The election is done, it's old news, let's move on.
Pastry based bets will be still be honored.
Let's gooooo!
Oooo a freshly branded thread title!
Does the Labour membership card still say a 'democratic socialist' party or have they rebranded to the 'fiscal rules' party?
Be interesting what Starmer has to say about Leeds...
Why would Starmer say anything about an incident in Leeds other than...violence against police is unacceptable?
It's the Home Secretary Yvette Cooper's first crises, she can deal with it
What's the crack with Leeds? I've deleted Twitter, Guardian aren't reporting it, not much on BBC? Only coverage seems to be Daily Mail and Express which I'll not be clicking on.
The Daily Mail reader's comment bit is raging about immigrants and people living off benefits
Be interesting what Starmer has to say about Leeds…
The Home Secretary, who’s job it is to deal with such things, has said this…
https://Twitter.com/yvettecoopermp/status/1814053015285858813?s=46&t=1lK7Dw1b6RqGJyvufO-trQ
I see that unlike her predecessors, she’s not bothered to indulge the far right with any racist dog whistling, which is a rather pleasant change.
Not that’s it’s stopped Mr Yaxley Lennon from trying to stir things up, but this time he’s not got any tacit allies in the Home Office
I see that Nigel Farage is milking it with a comment claiming, "The politics of the subcontinent are currently playing out on the streets of Leeds. Don't say I didn't warn you"
Edit: I don't know what subcontinent he means btw, the people in the photos don't make that obvious imo.
Well, , whoever runs his social media while he’s out sucking up to Trump in Milwaukee.
https://Twitter.com/nigel_farage/status/1814047452212740479?s=46&t=1lK7Dw1b6RqGJyvufO-trQ
Reforms posts are now indistinguishable from Tommy Robinson and the EDL. Neither bother to let the facts get in the way of a bit of racist rabble rousing
Edit: I don’t know what subcontinent he means btw, the people in the photos don’t make that obvious imo.
Apparently the issue is with Romanian kids being taken into local authority care, so that’ll be the subcontinent of Europe and it’s the politics of Leeds that are playing out in Leeds
Be interesting what Starmer has to say about Leeds…
You dirty Northern Bast**ds!
Sorry
maybe 1 too many 🙂
The Home Secretary, who’s job it is to deal with such things, has said this…
So we have a government/minister quietly responding to things in a "just doing their job" kind of way, rather than a "let's find someone to blame and dog whistle" kind of way.
That's the far right creep right there. Mainstreaming of fascism. It's very dangerous and it needs calling out for what it is.
Apparently the issue is with Romanian kids being taken into local authority care, so that’ll be the subcontinent of Europe and it’s the politics of Leeds that are playing out in Leeds
If that turns out to be the case, there needs to be a big social media push to call out Farages knee jerk dog whistling without actually checking the facts.
Need to expose the Honourable Member for Clacton as the shit stirring little twerp that he is.
You dirty Northern Bast**ds!
Oi! Don’t be lumping us all in with people from Yorkshire 😉
Yeah I got the impression that the people in the photos looked East European.
https://twitter.com/Kahlissee/status/1814057597906923855
Here's the explanation, if you can understand what he is saying.
He claims that a child was taken by the parents to a hospital with a bump on the head to be checked out, and that caused a chain of events.
I have no idea what Nigel Farage was talking about
LOL....a brilliant article in the Daily Mail reporting on the criticism, including from the police, of Nigel Farage for trying to inflame the situation with misinformation, some of their readers won't like that!
Edit: And they even managed to shoehorn the suggestion that Farage was an uninvited guest at the Republican National Convention!
so a few kids taken into care, and an angry mob smash up and roll over a police car and then torch a double decker bus on fire.. good job people are thick, their faces are clear as day on the pictures circulating on social media..
hopefully cps will prosecute and hand down adequate custodial sentences
Leeds is a little skirmish compared to the riots of the '80s - some perspective is needed.
Yeah I would expect plenty of arrests from all the social media footage. But why necessarily the need for custodial sentences?
And I suspect that anger rather than stupidity is the explanation for their carelessness in not hiding their identities. The incident was presumably not preplanned
Oi! Don’t be lumping us all in with people from Yorkshire 😉
Oi! Don't lump all us Yorkshire folk in with Leeds 😉
Leeds is a little skirmish compared to the riots of the ’80s – some perspective is needed.
