Indeed. All those clever people unable to spot this happening under their noses.
What was that again about having experts on juries in fraud trials? 😌
I 100% agree with you.
Juries must stay. No ifs, no buts.
Serendipitously I just read today about the history of initial jury trials in a book on the high middle ages. Partly to do with Papal rulings on trial by ordeal apparently . fascinating stuff
We all seem to be quite down on people who clean toilets don't we? Toilet cleaning - tee hee. I am not sure why. Not only is it a vital job, it's a job which you can indeed do badly, indifferently, well, or superbly. You can also if you feel so inclined, take on another cleaner, and another, and build a multi-million pound facilities management empire - it's been done.
That is one example of aspiration and it's a good one. But what about working instead to bring down the system that has brought you to such a sorry pass? Is this not aspiration too?
If I wasn't clear before, let me be so now - I am rejecting the rather patronising notion that being a cleaner is 'a sorry pass'. I also don't see how the fall of capitalism will lead to the role of toilet cleaner being eliminated - unless society is going to collapse so quickly we'll all be digging holes in the ground instead.
Automation. It's the "luxury communism for all" thing that Ash Sarkar has as her twitter strapline. Used to be followed by "fucks like a champion" but this has gone now. As has Toby Young's "Classical Liberal". His now says "President of the Free Speech Union."
But, yes, a great point you make about low paid jobs often having a value in excess of their paltry remuneration. I agree with this very strongly. I also believe the opposite - that high paid jobs often have remuneration in excess of their value.
Automated toilet cleaning, if and when it becomes widespread, will be a by-product of capitalism, not communism.
But can capitalism deal with the consequences of a vast amount of surplus labour? Or will this require something rather different?
It has managed to deal with the loss of Ale tunners, Ankle beaters, Apparitors, Arkwrights, and Amblers, and that's just a selection from 'A'. http://sites.rootsweb.com/~usgwkidz/oldjobs.htm
So what should the LibDem strategy be? That will decide whether they can work with Labour, the Tories or go it alone. A small party under FPTP needs a popular but not too popular selling point. If it's too popular, one of the big parties will steal it. The policy or policies should also be regionally based - getting 20% of the vote in every constituency won't get you any seats, but getting all the vote in a fifth of the constituencies makes you a power to be reckoned with.
I can think of five possibilities:
- the party of the Celtic fringe. This policy is regionally based, and builds on LibDem strength in the Highlands and Cornwall (though not Wales). But it's not obvious what policies this implies. And the number of seats at stake isn't that large. - the party of voting reform. Definitely a distinctive policy, and might be beneficial to their political fortunes, but as I say to someone else below, I can't see it ever being a popular mass cause in England. Also, I doubt if the support for it is regionally concentrated - the party of rejoin. Maybe, but I don't detect a huge appetite to undertake years more debate about Europe. Anyway we'd probably have to join the Euro. Also, LibDem support amongst rejoiners is probably pretty high already. - the party of the English suburbs and small towns. Certainly regionally based, but confronting the Conservatives here would be challenging, to say the least. Why wouldn't people who don't like the Tories there simply vote Labour? - the party of woke. Possible. Regionally based but difficult as it would involve challenging the mighty Labour machine in big cities and university towns. Also needs some very difficult judgements determining what is PC and what is not. Muslims or trans vs feminists? etc. And, of course, might split the vote on the left and let the Tories in.
I don't know if anyone else more sympathetic to the yellows than me can think of a better strategy for their new leader. But I don't think sucking up to Starmer is the whole, or even a partial, answer.
You could add the Northern Isles (Orkney and Shetland) to that analysis.
And adopting the Euro is not necessary - merely a pious assumption deferred to some shadowy future (cf. Sweden IIRC)
Sure it is whatever the impotent whinging of the LOTO says.
Its frankly absurd for the Starmer to be majoring on something as petty and meaningless as Jenrick when there are allegations there is a serious assault on our constitution and the Magna Carta coming. Why is Starmer whinging about Jenrick and not banging on about the importance of the right of trial by jury. Its not as if he's lacking legal expertise to speak on this matter but instead he's playing to NIMBYs in Tower Hamlets, its disgraceful priorities.
Cyclefree would make an infinitely better LOTO than Starmer. I don't always agree with her but she's got smart priorities.
Sure it is whatever the impotent whinging of the LOTO says.
Its frankly absurd for the Starmer to be majoring on something as petty and meaningless as Jenrick when there are allegations there is a serious assault on our constitution and the Magna Carta coming. Why is Starmer whinging about Jenrick and not banging on about the importance of the right of trial by jury. Its not as if he's lacking legal expertise to speak on this matter but instead he's playing to NIMBYs in Tower Hamlets, its disgraceful priorities.
Cyclefree would make an infinitely better LOTO than Starmer. I don't always agree with her but she's got smart priorities.
Indeed, unless Starmer gets a Blair 1997 style swing of over 10% he will not get an overall majority so to become PM he would likely need the support of 30 odd LD MPs if they pick up some Tory seats in London and the South.
In which case Davey could become Clegg to Starmer's Cameron
Even then I actually don't think it's enough - Starmer needs to either win seats that Labour never had or find a way back in Scotland.
While personally Boris is crap I really cannot see how Labour wins a majority next time round. Even if the Lib Dems had 30 odd seats the 2 parties together still won't have enough.
I think Starmer's ceiling is 260-280 seats at the next election although I can see Labour playing that scenario as a minority gvt to their own advantage.
Starmer "squishing" the Lib Dems would just give seats to the Conservatives, and therefore make a Labour government less likely:
Twickenham: LD 56%, Con 34%, Lab 9% Bath: LD 47%, Con 36%, Lab 15% Kingston & Surbiton: LD 51%, Con 34%, Lab 11% Oxford West & Abingdon: LD 53%, Con 38%, Lab 7% Richmond Park: LD 53%, Con 41%, Lab 5% St Albans: LD 50%, Con 39%, Lab 9%
Labour did hold St Albans 1997 - 2005, so it is reasonable to assume that much of the LD vote comes from anti-Tory Labour voters. A similar story re- Bath - though Labour has never won there despite coming very close in 1966.
Starmer "squishing" the Lib Dems would just give seats to the Conservatives, and therefore make a Labour government less likely:
Twickenham: LD 56%, Con 34%, Lab 9% Bath: LD 47%, Con 36%, Lab 15% Kingston & Surbiton: LD 51%, Con 34%, Lab 11% Oxford West & Abingdon: LD 53%, Con 38%, Lab 7% Richmond Park: LD 53%, Con 41%, Lab 5% St Albans: LD 50%, Con 39%, Lab 9%
Indeed. There isn't much electorally Labour can do about the LDs. Other than Sheffield Hallam they aren't in competition anywhere I can think of as far as Westminster that is. Edit. See @HYUFD has made the point with more facts as always...
Labour could reasonably expect to recover in Finchley & Golders Green and Coties of London & Westminster next time. Possibly also true of Wimbledon - though that was a narrow LD 'miss' in 2019and probably makes it more difficult for Labour to be back in serious contention.
I think Cities of London and Westminster is a more feasible target for Labour (although still a major long shot) than Finchley and Golders Green TBH (probably the only credible Labour target from 3rd place) as I think Berger is a lot more likely to appeal to the Jewish Tory remain vote directly which solidly stuck with the Tories in 2019. I can also see Labour being a lot more relaxed next time about giving her a free run as they'll be too busy in Chipping Barnet and Hendon and there is bad blood with Umunna.
Labour has never won Cities of London and Westminster which is 14th on the LD target list but only 75th on the Labour target list while Finchley and Golders Green is 17th on the LD target list and only 117th on the Labour target list
As we saw at GE2019 the party in second place at the previous election is in a much better position to argue for the anti-CON vote.
I'm not sure how 2019 showed any such thing. In 2019 the Conservatives lost just 10 seats, not sure that's a very meaningful sample to work from and I'm sure the Conservatives would be happy to lose just 10 next time too. Excluding Scotland (where there was a significant swing away from the Tories) there were just 3 Tory seat losses, I really don't think 3 seats is a meaningful sample at all.
Either way though local parties can campaign locally but on a national basis the best way to gain seats is to have a swing to your own party.
Sure it is whatever the impotent whinging of the LOTO says.
Its frankly absurd for the Starmer to be majoring on something as petty and meaningless as Jenrick when there are allegations there is a serious assault on our constitution and the Magna Carta coming. Why is Starmer whinging about Jenrick and not banging on about the importance of the right of trial by jury. Its not as if he's lacking legal expertise to speak on this matter but instead he's playing to NIMBYs in Tower Hamlets, its disgraceful priorities.
Cyclefree would make an infinitely better LOTO than Starmer. I don't always agree with her but she's got smart priorities.
Shameful that Starmer did not raise it at PMQ’s yesterday. If the former head of the CPS can’t see the importance of this change, what hope is there.
If he doesnt pick up on it this week hes not as sharp as advertised. Despite more people than I'd like indicating approval I feel like unexpected people would stand to oppose it as it's just not fair play.
Jenrick is absolubtely bubble stuff. Cummings was different, that had cut through - real cut through. There's not millions of us who can't get pp for a big housing development out there. There are and were millions who have their movement restricted right now. Going back to Jenrick it'll be one of those stories a minimal amount of people notice in the press.
The story is about a £12k payment to get access that resulted in a £40m saving (and £40m lost to a local authority).
It may not cut through but it leaves one hell of a smell...
Sure it is whatever the impotent whinging of the LOTO says.
Its frankly absurd for the Starmer to be majoring on something as petty and meaningless as Jenrick when there are allegations there is a serious assault on our constitution and the Magna Carta coming. Why is Starmer whinging about Jenrick and not banging on about the importance of the right of trial by jury. Its not as if he's lacking legal expertise to speak on this matter but instead he's playing to NIMBYs in Tower Hamlets, its disgraceful priorities.
Cyclefree would make an infinitely better LOTO than Starmer. I don't always agree with her but she's got smart priorities.
Shameful that Starmer did not raise it at PMQ’s yesterday. If the former head of the CPS can’t see the importance of this change, what hope is there.
I'd be worried the former head of the CPS privately agrees with this change. 🙁
I seriously hope this is just a kite that will be abandoned. If this is forced through I will abandon all support of the Tories as I did while they were led by Theresa May. This is a dealbreaker for me.
Sure it is whatever the impotent whinging of the LOTO says.
