Not The Politics Thread.

[Buce]

3 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Good person to have in government... 

 

 

 

I'm shocked.

 

He seems such a nice man.

[David Guiza]

Gavin Williamson to be replaced as Education Secretary. As ever, the ousted minister is reciting a list of made up successes. 

[urban.spaceman]

1 minute ago, David Guiza said:

Gavin Williamson to be replaced as Education Secretary. As ever, the ousted minister is reciting a list of made up successes. 

No doubt excluding his A Level results?

[Wymsey]

4 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

No doubt excluding his A Level results?

An A in Imbetterthanyou-ism. 

[David Guiza]

4 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

No doubt excluding his A Level results?

Surprisingly, yes.

 

Still, at least he was able to meet Marcus Rashford. 

[RoboFox]

26 minutes ago, David Guiza said:

Gavin Williamson to be replaced as Education Secretary. As ever, the ousted minister is reciting a list of made up successes. 

My highlight was when he threatened to sue a school if they didn’t stay open while the virus raged and then opened the schools for one day and then closed the schools, because of the virus. 

 

Wait, it’s the time he assigned everyone’s grades using a shitty algorithm. 

 

No wait, it’s the time he had all fvcking summer to sort ventilation within schools and did nothing. 

 

Hold on, it's that time he turned down an offer to get free or cheap broadband for thousands of disadvantaged families whilst they were working from home on the governments orders, then voted against them eating.

 

Some absolute classic moments. 

[Lionator]

Jenrick gone too. 

 

If he has any sense (lol), Williamson, Jenrick, Coffey and Patel will be gone amongst others.

 

With Javid as Health secretary it's shown how somebody with competence regardless of political affiliation helps.  

[Bellend Sebastian]

I hope the suggestion that the rise in inflation is just a temporary spike is correct.

 

There's rarely a good time to raise increase rates but if they ended up having to do it now folk would go mental

[RobHawk]

Patel survives, no shock there, she must have some dirt on Boris.

[Rain King]

14 minutes ago, RobHawk said:

Patel survives, no shock there, she must have some dirt on Boris.

Don't you mean the 'Pritster'

🤮

[Brizzle Fox]

I see Truss has got Foreign Secretary. Thick as mince but is very popular with the Tory membership, so not the biggest surprise. 

 

Gove demoted to Housing? 

[Corky]

Deckchairs and Titanics spring to mind.

[Legend_in_blue]

Zahawi in for Williamson.

 

Does Bojo care at this point or is he just doing this for laughs?

[Brizzle Fox]

32 minutes ago, Corky said:

Deckchairs and Titanics spring to mind.

Yeah. I see Dorries to Culture now. This government really does hate the arts. 

[Sampson]

I'll never understand why we claim to be a meritocracy but shuffle people round into extremely important positions on public finances, health, defence, education, diplomacy etc. based on politicking.

 

The idea how someone who has previously spent his or her career in foreign diplomacy can all of a sudden become the most powerful person and head of the entire nation's health sector, rather than someone who has specialist knowledge about health has always confused me.

 

Surely someone who's dedicated the last several years of their life to understanding the health or education sectors should be health or education secretary. Ditto, a person who's dedicated the last several years of their life to understanding diplomacy and international geopolitics should be foreign secretary.

 

But the way the system works in this country, especially under this current government, seems to be you take the most in vogue politicians then appoint them to random sectors of which they have no specialist knowledge for and are surely not the most qualified to understand.

 

At least Chancellor seems to be somewhat of an exception, as we at least tend to keep those for a long time and tend to appoint people with some kind of background in economics

Edited 15 September 2021 by Sampson

[thursday_next]

Thank God Gavin Williamson's gone. He's an embarrassment to the Tory Party, which is saying something. Alan Partridge would be a good deal better. What I don't understand is how the Tory party could take him seriously as their Chief Whip, let alone Education Secretary, which is like Titanic v Iceberg in terms of rapidly impending catastrophe. It's not often that I say this, but he's a xxxxxxx xxxx and not only that he's also a xxxxxx and a xxxx-xxxxxxx. I bet even his mother secretly knows that.  

[StanSP]

Nadine Dorries is cabinet is sickening enough, but in that DCMS role? Eurgh. She's a vile horrible person. 

[Buce]

 

More levelling down from 'Global' Britain:

 

‘Unconscionable’ universal credit cut breaks human rights law, says UN envoy

 

Cutting universal credit by £20 a week is an “unconscionable” move that breaches international human rights law and is likely to trigger an explosion of poverty, the United Nations’ poverty envoy has said.