It's not a competition. It's still a pretty unsavoury episode and there was plenty of opportunities for people to get seriously hurt
What I would be interested in knowing is why did the hospital apparently refer the case to social services. I am assuming that not all cases of child trauma injuries seen at A&E are referred to social services?
But why necessarily the need for custodial sentences?
Why bother having law and order, just pointless really
the hospital was just doing their job, we had some extensive questions when we took our eldest, as a toddler, to A&E with a split lip, apparently the nature of it could constitute them being force fed a bottle. As it was he had face planted on some decking in the garden. Anyway, whilst being terrified I was going to loose my son at that point at no time did getting a bunch of my mates & family involved and torching some cars even enter my head. Yes they should be in jail.
What I would be interested in knowing is why did the hospital apparently refer the case to social services. I am assuming that not all cases of child trauma injuries seen at A&E are referred to social services?
There are protocols if a child is seen by a medical professional or emergency services to trigger an assessment by social services. If they're then taking the children away then something must have happened to cause concern. I believe it's sometimes precautionary; get the child into short term care whilst an assessment is made rather than risk leaving them in the home and something bad happening. It'd be pretty traumatic for the family, but it's too mitigate a greater risk of harm
Why bother having law and order, just pointless really
You can have law and order without sending everyone to prison, but then you know that.
But why necessarily the need for custodial sentences?
Why bother having law and order, just pointless really
So the solution to all law and order issues is custodial sentences, if you don't always lock up people you might as well not bother with law and order?
Well it's certainly a widely held opinion but I only generally see it in the Daily Mail reader's comment sections
Have custodial sentences ever been shown to reduce the likelihood of acts of civil unrest?
I guess if you subscribe to the idea that 'criminal justice' and 'revenge' are interchangeable terms then it makes perfect sense to assume putting as many people in prison as possible for rioting is just what the country needs.
Once you've somehow found space for all those prisoners, of course.
Maybe that's why Labour aren't lifting the two child cap. They need every penny they can get their hands on to lock people up.
With having a debate over the relative merits of custodial sentances, its probably a good thing that Labour have put somebody in charge of prison policy who's a genuine expert on the subject, and believes in reform and rehabilitation rather than just banging people up, eh?
It is for me but not apparently for everyone
With having a debate over the relative merits of custodial sentances, its probably a good thing that Labour have put somebody in charge of prison policy who’s a genuine export on the subject, and believes in reform and rehabilitation rather than just banging people up, eh?
To be fair, so far everyone seems to have reacted in the best way possible but this is not going to be the last incident like this. I suspect it's going to be pretty common over the next few years.
Let's see if Labour are going to be able to keep their sensible hats on and resist the calls to smash 'em with riot police and lock 'em up. Judging by this thread, plenty are going to be screaming for this kind of reaction.
I bet these cretins who have wrongly blamed Muslims haven’t shared videos of locals putting out the fires.
plenty are going to be screaming for this kind of reaction.
The kind of people screaming for that kind of reaction were also last night screaming to send the army in, then deport people, so I can't really see the government paying too much attention to them.
Even the Daily Mail are taking the piss out of Farage and co for their knee-jerk reaction and trying to imply it was some kind of muslim uprising.
When even the Daily Mail is laughing at your reactionary far right nonsense....
With having a debate over the relative merits of custodial sentances, its probably a good thing that Labour have put somebody in charge of prison policy who’s a genuine export on the subject, and believes in reform and rehabilitation rather than just banging people up, eh?
Yup, and having a former human rights lawyer as PM and another in the Cabinet hopefully they'll find ways to decriminalise legitimate protest.
Some of the online stuff (including Farage) is aimed at the USA at this point... Republicans go all in on the "no go zones in British cities" nonsense. It's not all ignorance... some of it is manipulative and designed to amplify hatred for votes well beyond the UK (and also in certain areas of the UK of course).
torching a £300k-350k bus for no reason, seems fair game for a custodial sentence, community orders, bound over to keep the peace for the rest
Very much so. I was in an online debate recently where I was told by a trumper that the UK was heading for muslim rule.
Let’s see if Labour are going to be able to keep their sensible hats on and resist the calls to smash ’em with riot police and lock ’em up. Judging by this thread, plenty are going to be screaming for this kind of reaction.
Going by this thread a lot of folk don't see the need in the judiciary, why would you have potential custodial sentences for endangering life and destruction of property, i mean it's all harmless fun.
why would you have potential custodial sentences
Backtracking? You didn't say anything about "potential" custodial sentences.
