Monthly Archives: November 2018

Did the BBC do a backroom deal with the Tories? (Why the BBC shouldn’t host the Brexit debate part 2)

The BBC thought the deal was all sewn up – but it seems the Corporation’s bosses jumped to the wrong conclusion, too soon.

Before you jump to conclusions too, dear reader, be advised that this is not about Theresa May’s Brexit agreement with the EU, but about her challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, to take part in a debate about the deal on television.

Around lunchtime yesterday, the BBC News press team announced that Mrs May had accepted the Corporation’s offer to host the debate, on December 9.

There was just one problem, as Jim Waterson explained:

As The Canary reports: “Before becoming May’s director of communications in late 2017, Robbie Gibb was head of the BBC‘s Westminster programmes. Now, Gibb is reportedly insisting that the BBChosts the debate “at all costs”.

“Meanwhile, BBC news bulletins (and reporting from elsewhere in the corporate media, such as the Independent) are presenting May’s BBC debate as a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn. But in reality, the Labour leader said he would “relish” a TV debate with May late on 25 November, immediately after she suggested one.”

Here’s the thing:

https://twitter.com/James4Labour/status/1068129130133291013

That’s right. Theresa May issued the challenge, meaning Mr Corbyn should have the right to choose the terms.

And he doesn’t want to debate Mrs May on the BBC.

Can anybody blame him?

Here’s The Canary again: “The difference is that Labour prefers what ITV has tabled: a straight head-to-head debate between the two leaders. And it’s pretty obvious why. Because the BBC‘s format seems to allow for BBC editors to rig the discussion against Corbyn. They will have significant power over the questions and participants involved in the debate”

Not only that: Already we have learned that the BBC apparently hired an actress who runs her own tiny internet church to speak in favour of Mrs May on Newsnight debates. Social media commentators have already linked this behaviour with the debate challenge:

Now it seems the BBC has been discussing the challenge that Mrs May sprang on Mr Corbyn – not-so-spontaneously, it seems – for many weeks.

Why else would the Tories plan TV appearances hosted by the BBC’s David Dimbleby, including a “Question Time style session” and brief the Conservative-supporting Daily Telegraph about it on Monday (November 26)?

Commentators are already concluding that the BBC is colluding with the Conservative Party – so much for the Corporation’s claims of impartiality! – to build support for her Brexit deal and run Labour down:

Some have resorted to satire:

https://twitter.com/JackDunc1/status/1068172386732843008

While others have aimed sharper barbs:

Personally, I like this comment, which bypasses the silliness of the BBC and ITV jostling for position and goes straight to the heart of the matter:

He’s right.

But then, we’re discussing Brexit – a situation in which the elected leaders of the United Kingdom have vowed to follow the wish of a majority of voters in a referendum, even though they know there is no possible outcome in which the country will be better-off as a result of it.

No part of Brexit makes any sense at all. Why should this be any different?

Visit our JustGiving page to help Vox Political’s Mike Sivier fight anti-Semitism libels in court


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

The strange tale of the ‘Vicar of Brexit’ (Why the BBC shouldn’t host the Brexit debate part 1)

A priest, we’re told: Lynn Hayter in one of the costumes she apparently uses on a day-to-day basis as the leader of Seeds for Wealth Ministries on Facebook, which apparently has 69 members. Gosh!

The BBC is working hard to be the channel that hosts a debate on Brexit between Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn. There’s just one problem – the BBC appears to be a pro-Tory fake news outlet.

It seems that, on Monday (November 26), the BBC’s Newsnight show featured a Brexit-supporting priest named “Lynn” in an apparently-genuine debate on Theresa May’s Brexit deal:

But it seemed Lynn was not all she appeared to be:

So the allegation was that “Lynn” was not a qualified vicar, but was definitely a person who had appeared as an actor in BBC productions – but the BBC was denying that there was anything shady about her, and was claiming that anyone suggesting this must be a conspiracy theorist. Here’s what the Newsnight team had to say – and a response that suggests the social media sleuths were way ahead of the game:

Nobody was convinced – especially Stevie, below:

https://twitter.com/StevieCABZ/status/1068172728010711046

“Not a leader of any real, physical church entity”? Then what kind of vicar could “Lynn” be? Well, Stevie had a few answers for us:

https://twitter.com/StevieCABZ/status/1068117406231523328

That’s “Hayter”, it seems.

