UK Politics IV - In Lies we Don't Truss

Status
Not open for further replies.
So one sides still worse? How common are such comments in UK labour? Parties big tent they have a progressive wing?
They were called momentum and the leadership has done all they can to expel them from the party. Currently the latest efforts:

Diane Abbott attacks Labour investigation as 'fraudulent'

Diane Abbott has branded a Labour Party investigation into her comments about racism "fraudulent".

She was suspended as a Labour MP in April after suggesting Jewish, Irish and Traveller people were not subject to racism "all their lives".

Ms Abbott later apologised and withdrew her remarks.
 
So one sides still worse? How common are such comments in UK labour? Parties big tent they have a progressive wing?
One side is technically worse, but the other side is pursuing a lot of the same policies in a more competent way. So there's no real difference at this point (at the national level).

And no, Starmer threw out the progressive wing. And the media hasn't held him to anywhere near the same critical standard they did Corbyn, when party right-wingers left the party (voluntarily, even).
 
One side is technically worse, but the other side is pursuing a lot of the same policies in a more competent way. So there's no real difference at this point (at the national level).

And no, Starmer threw out the progressive wing. And the media hasn't held him to anywhere near the same critical standard they did Corbyn, when party right-wingers left the party (voluntarily, even).

Sounds like our labour from 1980s. Other thread though.
 

99 year recall? Are they apartment buildings on the Thames? :/
I have not watched the video, but it is shocking:

Clara White is one of two relatives of an IPP prisoner who contributed to Mingay’s documentary. She told the story of her brother Thomas White. He got a two-year tariff for stealing a mobile phone on the street. However, almost 11 years later, he’s still inside. According to Clara, this will in all likelihood increase to at least 13 years. Alana Bell is the other relative. She explained what happened to her brother Wayne Bell. He stole a bike when he was 17. So far he’s served 16 years for that offence.

Alana said that her brother’s mental health began to “deteriorate quite badly” when he went into his eighth year inside. Clara said she could hear her brother’s mental health deteriorate from his voice during their telephone conversations. She said his mental health is so bad today that he actually feels more comfortable in segregation. According to Clara, that’s because "

he’d done that much time in segregation that it had become really hard to be around people"​

Alana said that her brother is at the stage where he doesn’t believe what his family says and he won’t even speak to them on the phone. At one stage he’d ignored all contact from them for two years.

The head of research at the Prison Reform Trust, Dr Kimmett Edgar, also contributed to Unintended Consequences. Edgar said that imposing solitary confinement on someone in a mental health crisis “is inhumane”. He said one IPP prisoner, who he believes speaks for many others, told him:

I’m always walking on eggshells and there is no chance of me ever being free…until I’m dead. Whether that’s through natural causes or because I can’t cope with it.​

Then, once released into the outside community, some of these prisoners still don’t feel at ease. That’s because the threat of going back to “prison indefinitely” was “intensely anxious producing”.

Edgar also noted that they’re at risk of exploitation from others inside prison. That’s because they can’t risk any form of confrontation. To do so could mean adding years to their sentence. This leaves them unable to properly defend themselves, and it allows others to take advantage of that situation.
 
If you are in jail for 11 years, for stealing a mobile phone, I can see how you'd try to kill yourself.
Even if many of those in had a long history of violence/crime, not setting a sentence is simply inhumane.
New Labour, tough on crime. Even the tories cancelled the law ;)
 
Love it when a dude who has no idea what it's like to be the punching bag of both the government and the public, both of which take issue with your existence and all the **** that comes with that, decides to comment on my life like he could last a day in my shoes lmao

Go back to worrying about your property prices Zardnaar and making asinine, insipid comments that make you come across as even more detached from people's lived experiences
 
Moderator Action: Keep it civil and impersonal please.
 
So, Tory party conference is over. Obvious highlights being the footage of Nigel Farage and Priti Patel dancing.

HS2 north gone, no more A levels, and…a smoking ban? That’s not very liberal, is it?

In more exciting news, there’s a by-election in Scotland today. Will be a great chance to see how the parties are really fairing. I predict a labour win, but by a smaller majority than they’d like (2-4k maybe). But let’s see!
 
So you're saying nobody can ever criticise the place they live in, or plan to live in?

Weird.

Nope but personally if I was moving somewhere else I would be somewhat grateful and wouldn't be slagging it off 100% of the time.

Australia would probably be my place of choice.

It's not a perfect place.

That's just me though.
 

99 year recall? Are they apartment buildings on the Thames? :/

Another great Tony Blair law, by the way.

I suspect that it will eventually get severely curtailed or even thrown out by the ECHR or by UK courts..

The ECHR took the view that extending a sentence or refusing parole for a fixed term
sentence are almost tantamount to judicial sentencing, at least quasi-judicial actions.
This implicitly meant that prisoners could regularly appeal against parole refusal and the hearing of
those was resource intensive, so to avoid that overhead, indefinite sentencing was introduced in the UK.

I regard that solution as worse than the problem, that was introduced by the ECHR meddling.
 
‘Seismic night in Scotland’: Labour crushes SNP in Rutherglen and Hamilton West byelection

Scottish Labour’s Michael Shanks has won the Rutherglen and Hamilton West byelection in an overwhelming victory over the SNP that the party leadership declared “seismic”, and a clear demonstration that Scotland could lead the way in delivering a Labour government at Westminster at the coming general election.

In a result that exceeded Scottish Labour expectation, Shanks beat his closest rival, the SNP’s Katy Loudon, by 17,845 votes to 8,399 – a majority of 9,446 and a resounding swing of over 20%.

The result marked a “seismic night in Scotland”, and proved that “Scottish politics has fundamentally changed”, said Scottish Labour leader, Anas Sarwar. Voters were sending “a very clear message that they are sick of two tired, failing, incompetent governments”, he added.

Scotland’s first-ever recall byelection was also Humza Yousaf’s first major electoral test since he became SNP leader, and first minister, in the spring.

Responding to the “disappointing” result, he said the party would “reflect on what we have to do to regain the trust of the people of Rutherglen & Hamilton West.”

But Yousaf added that the “circumstances of this byelection were always very difficult for us” – the contest was triggered after constituents voted for the Covid rule-breaking former SNP MP Margaret Ferrier to be removed from her seat.

He also partly blamed the collapse in Tory support – the Scottish Conservative candidate lost his deposit on the night – which he said “went straight to Labour”.

Turnout on Thursday was 37.19% compared with 66.5% at the last general election in 2019, in the seat to the south-east of Glasgow that has now changed hands four times between the SNP and Labour since 2010.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom