Politics

[Sweep]

1 hour ago, Traf said:

Elsewhere...

Doesn't need to be costed - stuff like this is a vote winner with the Reform m0ngs, obviously when it doesn't happen, it'll be the fault of EU/Labour Party/Conservative Party/ECHR/Civil Service*

 

*delete as applicable

Edited 13 hours ago by Sweep

[Ani]

So the Civil Service think they followed the rules and had no obligation to inform Starmer of the results. 
 

You do not fail vetting as such but a series of risks are assessed and these are deemed to be serious or not. If they are serious the Foreign Office decides internally if the risks can be managed or mitigated. If they think they are able to be managed or mitigated then the appointment goes ahead. 
 

Only a very restricted group of people see the actual vetting as it is strictly confidential, so Starmer would not have known and the idea he lied is seemingly nonsense.

What is coming clear that not many, if any senior politicians fully understand the process and it certainly adds to idea of an inner sanctum of unelected officials with too much power. 
 

Olly Robbins seems to think they did everything right and nothing untoward happened. Ironically Starmer sacking him might open KS to more criticism as Robbins was ‘only doing his job and following the rules’ . 
 

It just seems this Govt have an unfortunate habit of shooting itself in the foot. The flags in the vetting did not relate to Epstein so god knows what it is to do with. But at the end of the day Starmers judgement was that Mandelson with all his baggage was a suitable choice (and apparently doing a good job) but he is clearly highly damaged in a political and diplomatic sense. Terrible judgement by KS. 
 

 

[frank_spencer]

Just now, Ani said:

So the Civil Service think they followed the rules and had no obligation to inform Starmer of the results. 
 

You do not fail vetting as such but a series of risks are assessed and these are deemed to be serious or not. If they are serious the Foreign Office decides internally if the risks can be managed or mitigated. If they think they are able to be managed or mitigated then the appointment goes ahead. 
 

Only a very restricted group of people see the actual vetting as it is strictly confidential, so Starmer would not have known and the idea he lied is seemingly nonsense.

What is coming clear that not many, if any senior politicians fully understand the process and it certainly adds to idea of an inner sanctum of unelected officials with too much power. 
 

Olly Robbins seems to think they did everything right and nothing untoward happened. Ironically Starmer sacking him might open KS to more criticism as Robbins was ‘only doing his job and following the rules’ . 
 

It just seems this Govt have an unfortunate habit of shooting itself in the foot. The flags in the vetting did not relate to Epstein so god knows what it is to do with. But at the end of the day Starmers judgement was that Mandelson with all his baggage was a suitable choice (and apparently doing a good job) but he is clearly highly damaged in a political and diplomatic sense. Terrible judgement by KS. 
 

 

Links to China apparently.

[Ani]

6 minutes ago, Sweep said:

Doesn't need to be costed - stuff like this is a vote winner with the Reform m0ngs, obviously when it doesn't happen, it'll be the fault of EU/Labour Party/Conservative Party/ECHR/Civil Service*

 

*delete as applicable

The debacle re Mandelson plays very much into the hands of the challenger parties such as Reform and Greens, then Plaid in Wales and the SNP. Their message is simple ‘ the established interests in Westminster need changing.’ 

[Zulu]

4 minutes ago, frank_spencer said:

Links to China apparently.

China and Russia. He had his grubby little fingers in many pies. 
Allegedly. 

[Sweep]

Just now, Ani said:

The debacle re Mandelson plays very much into the hands of the challenger parties such as Reform and Greens, then Plaid in Wales and the SNP. Their message is simple ‘ the established interests in Westminster need changing.’ 

I don't think that message is wrong to be honest - we're now entering an era of multi party parliament, like they have in other countries. It'll be interesting to see what (if any) alliances are formed moving forward. No doubt, some seats will go uncontested, so as not to split the votes - and I suspect that Reform will be the target of everybody.