Its frankly absurd for the Starmer to be majoring on something as petty and meaningless as Jenrick when there are allegations there is a serious assault on our constitution and the Magna Carta coming. Why is Starmer whinging about Jenrick and not banging on about the importance of the right of trial by jury. Its not as if he's lacking legal expertise to speak on this matter but instead he's playing to NIMBYs in Tower Hamlets, its disgraceful priorities.
Cyclefree would make an infinitely better LOTO than Starmer. I don't always agree with her but she's got smart priorities.
Jenrick is absolubtely bubble stuff. Cummings was different, that had cut through - real cut through. There's not millions of us who can't get pp for a big housing development out there. There are and were millions who have their movement restricted right now. Going back to Jenrick it'll be one of those stories a minimal amount of people notice in the press.
The story is about a £12k payment to get access that resulted in a £40m saving (and £40m lost to a local authority).
It may not cut through but it leaves one hell of a smell...
The man in the street may not notice, but he's got to go.
Sure it is whatever the impotent whinging of the LOTO says.
Its frankly absurd for the Starmer to be majoring on something as petty and meaningless as Jenrick when there are allegations there is a serious assault on our constitution and the Magna Carta coming. Why is Starmer whinging about Jenrick and not banging on about the importance of the right of trial by jury. Its not as if he's lacking legal expertise to speak on this matter but instead he's playing to NIMBYs in Tower Hamlets, its disgraceful priorities.
Cyclefree would make an infinitely better LOTO than Starmer. I don't always agree with her but she's got smart priorities.
Shameful that Starmer did not raise it at PMQ’s yesterday. If the former head of the CPS can’t see the importance of this change, what hope is there.
Everybody should fight this tooth and nail
Has there been an impact assessment of Jury Trials with Jury of 7 and 1m social distancing?
frankly, I don;t effing care. They should manage it somehow. Untold people have given their lives and shed their blood for rights such as these. We should fight with everything we have to keep them.
Any questions to Starmer as to whether his adoption of the BLM pose makes it difficult to criticise violence stemming from that movement? I can imagine Farage or Boris would be quizzed if they were foolish enough to do the the same for a far right equivalent
There is no far right equivalent. The far right is the far right. I have explained this till I'm blue in the face. No equivalence. Every time the false equivalence is made the far right notches a little victory and the spirits of all people of sound mind and good character are lowered.
The far right equivalent would be the BNP rebranding itself 'Don't abuse teenage girls'
I would oppose the abuse of teenage girls even if the BNP did that.
Almost everyone would. But mainstream politicians would be ill advised to pose in solidarity with the BNPs new slogan whilst BNP voters bash up muslims
Kaepernick's protest has nothing to do with the far left or hate groups though and is everything to do with showing respect as it has been for four years. It was agreed four years ago to do that as it was more respectful than his prior protest of staying seated.
People trying to associate it with nonsense since then are no different to idiots trying to associate the Union Flag with the BNP.
Sure it is whatever the impotent whinging of the LOTO says.
Its frankly absurd for the Starmer to be majoring on something as petty and meaningless as Jenrick when there are allegations there is a serious assault on our constitution and the Magna Carta coming. Why is Starmer whinging about Jenrick and not banging on about the importance of the right of trial by jury. Its not as if he's lacking legal expertise to speak on this matter but instead he's playing to NIMBYs in Tower Hamlets, its disgraceful priorities.
Cyclefree would make an infinitely better LOTO than Starmer. I don't always agree with her but she's got smart priorities.
Shameful that Starmer did not raise it at PMQ’s yesterday. If the former head of the CPS can’t see the importance of this change, what hope is there.
I'd be worried the former head of the CPS privately agrees with this change. 🙁
I seriously hope this is just a kite that will be abandoned. If this is forced through I will abandon all support of the Tories as I did while they were led by Theresa May. This is a dealbreaker for me.
There is a certain kind of lawyer who wants to remove all "non-professionals" from the Justice system. i.e. all non-lawyers.
Any questions to Starmer as to whether his adoption of the BLM pose makes it difficult to criticise violence stemming from that movement? I can imagine Farage or Boris would be quizzed if they were foolish enough to do the the same for a far right equivalent
There is no far right equivalent. The far right is the far right. I have explained this till I'm blue in the face. No equivalence. Every time the false equivalence is made the far right notches a little victory and the spirits of all people of sound mind and good character are lowered.
There is no difference between the far left and the far right. They are two cheeks of the same arse and I oppose them both equally.
I think your idea of far right is probably much further right than many of the rest of us. As far as I am concerned, the far right and Brexit are two cheeks of the same arse: motivated by hatred and division and dressed up with all sorts of excuses to pretend it is about something else. UKIP were just the BNP in tweed with posher accents.
We all seem to be quite down on people who clean toilets don't we? Toilet cleaning - tee hee. I am not sure why. Not only is it a vital job, it's a job which you can indeed do badly, indifferently, well, or superbly. You can also if you feel so inclined, take on another cleaner, and another, and build a multi-million pound facilities management empire - it's been done.
That is one example of aspiration and it's a good one. But what about working instead to bring down the system that has brought you to such a sorry pass? Is this not aspiration too?
If I wasn't clear before, let me be so now - I am rejecting the rather patronising notion that being a cleaner is 'a sorry pass'. I also don't see how the fall of capitalism will lead to the role of toilet cleaner being eliminated - unless society is going to collapse so quickly we'll all be digging holes in the ground instead.
Automation. It's the "luxury communism for all" thing that Ash Sarkar has as her twitter strapline. Used to be followed by "fucks like a champion" but this has gone now. As has Toby Young's "Classical Liberal". His now says "President of the Free Speech Union."
But, yes, a great point you make about low paid jobs often having a value in excess of their paltry remuneration. I agree with this very strongly. I also believe the opposite - that high paid jobs often have remuneration in excess of their value.
Automated toilet cleaning, if and when it becomes widespread, will be a by-product of capitalism, not communism.
But can capitalism deal with the consequences of a vast amount of surplus labour? Or will this require something rather different?
Yes it can. It has done for hundreds of years.
There is no such thing as a deficit or surplus of labour.
Absolutely nothing to do with a surplus of labour.
Stock-take.
1. Rebecca Long Bailey wants to exterminate the jews. 2. Priti Patel is a social liberal. 3. The national debt does not matter. 4. Boris Johnson did not write the extension letter he wrote to the EU. 5. Nor did he promise no border in the Irish Sea. 6. And he has a very muscly torso
To which can now be added a magnificent 7th -
Unemployment has absolutely nothing to do with a surplus of labour.
@isam see the date on this Tweet from 2016: the kneeling symbolism has been going for four years now and is a symbol that was agreed with ex-servicemen to show respect.
Anyone trying to associate it with anything nefarious is pathetic. Kudos to Starmer for understanding its real meaning.
We all seem to be quite down on people who clean toilets don't we? Toilet cleaning - tee hee. I am not sure why. Not only is it a vital job, it's a job which you can indeed do badly, indifferently, well, or superbly. You can also if you feel so inclined, take on another cleaner, and another, and build a multi-million pound facilities management empire - it's been done.
That is one example of aspiration and it's a good one. But what about working instead to bring down the system that has brought you to such a sorry pass? Is this not aspiration too?
If I wasn't clear before, let me be so now - I am rejecting the rather patronising notion that being a cleaner is 'a sorry pass'. I also don't see how the fall of capitalism will lead to the role of toilet cleaner being eliminated - unless society is going to collapse so quickly we'll all be digging holes in the ground instead.
Automation. It's the "luxury communism for all" thing that Ash Sarkar has as her twitter strapline. Used to be followed by "fucks like a champion" but this has gone now. As has Toby Young's "Classical Liberal". His now says "President of the Free Speech Union."
But, yes, a great point you make about low paid jobs often having a value in excess of their paltry remuneration. I agree with this very strongly. I also believe the opposite - that high paid jobs often have remuneration in excess of their value.
Automated toilet cleaning, if and when it becomes widespread, will be a by-product of capitalism, not communism.
But can capitalism deal with the consequences of a vast amount of surplus labour? Or will this require something rather different?
It has managed to deal with the loss of Ale tunners, Ankle beaters, Apparitors, Arkwrights, and Amblers, and that's just a selection from 'A'. http://sites.rootsweb.com/~usgwkidz/oldjobs.htm
I think you mean that it carried on regardless.
Wonderfully so. And got us to the stage where the poorest in the UK live in a state of comfort unimagined by the richest Duke in medieval Britain.
How can we morally stand-up to China whilst making moves like this?
Unfortunately "we" don't stand up to China. They have propped up western economies for a long time. Trump does stand up to China, but has no moral authority or gravitas to do it effectively.
Sure it is whatever the impotent whinging of the LOTO says.
Its frankly absurd for the Starmer to be majoring on something as petty and meaningless as Jenrick when there are allegations there is a serious assault on our constitution and the Magna Carta coming. Why is Starmer whinging about Jenrick and not banging on about the importance of the right of trial by jury. Its not as if he's lacking legal expertise to speak on this matter but instead he's playing to NIMBYs in Tower Hamlets, its disgraceful priorities.
Cyclefree would make an infinitely better LOTO than Starmer. I don't always agree with her but she's got smart priorities.
Shameful that Starmer did not raise it at PMQ’s yesterday. If the former head of the CPS can’t see the importance of this change, what hope is there.
I'd be worried the former head of the CPS privately agrees with this change. 🙁
I seriously hope this is just a kite that will be abandoned. If this is forced through I will abandon all support of the Tories as I did while they were led by Theresa May. This is a dealbreaker for me.
There is a certain kind of lawyer who wants to remove all "non-professionals" from the Justice system. i.e. all non-lawyers.
So no lay magistrates, juries etc.
If we think political correctness is rampant now, wait until the public cannot interfere and break up the process.
We all seem to be quite down on people who clean toilets don't we? Toilet cleaning - tee hee. I am not sure why. Not only is it a vital job, it's a job which you can indeed do badly, indifferently, well, or superbly. You can also if you feel so inclined, take on another cleaner, and another, and build a multi-million pound facilities management empire - it's been done.
That is one example of aspiration and it's a good one. But what about working instead to bring down the system that has brought you to such a sorry pass? Is this not aspiration too?
