O/T:- Banks

[OchPie]

Trans women commit male pattern crime, unsurprisingly. 99% of s*xual offences are committed by males. In the UK, around 50% (although it may be as high as 61.3%) of trans women in prison have been convicted of at least one s*xual offence. In 2022 that was 87 trans women in prison who had committed s*xual offence. That's not non existent.

These numbers are completely unreliable, as explained by Bent Bars.

As they say in that fact sheet:

Some media reporting is currently contributing to a similar moral panic around trans people and trans women in particular. This is not to deny the fact that there are some trans people in prison who have committed ***ual offences. But the media has been using selective examples to fuel anti-trans sentiments that equate trans women with ***ual predators and suggest that trans people are inherently dangerous. This is inaccurate and misleading.

[Newish Pie]

Thanks Newish Pie, likewise I agree with you on some points and not on others, but you make your arguments most eloquently and constructively.

Speaking as someone in his 50s who's voted Conservative at every election (except one) since I was 18, I think I can make
reasonable claim to being conservative, but I did vote for Brexit and I don't regret it. In fact, I think it was a rare but magnificent democratic moment when the public refused to do what they were told by the vested interests and power brokers, despite being subjected to a quite outrageous level of pressure to vote Remain, including a one-sided Government leaflet funded by the public purse!

Unsurprisingly, the dark forces who were shocked to their foundations by the Brexit vote were never going to accept the outcome and they still exercise a frightening amount of power which they're now using to push the message that Brexit has failed, to indeed try to make it fail, and ultimately seek to reverse the public's decision. Hopefully they'll overplay their hand in much the same way as they did during the campaign itself, making their self-serving agenda so obvious that even the less politically astute members of the public will still see through it.





I'm genuinely 50/50 on changing the voting system. I see some merit in the 'strong governance' argument often advanced by defenders of FPTP, especially when you see the chaos that sometimes ensues in countries with more proportional systems, but I also agree with you that democracy isn't served when smaller parties command a significant vote share and yet receive little or no representation in Parliament. I might support some form of PR in the future if only to create the conditions where we could get party names like the ones you've created!

Of course, the public were asked their opinion via the electoral system referendum a decade ago and voted to keep FPTP, but the level of undue Government/major party influence in limiting the options and steering the public towards the FPTP outcome was frankly not all that far different from the kind of coercive campaign we witnessed for 'Remain' in the Brexit referendum. In fact let's be honest, David Cameron's decision to "allow" the public a say on Brexit - how decent of him - owed much to the confidence he gained from the electoral system referendum. He thought he would be able to "control" the outcome in favour of 'Remain' in the same way he did for FPTP... but he was wrong!



(Unsurprisingly) I disagreed strongly with Jeremy Corbyn's policies which I believe would have been disastrous for the country. However, I immensely respected the integrity and dignity with which he articulated his beliefs, and his bravery in seeking to offer the public genuine change. In return, he was subjected to the most - as you say - 'monstrous' treatment, including multiple personal attacks and a persistent all-round character assassination by large swathes of the media. I found it hugely distasteful and completely unwarranted in what's supposed to be a democracy, and I've got no doubt whatsoever it was once again driven by those dark power brokers who saw a very real threat in someone offering the public such a radical alternative choice.



I agree that Boris Johnson and Liz Truss like Corbyn had competence issues and contributed to their own downfall, but having acknowledged the way Corbyn was targeted for his assertively Socialist agenda, it would be myopic not to see that several figures on the assertively Right-wing (not hard Right) of British politics have also been subject to what I call the 'hounds of hell' treatment for offering the public an option too far off the centre line.

One poster on here once described me as a libertarian conservative and I wouldn't necessarily disagree - economically conservative and socially liberal I would say - but as one of the 'Thatcher's children' generation I think it's sad to see how politicians taking a strong position anywhere beyond the centre of the political spectrum are vilified these days, and how by extension, we seem to see an ever growing number of vacuous career politicians who are quite happy to play "within the lines" as long as they're making money and feeding their egos.

Tony Benn is quoted as saying 'The people who have sacrificed their view in order to get to the top have very often left no footprint in the sands of time'. He was probably right, and they won't have made much positive difference to many people's lives either.

Thanks for another thoughtful post. We won't agree on Brexit. But I'd just observe in passing that Brexit was never going to deliver what was promised - it was pure cake-ism - as if you can vote for having your cake and eating it. It's absolutely true that the vested interests and the power brokers did want (on the whole) to remain, but that's because the facts and the evidence were on their side. Big business generally gets what big business wants in this country, which was why I thought Remain would win. But we can't talk about vested interests and hidden hands without talking about Leave campaign finance scandals, Russian interference, Cambridge Analytica, and the vested interests behind the Leave campaign whose aim is to turn the UK into an ultra low tax, deregulated playground for the wealthy. Typing that, I'm aware it starts to sound a little like conspiracy theory, but something very shady definitely went on. Which doesn't let the Remain campaign off the hook - Osborne's 'project fear' budget projection was pathetic, and people saw through it.