Apparently though, Rupert Lowe is attracting quite a few members, from folk who think Reform are going a bit soft, so maybe Restore will be in the mix as well

[Sweep]

7 minutes ago, frank_spencer said:

Links to China apparently.

Indeed, he has a 21% share holding in a company called Global Council, and their largest client is WuXi AppTec, to the tune of around £2.5M

Quote

Chinese company WuXi AppTec has sponsored events with China's military, reportedly stolen U.S. IP, and jointly operated genetic collection sites with China's military

WuXi paid £1.42M to Global Council just as Mandleson was appointed Ambassador. 

 

It may well amount to nothing, but it doesn't look good.....and I'm surprised the US didn't kick up a fuss, as I'm sure they'd have done some "research" on Mandleson as well

[Spider]

Question for all the reform voters (if we have any on here).

Now that Nigel looks likely to form the next government, what are you most looking forward to happening in the first 12/18 months?

There must be some sort of vision starting to crystallise about how the boats are stopped, how unwanted immigrants are disposed of, and how they will “get the country back”.

I assume they will have it all done within the first 18 months or you’ll all be calling for Nigel’s head?

They are coming down the road, must be time for preparations to get serious?

[Bertie]

3 hours ago, Spider said:

Question for all the reform voters (if we have any on here).

Now that Nigel looks likely to form the next government, what are you most looking forward to happening in the first 12/18 months?

There must be some sort of vision starting to crystallise about how the boats are stopped, how unwanted immigrants are disposed of, and how they will “get the country back”.

I assume they will have it all done within the first 18 months or you’ll all be calling for Nigel’s head?

They are coming down the road, must be time for preparations to get serious?

I also look forward to seeing their solutions implemented to improve health and healthcare, education, cost of living, law and order etc. You know, all the stuff that’s bit tricky but which is really important to folks once they’ve (hopefully) stopped the boats. Anyone know what they are?

FWIW I am being serious here, as I also think Farage will be the next PM given the mess Labour and the Tories are in.

 

Edited 5 hours ago by Bertie

[royal white]

22 minutes ago, Bertie said:

I also look forward to seeing their solutions implemented to improve health and healthcare, education, cost of living, law and order etc. You know, all the stuff that’s bit tricky but which is really important to folks once they’ve (hopefully) stopped the boats. Anyone know what they are?

FWIW I am being serious here, as I also think Farage will be the next PM given the mess Labour and the Tories are in.

 

Created* 

[Tonge moor green jacket]

8 hours ago, Ani said:

So the Civil Service think they followed the rules and had no obligation to inform Starmer of the results. 
 

You do not fail vetting as such but a series of risks are assessed and these are deemed to be serious or not. If they are serious the Foreign Office decides internally if the risks can be managed or mitigated. If they think they are able to be managed or mitigated then the appointment goes ahead. 
 

Only a very restricted group of people see the actual vetting as it is strictly confidential, so Starmer would not have known and the idea he lied is seemingly nonsense.

What is coming clear that not many, if any senior politicians fully understand the process and it certainly adds to idea of an inner sanctum of unelected officials with too much power. 
 

Olly Robbins seems to think they did everything right and nothing untoward happened. Ironically Starmer sacking him might open KS to more criticism as Robbins was ‘only doing his job and following the rules’ . 
 

It just seems this Govt have an unfortunate habit of shooting itself in the foot. The flags in the vetting did not relate to Epstein so god knows what it is to do with. But at the end of the day Starmers judgement was that Mandelson with all his baggage was a suitable choice (and apparently doing a good job) but he is clearly highly damaged in a political and diplomatic sense. Terrible judgement by KS. 
 

 

Whilst this is correct, there are contradictions the PM has made, which can't both be true.

This apart, he said yesterday that he hadn't misled the house even inadvertently. 

When clearly he had.

Robins wouldn't/couldn't go into detail about the last bit (communication between Starmer and him) under advice (no doubt legal) as he clearly is considering some sort of legal action.

