned, the tories managed to cock–up the election of a new leader of the 1922 committee.
Bless their little cotton's. They can't help themselves.
From the Beeb:
Starmer makes five new Labour MPs ministers - instantly
Henry Zeffman
Chief political correspondentIt is highly unusual to make a new MP a minister instantly. But that is what Sir Keir Starmer has just done, five times over, before he made his way across the Atlantic.
Georgia Gould is a parliamentary secretary at the Cabinet Office
Alistair Carns is minister for veterans
Miatta Fahnbulleh is an energy minister
Sarah Sackman is solicitor general
Kirsty McNeill at the Scotland OfficeEach has an impressive career before politics and, evidently, the new prime minister’s view is that he wants to draw on their service instantly.
At face value, when you see their earlier careers, they all seem like sound choices.
Jess Phillips makes a return to the Labour frontbench as a junior minister in the Home Office.
She resigned over the Gaza ceasefire vote.
tjagain
Full Member
Interesting poopscoop – there really does seem to be a change of direction over Gaza / Isreal
Yeah, she should be on the front bench, I'm glad to see her return.
Already removed the utterly stupid de facto ban on land wind turbines (clause in the regs / implementation guide said any objection at planning would = not approved. And there is ALWAYS going to be at least one objection - even if just from an oil company).
Twodogs
Full Member
I’ve only just realised that Mark Francois got re-elected…..how?
His extensive military career meant he made some powerful and influential friends along the way. I'll say no more...
He also made powerful enemies too but they, well they end up in a place where they can do him no harm.
He moves amongst us as of a shadow, not the hero we want, perhaps, but the hero we need.
As for bars in Westminster...
- only thing the Tories didn't sell off to let someone else make a profit. Wonder why not ?.
In the early 1990s the then Tory Gov passed legislation to force drug and alcohol testing on the railway industry. Tested (inc for traces of past use of illegal substances, not just 'the present moment) at employment, and any change in role that is safety critical (eg drivers, signallers, controllers, etc etc).
Also random testing, and testing for anyone involved in a safety related incident.
Fail and it's instant dismissal + barred from the industry for life unless there's a ****en good reason + any prescription drugs declared before.
Thresholds are far more stringent than normal civvy life - eg alcohol threshold is 30mg/100ml vs 80 for drink-drive (30 being the level where natural fermentation etc can in the stomach can be the reason).
Someone I know tested positive for opioids - which were traced back to eating poppy seed buns before the test (was not sacked for that).
Need to roll that legislation to the Commons given they are making decisions that impact of millions and can (like with the covid clusterfest) cost hundreds of thousands of lives. Could send thousands of military to their deaths, etc.
robertajobb
Full Member
Already removed the utterly stupid de facto ban on land wind turbines
Have to agree, the costs involved in off shoring them always made the effective ban ridiculous. We'll look back at the current contention a little like the period when telephone masts and plyons went up.. Hell, pylons are a little unpleasant asthetically but I quite like wind farms. Either way, given the need for renewables onshore farms have to be one of the least bad options.
Labour has appointed one of the country’s foremost climate experts to lead a “mission control centre” on clean energy.
Chris Stark, the former head of the UK’s climate watchdog, will head a Covid vaccine-style taskforce aimed at delivering clean and cheaper power by 2030.
We’ll look back at the current contention a little like the period when telephone masts and plyons went up.. Hell, pylons are a little unpleasant asthetically but I quite like wind farms.
Both upgrades to the grid, and onshore renewables, are going to be resisted. And we’re way behind on both thanks to the Tories putting them in a box marked “Too hard, do not open”, so projects need to be put in place at much higher speed than should have been necessary. Expect a big culture war on this… green energy and new energy distribution networks are going to be the bogey men over the next few years once the dust settles from this election. Come 2030+ I think you are right, we will look back and shrug at the necessary changes to our landscapes…but the pace of change will frighten many in the meantime.
The 1922 shambles is great. Different times on the invite sent out by the whips office and the 1922 committee itself and beyond the wit of some to check.
I can only hope the election of the chair is declared null and void, they waste another week getting sorted, and then re-elect the same chair anyway for comedy value.
