Rishi no-mates: his Conservative Party will have few options if it secures too few seats in a general election to form a government – other parties suffer at voters’ hands if they help the Tories.
We’ve all had our fun, mocking Keir Starmer’s inability to deny that he’d go into coalition with the Liberal Democrats if it gave him a sniff at power. Even Rishi Sunak did it, in Prime Minister’s Questions this week (Wednesday, May 10).
But it seems he has no reason to feel superior at all, because it seems he can’t rule out forming an alliance with some of the more… controversial?… parties:
Rishi Sunak's press secretary has refused to rule out the Tories forming a coalition with one of the smaller parties after the next general election https://t.co/TERie1QSRX
— ITV News Politics (@ITVNewsPolitics) May 10, 2023
The article states:
Number 10 has refused to rule out the possibility of the Conservatives forming a coalition government with a smaller party, including the controversial Reclaim Party, run by right-wing commentator Laurence Fox.
Rishi Sunak’s press secretary repeatedly said she would “not speculate” about what might happen after the next general election when asked at a briefing following PMQs.
Ironically, the prime minister criticised Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer for doing the same on Wednesday in response to questions about whether he’d form a coalition with the Liberal Democrats.
“While he is busy plotting coalitions, we are getting on and delivering for the British people,” the PM said.
But minutes later his press secretary, asked whether the Tories would consider a confidence-and-supply arrangement or coalition with a smaller party, said: “I don’t think anyone at this stage is going to speculate on the results of the next election.
“The prime minister is fully committed to and focused on delivering his five priorities and that’s what we’re going to do to get a Conservative majority.”
Asked if there could be a coalition with Reclaim, she said “it’s not one for me” and in response to a similar question about the Reform Party, previously the Brexit Party, she said: “Again, I am telling you that the prime minister is focused on delivering for the people, which will deliver a Conservative majority.”
Reclaim has just one MP. It announced that Andrew Bridgen had joined after being expelled by the Tories for expressing controversial views on coronavirus vaccines.
Reform doesn’t have any MPs at all.
The Tories would be scraping the barrel if they even considered either of these parties to have anything to offer in coalition.
But then, it’s well accepted that nobody else would even consider joining forces with Rishi Sunak’s party, after the experiences of the Lib Dems and the DUP
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:
Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/
6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical
7) Feel free to comment!
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!
Say what you want: Boris Johnson’s Tories have stamped on a bid to make MPs conform to principles of anti-racism, inclusion, diversity and respect. What does that tell us about them?
The Conservative government has rejected a proposal to change MPs’ code of conduct in line with a principle of “respect”.
Perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised; they seem to respect few things other than money and power.
They have rejected calls by the Commons Standards Committee that would mean MPs “should demonstrate anti-discriminatory attitudes and behaviours through the promotion of anti-racism, inclusion and diversity”.
It doesn’t actually mean they want to promote racism, exclusion and blind obedience – but it does appear to mean they won’t oppose it if MPs exhibit those traits during debates.
I wonder how long that will last, if non-Tories exploit the openings this presents?
A separate committee on Standards in Public Life has already updated the Seven Principles of Public Life – also known as the Nolan principles – to include the demand that all public officials “treat others with respect”, to counter “increasing intimidation and abuse”.
But 10 Downing Street chief of staff Steve Barclay and chief Tory whip Mark Spencer rejected the idea of incorporating this into the wider MPs code.
They said in a joint statement: “We would not want to stifle legitimate debate on politically contentious issues which are important to our democracy… This could have a chilling effect on free speech on contentious and polarised political issues.”
Expect the Tories to play on this as much as they can, just to rub it in everybody else’s faces.
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!
Starmer’s hypocrisy: this image was made when Starmer was accusing individual Jews of anti-Semitism. Now he’s attacking organisations that will have Jews in their memberships – and Neil Coyne has called for one Jewish group to be proscribed as well, in an echo of Nazi demands during the Weimar period in Germany.
Boris Johnson’s Tories may be unfit to govern but Keir Starmer’s version of Labour is in no condition to take over as it continues its self-harming course to the political scrapheap.
Starmer’s latest big idea for electoral success is to make Labour even more like the Conservative Party by ending its pretence of being a “broad church”; he wants to ban membership from anyone who claims to be a socialist.
As stated in a previous article, he’s doing this by claiming that socialists – who want self-determination for people of all ethnicities, particularly those that currently suffer persecution – are anti-Semites (because this means they want self-determination for Palestinians who are persecuted by the Israeli government that Starmer smarms up to).
First on the list to get the chop are around 1,000 party members who also belong to Resist, Labour Against the Witchhunt, Labour in Exile and Socialist Action.