If I wasn't clear before, let me be so now - I am rejecting the rather patronising notion that being a cleaner is 'a sorry pass'. I also don't see how the fall of capitalism will lead to the role of toilet cleaner being eliminated - unless society is going to collapse so quickly we'll all be digging holes in the ground instead.
Automation. It's the "luxury communism for all" thing that Ash Sarkar has as her twitter strapline. Used to be followed by "fucks like a champion" but this has gone now. As has Toby Young's "Classical Liberal". His now says "President of the Free Speech Union."
But, yes, a great point you make about low paid jobs often having a value in excess of their paltry remuneration. I agree with this very strongly. I also believe the opposite - that high paid jobs often have remuneration in excess of their value.
Automated toilet cleaning, if and when it becomes widespread, will be a by-product of capitalism, not communism.
But can capitalism deal with the consequences of a vast amount of surplus labour? Or will this require something rather different?
Yes it can. It has done for hundreds of years.
There is no such thing as a deficit or surplus of labour.
Absolutely nothing to do with a surplus of labour.
Stock-take.
1. Rebecca Long Bailey wants to exterminate the jews. 2. Priti Patel is a social liberal. 3. The national debt does not matter. 4. Boris Johnson did not write the extension letter he wrote to the EU. 5. Nor did he promise no border in the Irish Sea. 6. And he has a very muscly torso
To which can now be added a magnificent 7th -
Unemployment has absolutely nothing to do with a surplus of labour.
I never said 2, or 3, or 5 or 6.
1 was clearly hyperbolic criticism of a nasty antisemite.
4 is correct. He sent the letter as he was obliged to by law but he didn't write it, Grieve and the House of Commons wrote it. If I order a book off Amazon they may post it to me but they didn't write the book.
Unemployment does have nothing to do with a surplus of Labour. That's not what causes unemployment.
Any questions to Starmer as to whether his adoption of the BLM pose makes it difficult to criticise violence stemming from that movement? I can imagine Farage or Boris would be quizzed if they were foolish enough to do the the same for a far right equivalent
There is no far right equivalent. The far right is the far right. I have explained this till I'm blue in the face. No equivalence. Every time the false equivalence is made the far right notches a little victory and the spirits of all people of sound mind and good character are lowered.
The far right equivalent would be the BNP rebranding itself 'Don't abuse teenage girls'
I would oppose the abuse of teenage girls even if the BNP did that.
Almost everyone would. But mainstream politicians would be ill advised to pose in solidarity with the BNPs new slogan whilst BNP voters bash up muslims
Kaepernick's protest has nothing to do with the far left or hate groups though and is everything to do with showing respect as it has been for four years. It was agreed four years ago to do that as it was more respectful than his prior protest of staying seated.
People trying to associate it with nonsense since then are no different to idiots trying to associate the Union Flag with the BNP.
There was an interesting piece by Paul Hayward in the Telegraph on the Burnley banner:
What a waste of money, though. We already knew ‘white lives matter.’ How? Because in America white people are generally not being murdered by police on the streets and in their cars; white people are not being excluded from the top professions because of the colour of their skin; white people are not discriminated against or judged in the way black citizens routinely are.
I hadn't appreciated that all the BLM stuff in the UK is about the situation in the USA. If that was emphasized more, and it was about supporting Colin Kaepernick, I'd feel a lot more comfortable about it.
Any questions to Starmer as to whether his adoption of the BLM pose makes it difficult to criticise violence stemming from that movement? I can imagine Farage or Boris would be quizzed if they were foolish enough to do the the same for a far right equivalent
There is no far right equivalent. The far right is the far right. I have explained this till I'm blue in the face. No equivalence. Every time the false equivalence is made the far right notches a little victory and the spirits of all people of sound mind and good character are lowered.
The far right equivalent would be the BNP rebranding itself 'Don't abuse teenage girls'
I would oppose the abuse of teenage girls even if the BNP did that.
Almost everyone would. But mainstream politicians would be ill advised to pose in solidarity with the BNPs new slogan whilst BNP voters bash up muslims
Kaepernick's protest has nothing to do with the far left or hate groups though and is everything to do with showing respect as it has been for four years. It was agreed four years ago to do that as it was more respectful than his prior protest of staying seated.
People trying to associate it with nonsense since then are no different to idiots trying to associate the Union Flag with the BNP.
Of course, he didn't intend it to be adopted by them, but they have hijacked it now, and it will be used by them in the future. People have already started adding the raising the fist salute to it, and the violence we have seen this month comes from people supporting the movement associated with it.
Sure it is whatever the impotent whinging of the LOTO says.
Its frankly absurd for the Starmer to be majoring on something as petty and meaningless as Jenrick when there are allegations there is a serious assault on our constitution and the Magna Carta coming. Why is Starmer whinging about Jenrick and not banging on about the importance of the right of trial by jury. Its not as if he's lacking legal expertise to speak on this matter but instead he's playing to NIMBYs in Tower Hamlets, its disgraceful priorities.
Cyclefree would make an infinitely better LOTO than Starmer. I don't always agree with her but she's got smart priorities.
Shameful that Starmer did not raise it at PMQ’s yesterday. If the former head of the CPS can’t see the importance of this change, what hope is there.
I'd be worried the former head of the CPS privately agrees with this change. 🙁
I seriously hope this is just a kite that will be abandoned. If this is forced through I will abandon all support of the Tories as I did while they were led by Theresa May. This is a dealbreaker for me.
To be honest I agree with the change if it was for serious fraud trials. I sat as a juror on one when I was 21. There was 13 separate indicments very difficult for most of us on the jury to understand the complexity.On the main one we took an initial vote it was 6-6. After hours the judge called us back in and said he would accept a majority of 10 -2,. Then more hours passed and it went 9-3 guilty. Then it went 10-2 , the foreman asked the man why he had changed his vote. He said he was sick of waiting he wanted to go home for his dinner. When I went home I said to my my mother a man had gone to prison because someone wanted their meal.
@isam see the date on this Tweet from 2016: the kneeling symbolism has been going for four years now and is a symbol that was agreed with ex-servicemen to show respect.
Anyone trying to associate it with anything nefarious is pathetic. Kudos to Starmer for understanding its real meaning.
Yes, I know it's original meaning. But it has been hijacked now by the extreme left at BLM, and I think therefore it is a mistake for mainstream politicians to associate themselves with it.
One way lib dems could harvest a stack of tory and labour votes and get back into the fight for Westminster would be to oppose restricting jury trials and guarantee to reinstate the public's full rights at whatever cost.
One way lib dems could harvest a stack of tory and labour votes and get back into the fight for Westminster would be to oppose restricting jury trials and guarantee to reinstate the public's full rights at whatever cost.
Any questions to Starmer as to whether his adoption of the BLM pose makes it difficult to criticise violence stemming from that movement? I can imagine Farage or Boris would be quizzed if they were foolish enough to do the the same for a far right equivalent
There is no far right equivalent. The far right is the far right. I have explained this till I'm blue in the face. No equivalence. Every time the false equivalence is made the far right notches a little victory and the spirits of all people of sound mind and good character are lowered.
The far right equivalent would be the BNP rebranding itself 'Don't abuse teenage girls'
I would oppose the abuse of teenage girls even if the BNP did that.
Almost everyone would. But mainstream politicians would be ill advised to pose in solidarity with the BNPs new slogan whilst BNP voters bash up muslims
Kaepernick's protest has nothing to do with the far left or hate groups though and is everything to do with showing respect as it has been for four years. It was agreed four years ago to do that as it was more respectful than his prior protest of staying seated.
People trying to associate it with nonsense since then are no different to idiots trying to associate the Union Flag with the BNP.
Of course, he didn't intend it to be adopted by them, but they have hijacked it now, and it will be used by them in the future. People have already started adding the raising the fist salute to it, and the violence we have seen this month comes from people supporting the movement associated with it.
Extremists join every protest. Extremists join every movement.
Protests can still be powerful and the right thing to do is fight the extremists and support the parts of the protest you believe in.
The BNP may wrap themselves in the Union Flag or the Cross of St George. I will still proudly support and if I want to fly the Union Flag or the Cross of St George because they are the flags of my country. Extremists may kneel, but I will still kneel if I want to and if I was PM I would have knelt in front of the door of Number 10 to show support to equality.
I don't expect the PM not to fly the Union Flag just because the BNP wrap themselves in it. Why do you expect Starmer not to show support to a cause he believes in because of a minority abusing it?
One way lib dems could harvest a stack of tory and labour votes and get back into the fight for Westminster would be to oppose restricting jury trials and guarantee to reinstate the public's full rights at whatever cost.
Legalisation of cannabis would also work.
Absolutely and maybe not just cannabis. Maybe something more radical, a las Portugal.
One way lib dems could harvest a stack of tory and labour votes and get back into the fight for Westminster would be to oppose restricting jury trials and guarantee to reinstate the public's full rights at whatever cost.
Legalisation of cannabis would also work.
A great idea whose time has long since come. The Chancellor should be pushing for this.
Any questions to Starmer as to whether his adoption of the BLM pose makes it difficult to criticise violence stemming from that movement? I can imagine Farage or Boris would be quizzed if they were foolish enough to do the the same for a far right equivalent
There is no far right equivalent. The far right is the far right. I have explained this till I'm blue in the face. No equivalence. Every time the false equivalence is made the far right notches a little victory and the spirits of all people of sound mind and good character are lowered.
The far right equivalent would be the BNP rebranding itself 'Don't Abuse Teenage Girls', then Boris or Farage posing in solidarity with them as racists bash up muslims
We all seem to be quite down on people who clean toilets don't we? Toilet cleaning - tee hee. I am not sure why. Not only is it a vital job, it's a job which you can indeed do badly, indifferently, well, or superbly. You can also if you feel so inclined, take on another cleaner, and another, and build a multi-million pound facilities management empire - it's been done.
That is one example of aspiration and it's a good one. But what about working instead to bring down the system that has brought you to such a sorry pass? Is this not aspiration too?
If I wasn't clear before, let me be so now - I am rejecting the rather patronising notion that being a cleaner is 'a sorry pass'. I also don't see how the fall of capitalism will lead to the role of toilet cleaner being eliminated - unless society is going to collapse so quickly we'll all be digging holes in the ground instead.
Automation. It's the "luxury communism for all" thing that Ash Sarkar has as her twitter strapline. Used to be followed by "fucks like a champion" but this has gone now. As has Toby Young's "Classical Liberal". His now says "President of the Free Speech Union."