I like the KeirStarmerParody account on X, can't post a screenshot till things are fixed:
"Suella Braverman is what happens when you feed Priti Patel after midnight"
It’s all getting a bit overwhelming this idea of governments actually doing stuff that they’ve clearly planned for…
https://Twitter.com/markjcarney/status/1810761044379529429?s=46&t=1lK7Dw1b6RqGJyvufO-trQ
All while the Tories sum up their 14 years in power by their inability to get their few remaining MPs together in the same room at the same time
The effective wind farm ban and the appointment of a climate expert is excellent news. A positive provable action and setting up more positive actions to come.
I'm seeing way more stuff being done, and set up to be done than I ever expected in very short time. Although this might simply be normal for a government not stuffed full of blithering idiotic morons, which is what I'd got used to.
Yeah, but has Starmer appointed a 'Minister for Common Sense' or a 'Minister for Brexit Benefits' yet? I don't see how you have a functioning government without them.
‘Minister for Brexit Benefits’
Well he should do, he’s still promising them.
It's good to have a climate expert on the carbon reduction panel but I'm not sure they're going to add a lot. You might be an expert in modelling but your recommendation is always going to be 'emit far less carbon!' Obviously they need to be there, and I'm sure I'm wrong 🙂
You are Mol. Chris Stark isn't an expert in modelling, he's an astute political operator with the respect of the industry. I struggle to think of someone I'd have more confidence in their ability to deliver the improvements required to deliver decarbonisation at pace.
the costs involved in off shoring them always made the effective ban ridiculous.
IIRC the costs WERE ridiculous, but now it's pretty much the same per MW.
The difference is that you can build an offshore windfarm the size of Wales and no one notice.
I suspect that apart from smaller scale schemes where individual landowners do it* rather than big companies that we won't see a big rush of schemes. I used to work on a site where a relatively small (i.e. it's a "big" wind turbine, not one you'd put up on scaffold pole but not quite Afan Masts scale) , turbine had been installed and it was paying the landowner £300k/year with no upfront costs as a 3rd party managed it. I can see a lot of farmers opting to do that.
But when will we be able to buy wine in pints?
We should rejoin the EU, I was at a music festival near Nantes last week and bought a pint of Muscadet (If picture uploads were working I'd include proof). I regretted it later though...
Edit - used a hotlink instead 🙂
It’s good to have a climate expert on the carbon reduction panel
Its probably better than to have somebody on the panel from Shell, who happens to have made a large donation to your funds in order for you to end the 'woke nonsense' and grant some more North Sea drilling licenses 😉
@molgrips - Mrhoppy is spot on. Stark seems to be an operator and pragmatist, he's not just numbers and wishful thinking.
I'm starting to feel positive about hitting carbon targets again. I'm working on decarbonisation in industry, if we can tap in to, or benefit from this sovereign wealth fund announced, I'm pretty certain I can draw down inward investment from our global leadership team.
There's a couple of serious things we need from the new government.
An industrial strategy with decarbonisation embedded. Make us attractive for investment to produce products here at a lower rate of emissions.
A proper strategy for green electricity and non-fossil fuel sources of thermal energy. Hydrogen, electricity, biogenic gases, carbon capture and use (CCU)
They're saying the right things so far and appointing the right people
Every morning since the weekend I've woken up and just listened to the peace and tranquility that has descended.
No wondering every day what the **** are they doing now.
It's beautiful
I saw Starmer on the news last night - I don't see face to face clips very often these days - and I was struck by how professional and businesslike he appeared. There might be confirmation bias, for sure, but he was talking efficiently and authoritatively about the issues (NATO summit).
Anyone else notice the lack of brown faces in the Labour Cabinet? I make it just two out of 26 Cabinet members, which is in sharp contrast with Boris Johnson's Cabinet.
Or is something which white politicos don't notice?
I include myself btw. I hadn't noticed until a black person drew my attention to it.
Anyone else notice the lack of brown faces in the Labour Cabinet? I make it just two out of 26 Cabinet members, which is in sharp contrast with Boris Johnson’s Cabinet.