Their crimes appear to be claiming that many anti-Semitism allegations, for which Labour members have been suspended or expelled, were blown out of proportion and politically-motivated; welcoming such expelled or suspended members into their own ranks; and demanding the re-admission of Jeremy Corbyn into the Parliamentary Labour Party.
All of these stances may be demonstrably connected to support for Palestinians against Israeli persecution.
Here’s the part that marks Starmer out as an imbecile, though: in cutting members out of the party, he’s cutting off the membership fees that he needs, in order to maintain the machinery he is using to attack them.
As it is – at the same NEC meeting where he will demand the removal of the above-named groups, he will have to propose plans to make around a quarter of Labour Party staff jobless:
“@UKLabour’s ruling NEC is set to discuss plans for large-scale redundancies among staff, with up to 90 jobs at risk, as @Keir_Starmer seeks to repair the party’s shattered finances.”
Hilariously, the Guardian report tells us that the plan has been devised in a report entitled Organise to Win!
The report states:
Labour’s finances have been hit hard by fighting three general elections in the past six years, as well as a string of costly legal cases, and hopes of a membership bounce after Starmer took over failed to materialise.
The party paid out a six-figure sum a year ago to settle a case brought by seven former employees and a veteran BBC journalist, admitting it defamed them in the aftermath of a Panorama investigation into its handling of antisemitism.
It doesn’t mention the possibility that Labour had no need to settle, as its legal advisors had told Starmer that the party was likely to win if the case came to court. His decision to capitulate is inexplicable.
And how many other disasters have gone unreported? Labour lost thousands of pounds defending itself in court against This Writer’s case, that the party had broken its own disciplinary rules in order to expel me.
The finding was that the party had not broken its rules, which are extremely vague in respect of what may actually be done – but Labour did appear to have broken the regulations it had in place at the time, in order to justify throwing me out. The court ordered that Labour should not be repaid the thousands of pounds it had spent on the case.
How many other such cases have taken place? What other disputes have eroded the party’s funds?
Remember: Labour became the richest UK political party under Jeremy Corbyn because he inspired hundreds of thousands of people to join up – people Keir Starmer has been desperately trying to throw off since he became leader.
Starmer’s plan, it seems, was to go back to relying on donations from big businesses – the same model as that used by Tony Blair during the ‘New Labour’ period of the mid-1990s to 2015.
But his failure to inspire popular support – because he hasn’t said what he stands for – means businesses aren’t supporting him.
There is only one conclusion to draw:
Here’s an obvious, incontrovertible sentence you won’t read in the press tomorrow as Labour makes more layoffs:
The party is in a financial death spiral because of Keir Starmer. I have no idea whose advising him – it’s as if he’s trying to end the Labour Party.
If he isn’t trying to end his own party, then it is ironic that he might be saved from his own stupidity by NEC members who oppose the proscription plan. The UK’s biggest union, and Labour’s biggest donor – Unite – is against it:
Oh, brilliant plan. Labour is haemorrhaging member subscriptions, and is so broke it is having to lay off staff, so @Keir_Starmer's idea of repairing its finances is to enrage the party's largest donor by purging and victimising socialists. https://t.co/p6FzA7TW2Npic.twitter.com/qEsThNwAc2
— leftworks #WeAreCorbyn #IStandWithJeremyCorbyn (@leftworks1) July 19, 2021
The quoted section in the above tweet is from the Guardian article, again, and states:
Labour’s biggest donor, the Unite trade union, attacked the plans on Monday, saying: “While working-class communities are continuing to bear the brunt of the sickness and employment worries made much worse by Conservative mishandling of the pandemic, Labour is abandoning the field of battle against this government to turn its fire on its members instead.”
The union added that such “acts of political machismo” create a “sense of despair among voters who see a party at perpetual war with itself”.
And NEC members from the left-wing Grassroots Voice organisation also oppose the proscriptions:
— Nadia Jama – #GrassrootsVoice (@MizJama) July 19, 2021
The group states:
We believe that asking us to consider this matter … is a continuation of the destructive, factional behaviours from the leadership of the party which have marked the last year.
This isn’t just about the organisations we are being asked to consider… it is about … setting a precedent, proscribing these organisations as a forerunner to proscription of more and more groupings on the left of the party, to ultimately expel large sections of the Labour left and erase the Bennite and other socialist traditions within the party.
Then again,
Starmer has a supportive majority on the NEC, so the plans are expected to be agreed.
If so, then Starmer has stuffed the NEC with drones who are just as stupid as he is and the Labour Party no longer deserves to survive.