Of course that is a possibility, it is for the courts to decide.
You said you were hoping for custodial sentences and I asked if it had to be necessarily custodial sentences
binners Full Member
Yeah, but then you’d have to have a debate about where to build the wall where ‘The North’ starts?Some say Watford, Some say Gretna Green
Fake news! The original jab about the North was that it started at Watford Gap, not Watford. Is the corruption to it apparently referring to Watford complete now?
Admittedly Watford Gap is between Northampton and Rugby, so isn't very far north either, but it's not part of the London sprawl at least!
What I would be interested in knowing is why did the hospital apparently refer the case to social services. I am assuming that not all cases of child trauma injuries seen at A&E are referred to social services?
Any injury to a child is logged and reviewed any time there's contact with school, Police, social services, health professionals. There have been far too many cases over the years to need to explain why.
Whether social services then take action will depend on the circumstances, but I can assure you that kids don't get removed unless absolutely necessary. There will be more places available in prisons than are available for urgent foster places.
Any injury to a child is logged and reviewed any time there’s contact with school, Police, social services, health professionals.
Really, all child injuries that are presented to A&E? I didn't know this. I am surprised that there are the resources to do that. Although it is heartening to hear that child welfare is given such a priority in the UK. I have always felt that Brits had a less positive attitude towards children compared to other Europeans. Perhaps things have changed.
Anyway... shall we all take a moment to laugh at the MP for Clacton and our former salad-based PM deperately trying to make it look like Donald Trump knows who they are and they were actually invited.
You can literally smell the desperation to be relevent or just for any kind of acknowledgement at all...
Going by this thread a lot of folk don’t see the need in the judiciary, why would you have potential custodial sentences for endangering life and destruction of property, i mean it’s all harmless fun.
Depends on what you feel custodial sentences accomplish.
Personally I think that custodial sentences should be reserved for those who have shown that they have the potential to harm others. There's a case to be made that they should be removed from society while they are being rehabilitated.
On the surface, the rioters clearly fulfill that requirement.
However, when it comes to mob violence, that's a slightly different matter. The group psychology is fascinating.
Strictly speaking, trying to apply criminal justice to a mob doesn't really work. In some cases, it's clear that the violence is being incited by an individual or group of individuals (such as when Trump was telling people to storm the Capitol) but often when the violence comes from deep frustrations in a community it's almost organic and doesn't really have anyone in charge.
The problem is that we all have the potential to end up in the middle of a riot and we don't really know how we are going to react until we are actually there. Some people just went with the crowd and some were actively trying to stop the violence.
Possibly there's a bit of 'there but for the grace of God' in my argument. I'd like to think I'd be one of the people keeping the head and reasoning and stopping the rioters but I suspect that if I was frustrated enough I'd just as likely take the easy route and join the herd in finally getting a chance to vent my frustrations.
But yes, simply calling for custodial sentences in the name of justice (or in this case I think revenge is a more appropriate term) is certainly a simpler way of thinking about it so I see the appeal.
Yeah, but then you’d have to have a debate about where to build the wall where ‘The North’ starts?
Some say Watford, Some say Gretna Green
I'd be happy with walling off Watford if that's on the cards?
Of course that is a possibility, it is for the courts to decide.
Are you backtracking from your original statement now?
But why necessarily the need for custodial sentences?
I thought we already were?
Are you backtracking from your original statement now?
No not at all. And it wasn't a statement it was a question.... does it necessarily have to be a custodial sentence?
What is there for me to backtrack on?
I thought we already were?
I'm increasingly thinking we should thank Sunak for not waiting 'till the Autumn to hold the election... having all the noise from the MAGA message amplifiers flooding news and social media (this is just the start) could have caused big problems here during campaigning.... having stability here while all that nonsense kicks off over there is very welcome.
What I would be interested in knowing is why did the hospital apparently refer the case to social services. I am assuming that not all cases of child trauma injuries seen at A&E are referred to social services?
No, but all cases will be assessed to determine if there is cause for concern sufficient to involve further authorities. If a referral was made I'd assume there was a reason.
You would have thought so. Which is why I said that I would be interested in knowing why it was apparently referred to social services/agencies
why would you have potential custodial sentences for endangering life and destruction of property
For endangering life yes (depending on the evidence), property no. It's stuff that can be replaced, it's inconvenient when a the car or bike used for work goes missing or is trashed but nobody is physically harmed. Our property laws are still too feudal and should be modernised.
