It’s a good question – and the answer should not be for members of the public to physically assault the protesters. Or should it?
That’s what MPs and journalists debated on the BBC’s Politics Live. Some of the opinions here may be abhorrent to many viewers – but if you are a protester, it’s good to know how others see you and what they would like to do!
Here’s the clip:
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
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:
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.
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!
Almost six times as many people as voted Liz Truss into 10 Downing Street are demanding an early general election in the hope of having her ejected.
Parliament will have to debate the petition because it has topped 100,000 signatories – and this may create a problem for Truss, who does not have the full support of her party in Parliament (especially after the godawful stink she has made in just four weeks).
The call for an election has been echoed by former Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries.
She tweeted that there was ‘widespread dismay’ at the prime minister – and we can conclude that she meant among her fellow Conservative MPs.
The government responded to the petition on September 20, saying nothing would change: “A change in the leader of the governing party does not trigger a general election – this has been the case under governments of successive political colours.”
But that isn’t the issue now.
The issue now is that the UK’s current – unelected – leadership has crashed the economy and cannot accept its role in having done so, and millions of people think it is time for a new administration.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
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:
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.
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!
Where he ought to be: but Boris Johnson looks set to avoid even the slightest censure for breaking the law and lying about it to Parliament because it seems Conservative MPs care more about their own money than the rule of law.
Look how far the UK has fallen under the corrupt leadership of these criminal Conservatives!
After being fined – probably less than the country’s poorest citizens, despite his offence being far worse – for attending a party he had personally explained to the nation was against the law, Boris Johnson looks set to get a free pass from his lickspittle Cabinet and backbenchers.
They seem to think that a criminal who knowingly lied to the nation – about the good times he was having at the same time he was forcing us apart from our friends, family and loved ones who were dying with Covid-19 – will continue to boost their own popularity in elections, and it seems they are more concerned with continuing to draw their enormous MP salaries and expenses claims than with upholding the law.
Only one Conservative – Tory Lord Wolfson – has acted on his conscience. He said the “scale, context and nature” of Covid breaches in government was inconsistent with the rule of law. As a Justice Minister responsible for the constitution, he said the prime minister’s failure to resign left him with no option other than to resign himself.
Three other Tory MPs have said Johnson should quit but others who have previously demanded his resignation have changed their tune and are now cravenly expressing support for the crook.
So the word is that, no matter what sanctions Opposition parties suggest against the UK’s first and only criminal prime minister, the Tories’ 80-seat voting majority will keep him in place.
According to the rules, he should have resigned last week so any failure to do so today (April 19) will be a further offence against the nation.
Johnson deliberately and repeatedly lied to Parliament and to the nation, saying he had not attended any illegal gatherings. Current intelligence suggests he went as far as organising one of them, which renders his current excuse – that he did not realise any of the events he was attending were illegal – into utter nonsense.
He is also expected to say that Partygate is not important – meaning the suffering he put you through while he raved it up is worth nothing to him and his MPs – and we should concentrate instead on the cost of living crisis (that he has caused) and the war in Ukraine (in which the UK is not a participant. In any case, many UK prime ministers have been replaced during wartime).
Opposition parties have been discussing how best to hold Johnson to account and demonstrate the corruption within the Tory ranks that support him. Possible measures include a censure motion or a vote of no confidence.
This Writer believes that it is in the debate that the most damage can be done. Each Conservative who stands up to speak will have to try to justify why they support a prime minister who has not only criminalised himself but has broken the ministerial code to lie about it – to Parliament, an offence that requires him to resign but he has failed to do so.
All Opposition MPs need to do is, when they stand up to speak after a Tory, pass a comment to the effect that the previous speaker is condoning criminality and should themselves be censured by the voters. But I doubt they will have the wit to do that.
Commons Speaker Lindsay Hoyle is expected to make a decision around lunchtime on what vote – if any – should take place on measures against Johnson (and, for that matter, against Chancellor Rishi Sunak, who has also been fined and is also, therefore, a criminal).
Whatever happens, the day is likely to end with the UK still labouring under the cosh of a government headed by two criminals. Nobody should be comfortable with that.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
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:
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.