So those like Mrs Gee, below, who believe the Left is on a hiding to nothing if it carries on with Labour, may be entirely justified in that view – and, while it may take decades to get a new party up to the popularity Labour achieved under great left-wing leaders like Clement Attlee and Harold Wilson, it may be better to work towards that than to support a lost cause:
If I'm honest I don't want the whip restoring to Jeremy Corbyn
I'd rather other Labour MPs resigned the whip in protest & started a new party as part of a progressive alliance to seriously take on the Tories across the UK because clearly centrist Labour has no plans to do that
Whatever happens, it seems the Labour Party, as run by Keir Starmer, is over.
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!
Jenny McGee: apparently Boris Johnson survived Covid-19 because she and another NHS nurse sat vigil for him at night. What a shame he offered her disrespect in return.
No, Boris Johnson, even the nurse who cared for you when you had Covid-19 says clapping for the NHS isn’t enough.
Jenny McGee, we’re told, kept vigil by Johnson’s bedside when he was suffering with the virus.
She stayed at her post, carrying out soul-destroying work through the height of the pandemic, while her former patient fudged his way through a series of wrong decisions, crony contracts and “clap for NHS” publicity stunts.
And now it seems she’s had enough.
She has handed in her resignation, such is her disillusionment with the “lack of respect” shown by the government for the NHS and healthcare workers.
“We’re not getting the respect and now pay that we deserve. I’m just sick of it. So I’ve handed in my resignation,” said McGee, referring to the government’s proposed 1% pay rise for NHS staff, which unions have described as a “kick in the teeth”.
She was also critical of the government’s handling of the Covid crisis, adding: “Lots of nurses felt that the government hadn’t led very effectively – the indecisiveness, so many mixed messages. It was just very upsetting.”
Personally, I would have quit in an extremely public way, if I were her, when Johnson tried to co-opt her into a “clap for the NHS” photo opportunity with him during what she thought would be a discreet thank you visit to Downing Street.
Instead, she waited to make her announcement until she was filmed for a Channel 4 documentary, The Year Britain Stopped (apparently Northern Ireland didn’t).
One could describe it as an example of the discretion for which NHS nurses are rightly respected – if not by Tories like Johnson.
What a shame that, after Ms McGee restored his health with patience and care, he could not offer the NHS the same courtesy.
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!
Theresa May: She looks like a horse, bridling at the EU’s rejection of her plan.
Faced with an absolute refusal of her useless ‘Chequers’ plan from the EU, Theresa May has doubled down on her own position – with a public statement that piles embarrassment upon humiliation.
She said this:
"I have treated the #EU with nothing but respect, the #UK 🇬🇧expects the same," said @theresa_may Friday,
I don’t often swear on This Site but I am sure you will understand me when I say: What a bag of sh*t.
What was she trying to achieve with this broadcast? One look at the two Union Flags behind her and you’re thinking of nationalistic pride. Defiance, perhaps? “Britain stands alone”? The “Dunkirk spirit”?
But this is not defiance. This is petulance.
And it is stupidity:
Threatening no-deal is like the cowboy in Blazing Saddles who says “give me what I want or I’ll shoot myself” #SalzburgSummit#TheresaMay
“Theresa May demands respect from EU in negotiations” Hmm… Why should EU respect Mrs May? She has insulted them; she has come to the table unprepared; she has asked for the impossible. And now she *demands respect*?
She did insult them; she said she would be a “bloody difficult woman” – right, Angela Rayner?
It is clear from the start when our PM told the EU that she was going to be a ‘bloody difficult woman’ that things were not going to go well. That performance at Downing Street proves to me why negotiations have failed & she has put our whole economy at risk. She should resign.
Her demand that the EU propose a solution to Brexit’s insoluble problems is laughable.
So #theresaMay tries the tired old trick of blaming Brussels. But it’s the UK that’s walking out, took 23 months to come up with a flawed proposal, wants the EU to change its rules to lessen the problems for us, and now the PM complains that the EU isn’t proposing solutions!
The EU did not vote to leave the UK. It is not the EU’s job to put forward the UK’s plan for leaving. It is their job to negotiate what the U.K. put forward.
Theresa May basically just said that more then 2 years after the Brexit referendum & despite Liam Fox, secretary of state for international trade saying an EU trade deal would be “one of the easiest in human history” she and her Government have proved incapable of agreeing one
My snap judgement on May's deranged statement threatening the EU with No Deal. The Tories could disintegrate in office – weakening both the economic and security interests of the United Kingdom… pic.twitter.com/WZfRrsnBr9
PM #Brexit plan rejected by EU leaders, rejected by many on both wings of her party,rejected by business,rejected by the vast majority of voters too,but she is to carry on down the same path. This is a PM who cannot get any deal,it's time for her to resign it's gone on too long.
