International Skeptics Forum

International Skeptics Forum (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   Non-USA & General Politics (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=98)
-   -   General UK politics (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=346868)

Squeegee Beckenheim 6th December 2020 05:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darat (Post 13316335)
Creating a role for your mate is something we all do: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...overnment-role

While I do agree with the general sentiment, I think this is nowhere near as bad as other recent appointments, given a) that she's getting relatively little money for it,* b) the subject she's been brought in to tackle is one that is often overlooked and does require tackling and reform, and c) she does appear to actually be qualified for and passionate about the job.

Perhaps there should have been an interview process, but this doesn't strike me as "let's find a way to bung you some money, shall we?" but more as "you're talking a lot of sense. I think we could do well by hiring you".

The majority of job hires come about through knowing the right people. Sometimes that can lead to unqualified people getting jobs because their mates are in the position to give it to them, but it can also mean that people get jobs that they're suited for because the people in the position to hire people already know their ability and their character. This strikes me as much more akin to the latter than the former.

*£8,400 a year isn't nothing, certainly, but it's not the more traditional millions, either.

P.J. Denyer 6th December 2020 05:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim (Post 13316836)
While I do agree with the general sentiment, I think this is nowhere near as bad as other recent appointments, given a) that she's getting relatively little money for it,* b) the subject she's been brought in to tackle is one that is often overlooked and does require tackling and reform, and c) she does appear to actually be qualified for and passionate about the job.

Perhaps there should have been an interview process, but this doesn't strike me as "let's find a way to bung you some money, shall we?" but more as "you're talking a lot of sense. I think we could do well by hiring you".

The majority of job hires come about through knowing the right people. Sometimes that can lead to unqualified people getting jobs because their mates are in the position to give it to them, but it can also mean that people get jobs that they're suited for because the people in the position to hire people already know their ability and their character. This strikes me as much more akin to the latter than the former.

*£8,400 a year isn't nothing, certainly, but it's not the more traditional millions, either.


I don't entirely disagree, she certainly seems one of the more appropriate choices this government has made. But on the money side, this is two days days a month, £370/day, so no, it's not a fortune, but it's not a part time gig most people would turn their nose up at either & very reminiscent of the non-exec & consultancy positions that people in these circles such as MPs stack up.

And as with the PPE contracts, although giving the contracts to people who couldn't deliver or charged over the odds was the worst part, it was also the crap icing on the corruption cake. When the field is narrowed down to legitimate suppliers offering quality goods or services at the appropriate price, when government money is being handed out the process should be transparent and fair to all qualified to apply not dependent on having a personal connection to Ministers, spads or the PM's girlfriend.

Wudang 6th December 2020 07:06 AM

For comparison: programming contracts in the UK the median daily rate is £475 and the 10% percentile (lowest 10%) daily rate is £310. £525 and £353 for java.

Source https://www.itjobswatch.co.uk/contracts/uk/java.do

Carrot Flower King 10th December 2020 09:12 AM

And another example of our current excuse for a government's chumocracy - https://www.theguardian.com/society/...t-matt-hancock - as well as being yet another example for my continuous tirade about useless, bullying NHS management.

I mean, it's not like every single NHS trust has a specific policy concerning whistle blowers nor any policies concerning bullying and harassment. I mean why would they have such policies? It's not like anyone needs them, is it?

Garrison 22nd December 2020 12:11 PM

So it appears that even with a pandemic fiasco and a looming Brexit disaster Boris thought, 'you know I don't think I'm being criticized enough, what else can I do?'

Peter Cruddas: PM overrules watchdog with Tory donor peerage

Quote:

Boris Johnson has nominated businessman Peter Cruddas for a peerage, despite his rejection by the honours watchdog.

The Lords Appointments Commission did not support ennobling the businessman, who quit as Tory co-treasurer in 2012 following cash-for-access allegations.

Mr Cruddas later won a libel case against a newspaper over its claims.

Mr Johnson rejected the commission's recommendation, becoming the first PM to ignore its advice on a nomination since it was set up in 2000.

Labour accused Mr Johnson - who received £50,000 from Mr Cruddas for his campaign to become Conservative leader in 2019 - of "cronyism".
Johnson really just doesn't care how blatantly he displays his cronyism, he simply can't imagine ever being held to account.

Darat 22nd December 2020 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garrison (Post 13334528)
So it appears that even with a pandemic fiasco and a looming Brexit disaster Boris thought, 'you know I don't think I'm being criticized enough, what else can I do?'

Peter Cruddas: PM overrules watchdog with Tory donor peerage



Johnson really just doesn't care how blatantly he displays his cronyism, he simply can't imagine ever being held to account.

