Scrutable

headshot wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:20 am

If you didn’t watch yesterday’s PMQs, do have a look. Starmer utterly skewered Johnson.

Yes and no. Starmer wanted to maneuver Johnson into lying on the record and on TV. Johnson avoided that by not answering the question and getting shouty. So Johnson looks foolish and guilty. But he'll probably think of the exchange as a success.

Woodchopper wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:33 am

headshot wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:20 am

If you didn’t watch yesterday’s PMQs, do have a look. Starmer utterly skewered Johnson.

Yes and no. Starmer wanted to maneuver Johnson into lying on the record and on TV. Johnson avoided that by not answering the question and getting shouty. So Johnson looks foolish and guilty. But he'll probably think of the exchange as a success.

I've been avoiding Boris Johnson as much as possible lately and am much happier for it, but I watched this yesterday. I think you're right but Starmer seemed to have a bit of a smirk on his face when he made his final point about lying about the 'bodies piled high' quote, and while cash for cushions/curtains was the ultimate focus and probably easier to 'get' Johnson on as it relates directly to financial procedures, I do wonder why Starmer seemed so confident about the 'bodies piled high' quote and what's coming. It could have been a segue into the cash for curtains questions I suppose but I didn't get that impression initially.

discovolante wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:41 am

Woodchopper wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:33 am

headshot wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:20 am

If you didn’t watch yesterday’s PMQs, do have a look. Starmer utterly skewered Johnson.

Yes and no. Starmer wanted to maneuver Johnson into lying on the record and on TV. Johnson avoided that by not answering the question and getting shouty. So Johnson looks foolish and guilty. But he'll probably think of the exchange as a success.

I've been avoiding Boris Johnson as much as possible lately and am much happier for it, but I watched this yesterday. I think you're right but Starmer seemed to have a bit of a smirk on his face when he made his final point about lying about the 'bodies piled high' quote, and while cash for cushions/curtains was the ultimate focus and probably easier to 'get' Johnson on as it relates directly to financial procedures, I do wonder why Starmer seemed so confident about the 'bodies piled high' quote and what's coming. It could have been a segue into the cash for curtains questions I suppose but I didn't get that impression initially.

His "There will be further on this, believe you, me", makes me think he has full evidence of this. Surely he's not going to make a statement like that without something solid backing it up.

Also, Johnson has lied on record many times. He did it yesterday when he said Labour opposed and voted against the Brexit deal. Labour reluctantly voted FOR it, and Starmer made it clear that he was voting for it to avoid no deal, but considered it a poor deal.

Unfortunately Lindsay Hoyle is useless and never recalls Johnson to correct the record.

headshot wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 29, 2021 11:15 am

discovolante wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:41 am

Woodchopper wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:33 am

Yes and no. Starmer wanted to maneuver Johnson into lying on the record and on TV. Johnson avoided that by not answering the question and getting shouty. So Johnson looks foolish and guilty. But he'll probably think of the exchange as a success.

I've been avoiding Boris Johnson as much as possible lately and am much happier for it, but I watched this yesterday. I think you're right but Starmer seemed to have a bit of a smirk on his face when he made his final point about lying about the 'bodies piled high' quote, and while cash for cushions/curtains was the ultimate focus and probably easier to 'get' Johnson on as it relates directly to financial procedures, I do wonder why Starmer seemed so confident about the 'bodies piled high' quote and what's coming. It could have been a segue into the cash for curtains questions I suppose but I didn't get that impression initially.

His "There will be further on this, believe you, me", makes me think he has full evidence of this. Surely he's not going to make a statement like that without something solid backing it up.

Also, Johnson has lied on record many times. He did it yesterday when he said Labour opposed and voted against the Brexit deal. Labour reluctantly voted FOR it, and Starmer made it clear that he was voting for it to avoid no deal, but considered it a poor deal.

Unfortunately Lindsay Hoyle is useless and never recalls Johnson to correct the record.

He also lied when he said that "leaving the European Medicines Agency was absolutely invaluable for our vaccine rollout".