No way is this sorry tale finished yet.

Moreover, the whole approach of pressure from No 10 flies in the face of a process driven ethos which they claim to follow.

So, so many bits on pieces that don't ring true. 

Starmer is finished.

He may not resign, but sooner or later he will be replaced. Probably by his party, or by an early election.

He isn't going full term.

[Ani]

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/uk-economy-fifth-largest-in-world-imf-figures-405307/
 

Surprised not more news about this. 

[Cheese]

5 minutes ago, Ani said:

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/uk-economy-fifth-largest-in-world-imf-figures-405307/
 

Surprised not more news about this. 

I'm not. Nor this

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3dzez1g451o

Edited 2 hours ago by Cheese

[Ani]

1 hour ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Whilst this is correct, there are contradictions the PM has made, which can't both be true.

This apart, he said yesterday that he hadn't misled the house even inadvertently. 

When clearly he had.

Robins wouldn't/couldn't go into detail about the last bit (communication between Starmer and him) under advice (no doubt legal) as he clearly is considering some sort of legal action.

No way is this sorry tale finished yet.

Moreover, the whole approach of pressure from No 10 flies in the face of a process driven ethos which they claim to follow.

So, so many bits on pieces that don't ring true. 

Starmer is finished.

He may not resign, but sooner or later he will be replaced. Probably by his party, or by an early election.

He isn't going full term.

What are the contradictions ? 
 

How did he mislead the house ? 
 

Genuine questions. 
 

What it has highlighted is that we have a stupid system that seems designed to make sure when total arseholes are appointed it helps mitigate that risk. Surely it is better just not appoint arseholes ? If you are getting appointed to senior political positions but need the system to be so confidential because of skeletons in your cupboard you ain’t fit for office are you ? 

Edited 2 hours ago by Ani

[Ani]

1 minute ago, Cheese said:

I'm not.

You need to invest in an irony meter. 👍😂

[Traf]

Reform will clear the nation's problems quicker than God created the earth.

We'll be out of the ECHR on day 1, the boats will stop on day 2, anyone darker than budget magnolia paint will be deported on day 3, income tax & VAT scrapped on day 4.

They'll be able to have the weekend off.

[bolty58]

14 hours ago, Sweep said:

I thought you were all for "democracy" - she was voted in by her constituency, so surely she should be allowed to stay until they decide otherwise?

For what it's worth, she was only showboating, she knew what would happen after Anderson had been turfed out, purely to give her and her shit party even the tiniest bit of publicity.

The "democracy" she wants used to have a label. CCCP.

Any elected member is allowed to stay as long as they observe the rules. A bit like The Dons realm.

[bolty58]

12 hours ago, Traf said:

Elsewhere...

Is this Candice Holmes the one who supports a mad cunt who believes that he can enlarge womens tits by the power of thought?

[bolty58]

11 hours ago, Sweep said:

Yes, but he was an eccentric, with scruffy hair and ill fitting suits

Not to mention, he was "Churchillian" - I'm not sure if he is more or less Churchillian than Farage though

Seems you're not sure about much. Or something like that.

[bolty58]

37 minutes ago, Traf said:

Reform will clear the nation's problems quicker than God created the earth.

We'll be out of the ECHR on day 1, the boats will stop on day 2, anyone darker than budget magnolia paint will be deported on day 3, income tax & VAT scrapped on day 4.

They'll be able to have the weekend off.

Exaggeration is always the best policy.

[bolty58]

13 hours ago, Traf said:

Yeah, but the boats / Corbyn / Starmer blah blah blah

Amazing how the stats can be manipulated by government and NHS job creation.

[bolty58]

Plain to see how the hysteria is growing as we get closer to the 6th May.

The squirmers can take solace from the fact that by then, it will be under 1,000 days until the 20th January 2029. Only 5 or 6 days to go before that milestone ticks over.

Get the champers out.