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!
Backhander: if Tories are taking money from corporates, who do you think they are representing in Parliament? It isn’t you!
It doesn’t matter which side won the Parliamentary debate on whether having a second job is a mark of corruption in a member of Parliament – or whether they should be paid more, so they don’t need(?) another job.
The public decision has already been made.
So Peter Bottomley’s miserable pleading that £81,000 per year isn’t enough and MPs should be paid more is easily dismissed – especially when most of the country is trying to exist on less than £18,000.
You are aware of the salary when you run for parliament, so don't start crying £81k isn't enough when there's people in work using Foodbanks.
Richard Burgon’s comment echoes one I made a few days ago: that companies don’t hire MPs to “advise” them – they hire MPs to represent their interests when plum contracts become available.
Senior Tories still think it is acceptable to speak in support of this attitude:
Tory MP reckons that MPs having second jobs ‘adds to the richness’ of Parliament.
I reckon MPs having second jobs adds only to the riches of MPs’ pockets.
I'd like to think Boris Johnson isn't attending the parliamentary standards debate because he's too ashamed to show his face. But the truth is he just can't be arsed.
In fact, he was in a hospital in Northumbria, making a potential contagion risk out of himself by wandering around without a face mask.
He was challenged on the subject of the Parliamentary debate! But he showed what an absolute and utter disgrace he is by refusing to answer it, point-blank:
This is a graphic example of the contempt in which the PM holds the public
Q. “Do you regret the huge error of judgement that saw you attempting to rewrite Parliamentary rules in favour of a friend & will you apologize to the public?”
Totally irresponsible: You can imagine Johnson’s excuse, though – “Er, er, they’re only northerners. I was trying to see how many I could contaminate in the shortest possible time. Haha!”
He’s totally irresponsible and a danger to everybody in the United Kingdom.
That was made abundantly clear when Boris Johnson elected to dodge the Parliamentary debate on MP corruption, pay and second jobs – to wander maskless through a hospital.
Look at this absolute scumbag, hiding away from the parliamentary debate on his government's corruption scandal, by hanging out maskless in a hospital.
Who on earth imagined that electing a bone-idle coward like this would turn out well? pic.twitter.com/hrJKcilLZ0
He, above all people, should know that nobody should go without a mask in an area where Covid-19 is likely to be found, caught, contracted. He fronted so many of the public information broadcasts about it.
Yet there he was – and you can see the photographic evidence for yourself.
What’s really amazing is the fact that he did this after contracting Covid-19, probably from visiting a hospital and shaking hands with the Covid patients who were there:
March 2020: “I went to a hospital and shook hands with everybody”
November 2021: “I went to a hospital and breathed over everybody”
It’s like a game of How Much Of A Shit Can He Not Give:
✅ Won’t wear a mask with a 78-year old President ✅ Won’t wear a mask with a 95-year old national treasure ✅ Won’t even wear a mask in a hospital pic.twitter.com/TJeOKbxwUl
Even more shocking is the fact that the minister Johnson’s government put up to do the morning media round actually made the following excuse for his non-attendance:
Anne-Marie Trevelyan suggests Boris Johnson probably won’t attend today’s debate on getting rid of sleaze from Parliament because "he has a very important job that only he can do.” #r4today
Er, no – he was doing the equivalent of his erstwhile hide-in-a-fridge routine.
Boris Johnson isn’t attending an emergency debate about his corruption, but he’ll travel back from COP26 to meet Telegraph journos and climate change deniers at the Garrick Club.
After the debacle of the last two years, won’t we all?
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
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:
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.
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!
Petitioners demanding that the Tory government must pause its plan to completely re-structure health and social care are to get a Parliamentary debate about it. But will your MP bother to attend?
The Tories’ Health and Care Bill represents a giant leap backward for health and social care in the United Kingdom, following the many baby steps away from decent provision that Conservative – and New Labour – governments, fearful of a public backlash, have made over the last few decades.
I discuss the major betrayals in the legislation here. The headline points are:
Services will be cut or rationed and the NHS will become an unregulated market for healthcare firms.
