Careless Tories!

[swaledale]

I dispute your right leaning.
This is a man who wanted to give every illegal immigrant "amnesty" and despite the mandate presented him, failed to sever EU/ECHR links that stopped him performing the job at hand.

You call him right leaning, I call him selfish and cunning to suit himself.
A PM handed a majority of over 80 seats should have been laughing like a hyena, as to how easy his job could have been.
He blew it.

It's easy to just blast the Tories, but British politics across the board is a corrupt mess in many forms. Be it financial, or flavour of the day politics.

Whilst we are at it, the civil service deserves a mention. If they cannot do the job the elected government asks for, then they should be swept aside and replaced by either a neutral or a reflection of the party in power.
They are by definition of word "servants" .
They are unelected and paid to do a task issued.
They are employees nothing more. They get no say, in bringing their personal issues or bias in to the mix.

Agree with you re Johnson a total incompetent and self serving liar.

Me thinks your taking too much notice of the right wing media who conveniently label the civil service as being the problem, when in actual fact its the Tory government who are incompetent. Indeed a leading Tory, I forget who, has just yesterday said, the Government need to stop blaming the civil service for when things go wrong, when they are down to government errors.

So lets get this clear - the civil service has always been neutral and served the government of the day, however, they are obliged as part of their job to advise government when a policy or action they propose is a) illegal, b) unworkable or c) just pie in the sky.

We saw what happened with Truss when she sacked the leading civil servant in the Treasury who warned her about her infamous budget and sure enough the markets spooked at the uncosted and unrealistic proposals.

There is more to the job, certainly at the higher level, (A friend of mine was a very senior civil servant and used to say that it was fine doing what the politicians wanted but they often ignored advice on how to achieve it and then had a strop when it didn't work. He worked under Labour and the conservative/Lib Dem coalition and said both were equally problematic in not liking being told the actual consequences of what they were proposing, or being advised that something was illegal.

On the whole the UK civil service do a very good job, compared to other countries where it is very much politicised. One has to remember that on the whole politicians have little detailed understanding on how to deliver their policies.

As for the ECHR, for all it may seem a solution to enabling some policies to happen, one would surely far ratherlive in a country that observes it - remember its got nowt to do with the EU, it was the UK that help set it up to go some way to ensuring there was a way of calling governments to account who abused human rights.

One can't just remove a respect for human rights because it seems convenient to do so.

[Trickytreesreds]

Agree with you re Johnson a total incompetent and self serving liar.

Me thinks your taking too much notice of the right wing media who conveniently label the civil service as being the problem, when in actual fact its the Tory government who are incompetent. Indeed a leading Tory, I forget who, has just yesterday said, the Government need to stop blaming the civil service for when things go wrong, when they are down to government errors.

So lets get this clear - the civil service has always been neutral and served the government of the day, however, they are obliged as part of their job to advise government when a policy or action they propose is a) illegal, b) unworkable or c) just pie in the sky.

We saw what happened with Truss when she sacked the leading civil servant in the Treasury who warned her about her infamous budget and sure enough the markets spooked at the uncosted and unrealistic proposals.

There is more to the job, certainly at the higher level, (A friend of mine was a very senior civil servant and used to say that it was fine doing what the politicians wanted but they often ignored advice on how to achieve it and then had a strop when it didn't work. He worked under Labour and the conservative/Lib Dem coalition and said both were equally problematic in not liking being told the actual consequences of what they were proposing, or being advised that something was illegal.

On the whole the UK civil service do a very good job, compared to other countries where it is very much politicised. One has to remember that on the whole politicians have little detailed understanding on how to deliver their policies.

As for the ECHR, for all it may seem a solution to enabling some policies to happen, one would surely far ratherlive in a country that observes it - remember its got nowt to do with the EU, it was the UK that help set it up to go some way to ensuring there was a way of calling governments to account who abused human rights.

One can't just remove a respect for human rights because it seems convenient to do so.

Yes it is more than a job Swale. But they don't get to pick and choose the policies set. They seem to think they do.
They have threatened strike action over Rwanda and Border Force have threatened it over boat control. That is not their call. They do not answer for it.

As for the ECHR, we all know why it was introduced after the Nazi's There is nothing wrong with a country having an adequate judicial system or "bill of rights". I don't think we'll be seeing genocide in the UK anytime soon.
Countries around the world don't need the ECHR to do the right thing.

Thus situations, like a plane being held on the tarmac by a judge somewhere in Europe, who over rides a countrys legal system. Cannot be allowed to continue.
You aren't even allowed to know who this judge was and what grounds he stalled it.
Then there's the foreign criminals, stuck here, because they lodge appeal after appeal through the European courts to prevent deportation. It's outrageous. We aren't even talking minor league nasties here, but real hard core.