“Pastor at her own, minute Facebook church”? That deserves a little extra digging – but here‘s Evolve Politics, a social media news site that has already done the hard work for us:

“Whilst Lynn is not a genuine vicar, she does regularly attend church. However, the church in question is her own.

“Yes… Lynn is … the creator of the “Seeds For Wealth Ministries”, who describe themselves as a religious organisation who can help you “realize, release and walk into your financial freedom in Christ. To Educate, Equip and Empower the saints.”

“Newsnight’s claims that Lynn is “a pastor” are incredibly misleading. Pastors are merely church leaders, and anybody can start their own church with absolutely no registration or official documentation needed.

“Hayter also calls herself a “minister” on her acting profile and on her Facebook page, and anybody is free to become ordained as a minister on the internet!”

This is true, as Stevie discovered:

https://twitter.com/StevieCABZ/status/1068133169344450560

So the claim that she was a priest, if taken according to the accepted use of the term, falls. What about the claim that she is an actor?

The above profile on mandy.com suggests that she is, as does the list of credits below:

https://twitter.com/StevieCABZ/status/1068134182449233921

And here’s Evolve Politics again:

“She is, in fact, an actor – and not only that, she has previously worked as a minor cast member on numerous BBC programmes.

“Lynn’s full name is Lynn Marina Hayter, and uses her middle name for her acting work.

“Lynn’s past acting work includes playing a Drunkard on the BBC show Eastenders, playing a “Theatre goer” on the BBC show The Dresser, playing a female beggar in the BBC programme Dickensian, and was cast as a nurse in the BBC show The Chronicles.

“Having been cast by the corporation on numerous occasions, Lynn is clearly a figure well known to BBC producers.

“And… her repertoire extends through many ranges, including – one would assume – the part of a supposedly pro-Tory vicar on a prime time political debate programme.”

So: Not a genuine priest, if by that we mean a member of a recognised church. But a genuine actor, and one known to the BBC. And the BBC is unlikely to admit trying to deceive us, so we have reason to doubt its claims.

Is that enough for an ordinary person to decide the Corporation has deceived us? Consider this:

And this:

And this:

Also this:

That satirists got in on the act quickly:

https://twitter.com/GuitarMoog/status/1068186661186666496

But of course, that did not mean Newsnight should not receive harsher criticism:

These are hard words for an organisation that claims to pride itself on its impartiality – and there is clearly enough information here to cast doubt on that claim.

But the BBC wants to host the big debate on Brexit between Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn. If it wins the rights to the broadcast, do you think the programme it produces will be impartial?

No.

Neither do I.

But there is worse to follow…

Visit our JustGiving page to help Vox Political’s Mike Sivier fight anti-Semitism libels in court


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Brexit deal, no deal or Plan B? May’s waffle undermines any confidence in her

The Death Stare: It’s as though Mrs May is daring anybody to question her disastrous deal.

Theresa May seems hell-bent on ruining her own Brexit deal.

She’s been on a tour around the UK, allegedly drumming up support for her Brexit agreement. The only people who’ll be allowed to vote on it are MPs, so the whole junket seems pointless – unless she’s betting on members of the public calling their representatives to demand support for the deal. That’s a long shot.

Today she appeared before the Commons liaison committee to discuss her deal and, instead of providing information as requested, all she wanted to do was waffle.

Asked if she had a “plan B” if she loses the vote on her Brexit deal, all Mrs May would say was that her deal was good and this was a matter for Parliament.

At another point, she suggested that she would activate full planning for a “no deal” Brexit if MPs vote down her deal.

This assumes that she would be in a position to do so – and that is not certain at all. MPs may trigger a “no confidence” vote in her, and a general election. Given this performance, they would be justified in doing so.

The way she twisted and turned is unbelievable: “If the House were to vote down the deal that has been agreed – given that the European Union has been clear that this is the deal that has been agreed and this is the deal that is on the table – then obviously decisions would need to be taken in relation the action that would need to be taken.” What?

Mrs May also refused to say explicitly that, if she lost the vote, the UK would definitely leave the EU with no deal.

Her performance failed to convince anybody, it seems:

https://twitter.com/ItClearly/status/1068085571128573952

What are we to make of this waffle? It seems Mrs May – and the rest of her government, considering the intransigence we’re seeing over the legal advice informing the Brexit deal – is demanding our support while refusing to provide any reason for it.