The Bill will break the NHS into 42 separate ‘Integrated Care Systems’ (ICS), each with its own – tight – budget that could lead to cuts in care.
These new organisations would be open to the private sector – and the removal of competitive tendering means contracts could be handed straight to asset-stripping profiteers. Already, 200 firms are connected to the new ICS structure, including at least 30 US-based health insurance companies.
Companies could be given access to confidential patient information
More patient care will be given by less-qualified staff who are cheaper.
Non-urgent referrals to hospital may be delayed or refused because of pressure to make savings.
A drive towards cash-saving digital services means face-to-face GP appointments may end.
The long-awaited overhaul of the care system may end up being a demand on already-overworked family carers to take on more unpaid work as unprofitable community services are stripped away altogether.
National agreements on pay, terms and conditions for NHS staff may be swept away with employees ordered to work wherever private-sector employers find it easiest to make a profit – undermining team working, union organisation and continuity of care.
Oh, and you remember the much-anticipated return of responsibility to the Secretary of State? It means a politician will be able to make devastating decisions about the NHS without any democratic accountability.
The Health Secretary will be able to deregulate jobs – offering them to candidates who don’t have the right qualifications but are available for the right price, risking harm to patients and interfering with professional judgement and staff development.
The NHS will be exempt from the Public Contract Regulations 2015, meaning it will be impossible to reject bids for contracts on the grounds of non-compliance with environmental, social, or labour laws guaranteeing Freedom of Association and the Right to Strike, or on the basis of a bidder’s previous history.
The Health Secretary will also impose local service reconfigurations, weakening or abolishing the right and power local authorities currently have to scrutinise significant health changes.
The Bill will not lead to the treatment of even one extra patient, or the recruitment of even one more nurse.
The petition states: “This White Paper… is being rushed through without adequate consultation with NHS frontline staff doing the work, local councils providing social care and the public using the services, when there are major concerns about proposals.”
In a response made after the petition won more than 10,000 signatures, the government stated that it “has no plans to pause the proposals”.
The long, self-justifying response adds: “Money will flow from the Integrated Care Board to providers largely through contracts for services and outcomes, which may be managed by place-based partnerships or provider collaboratives.” This means private organisations may decide which of them receives public money, and what they do with it.
“Service provision by the independent sector has been an important and valuable feature of the system under successive governments.” Considering the fall in the quality of healthcare under the Tories since 2010 (the NHS is now ranked fourth-best health system in the world – down from top place before the Tories slithered into office again), one has to question whether the value has really gone to patients – or to shareholders.
The government’s claims have been roundly condemned. The current situation has been summed up in this Twitter thread by one of the stewards of the petition:
In the meantime, various other similar campaigns were gathering momentum: (3/11)
Health Secretary Sajid Javid: Protect the NHS: Stop the health and care bill – Sign the Petition! https://t.co/UCsXliaMar via @UKChange
The purpose of all these excellent campaigns, is to stop the creeping #PRIVATISATIONOFTHENHS, begun by Virginia Bottomley, Health Secretary in the Major Government, in 1996: (5/11)https://t.co/bYV9MCwSCz
The best way for you to get your MP to attend, listen, and perhaps even participate in the debate is simply to write to them. There is a dedicated website for just that purpose and you can visit it here.
All you have to do is point out that MPs will hold a debate on the Future of the NHS on Wednesday 22 September in Westminster Hall, starting at 2.30pm. The debate will be led by Richard Burgon MP and that, as your representative, you expect your MP to attend in order to learn why the current Health and Care Bill is not acceptable to the people of England or those in the wider UK who will be affected by its changes.
Sajid Javid, Boris Johnson and the Tory government are slowly turning your National Health Service into a system for funding private health companies who are more concerned with making a profit than in improving your health. I understand that already services across England have been curtailed because they are not profitable.
If you want to know where this is leading, take a trip to the United States and get yourself hospitalised (if you can afford the bill. My guess is that you can’t).
Healthcare there is extremely expensive and therefore exclusive. If you can’t afford it there, you won’t be able to afford it in the UK, once Javid, Johnson and their cronies have finished turning the NHS over to private companies.