But, yes, a great point you make about low paid jobs often having a value in excess of their paltry remuneration. I agree with this very strongly. I also believe the opposite - that high paid jobs often have remuneration in excess of their value.
Automated toilet cleaning, if and when it becomes widespread, will be a by-product of capitalism, not communism.
But can capitalism deal with the consequences of a vast amount of surplus labour? Or will this require something rather different?
It has managed to deal with the loss of Ale tunners, Ankle beaters, Apparitors, Arkwrights, and Amblers, and that's just a selection from 'A'. http://sites.rootsweb.com/~usgwkidz/oldjobs.htm
I think you mean that it carried on regardless.
Wonderfully so. And got us to the stage where the poorest in the UK live in a state of comfort unimagined by the richest Duke in medieval Britain.
P J O'Rourke on the "Mines and Collieries Act 1842" -
"It created a great deal of unemployment among 10 year old boys. However, it left them free to pursue other options - such as living to the age of 11."
Any questions to Starmer as to whether his adoption of the BLM pose makes it difficult to criticise violence stemming from that movement? I can imagine Farage or Boris would be quizzed if they were foolish enough to do the the same for a far right equivalent
There is no far right equivalent. The far right is the far right. I have explained this till I'm blue in the face. No equivalence. Every time the false equivalence is made the far right notches a little victory and the spirits of all people of sound mind and good character are lowered.
The far right equivalent would be the BNP rebranding itself 'Don't abuse teenage girls'
I would oppose the abuse of teenage girls even if the BNP did that.
Almost everyone would. But mainstream politicians would be ill advised to pose in solidarity with the BNPs new slogan whilst BNP voters bash up muslims
Kaepernick's protest has nothing to do with the far left or hate groups though and is everything to do with showing respect as it has been for four years. It was agreed four years ago to do that as it was more respectful than his prior protest of staying seated.
People trying to associate it with nonsense since then are no different to idiots trying to associate the Union Flag with the BNP.
Of course, he didn't intend it to be adopted by them, but they have hijacked it now, and it will be used by them in the future. People have already started adding the raising the fist salute to it, and the violence we have seen this month comes from people supporting the movement associated with it.
Extremists join every protest. Extremists join every movement.
Protests can still be powerful and the right thing to do is fight the extremists and support the parts of the protest you believe in.
The BNP may wrap themselves in the Union Flag or the Cross of St George. I will still proudly support and if I want to fly the Union Flag or the Cross of St George because they are the flags of my country. Extremists may kneel, but I will still kneel if I want to and if I was PM I would have knelt in front of the door of Number 10 to show support to equality.
I don't expect the PM not to fly the Union Flag just because the BNP wrap themselves in it. Why do you expect Starmer not to show support to a cause he believes in because of a minority abusing it?
He can do what he likes, and I'm entitled to think it's a mistake for the reasons I've given
One way lib dems could harvest a stack of tory and labour votes and get back into the fight for Westminster would be to oppose restricting jury trials and guarantee to reinstate the public's full rights at whatever cost.
Legalisation of cannabis would also work.
A great idea whose time has long since come. The Chancellor should be pushing for this.
By the look of things Boris Johnson has been smoking it for a long time, or at least if he has it might explain a few things
Any questions to Starmer as to whether his adoption of the BLM pose makes it difficult to criticise violence stemming from that movement? I can imagine Farage or Boris would be quizzed if they were foolish enough to do the the same for a far right equivalent
There is no far right equivalent. The far right is the far right. I have explained this till I'm blue in the face. No equivalence. Every time the false equivalence is made the far right notches a little victory and the spirits of all people of sound mind and good character are lowered.
The far right equivalent would be the BNP rebranding itself 'Don't abuse teenage girls'
I would oppose the abuse of teenage girls even if the BNP did that.
Almost everyone would. But mainstream politicians would be ill advised to pose in solidarity with the BNPs new slogan whilst BNP voters bash up muslims
Kaepernick's protest has nothing to do with the far left or hate groups though and is everything to do with showing respect as it has been for four years. It was agreed four years ago to do that as it was more respectful than his prior protest of staying seated.
People trying to associate it with nonsense since then are no different to idiots trying to associate the Union Flag with the BNP.
Of course, he didn't intend it to be adopted by them, but they have hijacked it now, and it will be used by them in the future. People have already started adding the raising the fist salute to it, and the violence we have seen this month comes from people supporting the movement associated with it.
Extremists join every protest. Extremists join every movement.
Protests can still be powerful and the right thing to do is fight the extremists and support the parts of the protest you believe in.
The BNP may wrap themselves in the Union Flag or the Cross of St George. I will still proudly support and if I want to fly the Union Flag or the Cross of St George because they are the flags of my country. Extremists may kneel, but I will still kneel if I want to and if I was PM I would have knelt in front of the door of Number 10 to show support to equality.
I don't expect the PM not to fly the Union Flag just because the BNP wrap themselves in it. Why do you expect Starmer not to show support to a cause he believes in because of a minority abusing it?
He can do what he likes, and I'm entitled to think it's a mistake for the reasons I've given
You think if extremists embrace a symbol that symbol should be dropped by all non-extremists it seems?
So do you think because the BNP have embraced the Union Flag any time the PM stands by a Union Flag he's associating himself with the BNP?
@isam see the date on this Tweet from 2016: the kneeling symbolism has been going for four years now and is a symbol that was agreed with ex-servicemen to show respect.
Anyone trying to associate it with anything nefarious is pathetic. Kudos to Starmer for understanding its real meaning.
Yes, I know it's original meaning. But it has been hijacked now by the extreme left at BLM, and I think therefore it is a mistake for mainstream politicians to associate themselves with it.
Any questions to Starmer as to whether his adoption of the BLM pose makes it difficult to criticise violence stemming from that movement? I can imagine Farage or Boris would be quizzed if they were foolish enough to do the the same for a far right equivalent
There is no far right equivalent. The far right is the far right. I have explained this till I'm blue in the face. No equivalence. Every time the false equivalence is made the far right notches a little victory and the spirits of all people of sound mind and good character are lowered.
The far right equivalent would be the BNP rebranding itself 'Don't abuse teenage girls'
I would oppose the abuse of teenage girls even if the BNP did that.
But you wouldn't necessarily post a photograph of yourself on social media adopting their pose. You might be concerned that the impression would be given that you supported the organisation in its entirety.
As Philip points out, we already have a real life comparison rather than your somewhat tendentious one. And the PM is painting the Union Flag on the tail of his personal jet...
Mr. Thompson, do you think every kneeling footballer wants to do it, or do you think some are doing so due to pressure exerted on them?
I expect 99.99% of them want to do it because its the right thing to do, because they work with organisations like Kick It Out in their own day job, because their friends and team mates are of all races and because they can experience the nasty side of racism and are used to campaigning against it.
Any questions to Starmer as to whether his adoption of the BLM pose makes it difficult to criticise violence stemming from that movement? I can imagine Farage or Boris would be quizzed if they were foolish enough to do the the same for a far right equivalent
There is no far right equivalent. The far right is the far right. I have explained this till I'm blue in the face. No equivalence. Every time the false equivalence is made the far right notches a little victory and the spirits of all people of sound mind and good character are lowered.
The far right equivalent would be the BNP rebranding itself 'Don't abuse teenage girls'
I would oppose the abuse of teenage girls even if the BNP did that.
Almost everyone would. But mainstream politicians would be ill advised to pose in solidarity with the BNPs new slogan whilst BNP voters bash up muslims
Kaepernick's protest has nothing to do with the far left or hate groups though and is everything to do with showing respect as it has been for four years. It was agreed four years ago to do that as it was more respectful than his prior protest of staying seated.
People trying to associate it with nonsense since then are no different to idiots trying to associate the Union Flag with the BNP.
Of course, he didn't intend it to be adopted by them, but they have hijacked it now, and it will be used by them in the future. People have already started adding the raising the fist salute to it, and the violence we have seen this month comes from people supporting the movement associated with it.
Extremists join every protest. Extremists join every movement.
Protests can still be powerful and the right thing to do is fight the extremists and support the parts of the protest you believe in.
The BNP may wrap themselves in the Union Flag or the Cross of St George. I will still proudly support and if I want to fly the Union Flag or the Cross of St George because they are the flags of my country. Extremists may kneel, but I will still kneel if I want to and if I was PM I would have knelt in front of the door of Number 10 to show support to equality.
I don't expect the PM not to fly the Union Flag just because the BNP wrap themselves in it. Why do you expect Starmer not to show support to a cause he believes in because of a minority abusing it?
He can do what he likes, and I'm entitled to think it's a mistake for the reasons I've given
You think if extremists embrace a symbol that symbol should be dropped by all non-extremists it seems?
So do you think because the BNP have embraced the Union Flag any time the PM stands by a Union Flag he's associating himself with the BNP?
I have a problem with the England flag - because of the BNP and others.
I have far less problems with the Union Jack as that flag actually has a purpose outside of sport.
Sure it is whatever the impotent whinging of the LOTO says.
Its frankly absurd for the Starmer to be majoring on something as petty and meaningless as Jenrick when there are allegations there is a serious assault on our constitution and the Magna Carta coming. Why is Starmer whinging about Jenrick and not banging on about the importance of the right of trial by jury. Its not as if he's lacking legal expertise to speak on this matter but instead he's playing to NIMBYs in Tower Hamlets, its disgraceful priorities.
Cyclefree would make an infinitely better LOTO than Starmer. I don't always agree with her but she's got smart priorities.
Shameful that Starmer did not raise it at PMQ’s yesterday. If the former head of the CPS can’t see the importance of this change, what hope is there.
I'd be worried the former head of the CPS privately agrees with this change. 🙁
I seriously hope this is just a kite that will be abandoned. If this is forced through I will abandon all support of the Tories as I did while they were led by Theresa May. This is a dealbreaker for me.
Good for you!
Write to your MP about it. Copy in Robert Buckland and Keir Starmer. Hell, copy my article to them.
And don’t be deluded by the 7-jury proposal. That is not the expressed preference. It’s put in there as a feint. What the Lord Chancellor wants to do is take away the right to a jury trial altogether for a whole load of serious offences.
