How is the Tory government doing?

wanderlust wrote:

T.R.O.Y. wrote:
As ludicrous as they are we’ve entered a dangerous era under this government, they have no qualms openly lying on a regular basis and seemingly suffer no consequences.

Openly lying without consequences has become normalised in the UK now.

With a complicit media and the absence of a credible opposition willing to up the ante there's no reason why these clowns shouldn't continue for years to come.

The populist public don't trust Labour or the media so they tend to believe what they want to believe and it's gotten to the point where Boris and his cronies could do almost anything and still be thought of as "naughty" rather than dishonorable and untrustworthy. Frankly Starmer's rational and honourable approach will not work these days.

To have any chance of removing them, the opposition requires a charismatic populist leader who is willing to hit the Tories hard on subjects that gel with the populist/nationalist psyche - and be willing to be as equally dishonourable in the fight - and that's not Starmer.

Taint the Tories with touchstone populist subjects such as child abuse, a lack of patriotism, selling out their supporters etc - it's a sad state of affairs but only by fighting hard and dirty with strong punchy messaging that will grab the headlines will they be removed - not sniping from the sidelines.

Right now, the Tories make the headlines and control the narrative whilst the opposition is merely commenting on them. That needs to change which means that they need far more aggressive messaging e.g. their attack on democracy needs to be strongly messaged as an attack on Britain and British values e.g. "greatest threat to our country since the Luftwaffe".

I would stop short of saying "how many more children like Arthur will die before the government changes it's social policies?" but the opposition needs to move the narrative much closer to that line to control the situation - and that means doing the research, getting the evidence, lining up the legals and then pouncing i.e. pretty much what Trump, the Tories and the Leave campaign did.
Because sadly, that's what our populist society responds to.

It's not even worth the effort to reply to this hysterical nonsense.

I've already shown you to be utterly bonkers if you think the press is in the pocket of the government (does the todays Times headline not give you a clue they are clearly not???) and Labour need to find a way of finding unity amongst themselves first and foremost before they can even begin to think of moving forward again - clearly an elected leader (Starmer) and a separately elected deputy (Rayner) clearly doesn't work - does it?

To be honest I think Labour are unelectable as they are now - which is a bad place for any democracy to be in when it gives its people only one electable party to choose from at the ballot box to form the government.

Any form of extremism in an attempt to rid the country of the Tory government will ultimately provoke a reaction from them and this is clearly what has happened on a small scale with the Times report on the intended changes to Judicial Reviews because of Maughan trying to politicise them in order to change ministerial decisions.

T.R.O.Y. wrote:‘Nothing of the sort’ 

Out of interest, which of the 4 JR’s raised by Maugham this year was an abuse of the system Sluffy?

Which 4 JR's has he won?

I can only think of two.

One when the government openly admitted BEFORE the JR that it had been unable to meet a 28 day deadline to publish contract awards because they had the little matter of the emergency of the worldwide pandemic to deal with and the second when he won on a technicality that the government 'LOOKED' as though they had done something dodgy - which is currently under appeal.

Do I think it was worth tying up the government in court and all that was involved for those two decisions - and let us clearly note that the decisions changed absolutely nothing - there was no remedies flowing from them! - no I personally don't.

All that was achieved - and let's be honest the whole point of Maughan doing them - was to make the government to look bad.

That is NOT what the purpose of JR's are for - and I warned that imo this was dangerous and damaging if allowed to continue.

I'm not blowing my own trumpet in any way but knowing of and understanding why the constitution works it seemed obvious to me that cases such as Maughan brings were done deliberately for a purpose not consistent to what JR's exist for and that sooner or later, if it persisted, that it would have to be stopped.

It looks like that's exactly what is now intended.

Four out of four this year, and yes you shouldn’t blow your own trumpet - you’ve been proven wrong every step of the way you berk   .

T.R.O.Y. wrote:Four out of four this year, and yes you shouldn’t blow your own trumpet - you’ve been proven wrong every step of the way you berk   .

Kindly name the four then.

I may well be a berk but I'm a berk who predicted this proposal by the government would happen and why it would...

Seems I do know about somethings after all!

You can answer my question first. 

