MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Questions Of The Day (Politics)
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 269, 270, 271 ... 299, 300, 301  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

More careful ignoral on the migrant front preparatory to what we are told will be 'the highest figures on record' to be announced later in the week by Sue-Ella or her successor. The big new thing is apparently 'those in full time education'. Whatever you think about British higher education, there's no doubt this is a big foreign exchange earner. Whatever one thinks about migrants is irrelevant since they will be going home afterwards clutching their diplomas. I was going to say 'none the wiser' but I'm not going to.

Or two years afterwards anyway since the Home Office's baffling new ruling is they can stay here for that length of time 'if it assists with getting a job'. I presume not in Britain but why this should require being in Britain is something you'll have to take up with the Home Office. Students are also allowed to bring their dependents 'if they can afford to support them'. I understand that mature students might wish to do so, and more power to them, but somehow I've gained a different picture of students. I must be out of touch.

Never mind all that, it's the figures that are being carefully ignored. They're shooting up. Now if British higher education has become suddenly more fashionable one would expect this to be a worldwide phenomenon. It isn't. Overwhelmingly from old faves, India and Nigeria. The 'dependents' figure has also shot up. The mature students must have got the news in a hurry.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

If there are any ex-Directors of Public Prosecutions in Parliament he (or she) might remind his (or her) colleagues there is an overriding principle that cases should not be brought if doing so would be 'against the public interest'. To go after an ex-prime minister who broke/didn't break one or other minor (fined £50 though usually a police warning was considered sufficient) Covid regulation several years ago would come into the 'not in the public interest by any stretch of the imagination, what were you even thinking of' category, if it were anybody other than Adolf Hitler, or whatever his name is.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Good grief, one of the Capitol rioters has just been given eighteen years. I acknowledge people died -- quite how or why I've never been able to discover -- but this is so savage it is the best recruiting sergeant these insignificant mutts will ever get. Well done, the Democrats.
Send private message
Grant



View user's profile
Reply with quote

The "progressives" are terrified that there's going to be a counter-revolution. They must frighten those who are thinking of protesting, even if all they want to do is damage Nancy Pelosi's desk.

Sadly the counter-revolutionaries have no one to vote for. Trump would let them down again and DeSantis is another pretend conservative.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

I find it faintly terrifying that the only viable alternative to Trump as the Republican candidate is someone who is consciously placing himself to the right of him. I didn't know there was any political party to the right of Trump now the NSDAP has got itself outlawed.

We can only hope the Democrats don't hunt around for someone who is senile and adopts the campaign slogan "Four more years".
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

The Scots are having sexism problems with their police force (they've chosen only to have one) but it must be reassuring having a police chief who actually looks like one. He wasn't Taggart but close enough. Perception is everything when it's the thin blue line against ... well, us. (I include women in that category.)
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Germany has just announced a second quarter of declining GDP. This, they keep telling us, is the definition of a recession. We just escaped one of our own when we had a quarter of declining growth followed by a quarter of zero growth. This is despite quarterly figures frequently being adjusted later by more than the growth/decline figures.

However that's not the big news. The British liberal organs have been joyfully comparing our growth figures with 'the other major OECD countries' or -- depending what they are --'our competitors' or 'our European neighbours' or whatever. Any list that shows us at the bottom and carries the subtext 'because of Brexit' or more generally 'this Tory government'. Since no list showing us above Germany is suitable, look out for some deft rejigging, probably involving the choice of the 'right' time frame.

Or they may just announce the latest figures and look grim.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

The Serbs have just mobilised their army and placed it on the Kosovan border. I predicted this in a medium story I wrote here https://medium.com/@mickxharper/holding-onto-nurse-for-fear-of-something-better-81c9490941b9 Will I get the Nobel Peace Prize? Will I get readers of my medium stories into double figures?
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

I'm not tremendously clued up about these things but can someone tell me who Philip Schofield is and why him having a relationship with someone at work means the end of ITV?
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Channel 4 News ran a long piece about l'affaire Schofield so I am now up to speed. And even more baffled. The rules about sex with work colleagues is pretty well established. It is formally banned because of its generally deleterious effect so you have to be a bit circumspect. But the rule is not fiercely enforced because everyone's at it and there wouldn't be a workplace if it was.