That claim that “leaving the European Medicines Agency was absolutely invaluable for our vaccine rollout” is completely untrue. The first vaccine approved (AstraZeneca’s one) was approved while the UK was still under EU legislation & it was approved for emergency distribution in accordance with Article 5(2) of Directive 2001/83/EC, which states
“Member States may temporarily authorise the distribution of an unauthorised medicinal product in response to the suspected or confirmed spread of pathogenic agents, toxins, chemical agents or nuclear radiation any of which could cause harm.”

Over the last couple of months, Hungary and Slovakia (both of which are very much still EU member states) have authorised the emergency distribution of vaccines (Sputnik & SinoVac) using precisely this same mechanism and, had HMG been desperate to authorise any of the other vaccines currently authorised earlier than the EMA did to transparently score cheap political points make them available to the British public sooner, then they could have done so.

The decision of HMG not to participate in the EC’s vaccine purchase scheme (which actually has been invaluable in the UK’s vaccine rollout) had nothing to do with being a member of the EU or not and definitely nothing to do with the European Medicines Agency.

tom p wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 30, 2021 9:56 am

The decision of HMG not to participate in the EC’s vaccine purchase scheme (which actually has been invaluable in the UK’s vaccine rollout) had nothing to do with being a member of the EU or not and definitely nothing to do with the European Medicines Agency.

To be fair to the PM, he probably has no idea about any of this. He probably thinks he's telling the truth, which is only a teensy bit better than purposefully lying.

I doubt that. He'll have been told time and again. Johnson doesn't ever deserve the benefit of the doubt when it comes to a judgement of ignorance vs lying - there's too much previous.

I should say that it's f.cking depressing just how little the UK population cares about whether the f.cking government is actually corrupt. Johnson could be revealed as being blackmailed for really f.cking a real pig and the majority of the shitlords in this country would laugh it off as another of his Frank Spencer moments, and that Keir Starmer isn't as trustworthy because he's just being mean and anyway he'd not be able to roll out vaccines as well as Johnson

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 30, 2021 11:07 am

I should say that it's f.cking depressing just how little the UK population cares about whether the f.cking government is actually corrupt.

This.

According to Good Morning Britain only 30% of their viewers think it matters. Clearly most English* people are really f.cking stupid.


*Because I don't think many people in the other nations care much for him.

JQH wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 30, 2021 11:48 am

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 30, 2021 11:07 am

I should say that it's f.cking depressing just how little the UK population cares about whether the f.cking government is actually corrupt.

This.

According to Good Morning Britain only 30% of their viewers think it matters. Clearly most English* people are really f.cking stupid.


*Because I don't think many people in the other nations care much for him.

Does this say more about the viewers of GMB though?

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 30, 2021 11:07 am

I should say that it's f.cking depressing just how little the UK population cares about whether the f.cking government is actually corrupt. Johnson could be revealed as being blackmailed for really f.cking a real pig and the majority of the shitlords in this country would laugh it off as another of his Frank Spencer moments, and that Keir Starmer isn't as trustworthy because he's just being mean and anyway he'd not be able to roll out vaccines as well as Johnson

I mean it is depressing, but it's also not at all surprising. We've already seen exactly the same thing in the USA and Brazil.

People on the right don't care about lying or corruption, because they believe that everybody else is doing it too, so lying harder and robbing more loot is just how to win the game.

I had hoped that the UK might have stronger regulatory mechanisms in place to hold government to account, but so far that doesn't seem to be the case either.

So it seems that the people on the right are in fact correct, and the problem is the game.

It also shows the massive disparity between the standards to which Labour are held and those to which Johnson and the Tories are held. Like I said, f.cking depressing. I've just got to hope that somehow over the next three years some kind of sense breaks through the madness.

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 30, 2021 12:00 pm

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 30, 2021 11:07 am

I should say that it's f.cking depressing just how little the UK population cares about whether the f.cking government is actually corrupt. Johnson could be revealed as being blackmailed for really f.cking a real pig and the majority of the shitlords in this country would laugh it off as another of his Frank Spencer moments, and that Keir Starmer isn't as trustworthy because he's just being mean and anyway he'd not be able to roll out vaccines as well as Johnson

I mean it is depressing, but it's also not at all surprising. We've already seen exactly the same thing in the USA and Brazil.