Any questions to Starmer as to whether his adoption of the BLM pose makes it difficult to criticise violence stemming from that movement? I can imagine Farage or Boris would be quizzed if they were foolish enough to do the the same for a far right equivalent
There is no far right equivalent. The far right is the far right. I have explained this till I'm blue in the face. No equivalence. Every time the false equivalence is made the far right notches a little victory and the spirits of all people of sound mind and good character are lowered.
The far right equivalent would be the BNP rebranding itself 'Don't abuse teenage girls'
I would oppose the abuse of teenage girls even if the BNP did that.
Almost everyone would. But mainstream politicians would be ill advised to pose in solidarity with the BNPs new slogan whilst BNP voters bash up muslims
Kaepernick's protest has nothing to do with the far left or hate groups though and is everything to do with showing respect as it has been for four years. It was agreed four years ago to do that as it was more respectful than his prior protest of staying seated.
People trying to associate it with nonsense since then are no different to idiots trying to associate the Union Flag with the BNP.
Of course, he didn't intend it to be adopted by them, but they have hijacked it now, and it will be used by them in the future. People have already started adding the raising the fist salute to it, and the violence we have seen this month comes from people supporting the movement associated with it.
Extremists join every protest. Extremists join every movement.
Protests can still be powerful and the right thing to do is fight the extremists and support the parts of the protest you believe in.
The BNP may wrap themselves in the Union Flag or the Cross of St George. I will still proudly support and if I want to fly the Union Flag or the Cross of St George because they are the flags of my country. Extremists may kneel, but I will still kneel if I want to and if I was PM I would have knelt in front of the door of Number 10 to show support to equality.
I don't expect the PM not to fly the Union Flag just because the BNP wrap themselves in it. Why do you expect Starmer not to show support to a cause he believes in because of a minority abusing it?
He can do what he likes, and I'm entitled to think it's a mistake for the reasons I've given
You think if extremists embrace a symbol that symbol should be dropped by all non-extremists it seems?
So do you think because the BNP have embraced the Union Flag any time the PM stands by a Union Flag he's associating himself with the BNP?
Taking the knee is not equivalent to the flag of our country. If any PM refused to be associated with that he wouldn't be PM long, whereas had Starmer not decided to take the knee no one would have noticed.
We all seem to be quite down on people who clean toilets don't we? Toilet cleaning - tee hee. I am not sure why. Not only is it a vital job, it's a job which you can indeed do badly, indifferently, well, or superbly. You can also if you feel so inclined, take on another cleaner, and another, and build a multi-million pound facilities management empire - it's been done.
That is one example of aspiration and it's a good one. But what about working instead to bring down the system that has brought you to such a sorry pass? Is this not aspiration too?
If I wasn't clear before, let me be so now - I am rejecting the rather patronising notion that being a cleaner is 'a sorry pass'. I also don't see how the fall of capitalism will lead to the role of toilet cleaner being eliminated - unless society is going to collapse so quickly we'll all be digging holes in the ground instead.
Automation. It's the "luxury communism for all" thing that Ash Sarkar has as her twitter strapline. Used to be followed by "fucks like a champion" but this has gone now. As has Toby Young's "Classical Liberal". His now says "President of the Free Speech Union."
But, yes, a great point you make about low paid jobs often having a value in excess of their paltry remuneration. I agree with this very strongly. I also believe the opposite - that high paid jobs often have remuneration in excess of their value.
Automated toilet cleaning, if and when it becomes widespread, will be a by-product of capitalism, not communism.
But can capitalism deal with the consequences of a vast amount of surplus labour? Or will this require something rather different?
I'm always rather sceptical about the idea of automation creating vast swathes of unemployable people.
It's long been the case that advances in technology mean that an activity that used to employ thousands can be done by a handful of people and machines. But new activities and new jobs spring up.
I do, of course, get the point that this tends to exacerbate inequalities between those who provide the land and capital, and those who provide the labour. I also feel immense sympathy for the 50-something year olds particularly who suddenly have the rug pulled from under them when employment in an industry slumps. My point is simply that I am not convinced by the more extreme view that something radically new is happening requiring the replacement rather than evolution of the economic system.
I think you're probably right. I hear some remarkable forecasts as to what AI will usher in but most things underperform the hype. Leaving it to the market will be unwise though, imo, since the gap between winners and losers - already far too wide - could become downright decadent. Bet Germany doesn't leave it to the market.
One way lib dems could harvest a stack of tory and labour votes and get back into the fight for Westminster would be to oppose restricting jury trials and guarantee to reinstate the public's full rights at whatever cost.
The Lib Dems sadly, have long forgotten what the word “liberal” in their title actually means.
This absolutely should be something they ought to be pushing.
Any questions to Starmer as to whether his adoption of the BLM pose makes it difficult to criticise violence stemming from that movement? I can imagine Farage or Boris would be quizzed if they were foolish enough to do the the same for a far right equivalent
There is no far right equivalent. The far right is the far right. I have explained this till I'm blue in the face. No equivalence. Every time the false equivalence is made the far right notches a little victory and the spirits of all people of sound mind and good character are lowered.
The far right equivalent would be the BNP rebranding itself 'Don't abuse teenage girls'
I would oppose the abuse of teenage girls even if the BNP did that.
Almost everyone would. But mainstream politicians would be ill advised to pose in solidarity with the BNPs new slogan whilst BNP voters bash up muslims
Kaepernick's protest has nothing to do with the far left or hate groups though and is everything to do with showing respect as it has been for four years. It was agreed four years ago to do that as it was more respectful than his prior protest of staying seated.
People trying to associate it with nonsense since then are no different to idiots trying to associate the Union Flag with the BNP.
Of course, he didn't intend it to be adopted by them, but they have hijacked it now, and it will be used by them in the future. People have already started adding the raising the fist salute to it, and the violence we have seen this month comes from people supporting the movement associated with it.
Extremists join every protest. Extremists join every movement.
Protests can still be powerful and the right thing to do is fight the extremists and support the parts of the protest you believe in.
The BNP may wrap themselves in the Union Flag or the Cross of St George. I will still proudly support and if I want to fly the Union Flag or the Cross of St George because they are the flags of my country. Extremists may kneel, but I will still kneel if I want to and if I was PM I would have knelt in front of the door of Number 10 to show support to equality.
I don't expect the PM not to fly the Union Flag just because the BNP wrap themselves in it. Why do you expect Starmer not to show support to a cause he believes in because of a minority abusing it?
He can do what he likes, and I'm entitled to think it's a mistake for the reasons I've given
You think if extremists embrace a symbol that symbol should be dropped by all non-extremists it seems?
So do you think because the BNP have embraced the Union Flag any time the PM stands by a Union Flag he's associating himself with the BNP?
What about if the PM uses a racist word whose last use by a major British politician was by Enoch Powell in his Rivers of Blood speech? I wonder what that would tell us?
We all seem to be quite down on people who clean toilets don't we? Toilet cleaning - tee hee. I am not sure why. Not only is it a vital job, it's a job which you can indeed do badly, indifferently, well, or superbly. You can also if you feel so inclined, take on another cleaner, and another, and build a multi-million pound facilities management empire - it's been done.
That is one example of aspiration and it's a good one. But what about working instead to bring down the system that has brought you to such a sorry pass? Is this not aspiration too?
If I wasn't clear before, let me be so now - I am rejecting the rather patronising notion that being a cleaner is 'a sorry pass'. I also don't see how the fall of capitalism will lead to the role of toilet cleaner being eliminated - unless society is going to collapse so quickly we'll all be digging holes in the ground instead.
Automation. It's the "luxury communism for all" thing that Ash Sarkar has as her twitter strapline. Used to be followed by "fucks like a champion" but this has gone now. As has Toby Young's "Classical Liberal". His now says "President of the Free Speech Union."
But, yes, a great point you make about low paid jobs often having a value in excess of their paltry remuneration. I agree with this very strongly. I also believe the opposite - that high paid jobs often have remuneration in excess of their value.
Automated toilet cleaning, if and when it becomes widespread, will be a by-product of capitalism, not communism.
But can capitalism deal with the consequences of a vast amount of surplus labour? Or will this require something rather different?
It has managed to deal with the loss of Ale tunners, Ankle beaters, Apparitors, Arkwrights, and Amblers, and that's just a selection from 'A'. http://sites.rootsweb.com/~usgwkidz/oldjobs.htm
I think you mean that it carried on regardless.
Wonderfully so. And got us to the stage where the poorest in the UK live in a state of comfort unimagined by the richest Duke in medieval Britain.
And where the richest 1% own half the world's wealth.
Any questions to Starmer as to whether his adoption of the BLM pose makes it difficult to criticise violence stemming from that movement? I can imagine Farage or Boris would be quizzed if they were foolish enough to do the the same for a far right equivalent
There is no far right equivalent. The far right is the far right. I have explained this till I'm blue in the face. No equivalence. Every time the false equivalence is made the far right notches a little victory and the spirits of all people of sound mind and good character are lowered.
The far right equivalent would be the BNP rebranding itself 'Don't abuse teenage girls'
I would oppose the abuse of teenage girls even if the BNP did that.
Almost everyone would. But mainstream politicians would be ill advised to pose in solidarity with the BNPs new slogan whilst BNP voters bash up muslims
Kaepernick's protest has nothing to do with the far left or hate groups though and is everything to do with showing respect as it has been for four years. It was agreed four years ago to do that as it was more respectful than his prior protest of staying seated.
People trying to associate it with nonsense since then are no different to idiots trying to associate the Union Flag with the BNP.
Of course, he didn't intend it to be adopted by them, but they have hijacked it now, and it will be used by them in the future. People have already started adding the raising the fist salute to it, and the violence we have seen this month comes from people supporting the movement associated with it.
Extremists join every protest. Extremists join every movement.
Protests can still be powerful and the right thing to do is fight the extremists and support the parts of the protest you believe in.
The BNP may wrap themselves in the Union Flag or the Cross of St George. I will still proudly support and if I want to fly the Union Flag or the Cross of St George because they are the flags of my country. Extremists may kneel, but I will still kneel if I want to and if I was PM I would have knelt in front of the door of Number 10 to show support to equality.
I don't expect the PM not to fly the Union Flag just because the BNP wrap themselves in it. Why do you expect Starmer not to show support to a cause he believes in because of a minority abusing it?
He can do what he likes, and I'm entitled to think it's a mistake for the reasons I've given
You think if extremists embrace a symbol that symbol should be dropped by all non-extremists it seems?
So do you think because the BNP have embraced the Union Flag any time the PM stands by a Union Flag he's associating himself with the BNP?