Theresa May is the author of her own Brexit humiliation:- – Triggers Article 50 too early – Calls an unnecessary election which she lost her majority – Bribes DUP with £1billion – Wastes 2 years to produce an unworkable plan – Stubbornly refuses to budge from her Chequers plan
Cameron took a reckless gamble with the future of the UK. He lost – then cut & ran. We now have an incompetent PM – who is in office by *default* The Govt is split – and the Country teeters on the brink. Time for a General Election.
2/ the only remotely workable way to do Brexit is to stay in the single market and customs union. If PM not prepared to do that, Brexit shouldn’t happen. ‘No deal’ or ‘no detail‘ Brexit simply not acceptable – especially for Scotland, where we did not vote for this.
While the right-wing media tell you Theresa May is strong and stable after all, the new Thatcher, & whatever arse kissing effort Dan Whatsisname came up with, I’ll point out the Pound crashed 1.3% versus the US Dollar to $1.31 and 1% against the Euro to €1.11 – a 12 month low.
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!
So here's the problem. The Labour membership has been portrayed as a threatening disorderly thuggish rabble for three years. In this case a former Labour MP is using mental health stigma against his former members, which we can all agree is really classy. https://t.co/7cDumjnC1tpic.twitter.com/KCSmSBJkO5
If it isn’t Joan Ryan calling her own constituency party members “Trots, Stalinists, Communists and assorted hard left”, it’s Chuka Umunna calling Labour members and supporters “dogs” (whether he meant his word descriptively or metaphorically is immaterial as it is just as insulting either way) and saying the party is “institutionally racist”, or the “former MP” quoted in this Independent article (and above) suggesting that party members are suffering from mental ill-health.
Party members are furious that they are being treated in such a dismissive way by a small group of MPs who have arrived in Parliament in the belief that they give the orders and the rank-and-file do as they are told – an attitude that is too close to the “plebs” mentality – of a certain brand of Tory – for comfort.
These are the same MPs who have been carrying out almost ceaseless attacks on party leader Jeremy Corbyn since he was elected into the role in 2015 (with a short break after Labour’s huge gains in the 2017 general election), so it should come as no surprise that he is standing by his supporters.
He reminded a meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party: “I know what it feels like to be the target of a no confidence vote” [it happened in 2016 – and many of those who heard his speech supported it] but it would be wrong for me to intervene in the democratic rights of any part of the Labour party.”
And he is right. The leader has no power to prevent a “no confidence” vote called by members of individual constituency Labour parties.
And there’s another one happening on Wednesday – against Rosie Duffield, who probably owes her victory in Canterbury, against the Tory who had held that city for the previous 30 years, to the Corbyn surge of 2017.
In return, it seems she has undermined her leader, attending a Parliament Square demonstration that accused her own party of “systemic” anti-Semitism, warning that Labour MPs could “go on strike” if Labour did not adopt the flawed IHRA definition of anti-Semitism with all its examples (as eventually happened last week, despite Labour’s code of conduct being far more fit-for-purpose), and supporting the Jewish Labour Movement that has framed at least one high-profile Labour member with anti-Semitism accusations.
Mr Corbyn told the PLP he could not intervene if constituency members wanted to air their differences. He said: “We will always have some differences of opinion and we must protect the right of criticism and debate.”
But he added: “Our first and overwhelming priority is to deliver for the people we represent and remove this Conservative government from office. We must focus on that priority and turn our fire outwards.”
He also made it clear that he wanted all local meetings to be held in an atmosphere of “respect” – perhaps a reference to Joan Ryan’s comment about “Trots, Stalinists, Communists and assorted hard left”.
One wonders whether the MPs who have been so disruptive, so far, will honour that appeal after Wednesday’s motion of censure.
Their record up to now suggests that they will not.
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!
Esther McVey: She was Theresa May’s second choice for the role of Work and Pensions Secretary – and now the Tories have launched a bogus campaign to distract us from her appalling record [Image: Facundo Arrizabalaga/EPA].
What do Tories do when their (second) choice as Secretary of State for Work and Pensions is shown up as a liar and a law-breaker who positively revels in torturing the unemployed, the sick and the disabled?
They dig out an old recording of a Labour frontbencher talking about her, clip it so the words are taken out of context, and use it to accuse their opponents of abuse.
This is low, even for them.
And as inept as ever.