That is what will happen if you don’t do something about it. Will you?
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
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:
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.
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!
Border Force: if it has to enforce a new law blocking legitimate ways for refugees to come into the UK, won’t it be creating a market for people-traffickers?
Take a look at the following clip, from the July 6 edition of BBC2’s Politics Live.
The antagonists are left-wing social media presenter Ash Sarkar and Tory MP Tom Hunt, and they’re discussing plans by the Johnson Tory government to block ways in which refugees can come to the UK.
This guy’s face is bringing back painful memories of arguing about politics with public school boys in the smoking areas of Oxford nightclubs. https://t.co/ztxlSuqOGz
She puts forward common sense points about the reasons people would want to come to the UK after leaving a home country where they may be in danger – and points out that cutting off legitimate ways of entry will send more folk to the people-traffickers.
He repeats the oft-debunked – untrue – claim that refugees must settle in the first safe country they enter – and blusters. A lot.
As I stated on Twitter: “You can sympathise with every adult woman trying to reason with a little boy having a tantrum, can’t you?”
The concern is that it is Hunt who is in a position to make a new UK law on refugees.
On this evidence, it will be prejudiced – if not downright racist.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
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:
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.
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!
RIP democracy: Boris Johnson cut aid to foreign countries without offering MPs a chance to vote on it. His claim that the law allows such a move is highly debatable.
The message This Writer took from MPs’ failure to force a vote on reversing foreign aid cuts is that it means there will be hundreds of thousands of avoidable deaths in affected countries.
That was said by Tory Andrew Mitchell, who seems to have come a long way since the “BikeGate” controversy.
And the really offensive part was that the decision to cut foreign aid from 0.7 per cent to 0.5 per cent of National Income (do they mean Gross Domestic Product?) was taken without allowing Parliament to vote on it.
It was an offence against democracy, because Boris Johnson’s Tory government believes in dictatorship instead.
And (obviously) it believes in finding ways to ensure that as many people as possible die.
Ministers have said it is possible to vary the amount spent without changing the 2015 law that makes the target binding.
But the decision to make the change unilaterally means there is no deadline for restoring that target – meaning the government could leave the cut in place indefinitely.
Isn’t there a more important question to be answered, about what’s being done with this aid money?
Isn’t it important that it should be used to ensure that the nations receiving the money need less and less of it in the future?
Has that been happening? How can we check?
There are many questions to be answered about foreign aid and This Writer hopes the debate on Tuesday (June 8) provides some of the answers.
The joy of it is that the Tory government has shot itself in the foot, whatever happens.
It has already garnered bad publicity over this in the week before the UK hosts the G7 summit.
It will receive more bad publicity with the debate.
And Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle has said he wants a substantive vote, which means if Boris Johnson refuses to grant it, he’ll have even more bad publicity.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
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:
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.
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!
Opposition parties in the House of Commons are demanding that Commons Speaker Lindsay Hoyle allow a vote on an inquiry into Boris Johnson’s “consistent failure to be honest” in statements to MPs.
They have no chance of actually securing such an inquiry – the huge Tory(/fascist) majority in Parliament will kill it – but the debate will be hugely embarrassing to a prime minister who lies habitually.
And of course, deliberately lying at the Dispatch Box is Contempt of Parliament – for which the highest penalty is expulsion.
It occurs to This Writer that a viral video by Peter Stefanovic may have something to do with this move, having been viewed more than 11.5 million times.
Here it is – let’s give it a few more:
We have almost hit 11.5 million views!
Parliamentary action is now being taken by six opposition parties.
Keep it going. TOGETHER we can make a difference. Let’s make it 12 million today! pic.twitter.com/PlvEkE0HDl
The letter was organised by the Green MP Caroline Lucas and it has been signed by five other parliamentary party leaders: Ian Blackford (Scottish National party), Sir Ed Davey (Liberal Democrats), Liz Saville Roberts (Plaid Cymru), Colum Eastwood (SDLP) and Stephen Farry (Alliance).
