Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party.

[Luke McDonnell]

Hi,

Would Braverman's role as Home Sec be considered to be the equivalent of 'safety critical' with the railway context as I would have thought that national security implications of the role (sponsoring minister of MI5) etc could mean that mistakes in this role could potentially endanger lives, or would the fact that there are other staff and advisors within the department mitigate this (e.g. permeant secretary and the lower ranking Home Office ministers) - just thinking this in context of the email leaks is the fact say that she has advisors and other ministers which she can delegated make it more or less safety critical (or 'national security' critical) in this context than say a train driver or guard that is trained to work on there own?

Also just asking if anyone knows that if ministerial roles require you to go through a security vetting process - especially with the Home Office in its role as the 'sponsoring department' of MI5 I would think to carry out this role will need access to classified information on a need-to-know basis in order to make decisions e.g . signing off on surveillance operations - in any non-ministerial job in which you have access to such information you would need to go through the full security clearance vetting process which involves a lot of scrutiny but are members of the cabined required to go through this process especially in the more sensitive roles? I know the President of the United States is exempt from needing a clearance by virtue of being elected to that office but is that also true under our system?

 

[najaB]

I know the President of the United States is exempt from needing a clearance by virtue of being elected to that office but is that also true under our system?

I believe that a successful clearance is necessary to take up the role as an MP in the first place.

 

[AlterEgo]

But by the same logic there are also people who know that they'd be fired in their organisation for doing the same sort of thing Braverman has reported to have done repeatedly, maybe even be fired for a lesser offence than this, and will thus see this as a concern.

Braverman has done things that would get her fired in a half-respectable white collar firm three times over.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 31 Oct 2022 ==

I believe that a successful clearance is necessary to take up the role as an MP in the first place.

I assume that a security vetting is undertaken, but there's no way of "clearing" it, surely? Have the intelligence services ever voided the result of an election due to security concerns?

 

[Gloster]

I believe that a successful clearance is necessary to take up the role as an MP in the first place.

I don’t think that the security services have any veto over candidates or MPs. However, I believe that if they have concerns about a candidate, they can advise a senior member of the party, probably the Party Chairman (as this would allow the party leader deniability), of such concerns. It is then up to the party machine to deal with the matter, in the knowledge that if they don’t there will probably be leaks: that last element probably isn’t official policy. Didn’t the bridging episode between Yes, Minister and Yes, Prime Minister include this?

 

[najaB]

I assume that a security vetting is undertaken, but there's no way of "clearing" it, surely? Have the intelligence services ever voided the result of an election due to security concerns?

No, they can't void the results of an election but as @Gloster says, anything untoward that is turned up will be brought to the attention of the party leadership. What happens after that is entirely a party matter, but I would like to think that a party, so advised, would find a plausible reason for that MP to resign in fairly short order.

 

[Gloster]

No, they can't void the results of an election but as @Gloster says, anything untoward that is turned up will be brought to the attention of the party leadership. What happens after that is entirely a party matter, but I would like to think that a party, so advised, would find a plausible reason for that MP to resign in fairly short order.

I think that they are doing checks and building up dossiers long before anybody gets to be a candidate. The party bosses will probably get the first warning as soon as a suspected person looks likely to stand for nomination as a candidate.

 

[AlterEgo]

No, they can't void the results of an election but as @Gloster says, anything untoward that is turned up will be brought to the attention of the party leadership. What happens after that is entirely a party matter, but I would like to think that a party, so advised, would find a plausible reason for that MP to resign in fairly short order.

Depends which party I guess. I can think of one which doesn't have MPs take their seats which might produce interesting clearance results!

Elsewhere today, Braverman has said the immigration system is "broken, and the illegal immigration problem is out of control" - sorry, who's been in power for 12 years?

The nasty rhetoric going around the party is palpable - she described an "invasion" of our southern coast, absolutely deplorable given the events in Dover yesterday, which were no doubt fuelled by similar rhetoric. It's TIME TO GO.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Wouldn't it be better to tie the General Elections with local and Mayoral Election in May 2024?