The person they chose to launch their ‘Respect’ offensive (and I use the word with several meanings) was Brandon Lewis, the new Tory Chairman and private landlord who is on record as having shown his own kind of respect for his tenants by voting down a Labour Bill to ensure that all rented properties are fit for human habitation. That shows which side his bread is buttered.
New Tory chairman Brandon Lewis has called on the Labour party to crackdown on abuse in politics by pledging to suspend candidate who breach a new code of conduct.
Mr Lewis… challenged Jeremy Corbyn to tackle the ‘rot’ of violent language being used by senior political figures.
He announced a new ‘respect pledge’ which all Tory candidates will have to sign up to, binding them to “behave responsibly” throughout the election process, and urged Mr Corbyn to follow suit.
Mr Lewis also criticised John McDonnell for previous remarks in which he referred to Tory MP Esther McVey being lynched and called her a “stain on humanity.”
Mr Lewis said: “When we have got people at top of the party, of the Labour party, the Shadow Chancellor, using the kind of actions and language and behaviour they are and endorsing threats against other MPs, physical threats… He has not apologised for that he has simply condoned that.
When it was put to him that Mr McDonnell maintains that he was merely repeating comments made by others, he replied: “If you look at the recording that is what he actually said.”
It’s not good form to start your campaign for respect with a fat lie, but there you are. When you have friends in the media, you hope to get away with it, one supposes.
That seems to be the message from the BBC’s Sunday Politics programme, which ran a segment on the McDonnell claims, including the edited recording of Mr McDonnell’s comments about Ms McVey, from 2014:
— BBC Daily Politics and Sunday Politics (@daily_politics) January 14, 2018
Presenter Sarah Smith, discussing the issue with Barry Gardiner, admitted that Mr McDonnell had been quoting other people, but went as far as to say he did so “approvingly”. Mr Gardiner dragged the discussion back to the real political issue – Esther McVey’s suitability for her DWP job.
And after the Labour Party complained about the inaccuracy of the segment, Ms Smith had to eat humble pie:
"He was quoting what somebody else said" – @BarryGardiner on comments repeated by John McDonnell about Esther McVey #bbcsp
— BBC Daily Politics and Sunday Politics (@daily_politics) January 14, 2018
Still, The Spectator seemed content to hop on the bandwagon, publishing its own perverse version of the story:
Labour HQ now complains to any broadcaster who says on air that John McDonnell spoke about "lynching" Esther McVey. His defence is that he was quoting someone else who (he claims) wanted to lynch her. Approvingly, or not? Here's the audio. https://t.co/4k5ktpmeaY
Why wouldn’t Labour complain about broadcasters referring to this three-year-old story out of context? It’s an unwarranted attempt to blacken a man’s name – as Ms Smith had to admit in her “clarification”.
The Tories are pressing on with their campaign:
Will @jeremycorbyn condemn the abuse which comes from the top to the bottom of his party and agree to instigate a respect pledge which includes suspending abusive members? #Peston
But they’re only preaching to the converted; the only support they’ve received is from Tories.
The rest of us take a different view:
Incredible that a government responsible for not only the callous disregard of the human rights of disabled people, but of denying they are, too ae now claiming the opposition is 'abusive'. Gaslighting at its very worst
The idea that the left are “abusive” is absolutely hilarious to me. All I see are people that care about everyone and not just themselves. People who believe EVERYONE should be treated fairly. If these are the kind of people that “abuse”, then fucking hell.
Apologies for the profanity in the tweet quoted above, but I wonder how many readers saw that and thought it was meant seriously, rather than ironically?
Susan, below, nails the Tory credibility problem:
Every single day, at least on Twitter, I see 100 times as much abuse from the right-wing as from the left. And right-wing abuse is vitriolic – racist, misogynistic, homophobic etc etc https://t.co/C1dAZlaezU
If you need reminding of his behaviour (it has been a few days since Mr Young resigned from the Office for Students), here’s Evolve Politics with a brief refresher:
Er, you guys literally employed a professional Twitter troll to advise you on universities.
A guy who tweeted about masturbating over starving kids and who hangs out with child-rape advocates and Nazis.
So, yes – let’s see the Tories sign up Mr Young to their “Respect” pledge. Oh – but he’s not likely to be a Conservative Party electoral candidate, is he? So it won’t count for him. Or perhaps the Tories think their pledge should only apply to Labour candidates and members?
Yes, that seems more likely.
But Labour candidates and members are encouraged to be respectful, and avoid abuse, at every opportunity. Look:
I noticed a #SackEstherMcVey Twitter Storm at 7 tonight on my timeline. A hugely worthy cause. But, please, think about what you tweet, do not direct abuse at her, it achieves nothing. Challenge her utterly ghastly appointment, & her record, but remember, we are better than them.