Taking the knee is not equivalent to the flag of our country. If any PM refused to be associated with that he wouldn't be PM long, whereas had Starmer not decided to take the knee no one would have noticed.
It is absolutely 100% equivalent.
The flag of the country represents the country, even if extremists act absurdly. Taking the knee represents supporting equality for all races, even if extremists act absurdly.
Extremists get no ownership of other people's symbols.
Any questions to Starmer as to whether his adoption of the BLM pose makes it difficult to criticise violence stemming from that movement? I can imagine Farage or Boris would be quizzed if they were foolish enough to do the the same for a far right equivalent
There is no far right equivalent. The far right is the far right. I have explained this till I'm blue in the face. No equivalence. Every time the false equivalence is made the far right notches a little victory and the spirits of all people of sound mind and good character are lowered.
The far right equivalent would be the BNP rebranding itself 'Don't abuse teenage girls'
I would oppose the abuse of teenage girls even if the BNP did that.
Almost everyone would. But mainstream politicians would be ill advised to pose in solidarity with the BNPs new slogan whilst BNP voters bash up muslims
Kaepernick's protest has nothing to do with the far left or hate groups though and is everything to do with showing respect as it has been for four years. It was agreed four years ago to do that as it was more respectful than his prior protest of staying seated.
People trying to associate it with nonsense since then are no different to idiots trying to associate the Union Flag with the BNP.
Of course, he didn't intend it to be adopted by them, but they have hijacked it now, and it will be used by them in the future. People have already started adding the raising the fist salute to it, and the violence we have seen this month comes from people supporting the movement associated with it.
Extremists join every protest. Extremists join every movement.
Protests can still be powerful and the right thing to do is fight the extremists and support the parts of the protest you believe in.
The BNP may wrap themselves in the Union Flag or the Cross of St George. I will still proudly support and if I want to fly the Union Flag or the Cross of St George because they are the flags of my country. Extremists may kneel, but I will still kneel if I want to and if I was PM I would have knelt in front of the door of Number 10 to show support to equality.
I don't expect the PM not to fly the Union Flag just because the BNP wrap themselves in it. Why do you expect Starmer not to show support to a cause he believes in because of a minority abusing it?
He can do what he likes, and I'm entitled to think it's a mistake for the reasons I've given
You think if extremists embrace a symbol that symbol should be dropped by all non-extremists it seems?
So do you think because the BNP have embraced the Union Flag any time the PM stands by a Union Flag he's associating himself with the BNP?
I have a problem with the England flag - because of the BNP and others.
I have far less problems with the Union Jack as that flag actually has a purpose outside of sport.
An interesting point. There is no "England" formally in politics - just the bit left over when t5he devolved administrations, such as Wales, Man, etc. are deducted from the UK. So nothing formally to use the St George's Flag.
Any questions to Starmer as to whether his adoption of the BLM pose makes it difficult to criticise violence stemming from that movement? I can imagine Farage or Boris would be quizzed if they were foolish enough to do the the same for a far right equivalent
There is no far right equivalent. The far right is the far right. I have explained this till I'm blue in the face. No equivalence. Every time the false equivalence is made the far right notches a little victory and the spirits of all people of sound mind and good character are lowered.
The far right equivalent would be the BNP rebranding itself 'Don't abuse teenage girls'
I would oppose the abuse of teenage girls even if the BNP did that.
Almost everyone would. But mainstream politicians would be ill advised to pose in solidarity with the BNPs new slogan whilst BNP voters bash up muslims
Kaepernick's protest has nothing to do with the far left or hate groups though and is everything to do with showing respect as it has been for four years. It was agreed four years ago to do that as it was more respectful than his prior protest of staying seated.
People trying to associate it with nonsense since then are no different to idiots trying to associate the Union Flag with the BNP.
Of course, he didn't intend it to be adopted by them, but they have hijacked it now, and it will be used by them in the future. People have already started adding the raising the fist salute to it, and the violence we have seen this month comes from people supporting the movement associated with it.
Extremists join every protest. Extremists join every movement.
Protests can still be powerful and the right thing to do is fight the extremists and support the parts of the protest you believe in.
The BNP may wrap themselves in the Union Flag or the Cross of St George. I will still proudly support and if I want to fly the Union Flag or the Cross of St George because they are the flags of my country. Extremists may kneel, but I will still kneel if I want to and if I was PM I would have knelt in front of the door of Number 10 to show support to equality.
I don't expect the PM not to fly the Union Flag just because the BNP wrap themselves in it. Why do you expect Starmer not to show support to a cause he believes in because of a minority abusing it?
He can do what he likes, and I'm entitled to think it's a mistake for the reasons I've given
You think if extremists embrace a symbol that symbol should be dropped by all non-extremists it seems?
So do you think because the BNP have embraced the Union Flag any time the PM stands by a Union Flag he's associating himself with the BNP?
What about if the PM uses a racist word whose last use by a major British politician was by Enoch Powell in his Rivers of Blood speech? I wonder what that would tell us?
Well Boris used it, and subsequently became PM with a massive majority, so I suppose it tells us people don't care
Any questions to Starmer as to whether his adoption of the BLM pose makes it difficult to criticise violence stemming from that movement? I can imagine Farage or Boris would be quizzed if they were foolish enough to do the the same for a far right equivalent
There is no far right equivalent. The far right is the far right. I have explained this till I'm blue in the face. No equivalence. Every time the false equivalence is made the far right notches a little victory and the spirits of all people of sound mind and good character are lowered.
The far right equivalent would be the BNP rebranding itself 'Don't abuse teenage girls'
I would oppose the abuse of teenage girls even if the BNP did that.
Almost everyone would. But mainstream politicians would be ill advised to pose in solidarity with the BNPs new slogan whilst BNP voters bash up muslims
Kaepernick's protest has nothing to do with the far left or hate groups though and is everything to do with showing respect as it has been for four years. It was agreed four years ago to do that as it was more respectful than his prior protest of staying seated.
People trying to associate it with nonsense since then are no different to idiots trying to associate the Union Flag with the BNP.
Of course, he didn't intend it to be adopted by them, but they have hijacked it now, and it will be used by them in the future. People have already started adding the raising the fist salute to it, and the violence we have seen this month comes from people supporting the movement associated with it.
Extremists join every protest. Extremists join every movement.
Protests can still be powerful and the right thing to do is fight the extremists and support the parts of the protest you believe in.
The BNP may wrap themselves in the Union Flag or the Cross of St George. I will still proudly support and if I want to fly the Union Flag or the Cross of St George because they are the flags of my country. Extremists may kneel, but I will still kneel if I want to and if I was PM I would have knelt in front of the door of Number 10 to show support to equality.
I don't expect the PM not to fly the Union Flag just because the BNP wrap themselves in it. Why do you expect Starmer not to show support to a cause he believes in because of a minority abusing it?
He can do what he likes, and I'm entitled to think it's a mistake for the reasons I've given
You think if extremists embrace a symbol that symbol should be dropped by all non-extremists it seems?
So do you think because the BNP have embraced the Union Flag any time the PM stands by a Union Flag he's associating himself with the BNP?
Taking the knee is not equivalent to the flag of our country. If any PM refused to be associated with that he wouldn't be PM long, whereas had Starmer not decided to take the knee no one would have noticed.
It is absolutely 100% equivalent.
The flag of the country represents the country, even if extremists act absurdly. Taking the knee represents supporting equality for all races, even if extremists act absurdly.
Extremists get no ownership of other people's symbols.
Any questions to Starmer as to whether his adoption of the BLM pose makes it difficult to criticise violence stemming from that movement? I can imagine Farage or Boris would be quizzed if they were foolish enough to do the the same for a far right equivalent
There is no far right equivalent. The far right is the far right. I have explained this till I'm blue in the face. No equivalence. Every time the false equivalence is made the far right notches a little victory and the spirits of all people of sound mind and good character are lowered.
The far right equivalent would be the BNP rebranding itself 'Don't abuse teenage girls'
I would oppose the abuse of teenage girls even if the BNP did that.
Almost everyone would. But mainstream politicians would be ill advised to pose in solidarity with the BNPs new slogan whilst BNP voters bash up muslims
Kaepernick's protest has nothing to do with the far left or hate groups though and is everything to do with showing respect as it has been for four years. It was agreed four years ago to do that as it was more respectful than his prior protest of staying seated.
People trying to associate it with nonsense since then are no different to idiots trying to associate the Union Flag with the BNP.
Of course, he didn't intend it to be adopted by them, but they have hijacked it now, and it will be used by them in the future. People have already started adding the raising the fist salute to it, and the violence we have seen this month comes from people supporting the movement associated with it.
Extremists join every protest. Extremists join every movement.
Protests can still be powerful and the right thing to do is fight the extremists and support the parts of the protest you believe in.
The BNP may wrap themselves in the Union Flag or the Cross of St George. I will still proudly support and if I want to fly the Union Flag or the Cross of St George because they are the flags of my country. Extremists may kneel, but I will still kneel if I want to and if I was PM I would have knelt in front of the door of Number 10 to show support to equality.
I don't expect the PM not to fly the Union Flag just because the BNP wrap themselves in it. Why do you expect Starmer not to show support to a cause he believes in because of a minority abusing it?
He can do what he likes, and I'm entitled to think it's a mistake for the reasons I've given
You think if extremists embrace a symbol that symbol should be dropped by all non-extremists it seems?
So do you think because the BNP have embraced the Union Flag any time the PM stands by a Union Flag he's associating himself with the BNP?
What about if the PM uses a racist word whose last use by a major British politician was by Enoch Powell in his Rivers of Blood speech? I wonder what that would tell us?
Well Boris used it, and subsequently became PM with a massive majority, so I suppose it tells us people don't care
Any questions to Starmer as to whether his adoption of the BLM pose makes it difficult to criticise violence stemming from that movement? I can imagine Farage or Boris would be quizzed if they were foolish enough to do the the same for a far right equivalent
There is no far right equivalent. The far right is the far right. I have explained this till I'm blue in the face. No equivalence. Every time the false equivalence is made the far right notches a little victory and the spirits of all people of sound mind and good character are lowered.
The far right equivalent would be the BNP rebranding itself 'Don't abuse teenage girls'
I would oppose the abuse of teenage girls even if the BNP did that.
