Brexit, for once some facts.

[oldtom]

I like Wetherspoon's business model; I like their prices but I don't like Tim Martin's politics.

Sadly, his success has contributed to the closure of a great many traditional pubs across Britain, not all good ones, mind you! Other factors took their toll too but when a business becomes massive, it can make demands of suppliers with which small businesses simply cannot compete.

Here is a recent story on the current fortunes of his empire:

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/wetherspoons-shares-slide-as-chairman-tim-martin-concentrates-on-championing-brexit-1-5768218

Tom

 

[oldgroaner]

I like Wetherspoon's business model; I like their prices but I don't like Tim Martin's politics.

Sadly, his success has contributed to the closure of a great many traditional pubs across Britain, not all good ones, mind you! Other factors took their toll too but when a business becomes massive, it can make demands of suppliers with which small businesses simply cannot compete.

Here is a recent story on the current fortunes of his empire:

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/wetherspoons-shares-slide-as-chairman-tim-martin-concentrates-on-championing-brexit-1-5768218

Tom

The expression couldn't run a P*** up in Brewery seems appropriate!

 

[oldtom]

The expression couldn't run a P*** up in Brewery seems appropriate!

I move in slightly posher circles where that sentiment is expressed as, 'Couldn't organise a cocktail party in a wine bar!'

Tom

 

[oyster]

I should think so too...

Arron Banks dropped from BBC Question Time panel


Leading Brexiter under NCA investigation jokes that Marr interview ‘went too well’

Businessman and Brexit campaigner Arron Banks has been removed from the panel of next week’s BBC Question Time following a furore over his interview on the Andrew Marr show.


The National Crime Agency is investigating allegations of multiple criminal offences by Banks and his unofficial leave campaign in the EU referendum. The Electoral Commission said last week that there were reasonable grounds to suspect Banks was “not the true source” of £8m given to the Leave.EU campaign, and that it had referred the matter to the NCA.


Days later, the insurance magnate appeared on the Andrew Marr Show, prompting criticism that the BBC was giving a platform to someone under criminal investigation, and that he was given an easy ride.


Since that appearance, the commission has confirmed that Leave.EU, which was co-founded by Banks, and Eldon Insurance, which he owns, face fines totalling £135,000 over breaches of data laws.


On Wednesday, Banks tweeted that his invitation to BBC Question Time had been rescinded, adding: “Clearly the Andrew Marr interview went too well!”


At the end of last Thursday’s Question Time, the host, David Dimbleby, said: “Believe it or not, at the moment, at any rate, Arron Banks is going to be on the panel so, we’ll see, we’ll see, that’s two weeks from now.”


In response to Banks’s tweet, a BBC spokesman said only: “Question Time panels are never fully confirmed until broadcast.” But the Guardian understands that he is no longer due to appear at the show in Milford Haven.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/nov/07/arron-banks-dropped-from-bbc-question-time-panel

 

[oldgroaner]

I move in slightly posher circles where that sentiment is expressed as, 'Couldn't organise a cocktail party in a wine bar!'

Tom

'ere guv, you wannathem shampain soshulists then?

 

[oldtom]

This year, I haven't bought a poppy yet and I may not even bother for this reason. I have mixed feelings about the continuing event due to its commercialisation and the way in which it seems to have been hijacked by TV news people and politicians as if to suggest that they share the grief of the millions of ordinary folk who lived in abject poverty but stepped up and did their bit for King and country. 'King and country' is in reality a euphemism for nothing other than the royal family and aristocracy, alternatively referred to as 'the elite'.

I read this by Harry Leslie Smith and realised I'm not alone:

why-i-will-never-again-wear-a-red-poppy-by-95-year-old-veteran-harry-leslie-smith

Tom

 

[oldtom]

'ere guv, you wannathem shampain soshulists then?

I'm more of an Adnam's Broadside kind of socialist but I'm not one to refuse a nice Rioja Reserva……I reckon between them, that's two of my five-a-day!

Tom

 

[oyster]

Deeply stinky behaviour. If it needs this sort of anti-constitutional decision, it shouldn't be happening.

Theresa May imposes new layer of secrecy on Brexit legal advice

Ministerial code outlines that cabinet should see full text if law officers provide advice
The convention that legal advice to the cabinet is never published is enforced by the ministerial code. That ban has not halted successive demands for greater political openness.


Theresa May’s decision to prevent cabinet ministers from seeing the full text of the Brexit guidance provided by the attorney general, Geoffrey Cox QC, appears, however, to introduce an additional restriction on the circulation of information at the highest levels of government.


Section 2.12 of the ministerial code explicitly declares that if law officers, such as the attorney general, provide legal advice then cabinet ministers should expect to see the entire text. According to reports the environment secretary, Michael Gove, has asked to see the full advice.

It reads: “When advice from the law officers is included in correspondence between ministers, or in papers for the cabinet or ministerial committees, the conclusions may if necessary be summarised but, if this is done, the complete text of the advice should be attached.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/07/prime-minister-imposes-new-layer-secrecy-cabinet-brexit-legal-advice

 

[oldgroaner]

Deeply stinky behaviour. If it needs this sort of anti-constitutional decision, it shouldn't be happening.