I can’t; I won’t. And I certainly wouldn’t expect any MP with an ounce of integrity to do so.

Visit our JustGiving page to help Vox Political’s Mike Sivier fight anti-Semitism libels in court


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Tories are happy to risk flaccid ‘contempt of Parliament’ punishment over refusal to provide Brexit legal advice

“Not acceptable”: Keir Starmer.

What is the point of having an offence of ‘contempt of Parliament’ if any punishment is so light that MPs aren’t worried about committing it?

I always thought MPs who were found guilty of contempt faced the possibility of being expelled from Parliament but after Conservative MPs – notably Iain Duncan Smith – committed the offence time and time again, it became clear that the threat of penalisation for it is a paper tiger.

In fact, the most discomfort any MP is likely to suffer is a paper cut from the notification letter. Big deal.

And in this particular instance, who will take the fall?

The government is being accused of “showing contempt for this house” by Labour’s Shadow Brexit Secretary Sir Keir Starmer, who has demanded to know why ministers are refusing to publish the government’s full legal advice relating to Theresa May’s Brexit deal in an emergency Commons debate this morning (November 29).

He said the government’s counter offer of sending attorney general Geoffrey Cox to answer questions on Monday was “not good enough”.

So – what, would everybody in the government be found in contempt?

Would it be Mr Cox, the Attorney General who said the Tory government would not publish the full legal advice, despite having been ordered to do so in a binding vote on November 13?

Or how about Robert Buckland, the solicitor general who said Mr Cox would attend Parliament and answer questions on the matter “in the fullest possible way” – which means nothing, as their idea of what’s “possible” certainly won’t coincide with that of the Labour Party or the British public?

Some cabinet sources say that the full legal advice makes clear that the mutual exit mechanism negotiated by Theresa May to the controversial Northern Irish backstop is a figleaf, and that in reality the European Union has an effective veto on whether the UK can abandon it.

10 Downing Street has denied this. So should Mrs May face contempt proceedings, for failing to supply the full factual information that would support this claim?

Either way, you have to agree with Sir Keir:

Commons Speaker John Bercow has made it clear that the government could be in contempt of Parliament if it fails to provide the information as demanded:

My opinion is that any demand for action in respect of contempt of Parliament can wait until after MPs hear Mr Cox on Monday. There’s no reason to go off half-cocked.

But my fear is that, even if anyone in the government is found guilty, it won’t mean anything at all.

Visit our JustGiving page to help Vox Political’s Mike Sivier fight anti-Semitism libels in court


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Survey shows Britain wants to remain in EU – so the Mail concocts a blatant May-supporting LIE

Propaganda: The Daily Mail’s ‘fake news’ front page.

How many people will be fooled by this fake news – and this fake newspaper?

The Daily Mail‘s front page yesterday (November 28) stated that a Survation poll showed the British people believe Theresa May’s comprehensively-rubbished Brexit deal is “the best on offer” – a meaningless claim as it is the only deal on offer, but how many Heil readers are going to recognise that?

The article stated: “Voters want Tory MPs to rally behind Theresa May’s Brexit deal, a poll shows today.

“According to the Survation survey for the Daily Mail, 52 per cent say her plan is the best on the table. Only 19 per cent disagreed.

“And 41 per cent said the Commons should back the withdrawal agreement – compared with 38 per cent who want it voted down.

“Asked to choose between Mrs May’s plan and the prospect of a Labour government, voters favoured the Prime Minister by 46 per cent to 31 per cent. Reversing Brexit would damage our national standing, according to 47 per cent.”

But the poll actually shows that Britons would rather remain in the European Union than put up with Mrs May’s pathetic plan.

Here’s journalist J.N. Paquet on Twitter to explain:

So only 37 per cent of those who answered the poll support Mrs May’s deal. Nearly two-thirds did not.

And 59 per cent did not want MPs to vote for it on December 11 (or whenever the ‘meaningful’ vote takes place).

So nearly half those polled thought Mrs May should resign if she loses the vote.

Oh – and look! “EU said Brexit agreement is the only one on table.” But the Mail stated “52 per cent say her plan is the best on the table”. What do the other 48 per cent support, then?