One name is significant for being missing from the list:
The Labour leader, Sir Keir Starmer, was invited to sign the letter, but declined. A party source said Labour did not normally sign up to initiatives launched by other parties.
This is typical Starmerism. He won’t sign up to any good Opposition ideas unless he can claim they come from him – although he has been quite happy to support Johnson’s government policies, no matter how daft.
Perhaps it’s time for genuine Opposition parties to resurrect an old US presidential campaign slogan from 1964, and say: We want a choice, not an echo.
As for Johnson, I can only echo the sentiment voiced by Billy Connolly, above. The Big Yin has always been able to spot a wrong ‘un.
Of course, it means most of the Tories who follow Johnson know exactly what he is and don’t care. Otherwise, they would be admitting they need psychiatric treatment and should not be in their current jobs…
(… although let’s be honest, they probably consider being an MP their second or third job, behind representing whichever private firm has them lobbying the government on its behalf!)
To Billy’s pronouncement, let’s add another piece of advice, for those whose sense of humour encompasses this kind of wit:
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
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:
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.
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!
Angela Rayner (here with her boss Keir Starmer): hypocrites – and very possibly anti-Semites without acknowledging it.
Note to Sienna Rodgers at LabourList: the headline on your report is wrong. It should have read Angela Rayner is a big ol’ hypocrite.
In the article, Rayner states that the findings of the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s report on anti-Semitism in the Labour Party are not open to debate:
There’s no debating what the EHRC said.
LabourList also reported another statement she made to the Jewish Labour Movement’s conference – insultingly held on the International Day of Solidarity with Palestinians – that she and Keir Starmer attended rather than support the Palestine solidarity event:
If I have to suspend thousands and thousands of members, we will do that.
The two comments are mutually exclusive. The report clearly states that
We have concluded that the practice of political interference was unlawful… The Labour Party should… implement clear rules and guidance that prohibit and sanction political interference in the complaints process.
Her threat to suspend thousands – a warning that the leadership is planning to purge the party of anybody who dissents against its dictatorship – is itself political interference in the process, as it is an attempt to suppress complaints by members against the actions of the leadership of which she is a member. Therefore she is not only debating the legitimacy of the EHRC’s finding; she is ignoring it altogether.
Remember that this is all about the attack on Jeremy Corbyn by Keir Starmer, party general secretary David Evans, and others at the very top of the Labour leadership including Rayner herself, despite the fact that she once said this:
She is a hypocrite. She has revealed her true colours. She cannot be trusted. She should be ejected from her position of power.
This will be hard because the Labour Party leadership has a well-known track record of rejecting any complaints against its own members and friends, no matter how well-justified they may be.
But we have all seen this behaviour and we are talking about it:
Big from @AngelaRayner as she seems to back suspending ‘thousands and thousands of members’ for wanting to demonstrate support for Jeremy Corbyn having the whip returned.
This whole thing just shows the duplicity and shiftiness of those at the top of the Labour Party.
David Evans explicitly stated the disciplinary process against Corbyn is now over. What we now have is leaders doing the precise opposite of what the EHRC asks for, interfering. https://t.co/mK5JOtVyxZ
Yes, it's 'totally unacceptable' to say precisely what the EHRC report says you can say, and which you have the freedom of speech to say, and which is obviously and provably true, in case it upsets some right-wing bigots.