Almost everyone would. But mainstream politicians would be ill advised to pose in solidarity with the BNPs new slogan whilst BNP voters bash up muslims
Kaepernick's protest has nothing to do with the far left or hate groups though and is everything to do with showing respect as it has been for four years. It was agreed four years ago to do that as it was more respectful than his prior protest of staying seated.
People trying to associate it with nonsense since then are no different to idiots trying to associate the Union Flag with the BNP.
Of course, he didn't intend it to be adopted by them, but they have hijacked it now, and it will be used by them in the future. People have already started adding the raising the fist salute to it, and the violence we have seen this month comes from people supporting the movement associated with it.
Extremists join every protest. Extremists join every movement.
Protests can still be powerful and the right thing to do is fight the extremists and support the parts of the protest you believe in.
The BNP may wrap themselves in the Union Flag or the Cross of St George. I will still proudly support and if I want to fly the Union Flag or the Cross of St George because they are the flags of my country. Extremists may kneel, but I will still kneel if I want to and if I was PM I would have knelt in front of the door of Number 10 to show support to equality.
I don't expect the PM not to fly the Union Flag just because the BNP wrap themselves in it. Why do you expect Starmer not to show support to a cause he believes in because of a minority abusing it?
He can do what he likes, and I'm entitled to think it's a mistake for the reasons I've given
You think if extremists embrace a symbol that symbol should be dropped by all non-extremists it seems?
So do you think because the BNP have embraced the Union Flag any time the PM stands by a Union Flag he's associating himself with the BNP?
What about if the PM uses a racist word whose last use by a major British politician was by Enoch Powell in his Rivers of Blood speech? I wonder what that would tell us?
Well Boris used it, and subsequently became PM with a massive majority, so I suppose it tells us people don't care
So racism is ok as long as it is popular. Ok thanks, next time one of my family gets racially abused I will bear that in mind.
Sure it is whatever the impotent whinging of the LOTO says.
Its frankly absurd for the Starmer to be majoring on something as petty and meaningless as Jenrick when there are allegations there is a serious assault on our constitution and the Magna Carta coming. Why is Starmer whinging about Jenrick and not banging on about the importance of the right of trial by jury. Its not as if he's lacking legal expertise to speak on this matter but instead he's playing to NIMBYs in Tower Hamlets, its disgraceful priorities.
Cyclefree would make an infinitely better LOTO than Starmer. I don't always agree with her but she's got smart priorities.
Shameful that Starmer did not raise it at PMQ’s yesterday. If the former head of the CPS can’t see the importance of this change, what hope is there.
I'd be worried the former head of the CPS privately agrees with this change. 🙁
I seriously hope this is just a kite that will be abandoned. If this is forced through I will abandon all support of the Tories as I did while they were led by Theresa May. This is a dealbreaker for me.
Good for you!
Write to your MP about it. Copy in Robert Buckland and Keir Starmer. Hell, copy my article to them.
And don’t be deluded by the 7-jury proposal. That is not the expressed preference. It’s put in there as a feint. What the Lord Chancellor wants to do is take away the right to a jury trial altogether for a whole load of serious offences.
Any questions to Starmer as to whether his adoption of the BLM pose makes it difficult to criticise violence stemming from that movement? I can imagine Farage or Boris would be quizzed if they were foolish enough to do the the same for a far right equivalent
There is no far right equivalent. The far right is the far right. I have explained this till I'm blue in the face. No equivalence. Every time the false equivalence is made the far right notches a little victory and the spirits of all people of sound mind and good character are lowered.
The far right equivalent would be the BNP rebranding itself 'Don't abuse teenage girls'
I would oppose the abuse of teenage girls even if the BNP did that.
Almost everyone would. But mainstream politicians would be ill advised to pose in solidarity with the BNPs new slogan whilst BNP voters bash up muslims
Kaepernick's protest has nothing to do with the far left or hate groups though and is everything to do with showing respect as it has been for four years. It was agreed four years ago to do that as it was more respectful than his prior protest of staying seated.
People trying to associate it with nonsense since then are no different to idiots trying to associate the Union Flag with the BNP.
Of course, he didn't intend it to be adopted by them, but they have hijacked it now, and it will be used by them in the future. People have already started adding the raising the fist salute to it, and the violence we have seen this month comes from people supporting the movement associated with it.
Extremists join every protest. Extremists join every movement.
Protests can still be powerful and the right thing to do is fight the extremists and support the parts of the protest you believe in.
The BNP may wrap themselves in the Union Flag or the Cross of St George. I will still proudly support and if I want to fly the Union Flag or the Cross of St George because they are the flags of my country. Extremists may kneel, but I will still kneel if I want to and if I was PM I would have knelt in front of the door of Number 10 to show support to equality.
I don't expect the PM not to fly the Union Flag just because the BNP wrap themselves in it. Why do you expect Starmer not to show support to a cause he believes in because of a minority abusing it?
He can do what he likes, and I'm entitled to think it's a mistake for the reasons I've given
You think if extremists embrace a symbol that symbol should be dropped by all non-extremists it seems?
So do you think because the BNP have embraced the Union Flag any time the PM stands by a Union Flag he's associating himself with the BNP?
What about if the PM uses a racist word whose last use by a major British politician was by Enoch Powell in his Rivers of Blood speech? I wonder what that would tell us?
Well Boris used it, and subsequently became PM with a massive majority, so I suppose it tells us people don't care
So racism is ok as long as it is popular. Ok thanks, next time one of my family gets racially abused I will bear that in mind.
Who said that? You asked what using Picanninie meant, and, in terms of a bar to political achievement, it seems not much. My point is I think Starmer will be associated with BLM violence now he has taken the knee for them, doesn't matter if I think it's right or wrong that he did it.
Any questions to Starmer as to whether his adoption of the BLM pose makes it difficult to criticise violence stemming from that movement? I can imagine Farage or Boris would be quizzed if they were foolish enough to do the the same for a far right equivalent
There is no far right equivalent. The far right is the far right. I have explained this till I'm blue in the face. No equivalence. Every time the false equivalence is made the far right notches a little victory and the spirits of all people of sound mind and good character are lowered.
The far right equivalent would be the BNP rebranding itself 'Don't abuse teenage girls'
I would oppose the abuse of teenage girls even if the BNP did that.
Almost everyone would. But mainstream politicians would be ill advised to pose in solidarity with the BNPs new slogan whilst BNP voters bash up muslims
Kaepernick's protest has nothing to do with the far left or hate groups though and is everything to do with showing respect as it has been for four years. It was agreed four years ago to do that as it was more respectful than his prior protest of staying seated.
People trying to associate it with nonsense since then are no different to idiots trying to associate the Union Flag with the BNP.
Of course, he didn't intend it to be adopted by them, but they have hijacked it now, and it will be used by them in the future. People have already started adding the raising the fist salute to it, and the violence we have seen this month comes from people supporting the movement associated with it.
Extremists join every protest. Extremists join every movement.
Protests can still be powerful and the right thing to do is fight the extremists and support the parts of the protest you believe in.
The BNP may wrap themselves in the Union Flag or the Cross of St George. I will still proudly support and if I want to fly the Union Flag or the Cross of St George because they are the flags of my country. Extremists may kneel, but I will still kneel if I want to and if I was PM I would have knelt in front of the door of Number 10 to show support to equality.
I don't expect the PM not to fly the Union Flag just because the BNP wrap themselves in it. Why do you expect Starmer not to show support to a cause he believes in because of a minority abusing it?
He can do what he likes, and I'm entitled to think it's a mistake for the reasons I've given
You think if extremists embrace a symbol that symbol should be dropped by all non-extremists it seems?
So do you think because the BNP have embraced the Union Flag any time the PM stands by a Union Flag he's associating himself with the BNP?
What about if the PM uses a racist word whose last use by a major British politician was by Enoch Powell in his Rivers of Blood speech? I wonder what that would tell us?
Well Boris used it, and subsequently became PM with a massive majority, so I suppose it tells us people don't care
Or a large number of people are secretly racist....
In theory it is meant to have a sunset clause. It is not being presented as a practical way of dealing with social distancing because the problem is not caused by this. It is being presented as a way of dealing with the backlog by, dishonestly, claiming that this has been caused by Covid when that is untrue.
But I simply do not trust the government on this, any of them. Temporary solutions have a habit of becoming permanent.
We are already coming out of lockdown so there is no real reason why there cannot be socially distanced trials now.
To get rid of a backlog of 40,000 cases this change would need to go on for years not a few months which is why I don’t believe the temporary claim.
Re the numbers, the reason for 12 is to allow jurors to drop out and still permit a majority verdict if necessary. If you reduce the total you raise the possibility of having trials aborted because there are insufficient jurors even for a majority verdict. Currently you can have an 8-2 verdict.
So 7 is too low. You could reduce to 10 - temporarily. But this or even 7 does not increase capacity. For that courts need to be reopened etc. There are very real measures which can be taken to deal with the backlog but the government does not want to take them and is - quite dishonestly - pretending that these two false choices are the only ones.
Any questions to Starmer as to whether his adoption of the BLM pose makes it difficult to criticise violence stemming from that movement? I can imagine Farage or Boris would be quizzed if they were foolish enough to do the the same for a far right equivalent
There is no far right equivalent. The far right is the far right. I have explained this till I'm blue in the face. No equivalence. Every time the false equivalence is made the far right notches a little victory and the spirits of all people of sound mind and good character are lowered.
The far right equivalent would be the BNP rebranding itself 'Don't abuse teenage girls'
I would oppose the abuse of teenage girls even if the BNP did that.
Almost everyone would. But mainstream politicians would be ill advised to pose in solidarity with the BNPs new slogan whilst BNP voters bash up muslims
Kaepernick's protest has nothing to do with the far left or hate groups though and is everything to do with showing respect as it has been for four years. It was agreed four years ago to do that as it was more respectful than his prior protest of staying seated.
People trying to associate it with nonsense since then are no different to idiots trying to associate the Union Flag with the BNP.
Of course, he didn't intend it to be adopted by them, but they have hijacked it now, and it will be used by them in the future. People have already started adding the raising the fist salute to it, and the violence we have seen this month comes from people supporting the movement associated with it.
Extremists join every protest. Extremists join every movement.
Protests can still be powerful and the right thing to do is fight the extremists and support the parts of the protest you believe in.