He probably canít understand what is wrong with what he is doing.

P.J. Denyer 22nd December 2020 02:41 PM

In addition to the fifty grand to Johnson he's given the Tory Party between one & three point five million.

Darat 23rd December 2020 01:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer (Post 13334710)
In addition to the fifty grand to Johnson he's given the Tory Party between one & three point five million.

Purely coincidentally.

P.J. Denyer 23rd December 2020 03:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darat (Post 13335121)
Purely coincidentally.


Obviously. One wouldn't want commit a "Post Hoc Ergo Proptor Hoc" fallacy.

Carrot Flower King 23rd December 2020 07:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer (Post 13334710)
In addition to the fifty grand to Johnson he's given the Tory Party between one & three point five million.

The money was just resting in the accounts...

ceptimus 23rd December 2020 11:09 AM

Donating lots of money to political parties has always been a route to becoming ennobled. And it's not only the Tory party - they're all at it.

Best solution, in my opinion, would be to just scrap the House of Lords entirely. If you must have a revising 'upper chamber' then simply choose the members in the same way juries are chosen - by random selection from the entire population - and limit their term of office to five years. You could allow anyone rich enough to buy their way out of having to serve by paying some extravagant sum, say a million pounds to start with, to HMRC.

Captain_Swoop 28th December 2020 02:41 AM

Britons overseas have no right to our help, says Foreign Office

Quote:

British citizens arrested overseas through no fault of their own have no right to the government’s assistance or protection, even if they are tortured or held as diplomatic leverage against their country, the Foreign Office has said.

That stark assessment was delivered in a letter to lawyers for Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, who asked the department to lay out the government’s view of its obligations towards her.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/b...fice-99gscp5kt

P.J. Denyer 28th December 2020 03:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13339659)
Britons overseas have no right to our help, says Foreign Office



https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/b...fice-99gscp5kt

So long as Johnson is PM that might not be as bad a thing as it sounds.

Darat 28th December 2020 05:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13339659)
Britons overseas have no right to our help, says Foreign Office



https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/b...fice-99gscp5kt

He couldnít even be bothered to read his briefing notes about her when he was FS and was going to be asked about her arrests, trial and imprisonment and as a result of yet another one of his mistakes someone else had to pay.

Vixen 28th December 2020 05:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ceptimus (Post 13335482)
Donating lots of money to political parties has always been a route to becoming ennobled. And it's not only the Tory party - they're all at it.

Best solution, in my opinion, would be to just scrap the House of Lords entirely. If you must have a revising 'upper chamber' then simply choose the members in the same way juries are chosen - by random selection from the entire population - and limit their term of office to five years. You could allow anyone rich enough to buy their way out of having to serve by paying some extravagant sum, say a million pounds to start with, to HMRC.

I disagree with this. The House of Lords brings a much needed elderly and wise restraint on the shenanigans of the hoi polloi who will vote for anything if it includes the price of beer coming down. These are old heads who have seen it all before and it is good to have someone there to rein in the likes of the styled mobs. For example, the ERG and its madcap schemes.

Vixen 28th December 2020 05:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darat (Post 13339719)
He couldnít even be bothered to read his briefing notes about her when he was FS and was going to be asked about her arrests, trial and imprisonment and as a result of yet another one of his mistakes someone else had to pay.

It's all on Johnson's head.

Captain_Swoop 28th December 2020 05:20 AM

deleted

zooterkin 28th December 2020 06:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13339659)
Britons overseas have no right to our help, says Foreign Office



https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/b...fice-99gscp5kt

What a strange interpretation. From their website:
Quote:

About us
We pursue our national interests and project the UK as a force for good in the world. We promote the interests of British citizens, safeguard the UK’s security, defend our values, reduce poverty and tackle global challenges with our international partners.
Before the reorganisation, when it was the FCO, not FCDO, their statement was:
Quote:

Responsibilities
We are responsible for:
  • safeguarding the UK’s national security by countering terrorism and weapons proliferation, and working to reduce conflict
  • building the UK’s prosperity by increasing exports and investment, opening markets, ensuring access to resources, and promoting sustainable global growth
  • supporting British nationals around the world through modern and efficient consular services

So, they have somewhat de-emphasized support for British nationals, but surely they still are responsible.

Airfix 29th December 2020 01:42 PM

I agree with the original post, bring back British Rail, the privatised system keeps failing.

Darat 1st January 2021 05:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Airfix (Post 13340883)
I agree with the original post, bring back British Rail, the privatised system keeps failing.

Itís pretty much been nationalised... only in a much more expensive manner that envisioned!

Carrot Flower King 3rd January 2021 05:26 AM

Oh, look - https://www.theguardian.com/politics...-tory-majority - what a surprise!