Won't leave them much time to heal the economy though so it would be an outside bet

 

[Busaholic]

The nasty rhetoric going around the party is palpable - she described an "invasion" of our southern coast, absolutely deplorable given the events in Dover yesterday, which were no doubt fuelled by similar rhetoric. It's TIME TO GO.

I'd be interested to know on what basis Kent Police are uninclined to describe yesterday's events as ( possibly) terrorist related, even if the individual involved, from over 100 miles away, was acting entirely alone. It seems to me to bear comparison with the man from South Wales who travelled in his van to Finsbury Park mosque to cause mayhem a few years ago, and he was treated and charged as a terrorist.

 

[GS250]

The problem the Tories have is that they have failed to implement a fair and practical immigration system. Now, they are panicking that voters no longer trust them and are taking on paper a harder line approach.

 

[takno]

I'd be interested to know on what basis Kent Police are uninclined to describe yesterday's events as ( possibly) terrorist related, even if the individual involved, from over 100 miles away, was acting entirely alone. It seems to me to bear comparison with the man from South Wales who travelled in his van to Finsbury Park mosque to cause mayhem a few years ago, and he was treated and charged as a terrorist.

The criteria is pretty mixed, but the way extremism is working on the internet right now is becoming more and more like a loosely connected terror organisation. It's not like the IRA or Al Qaeda issued membership cards, so somebody acting nominally alone but with encouragement and help from people on the internet isn't functionally terribly different.

The other way of looking at it is that it was an attempt to kill or injure multiple arbitrary people who weren't known to the assailant in order to cause terror in a wider section of society and further a political aim.

What's your reason for believing it isn't terrorism?

 

[43096]

Depends which party I guess. I can think of one which doesn't have MPs take their seats which might produce interesting clearance results!

Elsewhere today, Braverman has said the immigration system is "broken, and the illegal immigration problem is out of control" - sorry, who's been in power for 12 years?

The nasty rhetoric going around the party is palpable - she described an "invasion" of our southern coast, absolutely deplorable given the events in Dover yesterday, which were no doubt fuelled by similar rhetoric. It's TIME TO GO.

I see even The Times has put the boot into Cruella today, with one Tory former Home Office minister quoted as saying “It just shows what a thug she is. She’s facile, totally uncompassionate and insincere, hamming it up and that’s the reputation she has now. The ERG is abandoning her, it’s only the dinosaurs left defending her now.”

There is something particular odious about the child of immigrants being so vehemently anti-immigration.

 

[baz962]

The criteria is pretty mixed, but the way extremism is working on the internet right now is becoming more and more like a loosely connected terror organisation. It's not like the IRA or Al Qaeda issued membership cards, so somebody acting nominally alone but with encouragement and help from people on the internet isn't functionally terribly different.

The other way of looking at it is that it was an attempt to kill or injure multiple arbitrary people who weren't known to the assailant in order to cause terror in a wider section of society and further a political aim.

What's your reason for believing it isn't terrorism?

I read Busaholics post as criticism of Kent police for not treating it as terrorism and is showing that it was the same as the Finsbury park incident and therefore should be treated as such and Busaholic is saying that it should be the same.

 

[DarloRich]

Matt Hancock is going on I'm a celebrity.

FFS. the country is getting flushed down the crapper and they think it is joke.

 

[GS250]

Matt Hancock is going on I'm a celebrity.

FFS. the country is getting flushed down the crapper and they think it is joke.

'Celebrity'/reality TV, The Premiership etc keeping people distracted from the actual problems in their lives for some time now.

 

[brad465]

Matt Hancock is going on I'm a celebrity.

FFS. the country is getting flushed down the crapper and they think it is joke.

He's been suspended as a Tory MP because of this. Also worth remembering Nadine Dorries did the same in 2012, so she did actually have experience as Culture Secretary (but was still rubbish).

 

[Gloster]

I wonder if Hancock reckons that he has lost his place in Parliament and is just going for the money. I understand that there is to be some redistribution of seats in Suffolk and, according to the rules laid down by Central Office, he is one of two MPs not automatically entitled to one of the new seats.

 

[Scotrail12]

This is genius casting by ITV - I guarantee the ratings will go up to see Hancock humiliate himself.

Does deserve the suspension from the party as the optics are just wrong but I'd be lying if I said I was not looking forward to this.

 

[nw1]

Won't leave them much time to heal the economy though so it would be an outside bet

No-one wants a winter election though. Think about it, it would be bad for the Tories. People aren't going to be happy at a time of year characterised by high fuel bills and miserable weather, and will take it out on the incumbents.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Nov 2022 ==

Depends which party I guess. I can think of one which doesn't have MPs take their seats which might produce interesting clearance results!

Elsewhere today, Braverman has said the immigration system is "broken, and the illegal immigration problem is out of control" - sorry, who's been in power for 12 years?

The nasty rhetoric going around the party is palpable - she described an "invasion" of our southern coast, absolutely deplorable given the events in Dover yesterday, which were no doubt fuelled by similar rhetoric. It's TIME TO GO.

Furthermore, Sunak himself shares part of the blame for this, for reappointing her.

Shows either that he tolerates Braverman, or is so utterly weak that he is desperate to please the right-wing of the party.

 

[Cdd89]

Is the language being spewed by Braverman (and I fully agree it is abhorrent) really that different in nature to some of the stuff Labour came out with in much of 2021, where they complained about “leaky borders” / “borders like a sieve” / “arriving onto our shores” / “human petri dishes”; and didn’t complain about abhorrent conditions in quarantine hotels instead pushing for further expansion of the programme?

 

[Typhoon]

I wonder if Hancock reckons that he has lost his place in Parliament and is just going for the money. I understand that there is to be some redistribution of seats in Suffolk and, according to the rules laid down by Central Office, he is one of two MPs not automatically entitled to one of the new seats.

Having backed Sunak twice and not getting a ministerial position, he probably realises his time in the spotlight is over. It also appears that he is not over popular in his own constituency. Guido Fawkes' Quote of the Day is:

Matt Hancock’s local constituency deputy chairman tells PA:

“I’m looking forward to him eating a kangaroo’s p***s. Quote me. You can quote me that.”

(Edited as it is before the watershed.)
From: https://order-order.com/2022/10/24/matt-hancocks-paintballing-pain/

More Hancock news on the same page as the url indicates, unfortunately no-one appeared to video the event. I trust it did not require NHS treatment, it would be unfortunate if there was a long list of more urgent cases and the doctor and nurse on duty were particularly hard of hearing so needed to get patients to speak up.

 

[GusB]

"I'm a celebrity" isn't a programme I would deliberately choose to watch, and I can't see me making the effort Hancock knowing that is on it. Now, if it was Braverman they might just find their ratings increasing by at least one; she'd be right at home with all the other nasty creepy-crawlies.

 

[Busaholic]

The criteria is pretty mixed, but the way extremism is working on the internet right now is becoming more and more like a loosely connected terror organisation. It's not like the IRA or Al Qaeda issued membership cards, so somebody acting nominally alone but with encouragement and help from people on the internet isn't functionally terribly different.

The other way of looking at it is that it was an attempt to kill or injure multiple arbitrary people who weren't known to the assailant in order to cause terror in a wider section of society and further a political aim.

What's your reason for believing it isn't terrorism?

Perhaps I didn't make it clear - I'm 100% convinced it should have been regarded as terrorism within the first hour of investigation. I suspect protocol and 'ownership' of that investigation plays a huge part here, and counter-terrorism police et al have to be 'invited' by Kent police to get involved. We need a two tier police force imo like in the USA and France, though with many differences from those models. But that's for a separate thread!