You would have thought so. Which is why I said that I would be interested in knowing why it was apparently referred to social services/agencies
As I understand it, all incidents are referred and triaged. I surely don't need to remind you of all the failings in social care and other services that have led to high profile child deaths, inquests, serious case reviews and trials in the last 30 years.
Maybe the injuries weren't consistent with the description of the cause. Maybe there were other injuries. Maybe the kid told the staff something else. Maybe it's the tenth time thekid's gone to hospital with dodgy injuries. Maybe the family was already on the radar for drugs, alcohol, domestic violence. Maybe it was because it was all of these things.
A chap organising stop oil protests just got a 5 year custodial sentence and I think a few of his group got 4.
Whilst they are bloody annoying I don't think their direct action protests are in the same league as a rioting mob attacking and burning stuff.
Not really surprising that the prisons are full up is it.
Whilst they are bloody annoying I don’t think their direct action protests are in the same league as a rioting mob attacking and burning stuff.
Not least because of the carbon footprint left by burning a bus
Really, all child injuries that are presented to A&E?
There's 'routine' safeguarding steps that will be taken when assessing anyone* in an clinical setting/examination, I think it's probably in the back of the mind of all clinicians these days, but they won't necessarily check everyone. With children, it'd be things like: Are these injuries consistent with what child/parent is telling me has happened. Are the injuries located on parts of the body that you'd normally expect to find them. Is the child reluctant to take off their clothes (so old injuries aren't revealed?) Is the child unbale to sit down, is that becasue of injures to intimate parts. Is the parent reluctant to leave the child alone with the clinician. Is the parent not letting the child speak, and so on. Some of them in isolation are explainable, but combinations should set off alarms.
* anyone can be assessed for safeguarding.
Maybe the injuries weren’t consistent with the description of the cause. Maybe there were other injuries. Maybe the kid told the staff something else. Maybe it’s the tenth time thekid’s gone to hospital with dodgy injuries. Maybe the family was already on the radar for drugs, alcohol, domestic violence. Maybe it was because it was all of these things.
I wasn't really interested in all the possible "maybes", I am sure there are lots!!
The reason I said I would be interested in the reason that it was reported to the appropriate agency is because the reaction by a lot of people, possibly hundreds, to the action taken. It obviously isn't a normal reaction to social services involvement.
Now unlike Nigel Farage I am not going to speculate but it would certainly appear that a lot of people were extremely angry about a perceived injustice. I wonder why?
Ah, it makes a little bit more sense now, the children involved are from the Roma community. A community which suffers widespread persecution and prejudice right across Europe.
I am not entirely surprised that they might feel more suspicious of authority especially if they feel their children might be taken from them than most. And if they become particularly defensive.
Before anyone makes the accusation I am not defending criminal behaviour, I am trying to understand what appears to be a very unusual reaction to a child welfare agency involvement in an issue.
Leeds council appear to have taken a remarkably positive, conciliatory, and constructive approach:
A council statement added: "The Romanian and Roma community have played a fantastic role in the community and have contributed much to the diversity and richness of the Harehills.
The Home Secretary has taken a position which I suspect is more designed to placate the right-wing press.
The Home Secretary has taken a position which I suspect is more designed to placate the right-wing press.
I'd suggest that the home secretary has taken the only realistic position you could reasonably expect in the face of rioting on the streets. What else is she supposed to say?! Her response in this instance can hardly be to open a nuanced socio political debate around possible causes. She's backed the police to do their job, said that rioting has no place in society, and otherwise seemed fairly neutral from what I've read.
She can say what she wants. I found the reported action and words from Leeds council more conciliatory and constructive than what was reported the Home Secretary was doing or saying.
That's my opinion you obviously have another one
On Friday, the council said it had agreed to undertake an urgent review of the case and work with the Romanian and Roma community moving forward.
We want this work to continue, and develop further work that makes Harehills an even better place to work and live.
"The events of last night will not help our community or the family.
"We need to work together with the authorities to ensure that best outcomes for the community, and to ensure our voices are heard at the highest level so we can avoid such scenarios in the future."