In an excoriating intervention alongside a letter to the UK government, Olivier De Schutter, the UN-appointed rapporteur on extreme poverty, told the Guardian that the withdrawal of the £1,000-a-year uplift from next month was “deliberately retrogressive” and incompatible with Britain’s obligation to protect its citizens’ rights to an adequate standard of living.

 

“It’s unconscionable at this point in time to remove this benefit,” he said, adding the decision to cut universal credit – which was boosted last year to help people get through the pandemic – was based on a “very ill-informed understanding” of its impact on claimants.

“For these people, £20 a week makes a huge difference, and could be the difference between falling into extreme poverty or remaining just above that poverty line … If the question is one of fiscal consolidation to maintain the public deficit within acceptable levels then you should raise revenues, not cut down on welfare at the expense of people in poverty.”

De Schutter urged the government to drop its plans to withdraw the £20 uplift from 6 October, saying it was too soon. There was plentiful evidence showing millions of people would struggle to afford food and pay essential bills as a result.

He said: “We are not out of the crisis yet. I suspect that when the expiry date of 6 October was set perhaps there was an expectation the economy would have significantly improved, or the pandemic be behind us, but none of these conditions are fulfilled. So it is really not the time now to move backwards.”

The intervention came as Labour raised pressure over the cut, which will be followed with a rise in national insurance contributions from April.

A working universal credit claimant paying tax would have to work more than nine hours extra every week to cover the loss from the two changes, the Labour leader, Keir Starmer, said.

A non-binding Labour Commons motion on Wednesday calling for the universal credit cut to be withdrawn was passed with the support of four Tory MPs: Peter Aldous, Neil Hudson, John Stevenson and William Wragg. The Tory former welfare secretary Stephen Crabb spoke in the debate to argue the benefit should be retained.

Crabb said: “This is not about being wet on fiscal discipline or about being Labour lite. It is about recognising what is good, responsible social policy, and I am clear in my mind that this sudden, abrupt withdrawal of the £20 uplift that millions of families will experience in the coming weeks is not the right way of doing welfare policy.”

De Schutter, a Belgian-born professor of law and a human rights expert, took up his role in May 2020, succeeding Philip Alston, who in 2018 produced a scathing report on the impact of austerity in the UK, calling rising child poverty levels “not just a disgrace, but a social calamity and an economic disaster”.

Ministers have argued that the withdrawal of the temporary universal credit uplift, introduced as a pandemic measure in April 2020 and worth £1,050 a year to more than 6 million out-of-work or low-paid working recipients, is necessary as the government focuses on getting people into work or working more hours as the economy opens up.

De Schutter said this did not justify the cut. “There are many studies showing that the condition for a healthy and well-qualified workforce to emerge is to provide adequate levels of social protection. You will not improve the productivity of workers or the rate of people employment by pushing people into poverty.”

As well as warnings from charities and opposition parties that 500,000 people, including 200,000 children, will fall into poverty, there is nervousness among Tory MPs that the withdrawal will hit families struggling with the cost of living, not least in politically sensitive former “red wall” seats in the north of England and the Midlands.

The cost of living crisis will have been further fuelled by record inflation spurred by a rise in food and drink prices. Inflation rose to 3.2% in August, from 2% in July, putting further pressure on household budgets. The £20 cut will come as furlough ends and energy prices increase.

Six Conservative former work and pensions secretaries have urged the government to abandon its plans. They include the political architect of universal credit, Iain Duncan Smith. He this week urged ministers to “seize the opportunity to protect more families from poverty and make the £20 uplift permanent”.

In a letter sent to the UK government, De Schutter said he commended the government’s decision to provide the uplift, saying it had played an important role in keeping low-income households out of poverty during the pandemic. However, its withdrawal would leave millions unable to cover daily expenses.

He said the UK was a signatory to the international covenant of economic, social and cultural rights, and under this the government must adequately justify “retrogressive measures” by carrying out a formal impact assessment showing the decision to be compelling, reasonable and proportionate.

“Taking into account these criteria, perhaps your excellency’s government may wish to reconsider the proposed cut, since it is prima facie doubtful whether the removal of the £20 uplift is a measure that conforms to international human rights law and standards,” the letter said.

Last week the government said it had not carried out a formal impact assessment of the cut as it constituted a return to “business as usual”. De Schutter said it was a “well established” rule of international law that states must assess and publish the impact of any retrogressive measures on citizens.