If a particular relationship gets widely known -- and a media organisation like ITV would presumably mean it would be -- then the hierarchy have a choice. If you're unimportant you'll probably just get your cards and that would be the end of it. If you're important you'd be called in, questioned about it, and deny it. Any competent management would shrug

"What can we do? We asked, we did our duty, we're not going to call in Philip Marlowe. Apart from the pot calling the kettle black factor, we'd be losing one of our key bods to no obvious purpose."

And corporate life would go on. Unless you're Philip Schofield when it means life does not go on for you, for ITV, for the amour propre of the outraged citizens watching breakfast television. I would have thought those sad sacks would lap it up. Me, if I was an ITV executive, I'd call Schofield into the office pretty damn quick

"Phil, can you start an affair with a work colleague. The breakfast ratings need gingering up."
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

So, huge queues form at Heathrow because the 'gates aren't working'. There are problems at the ports because various electronic folderols aren't available. Britain's at a standstill etc etc. For why? Because it's a perfect storm -- the start of the school holidays, the first weekend of the summer season, a getaway sunny spell, strikes, Brexit... I lost count. So did the government, they refused to comment.

Because it's none of the above. It's a leetle bit of electronic warfare. Shot across the bows from a state-actor. If they're targeting airports it's probably got something to do with F-16 planes. How do I know this? How come the news organisations aren't even mentioning such an obvious possibility? Always remember the rule: when careful ignoral is around, it's not what they say, it's what they don't say.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Oh, it's so glorious. We now have a constitutional crisis about what the executive has to hand over to the judiciary. Our very own Watergate Saturday Night Massacre. Will Dame Hallett get the goods on Bad Boris's What's App? Should some dim figure from the past be fined fifty sovs for teetering over the edge of long-forgotten Covid regulations. OR NOT. A nation trembles.

There's a precedent as it happens. They dug up Oliver Cromwell's bones so they could hang them in chains from London Bridge. I say we do it for real this time. No, Boris Johnson not Dame Hallett.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

If the government thinks they're going to get any help from a bunch of judges about a dispute they're having with a judge they don't know how this country works. So no change there.

But help is at hand! Grant Shapps has come out in favour of Hallett.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

I'd better update my Dame Andrea Leadsom? exchange

"Heather Hallett?"
"Yes."
"Ministry of Justice here."
"Is it about my damehood because I'm an ex-Appeal Court judge sitting as a crossbench peer in the House of Lords?"
"Yes, it's in the post."

"Heather Hallett?"
"Dame Heather Hallett if you don't mind."
"Cameron Mackintosh here. That's what I'm ringing about actually. We're casting Mother Goose."
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

The really daft aspect of all this is that a lawyer is the last person who should be conducting the enquiry. Judges are fine if it's an event, if it's something that went wrong, if there's something or someone to blame. So it won't happen again. This is simply not the case with Covid. Nobody in Britain was responsible for it. Insofar as it is how Britain dealt with Covid, that isn't an event, it is a massive raft of actions carried out over two years and more.

You don't need a judicial enquiry to find out what they were, who was responsible for thinking them up and who was responsible for implementing the policies, it's all a matter of public record. I haven't got much time for historians but they're helluva lot more experienced in that line of work than high court judges.

True, you might need to probe the motivations of the decision-makers but that is chicken feed. They might have got it wrong but they were doing their best (unless What's App shows they were partying into the night instead). What you are really asking the enquiry to deliberate on is "What should we do when faced with a pandemic?" You can call seventy million witnesses and shake them till the truth falls out, but you won't get an answer to that question. Nobody knows. And there are a lot of people professionally better equipped to deal with that than superannuated ex-Appeal Court judges. I was going to say 'someone medical' but maybe not.

"Covid, I sentence you to ten years without remission. The public is entitled to protection from the likes of you. Take him down."
"Where to, your honour?"
"A secure facility in China."
Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 269, 270, 271 ... 299, 300, 301  Next

Jump to:  
Page 270 of 301

MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group