If this is what @AngelaRayner has said it is dishonest. CLPs are debating whether the whip should be reinstated to Jeremy Corbyn: that is about democratic procedure not antisemitism
Genuine Q: have any CLPs passed motions against EHRC report or that antisemitism isn't a problem? https://t.co/HryXTRFAWm
Could Rayner clarify what, if any, powers she has to suspend "thousands of members" and how her doing that conforms with the EHRC recommendation of an investigation and disciplinary process free of leadership intervention? https://t.co/0ekPF64aj3
Because they ain't listening to us, that's for sure. 😒
— MerryMichaelW 🎗 😷 #T & T #BlackLivesMatter #BDS (@MerryMichaelW) November 29, 2020
With one side of her mouth she spits vitriol at Corbyn for his comments in which he said the EHRC report should be implemented, & with the other she outright defies the EHRC report criticism of political interference in disciplinary cases, saying she'll personally suspend 1,000s! https://t.co/KTOd6IQtIE
“It is not legitimate for the leadership to influence, make recommendations or make decisions on complaints.. The Labour Party needs to restore confidence in the independence of its complaints process”—EHRC
"If I have to suspend thousands & thousands of members…”—Angela Rayner https://t.co/vYzG1G8urK
A disgraceful way of approaching political debate here from Angela Rayner. She is talking about conducting a purge, let's be clear about that: there is no other way to describe this. https://t.co/ff2BJAxw5c
The Labour leadership are now deliberately shitting all over the recommendations of the EHRC report that they've used as an excuse to attack and vilify Jeremy Corbyn (despite the fact he said the EHRC recommendations should be implemented!).
— CrémantCommunarde#ActivistLawyer ⚖️ 🌻 ✋ (@0Calamity) November 29, 2020
There isn't thousands and thousands of antisemites in the party, @AngelaRayner . Corbyn was allowed to comment on the EHRC. He was allowed back to the party. If you fancy to play "I'm the dictator's best mate" go for it. But you showing who you really are and ppl won't forget it https://t.co/HxdFMpammj
And organisations that formerly wanted Rayner’s support and endorsement are now rejecting her. To be honest, I don’t know if the following tweet was connected with what she said on LabourList, but I anticipate that this is the soft footfall that precedes a stampede:
What a massive let-down and huge sell-out @AngelaRayner turned out to be. Please remove your support from the LGBTQ+ community Angela. The oppressed stand with the oppressed, we don't stand with apartheid committing states, and we don't stand with traitors who ignore that.
Oh, and by the way, Labour is not completely irredeemable. Members across the UK did come out in support of Palestine, unlike their treacherous leader and deputy leader. Here’s a tweet from Wales:
Well done to all across Wales who have taken the time to express solidarity with the Palestinian people, who continue to live in dire, oppressive circumstances under a brutal, right-wing Israeli government. 👇✊#palestineday#EndApartheid#StopAnnexationhttps://t.co/F85HpIQeXE
Let’s remember that Rayner – and her vile boss Starmer – are saying that they are taking all this action against the good members of their own party because of hurt, harm and injury done to Jewish people in the UK.
What about the harm done to Jewish people who agree with the viewpoint Rayner, Starmer and the others are attacking?
Genuine question @AngelaRayner@Keir_Starmer will you meet urgently with representatives of the many Jews who support Corbyn and think you are getting this disastrously wrong? If not, why not?
By the way THESE Jews feel you are injuring THEM. Don’t these Jews count Keir, Angela? https://t.co/HeU48hgIbo
That’s right. These Jews feel that Rayner, Starmer and the others are attacking them. And Rayner, Starmer et al treat them as though they don’t even exist.
Isn’t that attitude a little… you know… anti-Semitic?
Finally, Labour’s deplorable leaders need to acknowledge that this confrontation between them and party members arose because the EHRC found that the leadership had been interfering in investigations of anti-Semitism complaints in order to make it seem that there were more anti-Semites in the party than was the case.
A court found only last week that the process of investigating accusations against This Writer – me, Mike Sivier – was perverted in order to produce a false finding against me.
Labour failed to follow its own investigation procedure. It did not adequately inform me of the nature of the allegations against me (in fact, the party changed those claims as it went on, in order to ‘fix’ the result), and a party officer leaked false claims about me – including a lie that I was a Holocaust denier – to The Sunday Times (which subsequently had to publish a lengthy correction).
And I’m not the only one who has suffered this treatment. The EHRC report found that, of the investigations it examined, no fewer than 60 per cent suffered from bias calculated to discriminate against the respondent – against the person accused of anti-Semitism.
Where are the apologies for lying and smearing us? I still receive abusive messages accusing me of anti-Semitism, even now. It may be that I will continue receiving them for the rest of my life. The Labour Party is to blame for that. Where is the contrition? Where is the apology for that?
By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. This includes scrolling or continued navigation. more information
The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.