You’re reasoning for why this is happening is that the system has been abused by Maugham, so name which JR’s you see as an abuse?

T.R.O.Y. wrote:You can answer my question first. 

You’re reasoning for why is completely flawed is that the system has been abused by Maugham, so name which JR’s you see as an abuse?

I've already answered your question???

I am only am aware of two of the four JR's and clearly see them for what they are and that is a deliberate attempt (abuse) to use the JR system for political point scoring and not for the reason they exist, which is to see if legislation has been followed properly.

In short Maughan is seeking through JR's to challenge Ministerial (The Executive's) decision making which is clearly contrary to the constitutional relationship between the judiciary and the executive.

Now what are the four JR's that he's won this year please?

Or don't you know...

So you disagree with the courts decisions on those? It’s a pro Maugham conspiracy or you just know better than the court?

All 4 have been posted on the nepotism thread throughout the year, go find them or go on the GLP website yourself. But all 4 were successful and I’ll go with what the court thinks rather than Sluffy thanks .

T.R.O.Y. wrote:So you disagree with the courts decisions on those? It’s a pro Maugham conspiracy or you just know better than the court?

All 4 have been posted on the nepotism thread throughout the year, go find them or go on the GLP website yourself. But all 4 were successful and I’ll go with what the court thinks rather than Sluffy thanks .

So you don't know, just as I suspected.

Did I say I didn't think the TWO JR decisions I'm aware of not to be right in law - no I didn't.

One was already admitted to by the government itself - failure to publish contract awards within 28 days - technically it was the correct decision but we all know there was under unique and extenuating circumstance, namely no one had had time to do so in the face of the pandemic at the time.

The second was technically correct but ridiculous in reality in that the finding was that the government LOOKED dodgy - not that they were!!!

Think of these as akin to VAR decisions we've had on football, when a goal is struck off because someones toenail was offside or someones finger pointing to where he wants the ball to be played to, makes him offside as well.

Ridiculous in the scheme of things and as such needed changing - which indeed VAR as now done.

Similarly why there seems intent to do the same now with JR's.

To be honest I don't care what your views on what I write are.

I certainly wouldn't trust anything I read on social media but it may well make me think if I should look more closely at what is being said from both sides.

You unfortunately only wish to see one part of the story.

That's your choice.

Maybe you would view things differently if you opened up your mind and put aside your prejudices and judged things on merit rather than simply taking as gospel social media influencers like Maughan who tell you things you WANT to hear.

Clearly you are unable to do that and that's why you blindly follow all that the likes on Maughan spouts without ever doubting his motives or his aims.

To be fair you are far from alone in doing this.

I see it as you being manipulated and complacent with it, you obviously believe otherwise.

Hope you are contented with such bliss that you've appeared to have found from the likes of Maughan.

Boiling down court judgements to ‘VAR’ decisions and technicalities just because they came out on the side you didn’t want, fuck me how pathetic.

T.R.O.Y. wrote:So you disagree with the courts decisions on those? It’s a pro Maugham conspiracy or you just know better than the court?

All 4 have been posted on the nepotism thread throughout the year, go find them or go on the GLP website yourself. But all 4 were successful and I’ll go with what the court thinks rather than Sluffy thanks .

Given that he begins a post with "It's not even worth the effort to reply to this hysterical nonsense"....and then makes a considerable effort to rant on in a way that completely misses the point about a proposed general approach to electioneering strategy and tactics originally made, I'd rather go with what Mickey Mouse says than what Sluffy says
I'll read it for a laugh but I have long since given up trying to have a grown up conversation with the muppet from the council.

Social media at its finest with two blokes abusing another one simply because I don't hold the preconceived and prejudicial views they hold of the government and therefore in their minds I must be wrong!!!

And you think I'm the muppet!!!

T.R.O.Y. wrote:Boiling down court judgements to ‘VAR’ decisions and technicalities just because they came out on the side you didn’t want, fuck me how pathetic.

Hahaha!

wanderlust wrote:Given that he begins a post with "It's not even worth the effort to reply to this hysterical nonsense"....and then makes a considerable effort to rant on in a way that completely misses the point about a proposed general approach to electioneering strategy and tactics originally made, I'd rather go with what Mickey Mouse says than what Sluffy says
I'll read it for a laugh but I have long since given up trying to have a grown up conversation with the muppet from the council.

