Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party.

[SuspectUsual]

a big welcome back for Gav...sacked not once, but twice, as a Minister, which takes a bit of doing, and now hopefully heading for his hat trick

That’s Sir Gav, CBE to you

How can stuff like this happen?!

 

[baz962]

They attend Cabinet, but they don't have a formal role.

It's often used as a way of getting someone into Cabinet (and to take part in discussions) without them being a formal part of the government. In recent years, it's been usually used to get the Chair of the ruling party into Cabinet, although there was a point between 1970-1974 when a Northern Irish Unionist was given the position to make sure that NI was represented within the government alongside the Scottish and Welsh Secretaries.

Thanks

 

[najaB]

No. To my mind, neither are OK. It's not OK to call someone 'Cruella' on a public internet forum - that's direct abuse.

How is a play on someone's name "abuse"? You could argue that it's childish but there's no way that can be reasonably be put in the same category as derogatory comments based on someone's race, gender, religion, etc.

How about Suella "But it's like she should have been named Cruella because her behaviour reminds one of the character in the book 101 Dalmatians" Braverman? Is that still abuse?

Interesting to see all the opposition politicians demanding an early general election, including Nicola Sturgeon.

She seems to have forgotten that she became First Minister of Scotland in 2014 after Alex Salmond resigned, but didn't immediately dissolve the Scottish parliament and have an election. And rightly so, because there was no legal or constitutional need to do so.

Again, much like Brown taking over from Blair, the difference is that his resignation wasn't forced by scandal/unpopularity and specifically in this case Sturgeon held the post of Deputy First Minister, so it was a continuation of the same government.

 

[takno]

How is a play on someone's name "abuse"? You could argue that it's childish but there's no way that can be reasonably be put in the same category as derogatory comments based on someone's race, gender, religion, etc.

How about Suella "But it's like she should have been named Cruella because her behaviour reminds one of the character in the book 101 Dalmatians" Braverman? Is that still abuse?

Abuse is abuse. That doesn't change just because it's based on your entirely-reasonably-held belief that she's an absolute disgrace to British politics who appears to want to start a fight with every single person in the UK, rather than on a protected characteristic.

That said, name-calling of powerful people is very much not on the same level as many other forms of abuse, and abuse based on peoples behaviour and expressed opinions is very different from abuse based on their characteristics.

I'm sure if Braverman actually believes the line she likes to take on woke-ism she will appreciate the shades of grey involved here, and be an enthusiastic supporter of the right to call her Cruella. My main problem with it is that it engages with her as a person, when it's her bundle of vile policies rather than her personality that she will actually be bringing to the government.

 

[Yew]

The state that made "intervention in the private lives of people" an art form was East Germany via the Stasi.

I struggle to see how this is relevant to my comment about the UK?

 

[najaB]

Abuse is abuse. That doesn't change just because it's based on your entirely-reasonably-held belief that she's an absolute disgrace to British politics who appears to want to start a fight with every single person in the UK, rather than on a protected characteristic.

Is it abuse to say that Keir Starmer is boring? Or that Alexander Johnson is feckless? Where's the line between criticism and abuse?

 

[brad465]

Interesting to see all the opposition politicians demanding an early general election, including Nicola Sturgeon.

She seems to have forgotten that she became First Minister of Scotland in 2014 after Alex Salmond resigned, but didn't immediately dissolve the Scottish parliament and have an election. And rightly so, because there was no legal or constitutional need to do so.

So Rishi Sunak is only following the the same principles as Ms Sturgeon, and yet this seems to be a problem for her.

My view is changing leader once mid-Parliament doesn't warrant an election, especially if they largely follow the manifesto. However changing leader twice in one Parliament, especially where scandal/incompetence brought them down, should warrant an election.

That’s Sir Gav, CBE to you

How can stuff like this happen?!

Once a blackmailer, always a blackmailer*



*There are reports Williamson has dirt on numerous Ministers/former Ministers from his days as Chief Whip at the height of the Brexit vote aftermath, and that Cabinet positions and a Knighthood have been demands for silence, despite the fact that he has polled as a very unpopular Cabinet member even among Tory members.

 

[Howardh]

PMQ's; I watched the first three of Starmer's questions to Sunak, and all we got were absurd pre-planned rants thather than answering the questions, it might as well have been Johnson there for the difference it makes, so I turned off. I thought/hoped Sunak could answer a straight question with a straight reply, but oh, no. So disappointing.

As an aside I was in a Consrevative Club last night as part of the away team on a games evening. I asked a group of five members what they thought of Sunak, and just got a polite but blank stare back. Then "we'll have to see..." hardly a glowing endorsement from his own!

 

[Herefordian]

No. To my mind, neither are OK. It's not OK to call someone 'Cruella' on a public internet forum - that's direct abuse. Think how you'd feel if someone referred to you by an equivalent name in public. Just because the person is a politician or you disagree with their views does NOT make personal abuse OK - any politician is still a human being. And the fact that other people do it also does not make it OK.