Theresa May imposes new layer of secrecy on Brexit legal advice

Ministerial code outlines that cabinet should see full text if law officers provide advice
The convention that legal advice to the cabinet is never published is enforced by the ministerial code. That ban has not halted successive demands for greater political openness.


Theresa May’s decision to prevent cabinet ministers from seeing the full text of the Brexit guidance provided by the attorney general, Geoffrey Cox QC, appears, however, to introduce an additional restriction on the circulation of information at the highest levels of government.


Section 2.12 of the ministerial code explicitly declares that if law officers, such as the attorney general, provide legal advice then cabinet ministers should expect to see the entire text. According to reports the environment secretary, Michael Gove, has asked to see the full advice.

It reads: “When advice from the law officers is included in correspondence between ministers, or in papers for the cabinet or ministerial committees, the conclusions may if necessary be summarised but, if this is done, the complete text of the advice should be attached.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/07/prime-minister-imposes-new-layer-secrecy-cabinet-brexit-legal-advice

Straight out of the "Fascism for Dummies" guide in the chapter
"government by fiat"

 

[oldgroaner]

Fun and games at the Trump press conference yesterday i watched several videos, Acosta the reporter certainly was abrasive, but Trump lost control completely and one of his female aides tried to grab the microphone
Alan White‏Verified account @aljwhite


I see this press conference couldn’t be going better.

ABC News

Then they "Trumped" up a charge to remove his press pass
"
The announcement was made by Ms Sanders on Twitter.

She commented: “We will never tolerate a reporter placing his hands on a young woman just trying to do her job as a White House intern. This conduct is absolutely unacceptable.

“It is also completely disrespectful to the reporter’s colleagues not to allow them to ask a question.”

But they happily lied as the young woman placed her hands on him, not the other way about.
0:08 / 1:53
Video

This being in the Express comments were unavailable
Needless to say the Daily Mail tried to sell the Trump line too, there were readers comments permitted here and there was a mixed reaction.

 

[oyster]

Fun and games at the Trump press conference yesterday i watched several videos, Acosta the reporter certainly was abrasive, but Trump lost control completely and one of his female aides tried to grab the microphone
Alan White‏Verified account @aljwhite


I see this press conference couldn’t be going better.

ABC News

Then they "Trumped" up a charge to remove his press pass
"
The announcement was made by Ms Sanders on Twitter.

She commented: “We will never tolerate a reporter placing his hands on a young woman just trying to do her job as a White House intern. This conduct is absolutely unacceptable.

“It is also completely disrespectful to the reporter’s colleagues not to allow them to ask a question.”

But they happily lied as the young woman placed her hands on him, not the other way about.
0:08 / 1:53
Video

This being in the Express comments were unavailable

And he certainly didn't grab her by the female part famously bragged about by DT himself.

 

[oldtom]

Theresa May imposes new layer of secrecy on Brexit legal advice

Does anyone remember the buzzword bandied about by politicians for a time, 'Transparency'? It seems they discovered that openness, and honesty doesn't suit the kind of agenda they now operate under.

Tom

 

[oldtom]

On the subject of transparency, I note that 'VoxPolitical' has reported on the matter of 'gagging clauses', a subject that most of the media will overlook as Theresa May could well find herself implicated over her handling of aspects of the Grenfell fire disaster. This is shocking stuff!

https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2018/11/08/theresa-may-forced-grenfell-investigators-to-lie-about-the-cause-of-the-fire-so-she-wouldnt-look-bad/?fbclid=IwAR28N52AAHILbPnei1HztobK2XICsPgE9PptEZ9BIhrdg7w8xZKHPYz4iW0

Tom

 

[oldtom]

I read this earlier and it made me laugh. Doesn't he think French folk have an expression similar in meaning to that quaint old English phrase, 'Waddaloadabollox!'?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46128372

Tom

 

[Danidl]

On the subject of transparency, I note that 'VoxPolitical' has reported on the matter of 'gagging clauses', a subject that most of the media will overlook as Theresa May could well find herself implicated over her handling of aspects of the Grenfell fire disaster. This is shocking stuff!

https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2018/11/08/theresa-may-forced-grenfell-investigators-to-lie-about-the-cause-of-the-fire-so-she-wouldnt-look-bad/?fbclid=IwAR28N52AAHILbPnei1HztobK2XICsPgE9PptEZ9BIhrdg7w8xZKHPYz4iW0

Tom

What to my mind is shocking stuff here,is how or why an engineering consultancy would sign off on such a contract. There is an ethical dimension here. The Consulting firm, would be bound by the code of conduct of the professional engineering bodies,which as a matter of course,should have precluded them from discussing their clients business. So inclusion of a specific gagging clause is redundent. An exception to that is where public interest demands that disclosure. The Engineering Council would or should have a view on this.