I actually think a man with zero legal qualification claiming to know better than the court is a better example of social media in 2021. Bit like the anti-vaxxers knowing better than the scientists, just baseless nonsense more concerned with reworking snippets of information so they fit a pre-conceived theory.

If Maugham’s GLP was abusing the system, these JR’s wouldn’t have been successful - get over it and move on.

Well in between all the insults, the main question of how the Tories doing seems to have got lost. I suppose it depends where you look but as a Tory member and voter, I can tell you that I think they’re doing a largely shit job of running the country and if there was anything like a decent alternative, I think I’d take it but since under our current electoral system there is only Labour, I have to stay where I am. I read your suggestions earlier of how you think they should change to get people back on side Lusty and if you genuinely believe what you wrote you’ll be in the wilderness for a long time yet. The plain fact is, Labour despite how bad the Tories are, are completely unelectable. As Sluffy said, the Party is still split right from the top with Starmer completely held back by Raynor and however you try and dress it up, the left wing still retains a stranglehold. Until Labour stops associating itself with activist minorities like BLM, LBGT and others, it will never enjoy a revival. However much you may deny it, I’m afraid it’s a fact. Not only are they seen as supporting fringe groups they’re also seen as anti British and looking to rubbish our history and side with those pulling statues down and groups stopping traffic.

Having a charismatic leader would change nothing but then from what I’ve seen, you don’t have one of those anyway. In terms of numbers, until Labour win Scotland and the North of England back, they have absolutely zero chance of ever gaining power. You basically admit that yourself suggesting they form partnerships with the likes of the Lib Dems and Greens!! Oh dear, that alone indicates the problem you’re in. Maybe if they stopped trying to always find fault with what the government were doing and improved their support in key areas, they might just start to get some respect. The problem is, that when you keep telling people in red wall seats how stupid they were to vote Tory, they just dig the hole deeper. People don’t like to be told they’re stupid do they. Win them back firstly by listening to them and secondly and probably most importantly, bin the red flag brigade and understand that the days of the strong unions and Arthur Scargill are gone. I live near Barnsley and where all the pits once were are new housing estates full of young, aspirational people. Labour still harps on about the industrial past but it’s gone and it’s never coming back. Labour needs to accept that, even if it means jettisoning the left altogether and taking a Blairite, Social Democratic role. then you might have a chance but until Labour totally reforms into todays way of life, there will only be one option and that is sadly the Tories.

Best post you’ve ever written on here and I agree with most of it. I only differ on the way forward and do believe there are enough progressives out there for Labour to win as part of a coalition, you say ditch  the support for BLM and LBGT - believe me if you tried that you’d lose Labour’s new base which is people like me under 40’s living in citys, we’ll just go vote Green. 

The Tories have dragged the country through unnecessarily dark days, and this latest government is dangerous to democracy. Keep the faith though.

T.R.O.Y. wrote:I actually think a man with zero legal qualification claiming to know better than the court is a better example of social media in 2021. Bit like the anti-vaxxers knowing better than the scientists, just baseless nonsense more concerned with reworking snippets of information so they fit a pre-conceived theory.

If Maugham’s GLP was abusing the system, these JR’s wouldn’t have been successful - get over it and move on.

You are clearly just wumming now.

Please provide me one statement that I made that I know better than the courts.

You won't find one because I've never said it.

I gave you an example (VAR) that I thought you may understand in that being technically correct - in which the judges where in their rulings - doesn't necessarily equate to their constitutional reason for being.

Both JR's and VAR (at least initially) look at things in black and white - is it right or wrong - nothing in between.

JR's are NOT constitutionally there to rule on the executive's policy making.

Maughan et al have somewhat cleverly tried to manipulate JR's to make rulings to attempt to do just that.

Up to now they have had some initial success in respect of May and Johnson re Brexit and some such as Maughan has clearly seen this as a 'loophole' to exploit for his own political ends.

Seems to me that the government is simply intent on closing this loophole by bringing in such legislation to do so.

If you don't wish to understand that reality, then that's your problem - not mine.

You claimed Maugham’s 4 cases were an abuse of the system. If what you’re saying is true and supported by the courts then post some evidence from the statements.

Or (even better) just admit you got it wrong, and if the cases were abuses they would not have passed.

Whitesince63 wrote:Well in between all the insults, the main question of how the Tories doing seems to have got lost. I suppose it depends where you look but as a Tory member and voter, I can tell you that I think they’re doing a largely shit job of running the country and if there was anything like a decent alternative, I think I’d take it but since under our current electoral system there is only Labour, I have to stay where I am. I read your suggestions earlier of how you think they should change to get people back on side Lusty and if you genuinely believe what you wrote you’ll be in the wilderness for a long time yet. The plain fact is, Labour despite how bad the Tories are, are completely unelectable. As Sluffy said, the Party is still split right from the top with Starmer completely held back by Raynor and however you try and dress it up, the left wing still retains a stranglehold. Until Labour stops associating itself with activist minorities like BLM, LBGT and others, it will never enjoy a revival. However much you may deny it, I’m afraid it’s a fact. Not only are they seen as supporting fringe groups they’re also seen as anti British and looking to rubbish our history and side with those pulling statues down and groups stopping traffic.

Having a charismatic leader would change nothing but then from what I’ve seen, you don’t have one of those anyway. In terms of numbers, until Labour win Scotland and the North of England back, they have absolutely zero chance of ever gaining power. You basically admit that yourself suggesting they form partnerships with the likes of the Lib Dems and Greens!! Oh dear, that alone indicates the problem you’re in. Maybe if they stopped trying to always find fault with what the government were doing and improved their support in key areas, they might just start to get some respect. The problem is, that when you keep telling people in red wall seats how stupid they were to vote Tory, they just dig the hole deeper. People don’t like to be told they’re stupid do they. Win them back firstly by listening to them and secondly and probably most importantly, bin the red flag brigade and understand that the days of the strong unions and Arthur Scargill are gone. I live near Barnsley and where all the pits once were are new housing estates full of young, aspirational people. Labour still harps on about the industrial past but it’s gone and it’s never coming back. Labour needs to accept that, even if it means jettisoning the left altogether and taking a Blairite, Social Democratic role. then you might have a chance but until Labour totally reforms into todays way of life, there will only be one option and that is sadly the Tories.

Good post 63.

It actually picks up on several points I've made earlier - particularly that the maths is simply not there for Labour to form a government without not only winning back all the Scottish seats they once held plus the red wall seats they lost but they also need to win other seats too, if they want an outright majority in Parliament.

It simply isn't going to happen is it?

Labour, if it is serious about wanting to win needs to start off by presenting itself as a viable alternative government with polices the electorate want to vote for.

The reality is that they are a million miles away from that and are riven by internal discord and rivalries.

We have probably the worst government in my lifetime and they will simply stroll to another general election win simply because Labour, nor any other political parties are anywhere near capable of challenging them.

It's not really difficult to see that is it, yet the Labour Party seem oblivious to it - almost as though they really don't want to win?

T.R.O.Y. wrote:You claimed Maugham’s 4 cases were an abuse of the system. If what you’re saying is true and supported by the courts then post some evidence from the statements.

Or (even better) just admit you got it wrong, and if the cases were abuses they would not have passed.

Eh???

It doesn't work like that.

Clearly you don't understand how the system works.

If the matters was taken to say the Crown Court then 'intent' would be taken in - ie is it the intent of Maughan's claim to bring about a challenge to the executives decision making, then the matter would no be heard as it is outside of the judiciary powers.

JR's don't work to the 'intent' rule as such, they just look at how the administration of the law was carried out.

That's the 'loophole' that Maughan and others have seen and that's why they go the JR route and don't trouble themselves in finding any real evidence that actual sleaze or cronyism has happened.

That's why no smoking guns have been found, there isn't any too be found, nor any serious intent to even try and find one!

The government is simply intent on acting to close this loophole and stop Maughan et al tying to abuse the JR system for their own political ends.

Priceless from Line of Duty's Jed Mercurio!

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/jed-mercurio-tweets-boris-police-pic-saying-he-is-too-bent-for-next-line-of-duty-303922/