So it doesn’t matter what the options are – only 35-37 per cent of those polled support Mrs May’s deal. Other options always poll higher, no matter whether the choice is remaining in the EU or leaving without a deal.

Now we see that remaining in the EU earns between 44-50 per cent of the vote, no matter what the other options might be.

This is the only negative aspect of the poll: Mrs May’s Brexit beats the possibility of a Labour government – perhaps because Labour has never made clear exactly what its version of Brexit would be?

Again, Labour loses out – again, most likely, because we don’t know the shape of a Labour Brexit.

Perhaps the TV debate will change this, if Jeremy Corbyn opens up and explains a little of Labour’s alternative plan.

So we see that the Mail‘s report is – deliberately? – misleading.

The majority of those surveyed do not support Theresa May’s Brexit agreement.

More of those who took part supported remaining in the European Union.

There will be a lot more of this nonsense over the next two weeks.

Propaganda sheets like the Daily Mail cannot be trusted to provide accurate information. People should go to original sources where possible.

Spread the word.

Visit our JustGiving page to help Vox Political’s Mike Sivier fight anti-Semitism libels in court


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Tory MP endorses violence to defeat enemies. He means HIS enemies, not ours

Oppressor: It seems Johnny Mercer wants young people to join our armed forces so a Tory government can order them to brutalise others in the name of far-right-wing political dogma.

What kind of twisted mind does Plymouth’s Tory MP, Johnny Mercer possess?

He has started a huge debate with a claim that there is nothing wrong with killing to defeat the enemies of a nation.

Perhaps it hasn’t occurred to him that, to many of us, he is an enemy of the United Kingdom.

By his own reckoning, would I not be well within my rights to gather a few dozen like-minded people, track him down and beat him brutally with baseball bats wrapped in barbed wire (for example)?

No, of course I wouldn’t. He doesn’t mean it like that.

We’re told he made his comment in a tweet encouraging young people to join the army. It stated: “The application of violence to defeat the enemies of the nation has become worryingly unpopular. Nothing wrong with fighting (yes killing) for values/what you believe in. The oppressed/bullied/tormented/voiceless deserve it. Join the fight; best thing you’ll ever do.”

So he wasn’t discussing “the application of violence” for “values you believe in”. He meant he wants young people to enlist in order to apply violence in the name of values he believes in.

And what about the line that “the oppressed/bullied/tormented/voiceless deserve it”? If you think he means they deserve protection, think again!

Mr Mercer means the oppressed/bullied/tormented/voiceless deserve to be oppressed/bullied/tormented/voiceless.

If you don’t believe me, just look at Conservative policies regarding sick and disabled benefit claimants since 2010.

It’s a philosophy you can see espoused in the movie (and, I suppose, novel) Starship Troopers. Author Robert A Heinlein had imagined a future civilisation in which far-right politics had conquered the world and in one scene, a character states that violence is “the supreme authority from which all other authority is derived… Naked force has resolved more issues throughout history than any other factor. The contrary opinion, that violence never solves anything, is wishful thinking at its worst. People who forget that always pay.”

This is what Johnny Mercer believes – but notice that he doesn’t want to put himself at risk in the application of that “naked force”. He wants the plebs to do that for him.

Note that he served in the Army as an officer, not in the ranks.

Officers are the people who decide how troops should be deployed, and send them out – often to their deaths. But they don’t often put their own lives on the line, and I wonder how often they expect to be asked to take the lives of others, as Mr Mercer is clearly asking others to do in his tweet.

My point is that it is easy to sign orders for other people to die, and to expect other people to carry out those orders. But it is less easy to actually do it oneself.

So what does Mr Mercer’s tweet actually mean? As indicated, this has been the subject of heated debate.

An article in The Independent has published several responses which make good points, as follows:

“Noelle Moysi said: “Is this really what you mean? You’re an MP and words matter. Jo Cox was killed by someone fighting for what they believed in. Jo Cox’s murderer saw her as an enemy of the nation and shouted the words Britain first as he did it.”

“Helen Troup‏ said Mr Mercer’s remarks were “exactly the justification used by the IRA of course”.

“Lavendar Luke said: “I believe synth music is better than guitar music. Yet when I kill and fight for my beliefs I’m ‘a psychopath’ apparently. Thanks for standing up for me Johnny.””