Those who wanted Brexit got in put in charge of delivering Brexit, and they didn't. Johnson resigned in protest against the deal he negotiated. The Brexiteers were in charge - they purged the Tories of those who disagreed. Johnson claimed he had an "oven ready" Brexit (yet another lie). So... where is it? Why hasn't it happened? Where are the sunlight uplands? It's easy to blame dark forces and saboteurs... politicians saying "this isn't my Brexit". The Brexiteers must be furious with whoever's in charge... oh wait. There's been a complete lack of responsibility and accountability. Brexit politicians can't keep blaming someone else. You wanted this, you make it happen.

I also think it's perfectly legitimate to ask what the benefits of Brexit are. And if you have to go looking into the Brexit blogosphere, that's not a great look. The alleged triumphs trumpeted tend to be less good than what we had previously. It's really telling that it's so hard even for supporters to articulate those benefits.


On FPTP, I agree about potential problems with weak and unstable government. That worry was enough to put me off supporting some form of PR for a while. However... the Tories and the Lib Dems showed that a stable coalition can work... that put me in a weird position... on the one hand, I thought Cameron was a despicable fraud and Clegg was a gullible patsy, but on the other, it would be good to have evidence that a coalition could work. But then... we've not had strong and stable government for some time now, even with the Tories with a majority in terms of seats that their majority in terms of votes doesn't justify in any way.

It's certainly true that we had a referendum before, and I absolutely agree with the way that campaign was conducted. A new low, since surpassed. I guess the difficulty is that we don't know if/how/when parties will respond to PR... it's not like picking teams for football in the yard at school where we just start from scratch. So although I list some not-entirely-serious parties, we've no real way of knowing what will happen, other than looking at what kinds of parties exist in countries that do have PR.

There's also a bunch of different types of PR, with different strengths and weaknesses. Some keep constituency links (which I like), and some don't. I'd like to see the use of Citizens' Juries to look into the issue.


Fair play for acknowledging the monstering that Corbyn got. I also think he's a man of great integrity and consistency who's generally been on the right side of history. But being an effective opposition campaigner is one thing, leading a modern political party is another.

However... try as I might, I can't see any equivalent treatment meted out to anyone on the right. Perhaps I am being myopic... obviously I see things through the lens of my own beliefs, prejudices and expectations... but I really can't think of anyone on the right who's been aggressively smeared in the way that Corbyn was. I mean... Nick Griffin was set up as a pantomime villain on Question Time once, but he's an actual villain who didn't deserve the platform. But we're not talking about the far right, and we're talking about smears, not accurate reporting of things people say and do and think.

I mean... is there a nasty whiff of misogyny and snobbery about some of the treatment of Nadine Dorries? Yes, probably. Should she ever have been promoted to ministerial office? Absolutely not. Beyond that... can't really think of examples.

[Magpies1959]

Agree to disagree there Och Pie.

[OchPie]

Agree to disagree there Och Pie.

Fair enough, but I'm still pretty sure Coutts didn't suddenly wake up and learn about Farage's views this year.

Their commercial terms are three million in savings, or one million in mortgage outstanding or investment. Farage said on Newsnight he couldn't meet that any more.

[crazyfists]

So the alternative to opting for "a quite outrageous level of pressure to vote Remain, including a one-sided Government leaflet funded by the public purse" was to vote for a pack of outrageous lies by vote Leave. Not alleged lies, but proven lies with the benefit of hindsight.

So tell us how this "rare but magnificent democratic moment when the public refused to do what they were told by the vested interests and power brokers" has been magnificent? Also tell us how many promises have been realised and how many were lies?

What exactly are the benefits of Brexit?

This. Why would you be glad you've voted for something, that was predicted and also realised, that made your fellow Brits worse off. To stick it to the man? The man was on both sides, it's like the new extreme right conservatives saying they're going to take the Establishment down, they are the Establishment.

Also the public were told to vote leave for x, y and z reasons which have proved to be lies. Austerity and demonisation of immigrants plus the lies won the vote. My wife voted leave as she says 'cause they said the NHS would get more money' and this 21 year old woman at work said she didn't know which way to vote so just asked her grandparents as they know more. If you don't know which way you should vote then don't vote!

I'm just suprised you're glad you voted for leave, glad for what reason, I don't get it.

[keldsyke]

Fair enough, but I'm still pretty sure Coutts didn't suddenly wake up and learn about Farage's views this year.

Their commercial terms are three million in savings, or one million in mortgage outstanding or investment. Farage said on Newsnight he couldn't meet that any more.

I can tell you as I'm sat here with someone who has a Coutts account and that they have and never had nowhere near what they state the minimum requirements are.... regardless that is not the issue, if some Bank or Company can build a dossier on you on what you're views are and then decide `not to deal with you based on what certain people at the top of the organisation thinks is deeply worrying.