- Quote from Leeds council statement
https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1813659435350515876?t=fGyB9U_mvHmmJSI51SxZcw&s=19
‘The way we find more money is to grow the economy’ – Chief Secretary to the Treasury
Find more £? To find more £ you have to inject more £. And you are the sole issuer of it. The only people with the power to do it are the UK government and its agents.
Labour genuine believe protecting the economy from a 'Liz Truss type event' (OMFG) - is preferential to funding things properly.
We have a new breed of right-wing tool running the show.
Fancy repacking the failure of trickle-down as the only way out of economic misery.
As I said before, we are getting what we knew we were getting and they never hid their 'conservative' approach.
I would still much prefer it to what we had before and the disappointed phase was over before they even got elected so could say they managed my expectations well...
Tories as opposition.
^^ "We will still hold the government to account in opposition."
Aka be the noisy kids at the back of the classroom.
To be honest, I absolutely love this, they are going to fall to bits in opposition.
Wonderful! 😀
It is perfectly possible for the council to be conciliatory regarding the initial situation and the Home Secretary to want the law enforced for the ridiculous - and dangerous - response by some in the area (I suspect many not even from the affected community) and for both of those positions to be right and proper.
When the number of those who disapprove of his performance was subtracted from those who approve, Starmer’s rating stood at +19, compared with –1 in the last poll taken before the election.
I must admit to having been pleasantly suprised with how well he has done and the general make up of his team ( with two exceptions that I hope will get sidelined at some point) ( Edit - he did ditch thornberry who is one I cannot stand)
The new education secretary admitted Labour’s general election campaign had at times been defensive and cautious because the prize of victory was too big to put at risk.
“We were all terrified about screwing it all up,” she said, “because there was such a weight of responsibility.”
I guess its understandable but a wee bit more inspiration would not have goner amiss
It is perfectly possible for the council to be conciliatory regarding the initial situation and the Home Secretary to want the law enforced for the ridiculous – and dangerous – response by some
I very much suspect that the council want the law enforced with regards to the dangerous and unnecessary response.
It is possible to be both conciliatory to a disadvantaged community and fully back the police. It doesn't have to be either one or the other.
I guess its understandable but a wee bit more inspiration would not have goner amiss.
I think they were quite right to take it steady, not make any cockups and win the election. Let's be honest they couldn't have done much better. I hope they'll be an inspiration in government.
Wtf? I had no idea about the rape clause :
That is wrong on so many levels, including that.how you became pregnant should impact on whether the state will give assistance to your child.
And Labour are not prepared to scrap this grotesque and degrading Tory policy?
Still, I guess that when your moral compass includes publicly backing a far-right genocidal government humiliating rape victims who need financial assistance probably doesn't feel particularly problematic.
Doesn't matter Ernie we don't do Tory policy reversal or scrapping these days.
We just do their policy better.
Also: Guardian.
The new government has announced a taskforce to develop a child poverty strategy, led by Work and Pensions secretary Liz Kendall and education secretary Bridget Phillipson.
'Taskforce' FFS. I wouldn't let Liz Kendall near a can of soup. Liz Kendall is the end of level baddy for the ****less.
While I'm here ...
Wow, I'd never heard of the rape clause either. That is horrendous.
Jeepers guys - do you have your heads in the sand? It was added after the the imposition of the 2 child limit after it was pointed out that victims of rape would be caught in this - rather than just dropping the 2 child limit. Lots of fuss about it at the time. I alluded to it when complaining about this
Now just imagine how well informed the average punter (not actively engaged in positing on political threads on forums) is about things. And you can see how we got to where we are.
Lots of fuss about it at the time. I alluded to it when complaining about this
Was there? The reason I posted the link to the SNP website is because a Google search didn't throw up a lot of results, such as newspaper articles.
And I only googled it because yesterday I read a comment by a female Labour MP denouncing it. I thought "surely there isn't a clause whereby you can get tax credit for your third child if you prove to a complete stranger that you were raped?"
Yes there was. Its one of the reasons I am so disgusted this was not a high priority for labour. I am suprised this was not more widely known on here. I guess the maleness and middleclassness meant it escaped notice?
It was all over the press at the time and since and has been a large part of the campaign against the 2 child cap
State of this.
https://twitter.com/RichardJMurphy/status/1814936359485780458
Gordon Brown might mean well and I don't hate the guy but come on the solutions are well within Labour's control.
Why are these people living in the pockets of Thatcherism?
Send out some signals - you won the election and now we can go left yeah?