My own suggestion about the meaning of the tweet would be this:

It means he wants he wants the young people of the United Kingdom to put themselves at risk of death in order to subject the oppressed/bullied/tormented/voiceless to the worst far-right-wing domination possible, while he and his fellow Tories sit back and call the shots.

No thanks. If he wants to go around bullying other people – at home or abroad – he can damn well try it on his own and see how far his “values” get him then.

These Tories always talk big when the odds are stacked in their favour and it’s your life on the line.

Visit our JustGiving page to help Vox Political’s Mike Sivier fight anti-Semitism libels in court


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Don’t let Harry’s Last Stand be in vain

Smiling all the way: The late, great Harry Leslie Smith.

The better part of the UK has been in mourning for Harry Leslie Smith, the 95-year-old crusader who came to public attention in 2014 with his campaign to save the National Health Service from destruction at the hands of a Conservative government.

If you’re a fan of Mr Smith, you’ll have read and heard so many eulogies that anything I say here about him will be superfluous. He was a valued reader of Vox Political, as I was a fan of him, but I didn’t know him well.

His finest moment was his speech to the Labour Party conference in 2014, when he spelled out the consequences of letting the Conservatives take our publicly-funded, publicly-provided, free-at-the-point-of-use health service away from us, as they have been doing piecemeal since 2010:

Harry decided to become a campaigner because he remembered living in a United Kingdom that did not have a National Health Service and wanted to do whatever he could to prevent a return to those – let’s face it – barbarous days.

You can get a taste of it in an extract from his book, Harry’s Last Stand, that you can read here.

It seems to me that people will propose many ways to commemorate this inspirational man – this suggestion from Rachael Swindon is a topical example:

They will all have merit, I’m sure.

But wouldn’t it be the best way to celebrate his life if we all do what we can to achieve his aim – and save the NHS from the Tories.

Harry knew he was close to the end of his life when he started talking about the NHS. He wasn’t doing it for himself – he did it for us.

Those of you who have followed This Site for a long time will know that I believe the best possible leadership is leadership by example – and I would say Harry has shown us the best possible leadership.

So let’s do something for him: Take up the torch he has left behind, follow his example and finish the job he started – by speaking out publicly against Tory dismantling of the NHS wherever we find it.

During his last few days, Twitter-based fans were urged to tweet using the hashtag #istandwithHarry

We can’t stand with Harry any more. He’s made his Last Stand. It’s time for us to make our stand instead.

Visit our JustGiving page to help Vox Political’s Mike Sivier fight anti-Semitism libels in court


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Is Theresa May resorting to more bribery to get MPs supporting her duff Brexit deal?

Dark arts: If Theresa May can’t get her Brexit agreement through Parliament honestly, it seems she’ll bribe its way through.

First she offered a knighthood to John Hayes.

Now it’s peerages all round, and changes to future legislation that could change the lives of millions – most likely for the worse, considering the Conservative Party’s track record.

Here‘s the Daily Mail – not the most reliable of sources, I admit, but Mrs May’s track record suggests the story is believable:

“Theresa May’s team are said to be offering rebel MPs peerages and other sweeteners in a bid to buy votes to get her Brexit deal through Parliament.

“Mrs May has vowed to ‘make the case for this deal with all my heart’ to persuade restless MPs to back her. But it appears she will also resort to horsetrading.

“Some Brexiteers were said to have been offered peerages while other MPs are being bought off with changes to bills, according to reports.”

It seems Theresa May is willing to do anything to secure support for her Brexit agreement with the European Union…

… Except negotiate a worthwhile Brexit agreement, that is.

Visit our JustGiving page to help Vox Political’s Mike Sivier fight anti-Semitism libels in court


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

If Esther McVey isn’t part of a dodgy campaigning company, why tell police not to investigate it for fraud?

Esther McVey: Why did she tell police to stop investigating the company that listed her as its secretary?

Remember earlier in November, when then-Work and Pensions Secretary Esther McVey was revealed to be registered at Companies House as the Secretary of an apparently-dodgy campaigning organisation?

Ms McVey was named at Companies House as the secretary of Loyal Scots Company Ltd, a political campaign funding group allegedly worth £20 million. She had not notified the House of Commons of this financial interest. As secretary, she should be receiving correspondence to the company from HM Revenue and Customs, and may have broken the law by failing to file legally-required documents.