The BNP may wrap themselves in the Union Flag or the Cross of St George. I will still proudly support and if I want to fly the Union Flag or the Cross of St George because they are the flags of my country. Extremists may kneel, but I will still kneel if I want to and if I was PM I would have knelt in front of the door of Number 10 to show support to equality.
I don't expect the PM not to fly the Union Flag just because the BNP wrap themselves in it. Why do you expect Starmer not to show support to a cause he believes in because of a minority abusing it?
He can do what he likes, and I'm entitled to think it's a mistake for the reasons I've given
You think if extremists embrace a symbol that symbol should be dropped by all non-extremists it seems?
So do you think because the BNP have embraced the Union Flag any time the PM stands by a Union Flag he's associating himself with the BNP?
What about if the PM uses a racist word whose last use by a major British politician was by Enoch Powell in his Rivers of Blood speech? I wonder what that would tell us?
Well Boris used it, and subsequently became PM with a massive majority, so I suppose it tells us people don't care
Many Tories who voted for Johnson to be leader of their party did so because they positively approved of him saying things like that, not because they didn't care. The same applied at the end of last year to many who voted Tory in the GE having switched from Labour to UKIP (in EU elections if not GEs) and back to Labour in 2017. No "surrender", etc. For millions of voters, Brexit has a name, and that name is "Enoch". They don't care about things like the ECJ or international trading arrangements. For some reason they love referring to Australia though. Just don't ask them to explain how this year's harvest will be brought in...
Bravo, Sir Keir! (And only a couple of days since I recommended it!)
As was suggested when he put her and few others in the team, it gave him the opportunity to sack them when they inevitably showed themselves for what they are.
Completely different issues but a big contrast between Starmer's shad cab and Boris' closest advisers and ministers handling. Also looks like yesterday's PMQs might do wonders for Germany's track and trace system.
Any questions to Starmer as to whether his adoption of the BLM pose makes it difficult to criticise violence stemming from that movement? I can imagine Farage or Boris would be quizzed if they were foolish enough to do the the same for a far right equivalent
There is no far right equivalent. The far right is the far right. I have explained this till I'm blue in the face. No equivalence. Every time the false equivalence is made the far right notches a little victory and the spirits of all people of sound mind and good character are lowered.
There is no difference between the far left and the far right. They are two cheeks of the same arse and I oppose them both equally.
You can't argue this point with me and at the same time the one you are arguing with @isam. If you're right to say to isam that the BLM anti-racist cause is a good one - which you are - it follows that you are wrong to disagree with my contention that there is no equivalence between BLM/antifa and the racist cum fascist far right. Which you duly are.
So to summarize. I'm right, isam is wrong, and you are both right AND wrong - I think because you are trying to fight on too many fronts at the same time. Like Hitler.
Mr. Thompson, do you think every kneeling footballer wants to do it, or do you think some are doing so due to pressure exerted on them?
Not addressed to me, but while the answer is almost certainly the latter, it begs the question of where you're going with this. Should no footballer do it out of concern that others might feel pressured to join in? That seems a bit extreme.
If a footballer lost their job over not kneeling, then that would be worth getting upset about. But of course Kaepernick lost his job over kneeling, so we don't have to imagine the hypothetical injustice in the other direction. It's already happened.
In theory it is meant to have a sunset clause. It is not being presented as a practical way of dealing with social distancing because the problem is not caused by this. It is being presented as a way of dealing with the backlog by, dishonestly, claiming that this has been caused by Covid when that is untrue.
But I simply do not trust the government on this, any of them. Temporary solutions have a habit of becoming permanent.
We are already coming out of lockdown so there is no real reason why there cannot be socially distanced trials now.
To get rid of a backlog of 40,000 cases this change would need to go on for years not a few months which is why I don’t believe the temporary claim.
Re the numbers, the reason for 12 is to allow jurors to drop out and still permit a majority verdict if necessary. If you reduce the total you raise the possibility of having trials aborted because there are insufficient jurors even for a majority verdict. Currently you can have an 8-2 verdict.
So 7 is too low. You could reduce to 10 - temporarily. But this or even 7 does not increase capacity. For that courts need to be reopened etc. There are very real measures which can be taken to deal with the backlog but the government does not want to take them and is - quite dishonestly - pretending that these two false choices are the only ones.
Comments
Shameful proposal.
How can we morally stand-up to China whilst making moves like this?
And adopting the Euro is not necessary - merely a pious assumption deferred to some shadowy future (cf. Sweden IIRC)
Either way though local parties can campaign locally but on a national basis the best way to gain seats is to have a swing to your own party.
It may not cut through but it leaves one hell of a smell...
I seriously hope this is just a kite that will be abandoned. If this is forced through I will abandon all support of the Tories as I did while they were led by Theresa May. This is a dealbreaker for me.
https://twitter.com/clarkemicah/status/1275734852608970753?s=21
People trying to associate it with nonsense since then are no different to idiots trying to associate the Union Flag with the BNP.
So no lay magistrates, juries etc.
1. Rebecca Long Bailey wants to exterminate the jews.
2. Priti Patel is a social liberal.
3. The national debt does not matter.
4. Boris Johnson did not write the extension letter he wrote to the EU.
5. Nor did he promise no border in the Irish Sea.
6. And he has a very muscly torso
To which can now be added a magnificent 7th -
Unemployment has absolutely nothing to do with a surplus of labour.
Anyone trying to associate it with anything nefarious is pathetic. Kudos to Starmer for understanding its real meaning.
https://twitter.com/MaioccoNBCS/status/771582927075315712
1 was clearly hyperbolic criticism of a nasty antisemite.
4 is correct. He sent the letter as he was obliged to by law but he didn't write it, Grieve and the House of Commons wrote it. If I order a book off Amazon they may post it to me but they didn't write the book.
Unemployment does have nothing to do with a surplus of Labour. That's not what causes unemployment.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2020/06/23/football-must-lead-second-wave-support-black-lives-matter-now/
What a waste of money, though. We already knew ‘white lives matter.’ How? Because in America white people are generally not being murdered by police on the streets and in their cars; white people are not being excluded from the top professions because of the colour of their skin; white people are not discriminated against or judged in the way black citizens routinely are.
I hadn't appreciated that all the BLM stuff in the UK is about the situation in the USA. If that was emphasized more, and it was about supporting Colin Kaepernick, I'd feel a lot more comfortable about it.
I sat as a juror on one when I was 21.
There was 13 separate indicments very difficult for most of us on the jury to understand the complexity.On the main one we took an initial vote it was 6-6.
After hours the judge called us back in and said he would accept a majority of 10 -2,.
Then more hours passed and it went 9-3 guilty.
Then it went 10-2 , the foreman asked the man why he had changed his vote.
He said he was sick of waiting he wanted to go home for his dinner.
When I went home I said to my my mother a man had gone to prison because someone wanted their meal.
Protests can still be powerful and the right thing to do is fight the extremists and support the parts of the protest you believe in.
The BNP may wrap themselves in the Union Flag or the Cross of St George. I will still proudly support and if I want to fly the Union Flag or the Cross of St George because they are the flags of my country. Extremists may kneel, but I will still kneel if I want to and if I was PM I would have knelt in front of the door of Number 10 to show support to equality.
I don't expect the PM not to fly the Union Flag just because the BNP wrap themselves in it. Why do you expect Starmer not to show support to a cause he believes in because of a minority abusing it?
"It created a great deal of unemployment among 10 year old boys. However, it left them free to pursue other options - such as living to the age of 11."
So do you think because the BNP have embraced the Union Flag any time the PM stands by a Union Flag he's associating himself with the BNP?
And the PM is painting the Union Flag on the tail of his personal jet...
A bit like wearing poppies at Remembrance Day.
I have far less problems with the Union Jack as that flag actually has a purpose outside of sport.
Write to your MP about it. Copy in Robert Buckland and Keir Starmer. Hell, copy my article to them.
And don’t be deluded by the 7-jury proposal. That is not the expressed preference. It’s put in there as a feint. What the Lord Chancellor wants to do is take away the right to a jury trial altogether for a whole load of serious offences.
https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/legislation-to-abolish-some-jury-trials-could-be-passed-within-weeks/5104739.article
This absolutely should be something they ought to be pushing.
The flag of the country represents the country, even if extremists act absurdly.
Taking the knee represents supporting equality for all races, even if extremists act absurdly.
Extremists get no ownership of other people's symbols.
And what do you think of 7 instead of 12? Are you wedded to 12?
https://twitter.com/tom_nuttall/status/1276046859887357958
Brothels in the Netherlands can reopen on 1 July after being shut for more than three months, the government announced on Wednesday.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2020/jun/25/coronavirus-live-news-who-warns-of-global-oxygen-shortage-as-cases-rise-by-1m-per-week
In theory it is meant to have a sunset clause. It is not being presented as a practical way of dealing with social distancing because the problem is not caused by this. It is being presented as a way of dealing with the backlog by, dishonestly, claiming that this has been caused by Covid when that is untrue.
But I simply do not trust the government on this, any of them. Temporary solutions have a habit of becoming permanent.
We are already coming out of lockdown so there is no real reason why there cannot be socially distanced trials now.
To get rid of a backlog of 40,000 cases this change would need to go on for years not a few months which is why I don’t believe the temporary claim.
Re the numbers, the reason for 12 is to allow jurors to drop out and still permit a majority verdict if necessary. If you reduce the total you raise the possibility of having trials aborted because there are insufficient jurors even for a majority verdict. Currently you can have an 8-2 verdict.
So 7 is too low. You could reduce to 10 - temporarily. But this or even 7 does not increase capacity. For that courts need to be reopened etc. There are very real measures which can be taken to deal with the backlog but the government does not want to take them and is - quite dishonestly - pretending that these two false choices are the only ones.
Bargain.
Hopefully Starmer will put someone with ability in.
Good response to an obviously idiotic action by her this morning. Impressive.
tweet shit; get sacked.
Also looks like yesterday's PMQs might do wonders for Germany's track and trace system.
But hey, what a contrast with Johnson.
So to summarize. I'm right, isam is wrong, and you are both right AND wrong - I think because you are trying to fight on too many fronts at the same time. Like Hitler.
If a footballer lost their job over not kneeling, then that would be worth getting upset about. But of course Kaepernick lost his job over kneeling, so we don't have to imagine the hypothetical injustice in the other direction. It's already happened.
But a better question would ask about effects, such as:
* food shortages
* collapse of banking system / hyperinflation
* long-term power blackouts