Funnily enough I did notice that - although it's great there are plenty of women there, there is a lack of non-gender diversity.
Mark Francois got re-elected…..how?
His extensive military career
He was in the Waffle SS
The Tories made much of the diversity of their cabinet, but very few (of any background) were competent.
Ernesto - I don't think that skin colour is as relevent as someones attitude.
You can hardly say that any progressive cause was advanced while the non-white members of Boris Johnsons cabinet represented some of the most prejudiced, regressive, reactionary attitudes that we have ever seen in government.
In some cases the likes of Badanoch, Braverman and Patel have used their skin colour as a fig leaf to say things that would have caused outrage if they'd have come from someone white and male.
I think what's of far more relevence, when talking of inclusiveity, is the fact that the cabinet members are overwhelmingly educated at comprehensive schools and none of them have personal wealth equivelent to the GDP of Luxemburg.
They also look like they they wouldnt struggle to find their own arse using both hands, which certainly puts them a step up from the last lot
A new record of 90 ethnic minority MPs in this parliament (66 of them on the government benches)... so hopefully this balance will change over the coming years.
When having non white faces meant Badanoch, Braverman, Patel, Cleverly etc, I can probably live with that for now but yes it needs to be bettered.
I think what’s of far more relevence, when talking of inclusiveity, is the fact that the cabinet members are overwhelmingly educated at comprehensive schools and none of them have personal wealth equivelent to the GDP of Luxemburg.
This is important as is the gender balance but so is other diversity. However 2 out of 26 is close to the % across the nation
This is important as is the gender balance but so is other diversity
My point is that how representative of the general population, never mind the BAME population, are the likes of Sunak, Braverman and Kwatang?
Not even remotely. They all come from incredibley privileged backgrounds and were all privately educated.
Not one of them has ever showed the remotest interest in advancing the causes of the larger BAME population. In fact, given that they're all the children of immigrants, they've dedicated far more effort to pulling that ladder up behind themselves and making sure nobody else ever enjoys the advantages they had
Ernesto – I don’t think that skin colour is as relevent as someones attitude.
That just sounds like an excuse to me. Unless you are suggesting that Keir Starmer couldn't find more than one black MP and one Asian MP with the correct "attitude" to include in his Cabinet.
Kelvin claims that there are 66 ethnic minority Labour MPs so Starmer had plenty to choose from beyond the 2 that he did.
The Forde Report commissioned by Starmer highlighted some very serious problems with Black and Asians progressing within the Labour Party, the composition of the current Cabinet suggests that it is still something of a problem.
Black and Asian people should be fairly represented at the very highest levels of power, the fact that their lack of representation seemed to go unnoticed and wasn't even acknowledged on this thread until it was drawn to my attention by a black person makes the point.
From my point of view Wes Streeting is making sensible noises about spending money more effectively in the NHS, ie reversing the diversion of funds from primary to secondary care that's occurred over the past 15 years. It won't be popular but it is needed.
I’m seeing way more stuff being done, and set up to be done than I ever expected in very short time. Although this might simply be normal for a government not stuffed full of blithering idiotic morons, which is what I’d got used to.
Yeah scary how we’d been desensitised / submitted to ineffective government. In the dying days of previous governments were any of them anything like this ineffective?
Black and Asian people should be fairly represented at the very highest levels of power
I'm not saying for a minute that they shouldn't. My point is that they were statistically overly-represented in the last gang of corrupt, reactionary, backward-looking, incompetent ****-wits where they seemed to fit in without much difficulty, proving that colour is no barrier to either being in government or then being completely useless in government
One of them has to go down as the worst chancellor of the exchequer in this countries history and another one of them is presently over in America screaming 'WOKE!' to right wing nutjobs and railing against anything progressive
Black and Asian people should be fairly represented at the very highest levels of power
They pretty much are. there are 22 members of the cabinet, half of them are women, nationally about 8% of folks are Asian 3% are black, so in reality if Starmer had made just one more Asian MP a member of the cabinet, it could be said to fairly represent UK demographics, as it is, it's misses by just one.