A government spokesperson said: “Universal credit is supporting 6 million people and will continue to provide a comprehensive, vital safety net for those both in and out of work.

“As announced by the chancellor at the budget, the universal credit uplift was always a temporary measure designed to help claimants through the financial disruption of the toughest stages of the pandemic – it has done so, and it’s right that the government should focus on its plan for jobs, supporting people back into work and supporting those already employed to progress and earn more.”

 

*******************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************

 

Youth services in England and Wales ‘face being decimated’

Youth leaders are calling for the recruitment of an additional 50,000 youth workers and volunteers to meet a tripling in levels of need during the pandemic.

Cuts to public spending, which analysis shows have gone deeper in the most deprived areas, coupled with the depleted reserves of youth charities mean that failure to give more support “will see youth clubs and centres close, the youth sector decimated and lost opportunities for young people”, said Leigh Middleton, the chief executive of the National Youth Agency.

 

Local youth leaders also said young people were facing increased vulnerability to organised crime gangs, in particular county lines drug dealing operations, and sharp declines in self-esteem and self-confidence resulting from reduced interaction with other people during the pandemic.

Unemployment among 16- to 24-year-olds in the UK this summer remained 8% higher than for May to July 2019, Office for National Statistics labour market figures revealed on Tuesday.

Youth leaders have previously estimated that one in four youth centres could face closure. In Southall, west London, 1,500 people have recently signed a petition to try to save one of only three centres in the London Borough of Ealing from demolition under a council plan to turn the site into housing. They are also reporting staff quitting for other roles due to the instability of funding for frontline services.

The NYA calculates that over the past decade, total youth service spending in deprived areas of England was down by about £90 a head, compared with about £50 in the most affluent areas.

“There isn’t much left to cut further, without losing it all,” said Middleton.

The YMCA has also calculated that youth services in England have suffered a 73% real-terms funding cut from local authorities since 2010.

“This dire situation is only set to get worse before it gets better, as a dramatically increased need for provision is met with further budget cuts locally,” said Denise Hatton, the YMCA England and Wales chief executive. “Every decision not to invest … forces more and more youth centres into perilous situations.”

Paul Oginsky, who runs Vibe, which operates youth services in Knowsly on Merseyside, said the pressure came as young people “have all felt the loss of relationships in their lives”.

“We are seeing young people’s self-esteem being damaged,” he said.

There had been an increase in criminal behaviour, “noticeably county lines and people being more readily violent to one another”, he said. A fifth of his staff left over the summer for more stable jobs, including in schools and prisons.

Mervyn Kaye, the chief executive of Youth First, which runs youth provision in Lewisham, south-east London, said pandemic restrictions meant the number of children it was able to help regularly had fallen from 1,300 in a normal year to the low hundreds, and was only recently rebounding. Annual council funding had also fallen steeply to £1.5m, although Kaye said that was still more generous than other council areas where cuts had been deeper.

“We weren’t meeting the quantity of need anyway and now we have to create relationships with children whose needs we don’t yet understand after Covid,” Kaye said. “We are stripping children of support to empower them to deal with the problems they are going to face.”

A spokesperson for the Department of Culture Media and Sport said it recognised youth services were “vital”.

“Over £100m from our unprecedented charity sector package has gone to organisations supporting children and young people during the pandemic, including the £16.5m Youth Covid Support Fund, which provided emergency funding specifically for youth services.”

They cited the £200m Youth Endowment Fund to protect young people at risk of exploitation or becoming involved in serious violence and the Kickstart scheme to help them into employment.

 

 

 

 

Edited 16 September 2021 by Buce

[fox_up_north]

The fact is most people in government - civil servants included - wouldn't even notice £20 a week going missing from their account. 

 

What we realistically need is just a top end super tax. Why anyone needs to earn more than, say, £3 million a year, pays 75-80% tax on that amount. Congrats if you worked hard to earn it - that's amazing. A quick check tells me that if you earned £4 million a year, paying 80% tax on that last million, you've still got a monthly take home of about £135k.

 

In context - you could afford to buy a 3 bed house in Mayfair OUTRIGHT within 5 years, if you "only" spent £50k per month, while some couples are living with parents to save money for a deposit on a flat. 

 

I generally see myself as fairly centrist and I appreciate some of the things that post Tory governments have done but, really, you're stifling people living hand to mouth - who are WORKING - out of a measly £20 a week? 

[Strokes]

18 minutes ago, fox_up_north said:

The fact is most people in government - civil servants included - wouldn't even notice £20 a week going missing from their account. 