And likewise, her 'Tofu eating wokerati' comment was also not OK. It was insulting, wrong, and not at all the kind of language you'd expect of an MP or a cabinet minister.

But two wrongs don't make a right. By seriously referring to her using an abusive name, you've basically lowered yourself to the same level as her comment.

I haven't seen you saying anything when those on the right use "insulting nicknames" to "abuse" politicians in the centre or on the left.

For example, I've seen an RailUK Forums member use "Old Ham Face" (seriously, is that the best you can do?) as an insult for Keir Starmer. Is that okay?

Very few will listen to your argument while you're only calling out "insulting nicknames" and "abuse" when they're aimed at somebody on your side.

I've been subjected to actual, verbal abuse for being gay.

Calling the Home Secretary "Cruella" is nothing in comparison.

 

[duncanp]

I haven't seen you saying anything when those on the right use "insulting nicknames" to "abuse" politicians in the centre or on the left.

For example, I've seen an RailUK Forums member use "Old Ham Face" (seriously, is that the best you can do?) as an insult for Keir Starmer. Is that okay?

Very few will listen to your argument while you're only calling out "insulting nicknames" and "abuse" when they're aimed at somebody on your side.

I've been subjected to actual, verbal abuse for being gay.

Calling the Home Secretary "Cruella" is nothing in comparison.

There is a difference between insults and nicknames.

When the Russians referred to Mrs Thatcher as "The Iron Lady", they meant it as an insult, but she turned it into a virtue.

However when a journalist referred to Liz Truss's cabinet as "The Coconut Cabinet" that definitely crossed a line, and was in my view unacceptable.

But if it is acceptable to call the Home Secretary "Cruella", then it is also acceptable to refer to the Leader of the Opposition as "Captain Hindsight". Referring to Sir Keir Starmer as "Old Ham Face" is going a bit too far though.

I agree that you can't have double standards in these matters, and you should treat other people as you would like to be treated yourself.

 

[najaB]

But if it is acceptable to call the Home Secretary "Cruella", then it is also acceptable to refer to the Leader of the Opposition as "Captain Hindsight". Referring to Sir Keir Starmer as "Old Ham Face" is going a bit too far though.

I agree. "Cruella" and "Captain Hindsight" are based on the actions/behaviour of the people, where "Old Ham Face" is based on physical appearance. No different to fat shaming or basing a comment on a disability.

 

[Lost property]

Abuse is abuse. That doesn't change just because it's based on your entirely-reasonably-held belief that she's an absolute disgrace to British politics who appears to want to start a fight with every single person in the UK, rather than on a protected characteristic.

That said, name-calling of powerful people is very much not on the same level as many other forms of abuse, and abuse based on peoples behaviour and expressed opinions is very different from abuse based on their characteristics.

I'm sure if Braverman actually believes the line she likes to take on woke-ism she will appreciate the shades of grey involved here, and be an enthusiastic supporter of the right to call her Cruella. My main problem with it is that it engages with her as a person, when it's her bundle of vile policies rather than her personality that she will actually be bringing to the government.

Well as characteristics have been mentioned, in the same lines as abuse, there are numerous MP's for whom self would fulfil both criteria

 

[brad465]

Probably a quick win and IMO welcome, although may cause a stir among some in the party:

Rishi Sunak brings back fracking ban in first PMQs

The ban for England had been lifted by Liz Truss, but Rishi Sunak made it one of his first reversals as PM.

www.bbc.co.uk

The moratorium on fracking in England has been restored by new Prime Minister Rishi Sunak.
Downing Street confirmed Mr Sunak was committed to the ban on fracking in England set out in his party's 2019 manifesto.
His predecessor Liz Truss lifted the ban, saying fracking could take place where there was local consent.
But this provoked a backlash from many Conservative MPs because of concerns about earth tremors linked to fracking.
The controversial process was halted in 2019 following opposition from environmental groups and local communities. Labour and other opposition parties are also against the return of fracking.

Mr Sunak was asked about the issue in his first Prime Minister's Questions earlier.
Green MP Caroline Lucas asked if the new PM would restore the moratorium on fracking pledged in the Conservatives' 2019 manifesto.
In response, he said: "I have already said I stand by the manifesto on that."
The Tories' general election manifesto said the party would not support fracking unless the science showed "categorically" that it could be carried out safely.
The PM's official spokesman later confirmed Mr Sunak was committed to this promise.

 

[nw1]

Is it abuse to say that Keir Starmer is boring? Or that Alexander Johnson is feckless? Where's the line between criticism and abuse?