It's not bad. Or would you prefer overrepresentation just to make the point?
Still, I guess it’s up to you if you want to fiddle while Rome burns.
Hang on a minute? Rome's burning?
I thought that was last week?
Personally, I thought the fire brigade had just arrived?
Apologies if the crew of the fire engine aren't diverse enough for you. The arsonists who set fire to the place were very diverse
We need Dianne Abbott brought back to the front bench ?
so in reality if Starmer had made just one more Asian MP a member of the cabinet, it could be said to fairly represent UK demographics, as it is, it’s misses by just one.
Thangam Debbonaire (of Sri Lankan Tamil descent) would most certainly have been in the cabinet had she not lost her seat to the Greens
I wanted to gauge opinion on here, a very pro Starmer forum, over the lack of brown faces in the new Cabinet, I think that I have got my answer.
Wow, this is a very pro starmer forum indeed, full of the loony centrists :good:
I'd say there is more opportunity for 'brown faces', whatever that statement is meant to mean, to progress to the cabinet through the current government, due to the diversity within the current MPs, should we be concerned that the LGBT ratio, or disabled ratio as well, should the cabinet be proportionally representative of the nation, rather than being built on actual competence?
Apologies if the crew of the fire engine aren’t diverse enough for you. The arsonists who set fire to the place were very diverse
I think sums up the situation perfectly.
Starmer seems to have gone for experience and skills in deciding the cabinet. If we accept the that minority backgrounds have struggled to progress in the Labour Party, that needs to be corrected, no doubt. In the meantime, do you want less experienced/skilled people from minority backgrounds trying to deal with the mess the Tories left, or accept that stronger white ministers are better at least for now?
Oh dear, I can’t see any Tories in the Cabinet….. how unrepresentative!!
At best you are taking the piss, at worse you are trolling. Or just desperately looking for reasons to have a downer on the new government because you like to be contrary.
Though to be fair, I have no detailed knowledge of the relative skills and experience of 400+ Labour MPs, maybe Starmer is the grand wizard of the KKK UK. Oh, hang on, now I'm just making shit 🙂 up...
The cabinet faces will change over time and no one is going to get 100% what they want from government after 5 days or 5 years. We need to remember the state we were in only a week ago though, we are undoubtedly on a better track.
Me might be guilty at this point of finding negatives in a £10,000,000 lottery win because it was delivered in £5 notes by lorry.
I’m not up for a pointless argument over the issue.
For some reason, I find that hard to believe.
I’m not up for a pointless argument over the issue.
This side of forum is literally about pointless arguments.
This side of forum is literally about pointless arguments.
No it's not
Ernie - why do you want over representation? tokenism? 🙂
Or just desperately looking for reasons to have a downer on the new government because you like to be contrary.
Oh dear, I question the lack of ethnic minority faces in the new cabinet and it must because I like to be "contrary", no reasonable person would do such a thing! I am obviously trolling!
I am not on "a downer" at all about the new government, I have said on this very thread that this is the first general election in my lifetime when I haven't felt depressed the next day.
I have also said on this thread that I am hugely impressed by Starmer's choice of Attorney General and that the UK will drop its opposition to an arrest warrant issued for Netanyahu.
I believe that Labour winning such a huge majority is fantastic, but I also believe that only receiving 34% of the vote is shite and very disappointing.
There is a reason why this place is a political echo and as a consequence totally unrepresentative of wider political opinions, and unable therefore to engage in a sensible exchange of ideas, it is the staggering level of intolerance shown to anyone who should dare to deviate from the extremely narrowly defined STW political consensus.
I guess that it must make some people feel warm, reassured, secured, and unchallenged, to be in the company of others with identical political opinions to their own, especially as it would appear that a fair few have personal issues with their parents/in-laws/brothers/sisters over politics, like yourself MCTD, but I find having opinions on a forum which are unchallenged, and which I don't have to explain and justify, pointless.
So anyway....... only two brown faces in the Cabinet, that's not very good, it's a shame that Starmer couldn't find more ethnic minority MPs whose "attitude" he could trust.
why do you want non white faces over represented? 2 or 3 is the same % as in the general population?