[OchPie]

I can tell you as I'm sat here with someone who has a Coutts account and that they have and never had nowhere near what they state the minimum requirements are.... regardless that is not the issue, if some Bank or Company can build a dossier on you on what you're views are and then decide `not to deal with you based on what certain people at the top of the organisation thinks is deeply worrying.

Sure, Coutts can and do make exceptions. The point is they have to want to.

I'd be shocked if private elite banks like Coutts don't have dossiers on pretty much every customer they have (and thick ones for any current or former PEP like Farage). Risk management and regulatory compliance are some of the biggest core functions of a bank, and for banks like them a large part of those activities will come down to who their individual customers are. Of course if a customer doesn't broadcast their views, the bank won't know all that much about their views.

[Magpies1959]

Very true Keld, it is a good thing that Farage stuck to his guns to highlight how he had been treated. If as looks likely we become a cashless society in the not too distant future, then banks could be cancelling people on their beliefs and interests, very scary. We are getting closer and closer to thought control.

[AltyPie]

Thanks for another thoughtful post. We won't agree on Brexit. But I'd just observe in passing that Brexit was never going to deliver what was promised - it was pure cake-ism - as if you can vote for having your cake and eating it. It's absolutely true that the vested interests and the power brokers did want (on the whole) to remain, but that's because the facts and the evidence were on their side. Big business generally gets what big business wants in this country, which was why I thought Remain would win. But we can't talk about vested interests and hidden hands without talking about Leave campaign finance scandals, Russian interference, Cambridge Analytica, and the vested interests behind the Leave campaign whose aim is to turn the UK into an ultra low tax, deregulated playground for the wealthy. Typing that, I'm aware it starts to sound a little like conspiracy theory, but something very shady definitely went on. Which doesn't let the Remain campaign off the hook - Osborne's 'project fear' budget projection was pathetic, and people saw through it.

Those who wanted Brexit got in put in charge of delivering Brexit, and they didn't. Johnson resigned in protest against the deal he negotiated. The Brexiteers were in charge - they purged the Tories of those who disagreed. Johnson claimed he had an "oven ready" Brexit (yet another lie). So... where is it? Why hasn't it happened? Where are the sunlight uplands? It's easy to blame dark forces and saboteurs... politicians saying "this isn't my Brexit". The Brexiteers must be furious with whoever's in charge... oh wait. There's been a complete lack of responsibility and accountability. Brexit politicians can't keep blaming someone else. You wanted this, you make it happen.

I also think it's perfectly legitimate to ask what the benefits of Brexit are. And if you have to go looking into the Brexit blogosphere, that's not a great look. The alleged triumphs trumpeted tend to be less good than what we had previously. It's really telling that it's so hard even for supporters to articulate those benefits.

On FPTP, I agree about potential problems with weak and unstable government. That worry was enough to put me off supporting some form of PR for a while. However... the Tories and the Lib Dems showed that a stable coalition can work... that put me in a weird position... on the one hand, I thought Cameron was a despicable fraud and Clegg was a gullible patsy, but on the other, it would be good to have evidence that a coalition could work. But then... we've not had strong and stable government for some time now, even with the Tories with a majority in terms of seats that their majority in terms of votes doesn't justify in any way.

There's also a bunch of different types of PR, with different strengths and weaknesses. Some keep constituency links (which I like), and some don't. I'd like to see the use of Citizens' Juries to look into the issue.

Fair play for acknowledging the monstering that Corbyn got. I also think he's a man of great integrity and consistency who's generally been on the right side of history. But being an effective opposition campaigner is one thing, leading a modern political party is another.

However... try as I might, I can't see any equivalent treatment meted out to anyone on the right. Perhaps I am being myopic... obviously I see things through the lens of my own beliefs, prejudices and expectations... but I really can't think of anyone on the right who's been aggressively smeared in the way that Corbyn was. I mean... Nick Griffin was set up as a pantomime villain on Question Time once, but he's an actual villain who didn't deserve the platform. But we're not talking about the far right, and we're talking about smears, not accurate reporting of things people say and do and think.

All Brexit did was right the wrong of us signing up to the Constitution for Europe without a referendum (the one the Labour Party promised us and then denied us.)

As for no-one on the right having been treated as badly as Corbyn, have you been living in a cave for a decade?

[jonnyt1]

Alty Pie, exactly plus more. John Major signed up to Maastricht without a referendum. That single act removed major constitutional powers from the UK. We were heading feet first into another Soviet Union being created.

I personally voted Brexit not for financial gain (though there will be benefits along with losses) but for democracy and self determination.

Free trade deals yes, forming super states with unelected bureaucrats no.

So far its not going bad, second largest growing economy in Europe according to the OECD, only Greece above us, fuelled by UK tourism...