Indeed, the name Cruella (first used in this conversation, incidentally, by one of the forum members I consider very level-headed and middle-of-the-road, which lends it weight) is merely a suggestion that she might be a little bit unpleasant. It doesn't actually suggest that she bites the heads off furry animals, or whatever.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Oct 2022 ==

I wasn’t aware it was a binary choice

And I'm not sure Patel actually sounded off about left-wingers in parliament. Which would clearly make Patel the least bad of the two.


== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Oct 2022 ==

That’s Sir Gav, CBE to you

How can stuff like this happen?!

What did he get the knighthood for, service to tarantula farms?

 

[AM9]

And I'm not sure Patel actually sounded off about left-wingers in parliament. Which would clearly make Patel the least bad of the two.

Other unpleasant traits are available from those two women.

 

[nw1]

I agree. "Cruella" and "Captain Hindsight" are based on the actions/behaviour of the people, where "Old Ham Face" is based on physical appearance. No different to fat shaming or basing a comment on a disability.

Quite. And as someone who wants a Labour government, I think it's quite acceptable to call Starmer "Captain Hindsight". I agree that "Old Ham Face" is genuinely insulting and unacceptable, as would be similar appearance-based insults on, say, Boris Johnson.

 

[ScotTrains]

a big welcome back for Gav...sacked not once, but twice, as a Minister, which takes a bit of doing, and now hopefully heading for his hat trick....alongside which, who else, apart from Dorries that is, can be employed for purely comic effect than Raab.

Some Governments Do 'Ave 'Em!
Looking forward to his next episode! Oooh!

 

[neilmc]

Sorry but if you aspire to be in politics at the highest level you can expect this kind of name-calling and more.

 

[najaB]

This is at least a change:

Rishi Sunak has signalled that Scotland is on his mind, with a phone call to Nicola Sturgeon on his first day in office.

And in his first appearance in the Commons as prime minister, Mr Sunak reiterated that he wanted to work closely with the Scottish government.

I don't think the First Minister received any calls from the previous occupant of Number 10?

Three key Scottish questions for Rishi Sunak

The issues which could define how the new PM's administration is seen north of the border.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

For example, I've seen an RailUK Forums member use "Old Ham Face" as an insult for Keir Starmer.

Oh dear.

 

[Howardh]

Probably a quick win and IMO welcome, although may cause a stir among some in the party:

Rishi Sunak brings back fracking ban in first PMQs

The ban for England had been lifted by Liz Truss, but Rishi Sunak made it one of his first reversals as PM.

www.bbc.co.uk

So this is a u-turn on a u-turn (I've lost count) but when Truss insisted on fracking her ministers "had" to support it (whip, remember) but now they "have" to support the u-tuen and be against fracking.

Just shows how hypocritical it all is - follow my leader OR ELSE. I suppose they have now gone back to the policy in the manisfesto (??). I would love to see a Tory MP who was for Truss's fracking policy now come on air and say how they feel now.

 

[MikeWM]

Just shows how hypocritical it all is - follow my leader OR ELSE. I suppose they have now gone back to the policy in the manisfesto (??). I would love to see a Tory MP who was for Truss's fracking policy now come on air and say how they feel now.

The manifesto said it would only go ahead if 'the science showed it to be safe'. Given what has happened over the last few years, I'm sure they could have found some scientists to trot out to claim that if they really wanted to (and ridiculed the ones saying it was dangerous as 'fracking deniers' or similar, because that seems to be how science works nowadays). However, it appears they don't want to.

 

[neilmc]

Liz Truss was incredible stupid in treating the fracking vote as a vote of confidence, this meant Tory MPs such as mine ended up voting for something they didn't believe in for fear of losing the whip. I don't think anybody really wants to see this become permitted (except those with a financial interest in the industry, obviously).

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I struggle to see how this is relevant to my comment about the UK?

The common factor between both postings was based upon your very own statement that referred to "interference in private lives".

 

[brad465]

What did he get the knighthood for, service to tarantula farms?

Service to skeletons in his closet (or should I say, knowing about the skeletons in others' closets ).

 

[Gloster]

Reports are circulating that the new Royal Yacht, a.k.a. The Boris Boat, will be cancelled next week. So that is at least one vanity project less.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Service to skeletons in his closet (or should I say, knowing about the skeletons in others' closets ).

I hope that you are not referring to water closets above.

 

[Thirteen]

Reports are circulating that the new Royal Yacht, a.k.a. The Boris Boat, will be cancelled next week. So that is at least one vanity project less.

Boris really did love his vanity projects. London is full of them from his time as Mayor such as the Routemaster and the Cable Car.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Boris really did love his vanity projects. London is full of them from his time as Mayor such as the Routemaster and the Cable Car.

How well used are those two named vanity projects by the people in the area concerned?

 

[najaB]

How well used are those two named vanity projects by the people in the area concerned?

The New Routemasters are well used, however each one cost as much as four regular double deckers.

The Emirates Air Line is more or less a flop.