This would be different from say public disclosure of information obtained under the Official Secrets Act... Which is the law of the land.

 

[oldtom]

What to my mind is shocking stuff here,is how or why an engineering consultancy would sign off on such a contract. There is an ethical dimension here. The Consulting firm, would be bound by the code of conduct of the professional engineering bodies,which as a matter of course,should have precluded them from discussing their clients business. So inclusion of a specific gagging clause is redundent. An exception to that is where public interest demands that disclosure. The Engineering Council would or should have a view on this.

This would be different from say public disclosure of information obtained under the Official Secrets Act... Which is the law of the land.

Indeed 'Danidl'; Sadly, the whole Grenfell business stinks of corrupt practices. Whether it's the makers of a product intended to clad and insulate buildings, some consultancy firm, or the contractors who fitted the material….or the council sub-committee charged with overseeing such matters, there is a duty of care applicable to all those professionals and public servants.

Only yesterday, we learned that two staff of a takeaway food outlet were jailed for failing to exercise their duty of care in relation to the poor girl who died as a result of their disregard of her nut allergy to which they had been alerted and I see the Grenfell issue in rather the same way.

There seems to have been (and continues to be) a lot of blame-shifting by various groups, any or all of whom may be culpable in the matter. Clearly, the matter remains sub-judice but no-one should ever forget that as a result of decisions made by professional people and/or public servants, not just one girl, disgraceful as that is, died in this west London tragedy - 72 human beings perished in the most horrible way, waiting to be rescued from a burning building so impenetrable that the fire service couldn't reach them.

This occurred on May's watch.

Tom

 

[tillson]

Fun and games at the Trump press conference yesterday i watched several videos, Acosta the reporter certainly was abrasive, but Trump lost control completely and one of his female aides tried to grab the microphone
Alan White‏Verified account @aljwhite


I see this press conference couldn’t be going better.

ABC News

Then they "Trumped" up a charge to remove his press pass
"
The announcement was made by Ms Sanders on Twitter.

She commented: “We will never tolerate a reporter placing his hands on a young woman just trying to do her job as a White House intern. This conduct is absolutely unacceptable.

“It is also completely disrespectful to the reporter’s colleagues not to allow them to ask a question.”

But they happily lied as the young woman placed her hands on him, not the other way about.
0:08 / 1:53
Video

This being in the Express comments were unavailable
Needless to say the Daily Mail tried to sell the Trump line too, there were readers comments permitted here and there was a mixed reaction.

As usual, they are just sore because the mid-terms were better for Trump than expected. A bit like the remainers in Brexit, the Democrats, media and celebs have nothing more to offer than insults, and unfounded insinuations.

If Trump is so bad, why don’t these critics stand up and offer something more appealing to voters? The simple reason is, they don’t have anything appealing to offer. They are simply suits and dresses full of FA, with FA to offer. It’s as simple as that. Many remainers suffer the same affliction.

 

[oyster]

I read this earlier and it made me laugh. Doesn't he think French folk have an expression similar in meaning to that quaint old English phrase, 'Waddaloadabollox!'?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46128372

Tom

Only decades? We really need bonds of friendship forever.

{Edited to add as below.]

France and UK must strengthen links 'to hedge against Trump'
Hostility of US president to Europe’s defence role and impact of Brexit demand closer alliance says ex-Nato head

 

[tillson]

By all means criticise Theresa May for her incompetence, I do too. But please use the facts and don't stoop to Tommie's level of exaggeration. You are right about there being an adverse effect from the police reductions, but for the wrong reason. Read on.

From the 1990s to 2017, covering the whole period of police reductions, Londons murders have reduced by 28%, that reducing still further this year to over 35% down to date.

All the current fuss was brought about by a media moron taking a sudden clump of London murders in January and February and comparing that to New York's lower rate in those two months. Since then the media have never let up, aided by the Metropolitan Police distorted propaganda campaign for more money.

Fact, this year's murders are down on last years, from 131 to 118 to date. Back in the 1990s it was nearly 200 annually.

Compared to comparable cities and to it's own history, London does not have a particular murder problem currently. There certainly is a real problem related to police reductions, the murders that occur are not being investigated thoroughly any more, resulting in increasing numbers remaining unsolved with no conviction. That is the real problem brought about by Theresa May, not any fictitious increase in numbers of murders.
.

I am struggling to find any historical data which shows the actual number of murders committed in London year upon year. There is plenty of data showing U.K. murders per 1000 head of population, but that’s nonesens since the population is spiralling upwards out of control.

EDIT: I have found some data now, which seems to confirm what you have said in your post regarding the actual number of murders in London being higher during the 1990s. There does seem to have been a spike in recent years though. The use of acid to injure people also seems to have caught the media’s attention, that being particularly horrific.

 

[flecc]

The use of acid to injure people also seems to have caught the media’s attention, that being particularly horrific.

Indeed, but that's a national problem, Suffolk's Chief Constable leading on the exposure of the extent. The UK is now top in the world for acid attacks.
.