 

[SuspectUsual]

He's been suspended as a Tory MP because of this. Also worth remembering Nadine Dorries did the same in 2012, so she did actually have experience as Culture Secretary (but was still rubbish).

I suppose it isn’t so much going on the telly, it’s being unable to represent his constituents?

But what’s more reprehensible about Hancock than going on the telly is writing a book (well, being ghostwritten by that horrible woman Oakeshott) and seeking to profit from the pandemic.

Maybe he got Dorries in to write the bits where he snogs his SPAD

 

[nw1]

I suppose it isn’t so much going on the telly, it’s being unable to represent his constituents?

But what’s more reprehensible about Hancock than going on the telly is writing a book (well, being ghostwritten by that horrible woman Oakeshott) and seeking to profit from the pandemic.

Maybe he got Dorries in to write the bits where he snogs his SPAD

Maybe they should call him "Matti Vanatti".

 

[jon0844]

I wonder if Hancock reckons that he has lost his place in Parliament and is just going for the money. I understand that there is to be some redistribution of seats in Suffolk and, according to the rules laid down by Central Office, he is one of two MPs not automatically entitled to one of the new seats.

Going around the TV circuit a while back trying to reinvent himself as some sort of cool-guy, I guess he is thinking that a celebrity career might be better than a political one?

 

[duncanp]

Going around the TV circuit a while back trying to reinvent himself as some sort of cool-guy, I guess he is thinking that a celebrity career might be better than a political one?

Perhaps he fancies himself as a latter day Michael Portillo.

But at least Michael Portillo has a genuine interest in railways (or so it seems) and he establishes a good rapport with everyone he meets during his TV programmes. Also Portillo did not have to resign in disgrace, he lost his seat at the general election (in 1997) and then retired from parliament in 2005.

I doubt whether any reputable TV producer woul touch Matt Hancock with a bargepole, which is why he has ended up on a tacky "reality" TV show.

 

[jon0844]

Perhaps he fancies himself as a latter day Michael Portillo.

But at least Michael Portillo has a genuine interest in railways (or so it seems) and he establishes a good rapport with everyone he meets during his TV programmes. Also Portillo did not have to resign in disgrace, he lost his seat at the general election (in 1997) and then retired from parliament in 2005.

I doubt whether any reputable TV producer woul touch Matt Hancock with a bargepole, which is why he has ended up on a tacky "reality" TV show.

I haven't followed his activities much, but I guess he will find a niche talking at events, selling his book, and perhaps lurching to the right where you can easily grift if you're willing to sell your soul. As this can be very profitable, I am amazed anyone wants to be in politics these days - just rant about it to your enraged base.

 

[Gloster]

I haven't followed his activities much, but I guess he will find a niche talking at events, selling his book, and perhaps lurching to the right where you can easily grift if you're willing to sell your soul. As this can be very profitable, I am amazed anyone wants to be in politics these days - just rant about it to your enraged base.

The idea is that you spend a couple of years in politics and then use that as basis for whatever you then try on. Being a former MP sounds much better to the gullible than most other backgrounds.

 

[Thirteen]

Perhaps he fancies himself as a latter day Michael Portillo.

But at least Michael Portillo has a genuine interest in railways (or so it seems) and he establishes a good rapport with everyone he meets during his TV programmes. Also Portillo did not have to resign in disgrace, he lost his seat at the general election (in 1997) and then retired from parliament in 2005.

I doubt whether any reputable TV producer woul touch Matt Hancock with a bargepole, which is why he has ended up on a tacky "reality" TV show.

Portillo is great on the Railway Journeys programmes, leaving politics was the best thing to happen to him. The same is true for Ed Balls, he managed to reinvent himself as a presenter after doing Strictly.

You can bet the likes of the BBC and ITV are waiting for Boris to leave politics so he can be snapped up for one of these shows.