#SackEstherMcVey what qualifies you to have this post and risk the lives of vulnerable folk, don't you think you should do the right thing and resign….
Getting in early to say that her appointment is a calculated insult to all UK citizens and refugees barely clinging to survival. She's the one to stand on every head and shove it under and she'll love doing it. #SackEstherMcVey
— (((A. L. Kennedy))) Now wash your hands. (@Writerer) January 15, 2018
And so on. Of course, the whole story is a matter of deflection – from Esther McVey’s unsuitability to be Secretary of State for Work and Pensions.
Labour’s Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary, Debbie Abrahams, has written to Ms McVey, in accordance with Parliamentary protocol, with an offer to “work constructively”.
But she has made her opposition to Ms McVey’s appointment to the role an underlying theme, quoting many – if not all – the concerns that have been raised about her.
Read my full letter to Esther McVey following her appointment as Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. As I say here, your policies are hurting the people they should help most and continuing down the current road will only cause more misery. pic.twitter.com/X3zIWOO8ZV
Here are the relevant parts of what Ms Abrahams had to say:
“As we know from numerous studies more and more people, in work and out of work, are living in poverty. More worrying still is that these numbers are expected to rise over the next few years. But instead of getting the support that they need, they are being driven to destitution as a result of the decimation of the social security safety net by your Government. On top of this the culture you and your predecessors have developed in your department has meant that instead of feeling supported and enabled, people feel demonised and even dehumanised. Your policies are hurting the people they should helpl most.
“The manner in which you quietly pushed back the retirement age for women born in the 1950s has detrimentally impacted on a generation who have worked hard, paid into the system, often for decades, only to be badly let down when they most needed it. So much for “tackling burning injustices”. Your predecessors’ unwillingness to even consider Labour’s cost-neutral or low cost proposals that would make an immediate difference to millions of older women’s lives is unfathomable.
“Sick and disabled people have faced savage cuts in support which at the very least have driven more and more into poverty and isolation, and, at worst, has led to many deaths of disabled people. The Equality and Human Rights Commission has estimated the average cumulative cuts for a disabled adult at £2,500 a year, and the UN Committee on the Convention of the Rights of Disabled People has said this Government’s treatment of disabled people amounts to a “human catastrophe”. Your Government’s failure to make any reduction of the Disability Employment Gap adds insult to injury.
“The incompetent roll-out of Universal Credit (UC) is having a devastating effect on these claimants, causing rent arrears, debt and even homelessness. The poverty that they and their children are facing in 2018, in the sixth richest country in the world, shames us all. I recognise the measures introduced at the Budget to address some of the many issues associated with Universal Credit, but as I said to your predecessor, these are not nearly enough. I set out Labour’s key asks on UC and I look forward to your response on these.
“Of course, as a previous DWP minister, you have personally seen through many of these ill-advised reforms. In fact, we have had exchanges at the Work and Pensions Select Committee on these matters on many occasions. I’d be grateful to know, given the impacts of these reforms, if you now have a different position?
You saw through a cut in support to more than 300,000 disabled people when Disability Living Allowance was replaced by Personal Independence Payments.
You refused to undertake a second full independent inquiry into the effect of the Government’s punitive sanctions policy.
You suggested that the bedroom tax was never about saving money.
You originally estimated the number of children to be lifted out of poverty be 350,000 but downgraded this in 2013 to 150,000. Now your Government has refused to publish figures on the impact of UC on poverty, although the Child Poverty Action Group has estimated that by 2022 the number of children living in poverty will increase by one million, directly as a result of cuts to UC.
You suggested rising foodbank use was not the fault of Conservative social security reforms although foodbanks across the UK have consistently maintained that the demand for emergency food is as a direct result of social security cuts, sanctions or delays; in UC areas demand is up by an average of 30 per cent.
“Do you still stand by what you said? Do you finally acknowledge the real hurt these so-called reforms have inflicted? Do you recognise that you need to go beyond the measures introduced in the Budget to fix UC and when will you be making a statement to the House on this? Will you guarantee, as your predecessor David Gauke did, that there will be no further cuts to the social security budget?
“Will you look again at the ‘rape clause’? It is fundamentally wrong to include a ‘rape clause’ in our social security system. This, and the wider impact of the two-child policy on the poorest busts the myth of your Government’s support for families.
“I share my colleague Jon Trickett’s concerns, outlined in his letter to the Prime Minister, about your record as a director of J G McVey & Co regarding Health and Safety breaches. Given that Health and Safety at work are DWP responsibilities, how is your role compatible with your record as a director of this company?