She said the person who brought the connection to public attention – Alex Tiffin – had not checked the facts, and that she had written to Companies House because her name had been used without her knowledge.

But it seems Companies House has done nothing and – according to Mr Tiffin – Ms McVey herself told police not to investigate after he alerted them to the alleged fraud:

Now, why would Companies House not do the former, and why would Ms McVey do the latter?

(I like the – deliberate? – mistake in the address listed in the tweet above, in which Wilmslow is listed as being in Denmark rather than Cheshire. Of course the number of the building on the street, together with the postcode, would be enough to ensure that any correspondence reached its intended destination.)

Given the information available, perhaps the police should be investigating the activities of Ms McVey, rather than Loyal Scots Company Ltd.

Visit our JustGiving page to help Vox Political’s Mike Sivier fight anti-Semitism libels in court


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Labour’s Laura tackles Tory liars over ‘kill yourself’ scandal that is STILL happening after FOUR YEARS

Laura Pidcock MP.

It is nearly four years to the day since I published evidence that private contractors carrying out the Work Capability Assessment for the Conservative government were asking ESA claimants why they had not killed themselves. But Labour MP Laura Pidcock has raised concerns that it is still happening.

It should be plain to everybody that one does not ask why a person who has confessed to suicidal thoughts has not acted on those thoughts.

But that is clearly what happened to Abi Fallows, as described in my December 2014 article. We know it did because she recorded it.

I wrote at the time: “Abi Fallows described the interview on the I bet I can find a million people who DON’T want David Cameron as our PM Facebook group after reading Vox Political‘s article on the hidden cost of the Coalition Government’s benefits policy.

“‘At my last Atos ‘assessment’, when mentioning depression, the ‘assessor’ asked me why I hadn’t killed myself yet,’ she told astonished members of the Facebook group.

“She said the assessors’ attitude seemed to be that she couldn’t be depressed if she had not already killed herself.”

The resemblance between her words and those of Ms Pidcock – as quoted in this Canary article – is uncanny. The Labour MP stated: “Constituents have told us that they are concerned that some assessors are not specialist qualified mental health professionals. They tell us that they feel they are being judged as ‘not genuine’ – i.e. if you really were suicidal you would have killed yourself by now. This has caused great distress.”

So she tackled now-former Tory Work and Pensions Secretary Esther McVey, asking, in a written question, “what steps she has taken to ensure that (a) work capability assessment providers do not ask claimants with mental health problems why they had not carried out their suicidal ideas and (b) the conduct of assessments does not increase the risk of suicide and self harm among claimants with mental health problems.”

The response from minister of state Sarah Newton seems to suggest that no such steps have been taken. It explains: “All healthcare professionals (HCPs) carrying out WCA assessments were given face to face training on exploring self-harm and suicidal ideation in May 2018. The training which was quality assured by the Royal College of Psychiatrists was designed to enhance the skills of HCPs in sensitively exploring self-harm and suicidal ideation.”

Unfortunately, as Ms Pidcock herself complained, that does not answer the question. She did not want vague comments about training in sensitivity; she wanted to know that assessors had been banned from asking what is potentially an extremely harmful question.

And the Royal College of Psychiatrists has distanced itself from Ms Newton’s claim, saying its contribution could hardly be described as quality assurance: “The College’s role has been limited to assessing the written training material sent to them by the Centre for Health and Disability Assessment to ensure that it is factually correct.”

We don’t know what that material is. We don’t know what it says. And we don’t know what readers are intended to draw from it.

Ms Pidcock is quoted as saying: “The minister has not answered the specific question. MPs on the Work and Pensions Select Committee put it to Newton in December 2017 that this was a standard question on the assessment. Although some discussion of suicidal thoughts may be appropriate in order to safeguard vulnerable people, she has not answered whether this particularly direct question has been removed.”

We must, therefore, draw the only logical conclusion: The question is still part of the assessment and government assessors are still drawing the attention of people with mental health issues to suicide.

And the Conservative government is doing its best to hide these facts because the Conservative government wants to attract suicidal benefit claimants to suicide.

It gets them off the benefit books and the Tories know they can dodge the blame for it.

Visit our JustGiving page to help Vox Political’s Mike Sivier fight anti-Semitism libels in court


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook