• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

UK PoliGAF |OT2| - We Blue Ourselves

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CyclopsRock

Member
Fernando Fernandez said:
Maybe I'm being too optimistic but I can't see Apple and the makers of WhatsApp doing anything the government wants in this snoopers bill.
Click to expand...

I agree. Worth remembering, though, that Facebook own WhatsApp now. Not that I think that necessarily increases the chances of them doing anything, as they're allowing WhatsApp to go on largely independently, but yeah.
 
J

JonathanEx

Member
But one of the issues is while in the US Apple can do what they're doing and fight it, under the watchful eyes of THERESA MAY 3000, they:
1) won't be going through court process because it's just at govt discretion as to when encryption should be undone
2) have various gagging notices on them from commenting on surveillance as part of the bill

Not that they wouldn't try and object, but the law is designed to make it much harder for them to, or to even be public with those objections.

Actually if Apple could somehow tie the fight in the US to the fight in the UK that would be interesting from a PR point of view.
 
M

Mindwipe

Member
Fernando Fernandez said:
Maybe I'm being too optimistic but I can't see Apple and the makers of WhatsApp doing anything the government wants in this snoopers bill.
Click to expand...

They don't really have to under the new draft. It's not worded very well, but there's not much legal risk there now given the Home Office have stated the intent of the clause.

It will probably get fixed in amendments in the readings.

The only problem is that the rest of the bill is arguably an even bigger clusterfuck than previously, and now any old copper with a grudge against his ex-girlfriend has access. Wonderful.
 
Jezbollah

Jezbollah

Member
There is no fucking way this bill passes anywhere without warrants being involved in the data intercept process. Absolute lunacy.
 
C

CyclopsRock

Member
I feel like we never just talk any more, you know guys?

But really, James Forsyth at the Speccie had this to say:

Jeremy Corbyn’s delivery at PMQs today was far more passionate than usual. But his questions were still far too scattergun. Cameron batted them away with almost embarrassing ease.

Corbyn’s ineptitude is draining PMQs of its sense of occasion. It is also particularly maddening as there are plenty of things to pick the government up on at the moment — Sunday trading, the EU-Turkey deal, Hinkley Point to name just a few.

But the prize for the worse Labour question of the session didn’t go to Corbyn, but his City Minister Richard Burgon who asked Cameron if he would resign if he lost the EU referendum. Predictably, Cameron simply said no. But the question served to unify the Tory benches rather than divide them. It also exasperated many of his Labour colleagues, who —because they need left wing voters to turn out and vote to stay in — want to avoid turning this into a referendum on Cameron.

Towards the end of the session, Cameron himself attempted to inject some energy into it. He went from a reflection on Mothering Sunday to a demand that Labour end segregated political meetings, accusing the party of pandering to religious bigots who think that women are second class citizens. Things have come to a pretty pass when it is the Prime Minister, not the opposition, who is trying to add some drama to PMQs.
Click to expand...

I think he's kinda right. I remember the good old days of Ed Miliband's PMQs where not only would he some times win, but there was almost always some talking point, be it something funny or something actually of genuine interest. Now I think that if it didn't happen one week when it was supposed to, no one would actually notice.
 
K

Kuros

Member
So the SNP are going to bring down the Sunday trading hours in England/Wales bill despite there not being a Sunday trading law in Scotland. Whatever you think of the bill you have to admit this is all a bit constitutionally bonkers.
 
F

FlammableD

Banned
Kuros said:
So the SNP are going to bring down the Sunday trading hours in England/Wales bill despite there not being a Sunday trading law in Scotland. Whatever you think of the bill you have to admit this is all a bit constitutionally bonkers.
Click to expand...

#BetterTogether
 
C

CyclopsRock

Member
Never again will they be accused of being too wee, too poor and too stupid to halt laws being passed in rUK that already exist in Scotland.
 
U

Uzzy

Member
CyclopsRock said:
I feel like we never just talk any more, you know guys?

But really, James Forsyth at the Speccie had this to say:



I think he's kinda right. I remember the good old days of Ed Miliband's PMQs where not only would he some times win, but there was almost always some talking point, be it something funny or something actually of genuine interest. Now I think that if it didn't happen one week when it was supposed to, no one would actually notice.
Click to expand...

That'd be fantastic. PMQs is a shallow bit of political theatre which accomplishes very little of practical effect. People remember it for good quips like Stalin to Mr Bean, not for how it helped parliament hold the government to account. It's a pointless bit of drama.
 
C

CyclopsRock

Member
Uzzy said:
That'd be fantastic. PMQs is a shallow bit of political theatre which accomplishes very little of practical effect. People remember it for good quips like Stalin to Mr Bean, not for how it helped parliament hold the government to account. It's a pointless bit of drama.
Click to expand...

tbf though I think those two things are linked. The other departmental question times (as well as select committees and stuff) are far more effective at critiquing specific policies and legislation - the only "holding the government to account" power PMQs has ever had is via its ability to impact the media narrative. So I don't think the "political theatre" is a bad thing per se because it's just another avenue of account - but obviously that doesn't mean everything they do at PMQs is valuable to those ends.
 
Jezbollah

Jezbollah

Member
CyclopsRock said:
I feel like we never just talk any more, you know guys?

But really, James Forsyth at the Speccie had this to say:



I think he's kinda right. I remember the good old days of Ed Miliband's PMQs where not only would he some times win, but there was almost always some talking point, be it something funny or something actually of genuine interest. Now I think that if it didn't happen one week when it was supposed to, no one would actually notice.
Click to expand...

I saw a few tweets from some journalists that actually resonated with me re PMQs - one was that Corbyn seemed to try and chuck everything but the kitchen sink at Cameron wishing something would stick - another was to commend Angus Robertson who seems to always hit the right tone with his questions. Mind you, some might say it's easy to do that after usually being the first to ask questions after JC.

As Uzzy said, most of the times it's a pointless bit of drama.
 
L

Lirlond

Member
Kuros said:
So the SNP are going to bring down the Sunday trading hours in England/Wales bill despite there not being a Sunday trading law in Scotland. Whatever you think of the bill you have to admit this is all a bit constitutionally bonkers.
Click to expand...

All Cameron has to do is enforce Sunday pay in legislation. Then the SNP will abstain. But he can't do that, as it will destroy the narrative their applying to the NHS.
 
R

Roberto Larcos

Member
I quite liked New Labour, to be honest. Am I allowed to say that yet? New Labour may be about as far left as the party can go in the UK, before haemorrhaging votes to the Conservative party.
 
V

Volotaire

Member
Dan Jarvis, in my opinion, is one of the largest chances the Labour Party has got to truly move from New Labour to a 'New New Labour'.

He has the ability to capture the key demographics from UKIP which deviated from the Labour party and possesses a non orthodox his personal history and academic experience relative to other candidates. The New Statesman also picked up on his body language and speaking style, which I also feel has a distinctive flavour.

He is a very interesting candidate. He is someone I expected to have been in a winning chance in the Labour election leadership race last year before his announcement that he was not running. Dan Jarvis is the type of candidate that would cause the Conservatives to rethink their PR campaign against Labour.
 
F

Fernando Fernandez

Member
Yeah how could you call an ex-major in the British Army a "threat to national security" which is the go to line for Conservatives these days.

So looking at my post at the top of the screen, maybe I was being too optimistic. Its happening.
 
phisheep

phisheep

NeoGAF's Chief Barrister
Jarvis really needs to find a more distinctive line than "tough on the causes of ....", since that has been rather done to death by Blair.
 
Jezbollah

Jezbollah

Member
Fernando Fernandez said:
Yeah how could you call an ex-major in the British Army a "threat to national security" which is the go to line for Conservatives these days.

So looking at my post at the top of the screen, maybe I was being too optimistic. Its happening.
Click to expand...

Woah. The Apple/Whatsapp thing? Woah.

EDIT: Re Jarvis - I really like him. And I could easily see myself voting for him as a leader.
 
J

JonathanEx

Member
phisheep said:
Jarvis really needs to find a more distinctive line than "tough on the causes of ....", since that has been rather done to death by Blair.
Click to expand...

You could say you're tough on rhetoric, tough on the causes of rhetoric?


I find the Gove thing interesting as it looks like some fairly successful game playing. Like, it's pretty obvious he leaked the Queen thing. Normally that sort of thing would probably be a sackable offence as a cabinet minister, but sacking Gove would probably give the Leave campaign a bit of 'conspiracy against us!!!' momentum. Maybe he'll feel consequences in a post-referendum reshuffle if we remain.
 
K

Kuros

Member
JonathanEx said:
You could say you're tough on rhetoric, tough on the causes of rhetoric?


I find the Gove thing interesting as it looks like some fairly successful game playing. Like, it's pretty obvious he leaked the Queen thing. Normally that sort of thing would probably be a sackable offence as a cabinet minister, but sacking Gove would probably give the Leave campaign a bit of 'conspiracy against us!!!' momentum. Maybe he'll feel consequences in a post-referendum reshuffle if we remain.
Click to expand...

He is (probably was now) good mates with Cameron. I think in the event of a remain vote he will be sacked for his betrayal and now this.
 
K

kmag

Member
JonathanEx said:
You could say you're tough on rhetoric, tough on the causes of rhetoric?


I find the Gove thing interesting as it looks like some fairly successful game playing. Like, it's pretty obvious he leaked the Queen thing. Normally that sort of thing would probably be a sackable offence as a cabinet minister, but sacking Gove would probably give the Leave campaign a bit of 'conspiracy against us!!!' momentum. Maybe he'll feel consequences in a post-referendum reshuffle if we remain.
Click to expand...

The thing is he shouldn't be able to survive briefing against our Maj regardless of the circumstances, it's the one thing the forelock tuggers in Government aren't meant to do.

and he's basically admitted it with his 'denial' at the weekend

I don’t know how The Sun got all its information.
Click to expand...

When pressed he repeated the answer twice using the exact same formulation.
 
K

Kuros

Member
Watson has an urgent question at 15:30 so we'll see what Gove says again.

Will be tough to frame the question though as he's not allowed to mention the queen in it.
 
Jezbollah

Jezbollah

Member
Fernando Fernandez said:
Ah no I just meant the Snoopers Bill doesn't seem to be slowing down at all.
Click to expand...

Yeah I was just reading into how the tech companies are looking into hardening their encryption. Unfortunately I think with Obama chiming in with his opinion the other day it'll only strengthen the resolve of ours and the US' government to continue their ludicrous proposals.

EDIT: Just found the full Labour GE 2015 Post Mortem report - Its an interesting read.
 
Q

QuicheFontaine

Member
kmag said:
The thing is he shouldn't be able to survive briefing against our Maj regardless of the circumstances, it's the one thing the forelock tuggers in Government aren't meant to do.

and he's basically admitted it with his 'denial' at the weekend

When pressed he repeated the answer twice using the exact same formulation.
Click to expand...

If that was him he should be sacked. I'm completely pro-Brexit but that Sun headline left a really bad taste in the mouth. The main thing we expect of the Queen is to be politically neutral, and NOT opine on this sort of thing. Leaking that to the press was imbecilic.

The Leave campaign should be making its case on the merits, not trying to scrape together what basically amounts to celebrity endorsements. I doubt the Sun front page persuaded anyone to vote leave and just made the leave camp look like a bunch of bunch of directionless goons.
 
M

Maledict

Member
It's such a dumb, ideological move. It's the opposite of localisms, it fragments and degrades our education system, and it directly overrides the will of parents who may want their school to not be an academy. Plus there's absolutely no evidence that it improves education standards in any way.

The UK already has one of the most centralised states in the west, and as far as I can see this is just the civil service pushing us even further down that road.
 
K

kmag

Member
Beefy said:
Every English school to become an academy, ministers to announce.

http://www.theguardian.com/educatio...e-an-academy-ministers-to-announce?CMP=twt_gu

Cheers Dave.....
Click to expand...

Meanwhile the placement crisis grows. The issues with academies is that they can't be forced to take children, and the local authority is the one with the statutory duty to provide a place. Not exactly sure how you square that circle, probably by building a shit load of shit free schools in places with a surplus of provision. But hey as long as the donors get to play teacher with government money.
 
P

Pie and Beans

Look for me on the local news, I'll be the guy arrested for trying to burn down a Nintendo exec's house.
Ruining school system and ruining the NHS is quite a legacy. If idiots do vote us out of the EU, this will be the most disastrous period to happen to the UK since the World Wars.

This is all absolutely heartbreaking. Why did people vote them in. Also unlike the hatred for Thatcher, you have to split it up like an evil tri-force between Osborne, Hunt, and Iain Duncan Smith this time, all stuffed underneath a big wibbly wobbly ham puppet cunt.
 
E

Empty

Member
interesting how little education was an election issue last year yet how radical that policy is

i'm curious how they are going to work it out. it sounds like there's significant issues.
There are a few implementation issues here. The biggest of these is very simple - we do not have enough good academy chains as it is. There is plenty of demand for school support services at the moment and some existing school chains are extremely weak; Ofsted has recently started to worry more about them.
Lucy Powell, shadow education secretary, said: "There is no evidence to suggest that academisation in and of itself leads to school improvement. Only last week the Chief Inspector of Schools, Sir Michael Wilshaw, wrote to the Secretary of State for Education highlighting 'serious weaknesses' in academy chains. "
Malcolm Trobe, acting general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said: "Whatever the type of school, two of the essential ingredients for success are sufficient funding and teacher supply. Unfortunately, schools currently face real-terms cuts and a recruitment crisis."
This proposal would also create a lot of work for the Department for Education which has struggled with its existing workload. Since 2010, its role has gone from being a strategic body to deciding on rules for individual schools. The skills of its employees have not kept up.
Indeed, even the two most important things a Whitehall department must do, keeping to its budget and being accountable for spending, have proved beyond it. The free school programme showed that even the simple task of opening new schools was extremely trying for them.
Furthermore, this sort of proposal would require the DfE to fix a number of funding problems - for example, at what level it ought to fund small schools or schools with expensive private finance deals, for example. At the moment, local authorities absorb those problems. "Academisation" would remove that buffer.
Click to expand...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-35814215
 
B

Beefy

Member
Both Labour and the SNP abstained from the #IPBill tonight. What sort of an opposition is this?

https://twitter.com/CuriousCabbage/status/709823800544763904


@HouseofCommons MPs vote 281 to 15 to approve Second Reading of Investigatory Powers Bill. The Bill will progress to a Public Bill Committee #IPBill

https://twitter.com/HouseofCommons/status/709819466968915968

Only 281 of 330 Conservative MPs actually voted for #IPBill - 15 MPs voted against (Lib Dems, SDLP etc) - an majority of MPs *abstained*
https://twitter.com/mjrharris/status/709819607155122176

It's going to pass isn't it?
 
Jezbollah

Jezbollah

Member
Of course it's going to pass. Labour and the SNP wont touch this with a barge pole. If they voted for it, they'll be lumbered in with the evil Tories. if they go against it, the Tories can push back on them as preventing measures to make this country more secure (which jumps onto the Corbyn perception).
 
U

Uzzy

Member
Dan27's quite correct. Further, Labour agree with the need for new legislation, but disagree with a number of the provisions. So abstain now, work to improve the bill in committee and in the lords, then vote for or against at a later date. Seems like a constructive way to conduct business, to be honest.

I mean, there's times when I'm all for someone grabbing the mace and swinging it around like a loon, but most of the time it's nice to see Parliament working constructively. It's a rare enough event.
 
D

Daemul

Member
I've been following the American election cycle a little bit and I see that it's likely that it's going to end up being Clinton vs Trump going head to head.

I'm trying to think of what the closet comparison that would be in the UK. Would it be like only having the choice to vote between a Tory or a UKIP member? If so then sheesh, now I understand why the prospect of upsets people. I'd probably chuck myself off a cliff before voting in this hypothetical election tbh lads.
 
M

Maledict

Member
Daemul said:
I've been following the American election cycle a little bit and I see that it's likely that it's going to end up being Clinton vs Trump going head to head.

I'm trying to think of what the closet comparison that would be in the UK. Would it be like only having the choice to vote between a Tory or a UKIP member? If so then sheesh, now I understand why the prospect of upsets people. I'd probably chuck myself off a cliff before voting in this hypothetical election tbh lads.
Click to expand...

Clinton isn't right wing. Even by UK standards, she's a centre left politician.

The only people calling her right wing are people who don't understand politics at all. It makes for a handy insult but not much more.
 
J

JonathanEx

Member
Maledict said:
Clinton isn't right wing. Even by UK standards, she's a centre left politician.

The only people calling her right wing are people who don't understand politics at all. It makes for a handy insult but not much more.
Click to expand...
Is it like "red Tories" in nonsense insults by people annoyed others aren't lefter than thou?
 
N

nib95

Banned
Maledict said:
Clinton isn't right wing. Even by UK standards, she's a centre left politician.

The only people calling her right wing are people who don't understand politics at all. It makes for a handy insult but not much more.
Click to expand...

Centre left how? She's centre right or right by European standards, based on her policies on healthcare (still far from Universal), foreign policy (hawkish and aggressive), taxation (far lower than most European standards), big business (more lenient on regulations and major policy shifts) and so on. Obviously you could argue that US politics in general are more right wing and less….developed….but that doesn't change her political alignment comparative to most European standards.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
[TNYT] Brazil Blocks X After Musk Ignores Court Orders
Social News Community 2
69
4K
ManaByte replied
Bobby Kotick, former CEO of Activision, Interested in Buying Tik-Tok
2 3
143
11K
Gameplay Gods Bless replied
Satya Nadella: Annual letter to stockholders. Content on new platforms will continue
4 5 6 7 8
352
19K
noob smokes replied
  • Locked
MI5 warning over 'Chinese agent' in Parliament
News
2
1K
Jose92 replied
Big Business and Government: Grand conspiracy or ramblings of a mad man?
3
2K
Soodanim replied
Top Bottom