“The DWP has a huge impact on millions of lives. It needs compassionate leadership. At a time when your local Mid Cheshire foodbank has seen a 30 per cent increase on food parcels in the previous year you must now fix the botched roll-out of Universal Credit. You much rethink the inhumane cuts that disabled people are facing and provide the dignity and security in retirement that our older people deserve.
“We need a fairer social security system which works for the many, not the few, which provides hope and restores trust between citizens and Government. I am willing to work constructively with you in the best interests of the country. However continuing down the current road will only cause more misery.”
These are the issues – and Brandon Lewis wants his “Respect” campaign to distract you from them.
How would you describe that?
I would call it: Disrespectful.
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!
Blogger kittysjones put out a very interesting article yesterday (Tuesday) entitled Greens: the myth of the “new left” debunked in which the position claimed by the Green Party – that of being the ‘true party of the Left’ – is disputed. The article states:
“The Green Party do not have an underpinning ideology that can be described as left-wing at all. Some of the links with far-right and fascist ideology are very worrying.The fact that the Greens have themselves chosen to regard the Labour Party as their enemy means that they don’t see a potential ally, yet they manage very well in coalition councils, working amicably side-by-side and cooperatively with Tory and Liberal Democrats.
“Don’t let them fail the people of Britain by voting Green next year and allowing the Tories to remain in government another five years. People are suffering and dying as a consequence of Tory austerity; we need to ensure that ends. Vote Labour. That is the genuinely socialist thing to do.”
What is even more interesting than the article (which provides evidence to support its claims) is the reaction to it by some supporters of the party it criticises.
Here’s one: “You really must be running scared to write what you know to be utter rubbish. Thank you for invoking Godwin’s law because it just makes Liebour look all the more desperate and ridiculous.” The author of this comment was unwilling to put their own name to it, being described merely as ‘A Green Nazi’ – interestingly, because Godwin’s Law is, of course, the application of an inappropriate comparison with the Nazis.
The article does indeed compare Green ideology with that of the Nazis, but it does so on the basis of clearly-referenced evidence; therefore it would be wrong to suggest that the comparison is inappropriate. On the other hand, the commenter’s inability or unwillingness to provide any evidential argument against the assertions, relying on disparagement (“utter rubbish”) and insults (“Liebour”) suggest that in fact they are “running scared”, “desperate” and “ridiculous”.
The author’s response was one to which Yr Obdt Srvt has had to resort many times: “If it’s ‘utter rubbish’ then why don’t you explain how, in what way you disagree, rather than being a fascist and proving my point, by simply stooping to insulting the author?” This reply generally provokes one of only two possible responses: Silence, or invective.
Another comment (this one by ‘Nuggy’ – again, not likely to be their real name) attempted to twist the article into a gross generalisation: “Equating all greens with Malthus is like equating all socialists with Pol Pot or Kim Il Sung.”
It was easily put down by a reference to accuracy: “I equated the cited green policies with the ideas of Malthus.” [italics mine]
There was an (unintentially?) hilarious suggestion that the article was libellous; it isn’t, as anyone with knowledge of the laws of defamation will confirm.
And then there were the insults, first mentioned in a reply to Tim Barnden (at last, someone with a real name!) who asked: “Why are you moderating out most replies Ms Jones? Are you in fact not up for a debate?”
This was a continuing theme on the comment column, and the replies indicate the kind of pressure that was being brought to bear by people claiming to represent the Green Party: “I’m up for debate, just not up for allowing personal abuse and bullying on my site… I have had hundreds of comments from largely abusive green supporters… I am getting some pretty terrible personal abuse from Green supporters. But not much criticism of the content and details in the article, unfortunately.”
The Green Party isn’t the only political organisation whose supporters behave in this way.
Vox Political has received exactly the same responses (in different contexts, obviously) from supporters of the Conservative Party (although admittedly this has tailed off considerably since VP was launched in 2011), Scottish nationalism (including the SNP), and most particularly UKIP.
Many, many examples are available if anyone wants to question the truth of this claim.
It’s simply not good enough.
Perhaps those of you who consider this behaviour to be acceptable (it isn’t) may be persuaded against it if sites like VP and kittysjones parcelled up all your abuse and sent it to the head offices of these political parties as examples of how their supporters represent them?
You see, there are rules to this kind of debate and it seems too many people are breaking them. That’s just damned disrespectful and there’s no reason anyone should put up with it.
So, if you are one of those who types out streams of profanity and hits the ‘send’ button before engaging your brain, it’s time to change your ways.