 

What we realistically need is just a top end super tax. Why anyone needs to earn more than, say, £3 million a year, pays 75-80% tax on that amount. Congrats if you worked hard to earn it - that's amazing. A quick check tells me that if you earned £4 million a year, paying 80% tax on that last million, you've still got a monthly take home of about £135k.

 

In context - you could afford to buy a 3 bed house in Mayfair OUTRIGHT within 5 years, if you "only" spent £50k per month, while some couples are living with parents to save money for a deposit on a flat. 

 

I generally see myself as fairly centrist and I appreciate some of the things that post Tory governments have done but, really, you're stifling people living hand to mouth - who are WORKING - out of a measly £20 a week? 

It’s hard to disagree when you see the numbers laid bare.

I just wish there was a party to vote for that wasn’t repulsive to me.

[RoboFox]

So basically, De Pfeffel and his government don't take culture seriously. 

 

 

[CosbehFox]

That culture sec appointment has disaster all over it 

[Carl the Llama]

https://inews.co.uk/news/john-whittingdale-public-sector-broadcasters-british-only-fools-fleabag-1201634/amp

Ministers want UK broadcasters to be legally obliged to produce shows that evoke 'Britishness'.  Examples include the "bonkers" gogglebox which is incredibly original and not at all ripped directly from the globally popular reaction video phenomenon on YouTube.

 

I'm looking forward to seeing how they choose to define such a nebulous concept.  

 

If any ministers are reading I've got a great plan for a distinctly British gameshow:  Round up a bunch of people from council estates, but instead of having them compete for cash prizes into the thousands we could give them all a starting pot of a tenner each and make them answer a series of 20 questions.  If they answer correctly their money remains untouched but we'll subtract a quid for every wrong answer.  Could be a great earner for the public purse at the expense of people who thoroughly deserve it.

[Dunge]

15 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

https://inews.co.uk/news/john-whittingdale-public-sector-broadcasters-british-only-fools-fleabag-1201634/amp

Ministers want UK broadcasters to be legally obliged to produce shows that evoke 'Britishness'.  Examples include the "bonkers" gogglebox which is incredibly original and not at all ripped directly from the globally popular reaction video phenomenon on YouTube.

 

I'm looking forward to seeing how they choose to define such a nebulous concept.  

 

If any ministers are reading I've got a great plan for a distinctly British gameshow:  Round up a bunch of people from council estates, but instead of having them compete for cash prizes into the thousands we could give them all a starting pot of a tenner each and make them answer a series of 20 questions.  If they answer correctly their money remains untouched but we'll subtract a quid for every wrong answer.  Could be a great earner for the public purse at the expense of people who thoroughly deserve it.

I feel like I need some examples of shows that are considered not to evoke Britishness to understand exactly what he’s saying here or where he’s drawing the line. Because from the contents of that article and the attributed quotes, it almost seems arbitrary and not at all thought out, and I don’t believe that for a moment.

 

(Paragraph above reflects dry sarcasm and stoicism, thereby passing the Britishness test.)

 

I think what we can all agree on is that we need more Countdown. Nothing evokes Britishness more than Countdown. Except for it being a copy of a French show. But we have far more ‘W’s in our language, therefore making our version clearly superior.

[Buce]

1 hour ago, Carl the Llama said:

https://inews.co.uk/news/john-whittingdale-public-sector-broadcasters-british-only-fools-fleabag-1201634/amp

Ministers want UK broadcasters to be legally obliged to produce shows that evoke 'Britishness'.  Examples include the "bonkers" gogglebox which is incredibly original and not at all ripped directly from the globally popular reaction video phenomenon on YouTube.

 

I'm looking forward to seeing how they choose to define such a nebulous concept.  

 

If any ministers are reading I've got a great plan for a distinctly British gameshow:  Round up a bunch of people from council estates, but instead of having them compete for cash prizes into the thousands we could give them all a starting pot of a tenner each and make them answer a series of 20 questions.  If they answer correctly their money remains untouched but we'll subtract a quid for every wrong answer.  Could be a great earner for the public purse at the expense of people who thoroughly deserve it.

 

I think this typifies the Conservative party and its voter base: they have this false image of Britain being relevant like it was in days of empire, and that we still have these 'traditional values' of 'Britishness' (if they ever existed).

 

The reality is we don't have 'global reach' - ironically we lost a great deal of that with Brexit - and Shameless is more representative of modern 'Britishness' than Downton Abbey.