Darat 3rd January 2021 05:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carrot Flower King (Post 13345040)

It gives one some hope that we arenít all idiots.

Airfix 3rd January 2021 05:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darat (Post 13343451)
Itís pretty much been nationalised... only in a much more expensive manner that envisioned!

Agreed, it would be much better to do the job properly.

Tolls 4th January 2021 02:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darat (Post 13345043)
It gives one some hope that we arenít all idiots.

Oh, be assured that more than enough of them will forget this whole era quickly enough when we enter the run up to an election and the Tory propaganda machine gets into full swing.

ceptimus 4th January 2021 04:46 PM

Yes, and the Tories will be quick to swap leader if necessary. Maybe the chancellor! A chance to vote for a black PM!

Tolls 5th January 2021 12:46 AM

And then, as with last year, they will pretend that the current shower were a different party altogether...

Captain_Swoop 5th January 2021 03:27 PM

"Britain faces a simple and inescapable choice - stability and strong government with me, or chaos with Ed Miliband."

David Cameron, 4 May 2015

P.J. Denyer 6th January 2021 04:35 PM

I suppose we're in the unique position of having elected someone because they portrayed themselves as a posh incompetent buffoon & being shocked to find that we got what it said on the can. Who'd have thought that would go wrong?

Dave Rogers 7th January 2021 01:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer (Post 13349840)
I suppose we're in the unique position of having elected someone because they portrayed themselves as a posh incompetent buffoon & being shocked to find that we got what it said on the can. Who'd have thought that would go wrong?

This morning he's not looking like such a bad choice in comparison.

Dave

Airfix 7th January 2021 05:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13347869)
"Britain faces a simple and inescapable choice - stability and strong government with me, or chaos with Ed Miliband."

David Cameron, 4 May 2015

You know why David Cameron won in 2015 though don't you ?

He offered a referendum.
Ed Miliband ruled out a referendum.

If both had offered the referendum, David Cameron would have lost.

catsmate 7th January 2021 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Airfix (Post 13350982)
You know why David Cameron won in 2015 though don't you ?

He offered a referendum.
Ed Miliband ruled out a referendum.

If both had offered the referendum, David Cameron would have lost.

So you had a referendum. Now everyone loses.
:rolleyes:

Archie Gemmill Goal 7th January 2021 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Airfix (Post 13350982)
You know why David Cameron won in 2015 though don't you ?

Because England ALWAYS votes Tory?

Because Milliband ate a bacon butty?

Because the same racists and xenophobes who want to leave the EU were concerned about immigration in 2015?

Lothian 7th January 2021 08:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Airfix (Post 13350982)
You know why David Cameron won in 2015 though don't you ?

He offered a referendum.
Ed Miliband ruled out a referendum.

If both had offered the referendum, David Cameron would have lost.

:alert: This claim is unsubstantiated by evidence and is disputed.

catsmate 7th January 2021 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lothian (Post 13351191)
:alert: This claim is unsubstantiated by evidence and is disputed.

:D :thumbsup:

Captain_Swoop 7th January 2021 11:26 AM

The difference between the UK and the USA is the attempted coup by storming the Capitol failed whereas in the UK Boris' illegal dissolving and proroguing of parliament succeeded.

Captain_Swoop 7th January 2021 02:32 PM

There seems to be a mass deletion of tweets by Tory MPs today.

looks like they are deleting Toby Young retweets and all the pro Trump ones too.

Vixen 30th January 2021 02:34 AM

So 'Boris' Johnson visited Scotland in the middle of a pandemic. His approval rating there is low and over 50% want independence. Clearly, Johnson and Westminster are not popular there. So what does he do, he decides to go on a photo shoot, given all the pictures of him ham-fistedly trying to use some ancient multi-pipette and wearing science-y-looking goggles and a white coat. He looks like a toddler concentrating hard on hand eye-coordination. Perhaps he had had a skinful the night before.

https://twitter.com/PhantomPower14/s...423280130?s=20

https://twitter.com/AngusRobertson/s...973597697?s=20


Question: What did this visit achieve?

Archie Gemmill Goal 30th January 2021 03:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vixen (Post 13378550)
So 'Boris' Johnson visited Scotland in the middle of a pandemic. His approval rating there is low and over 50% want independence. Clearly, Johnson and Westminster are not popular there. So what does he do, he decides to go on a photo shoot, given all the pictures of him ham-fistedly trying to use some ancient multi-pipette and wearing science-y-looking goggles and a white coat. He looks like a toddler concentrating hard on hand eye-coordination. Perhaps he had had a skinful the night before.

https://twitter.com/PhantomPower14/s...423280130?s=20

https://twitter.com/AngusRobertson/s...973597697?s=20


Question: What did this visit achieve?