This site values informed debate. We appreciate it; sometimes it can even be persuasive (in VP‘s case this has occurred several times).
But from now on, anything else will receive an appropriate response.
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:
Keith Lindsay-Cameron writes the popular ‘A Letter A Day To Number 10’ and is a friend of Vox Political. His latest missive to David Cameron takes a similar attitude to that adopted by VP yesterday, regarding the respect we should accord to a prime minister – and a government – like David Cameron’s:
Dear Mr Cameron,
No party has ever brought politics into such disrepute as yours, the disrespect you heap on the nation on a daily basis is outrageous!
Such statements as – “people who are poorer should be prepared to take the biggest risks” as they have “the least to lose” – David Freud.
Iain Duncan Smith – “But essentially Universal Credit as a benefit will be the benefit by 2016 and the remains of the vast, vast majority of the stock will be in place pretty much by the end of 2017.”
Iain Duncan Smith, mocking reporters over his avoiding the bedroom tax debate – “I can’t hear you, I can’t hear you!”
David Scott, a Tory councillor from Tunbridge Wells – “The other area I’m really concerned about is obviously the disabled. I have a number of mentally damaged individuals, who to be quite frank aren’t worth the minimum wage.”
David Freud – “Now, there is a small… there is a group, and I know exactly who you mean, where actually as you say they’re not worth the full wage and actually I’m going to go and think about that particular issue, whether there is something we can do nationally, and without distorting the whole thing, which actually if someone wants to work for £2 an hour.”
Alan Mellins, a Conservative councillor from Maidenhead, on Travellers – “Execute them.”
Then there are the routine lies and falsified figures, election promise lies, welfare lies, economic lies, NHS lies, really, you name it and it’s doubtless been lied about.
Last week in Parliament Square should be held up and remembered as a beacon of what your party is all about, the oppression of the people.
Respect is earned, Mr Cameron, and by heaven the people of this country are due some respect, but you are not. You have earned all the disrespect that can be heaped upon you as a silly, ignorant, rich boy playing at politics, serving vested interests, robbing the nation and worthy of our greatest disrespect!
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:
The Coalition also awarded a contract treating NHS patients with brain tumours to the private healthcare company Hospital Corporation of America, a firm that has been accused by the Competition Commission of overcharging for its services by up to £193 million between 2009 and 2011 – but that has also donated at leave £17,000 to the Conservative Party since it came into office.
According to the National Health Action Party, £10 billion worth of NHS contracts have been awarded to private firms since the Health and Social Care Act was passed in 2012. How many of these have donated money to the Conservative Party, and in what quantities?
Meanwhile, a record five million working people are now in low-paid jobs, according to the Resolution Foundation. That’s around one-sixth of the total workforce. This is a direct result of government policies that threaten people on benefits with the loss of their financial support if they do not take any job available to them – at whatever rate of pay is being offered. The insecurity this creates means firms are free to offer the bare minimum, and keep workers on that rate for years at a time, and pocket the profits for themselves – after donating money to the Conservative Party for making it all possible.
There has been no benefit to the national economy from any of these actions; the deficit that Cameron said he would eliminate is currently at £100.7 billion per year and the national debt is almost twice as high as when he first darkened the doors of Number 10. This is because any improvement in the national finances would interfere with his real plan, which is to dismantle all public services (except possibly national security and the judiciary – albeit a court system available only to the rich) and hand the provision of those services to the private sector in return for fat backhanders from the companies involved.
The evidence is beyond question. David Cameron said he would govern in the national interest but has used his time as prime minister to further enrich his already-wealthy business donors, and consequently his own political party, through the impoverishment of working people and those who rely on the State for support.
What sort of respect is due to a man like that?
By custom, here in the UK, the prime minister is given a degree of respect due to his or her position as the head of the government – but respect must be earned and we judge our politicians on their actions.
Cameron has earned nothing from the British people other than our disgust. He is a liar, at the head of a government whose mendaciousness seemingly knows no bounds. And he is a thief; every benefit claimant who has had their payments sanctioned or their claim denied had paid into the system – via direct or indirect taxation – and had a right to expect the support they had funded.
He should be in prison.
Unfortunately, we (the people) do not currently have the wherewithal to put him there. We have to register our opinion in other ways.
This means he gets no respect at all. He is not the prime minister – he is the Downing Street squatter. There is no need to make way for him when he passes – Dean Balboa Farley was right to run into him. There is no need to pay attention to the things he says – if you get a chance to talk to him, just talk over him as though he wasn’t there. He is a pariah; he should be shunned at every opportunity.
He has disrespected and dishonoured the highest public office in the land. He deserves no better.
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:
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.