So sorry Swale, you and I will have to remain poles apart on this one.
The rights of a countrys citizens and innocents, far out weigh some scumbags whinging about their human rights.

[ramAnag]

I dispute your right leaning.
This is a man who wanted to give every illegal immigrant "amnesty" and despite the mandate presented him, failed to sever EU/ECHR links that stopped him performing the job at hand.

You call him right leaning, I call him selfish and cunning to suit himself.
A PM handed a majority of over 80 seats should have been laughing like a hyena, as to how easy his job could have been.
He blew it.

It's easy to just blast the Tories, but British politics across the board is a corrupt mess in many forms. Be it financial, or flavour of the day politics.

Whilst we are at it, the civil service deserves a mention. If they cannot do the job the elected government asks for, then they should be swept aside and replaced by either a neutral or a reflection of the party in power.
They are by definition of word "servants" .
They are unelected and paid to do a task issued.
They are employees nothing more. They get no say, in bringing their personal issues or bias in to the mix.

You can dispute ‘right leaning’ if you like, but take it up with GP not me. They were his words, which represent a bit of an about turn since the election victory you speak of back in 2019.

I’m inclined to agree...he’s a lot more than merely ‘right leaning’ and he is ‘selfish’. ‘Cunning’...I’m not so sure of. Would someone who is genuinely ‘cunning’ screw things up in the way he has? I think not. Devious, dishonest, disingenuous and dishonourable would be the four adjectives I’d always have used to describe him and everything that’s happened has only confirmed that opinion.

Agree with your earlier comments (#461) about the House of Lords.

[SithHappens]

Johnson Corbyn and Farage? By my reckoning there were 8 parties involved in the 2019 election and the leaders of all 8 have gone, one way or tother

was thinking Sturgeon who's resignation appears murky considering

[swaledale]

Sorry its such a an essay Tricky but these issues cannot be covered by simple slogans or short answers, much as this government would like to do so. Also I acknowledge an error, the countries signed up to the ECHR are of course European even Turkey, though given Erdogan's direction of travel one wonders for how much longer, the others are of course not signed up to the United Nations equivalent.

[Trickytreesreds]

Sorry its such a an essay Tricky but these issues cannot be covered by simple slogans or short answers, much as this government would like to do so. Also I acknowledge an error, the countries signed up to the ECHR are of course European even Turkey, though given Erdogan's direction of travel one wonders for how much longer, the others are of course not signed up to the United Nations equivalent.

You are comparing Erdogan to British politics? Errrrrrrrrrrm, ok.

BTW
en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Border_ForceBorder Force - Wikipedia
Members of the BF are known as "Border Force officers" and are civil servants, part of HM's Civil Service. Powers. Staff hold a mixture of powers granted to them by their status as immigration

[swaledale]

I note Johnson's hairdresser has had a honour, who knew he even had a hair dresser!!!!!!

[MadAmster]

The HoL should be an elected chamber. Their one and only job should be to vet proposed legislation, making sure it's fair, reasonable, proportionate and not breaking any Laws. End of. They should NOT turf proposed legislation because they don't like the politics behind it.

[swaledale]

The HoL should be an elected chamber. Their one and only job should be to vet proposed legislation, making sure it's fair, reasonable, proportionate and not breaking any Laws. End of. They should NOT turf proposed legislation because they don't like the politics behind it.

If its an elected chamber with a role as a counter balance to the commons aka the USA system, then there is no reason why they should not block legislation unless its in the manifesto of the elected government, which is how the HOL operates today, they can't actually stop legislation if it was in the manifesto the government was voted in on. However, they can act as a counter balance to stop a government promising one thing and then doing something they hadn't mentioned.

It isn't hard to devise a system which provides check on the government without preventing them from implementing policies that they were elected to implement. The hardest bit is getting rid of the 800 or so currently in the HOL>

[MadAmster]

If its an elected chamber with a role as a counter balance to the commons aka the USA system, then there is no reason why they should not block legislation unless its in the manifesto of the elected government, which is how the HOL operates today, they can't actually stop legislation if it was in the manifesto the government was voted in on. However, they can act as a counter balance to stop a government promising one thing and then doing something they hadn't mentioned.

It isn't hard to devise a system which provides check on the government without preventing them from implementing policies that they were elected to implement. The hardest bit is getting rid of the 800 or so currently in the HOL>

... but if what was in their manifesto is illegal, shouldn't the HoL point that out and block it?