Another 2 or 3% on the Yes vote hopefully.

P.J. Denyer 30th January 2021 03:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal (Post 13378563)
Another 2 or 3% on the Yes vote hopefully.

I'm sure he felt it was worth it so spend yet another day playing dress up. If there's one thing Mr Bent loves, it's playing dress up.

Carrot Flower King 30th January 2021 04:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal (Post 13378563)
Another 2 or 3% on the Yes vote hopefully.

So when you go, can someone please remember all the blether about "North of Hadrian's Wall..." and take us with you?

Seriously, you've even had better Tory leaders than we managed in Ingerland.

Mind, in reality for the likes of us, as someone I know in Berwick said to me a while back, Holyrood would probably ignore us as much as Westminster does. See also a conversation I had with someone in NW Sutherland shortly before the 2014 vote, in which he opined that being governed from the Central Belt would be no different from being governed from Westminster, as none of them know where Sutherland is...

Archie Gemmill Goal 30th January 2021 04:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carrot Flower King (Post 13378588)
So when you go, can someone please remember all the blether about "North of Hadrian's Wall..." and take us with you?

Seriously, you've even had better Tory leaders than we managed in Ingerland.

Mind, in reality for the likes of us, as someone I know in Berwick said to me a while back, Holyrood would probably ignore us as much as Westminster does. See also a conversation I had with someone in NW Sutherland shortly before the 2014 vote, in which he opined that being governed from the Central Belt would be no different from being governed from Westminster, as none of them know where Sutherland is...

I know this is a fairly common opinion in Scotland but not one I share. I've seen how Scotland is treated in the annals of UK Government at close quarters. Openly hostile at times.

Even being an afterthought would be an improvement to be honest.

Carrot Flower King 30th January 2021 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal (Post 13378589)
I know this is a fairly common opinion in Scotland but not one I share. I've seen how Scotland is treated in the annals of UK Government at close quarters. Openly hostile at times.

Even being an afterthought would be an improvement to be honest.

Yeah, that's a view which many, including me, in some regions of England would share, especially the North East or Cornwall, IME.

P.J. Denyer 30th January 2021 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carrot Flower King (Post 13378873)
Yeah, that's a view which many, including me, in some regions of England would share, especially the North East or Cornwall, IME.

Honestly when it comes to the Torys I don't think it's geographical, if you're not a millionaire in London they despise you just as much as if you're not a millionaire in Inverness.

Darat 31st January 2021 04:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carrot Flower King (Post 13378873)
Yeah, that's a view which many, including me, in some regions of England would share, especially the North East or Cornwall, IME.

Cornwall is starting to see a lot more investment; the fact that it became a very popular second home location for many of the London based ďgood and greatĒ is entirely coincidental.

Aber 31st January 2021 05:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer (Post 13378929)
Honestly when it comes to the Torys I don't think it's geographical, if you're not a millionaire in London they despise you just as much as if you're not a millionaire in Inverness.

Up to a point:

https://twitter.com/Helenreflects/st...ffiliation-fun

See Walsall North

catsmate 2nd February 2021 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal (Post 13378563)
Another 2 or 3% on the Yes vote hopefully.

:) :thumbsup:

Airfix 4th February 2021 04:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal (Post 13351184)
Because England ALWAYS votes Tory?

^ Irrational racism against the English?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal (Post 13351184)
Because Milliband ate a bacon butty?

Nope, because Miliband's an idiot who ruled out a referendum on membership of the EU.
Being anti democratic is not a good position.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal (Post 13351184)
Because the same racists and xenophobes who want to leave the EU were concerned about immigration in 2015?

Having concerns about immigration is not necessarily racist, especially if it's about skills and numbers, rather than nationality / colour.

But hating the English and claiming they're always voting Tory, that is racism. It's a hatred of someone based on their nationality.

Take a good long hard look at yourself in the mirror.

May I remind you that from 1997-2005 the elections were dominated by Labour?
And before that, in 1974 Labour won, 1966 and 64, Labour won, 1945 and 1950, Labour won.
That wouldn't have been possible without English Labour constituencies.

Stop making assumptions about people.

Captain_Swoop 4th February 2021 04:18 AM

I am English, I agree that idiots always vote Tory even when they know it is against their own interest to do so.

Airfix 4th February 2021 04:40 AM

Well, the answer is to provide an alternative!!!!

Once there's an alternative, then people WON'T!

Carrot Flower King 4th February 2021 05:13 AM

And remember when the SNP were the Tartan Tories? That wasn't too long ago.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:00 AM.

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015-22, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.