People on the right don't care about lying or corruption, because they believe that everybody else is doing it too, so lying harder and robbing more loot is just how to win the game.

I had hoped that the UK might have stronger regulatory mechanisms in place to hold government to account, but so far that doesn't seem to be the case either.

Oh, mate, I love your hopeful naïvete.
The UK has an unwritten constitution and it's dependent on the people at the top being jolly good sorts. It's classic toryism & it's a f.cking pathetic joke.
Starmer should promise serious rules to reform governance in the UK to prevent another shithouse like Johnson even getting close to the levers of power. Actual rules to disqualify c.nts like him when they act like c.nts.

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 30, 2021 12:06 pm

It also shows the massive disparity between the standards to which Labour are held and those to which Johnson and the Tories are held. Like I said, f.cking depressing. I've just got to hope that somehow over the next three years some kind of sense breaks through the madness.

But isn't this partially baked in?

Would you hold... lets say a door to door double glazing salesman to the same ethical standards as say, a doctor? I think most would expect the sales person to act in their own commission driven interest, and for the doctor to act in our interest.

Same thing seems to happen at a party political level... we expect Tories small state capitalism to be a bit sleazy and line their own pockets whilst looking after their rich chums. Whereas we expect Labour to do the right thing and provide some social fairness and security.

Accepting money to decorate a flat appears as corruption to a left leaning voter, but if your already of a Tory mindset it may be more akin to "great, some millionaire paying for it saves tax payer money."

(Although for some reason they never extend this concept to the idea that tax very rich people more generally will mean their middling incomes (at least by comparison) can be taxed less.)

It seems that the population of the UK is split fairly evenly between the two mindsets of left and right. But with three parties occupying the left, the right is going to win more often than not... which brings us back to PR. Whichever leftist party gets a majority next - it has to bring in PR.

TopBadger wrote: ↑

Fri May 14, 2021 8:34 am

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 30, 2021 12:06 pm

It also shows the massive disparity between the standards to which Labour are held and those to which Johnson and the Tories are held. Like I said, f.cking depressing. I've just got to hope that somehow over the next three years some kind of sense breaks through the madness.

But isn't this partially baked in?

Would you hold... lets say a door to door double glazing salesman to the same ethical standards as say, a doctor? I think most would expect the sales person to act in their own commission driven interest, and for the doctor to act in our interest.

Same thing seems to happen at a party political level... we expect Tories small state capitalism to be a bit sleazy and line their own pockets whilst looking after their rich chums. Whereas we expect Labour to do the right thing and provide some social fairness and security.

I agree. People tend to view the Tories as being a..eholes who will though ensure that you pay less tax, while Labour are the nice people who will cause you to pay more tax.

Impressions that negatively shake those basic assumptions are a huge problem for either party (eg Labour not being nice or the Tories not keeping taxes down), whereas ones that confirm them aren't such a big problem.

Woodchopper wrote: ↑

Fri May 14, 2021 9:06 am

TopBadger wrote: ↑

Fri May 14, 2021 8:34 am

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 30, 2021 12:06 pm

It also shows the massive disparity between the standards to which Labour are held and those to which Johnson and the Tories are held. Like I said, f.cking depressing. I've just got to hope that somehow over the next three years some kind of sense breaks through the madness.

But isn't this partially baked in?

Would you hold... lets say a door to door double glazing salesman to the same ethical standards as say, a doctor? I think most would expect the sales person to act in their own commission driven interest, and for the doctor to act in our interest.

Same thing seems to happen at a party political level... we expect Tories small state capitalism to be a bit sleazy and line their own pockets whilst looking after their rich chums. Whereas we expect Labour to do the right thing and provide some social fairness and security.

I agree. People tend to view the Tories as being a..eholes who will though ensure that you pay less tax, while Labour are the nice people who will cause you to pay more tax.

I wish this goddam country would understand that more tax doesn't mean less money. If a responsible Government raises taxes and increases public services (universal childcare, comprehensive care for the elderly, universal basic income etc etc) it will even out society's inequalities and leave people with more choice on how to spend the money they have left after taxation - perhaps spending it on things that help grow the economy further, create jobs and bring in more revenue.

Responsible Government though. *natch*