Who would ever employ this man again after being so spectacularly unfaithful to his previous employer?
What do we think of his new excuse for dashing home and going off to Durham? A group of people were outside his house, threatening. In that case, surely as a senior government advisor he would have a hot line to the police who would have been far better equipped for dealing with the problem far more promptly.
|
|
In the first instance I believe he's got delusions of grandeur.
|
I agree with you on his employment prospects, but some of what he had to say rang true.
In particular I can very easily believe that we were woefully ill prepared for a pandemic with limited untested contingency plans and inadequate supplies of PPE. Jeremy Hunt must take responsibility for this having been health secretary for most of the Tory reign since 2010.
Having worked in the public sector, in my experience many senior people are intelllectually and academically first rate. But the public sector gives greater rewards to those who avoid controversy over those who tread on toes to get things done. Hence poor processes for emergency procurements etc.
The rest of his testimony seemed along the lines of "everyone is an incompetent apart from me". He is clearly angry and bitter and may prioritise revenge against his former colleagues and masters over objective and honest evidence.
|
Lots of what he said were easy to say with hindsight. Easy pickings.
I don't like Cummings but I believed quite a bit of what he said about Boris and I think I like him even less.
I don't believe it's realistic to expect the govt can reasonably be expected to be completely prepared for every possible crisis. E.G. I can imagine the outcry when the Mail sees the bill for replacing all the stockpiled and unused PPE every 5 years.
Not every crisis is going to be a pandemic, which they will no doubt be better prepared for for next time.
I don't particularly trust this govt and his comment about donkeys leading the lions seemed entirely believable. Very few of the senior ministers really deserve their position IMO, or have proved themselves worthy of it. I like Hunt, Dishy, and to a lesser extent Gove. The rest are sub standard.
I will likely vote Tory next time again because they are the best fit to my own views, but the gap is narrowing al the time.
|
>>Very few of the senior ministers really deserve their position IMO
>>I will likely vote Tory next time again because they are the best fit to my own views, but the gap is narrowing al the time.
And there you have it. There have always been scandals and sleaze in governments but it seems impossible for the these serial liars and incompetents to do anything career-ending or election-losing on current polling. Johnson must feel he could walk on water.
What was the game changer? Populism, Trump, 'social media'.
Doesn't say much for the opposition, or the electorate, or maybe both.
I haven't had time to watch or read all of Cummings's revelations yet but the comment about the choice offered in the GE was sadly too true.
|
>>
>> The rest of his testimony seemed along the lines of "everyone is an incompetent apart
>> from me". He is clearly angry and bitter and may prioritise revenge against his former
>> colleagues and masters over objective and honest evidence.
>>
I saw a brief excerpt, seemed very similar to me to Alex Salmond's spat with the SNP (notwithstanding the different basis of course)!!
|
Much of what he siad may be true, he failed to say however he was at the centre of it all pulling strings, so bears much of the responsibility. If he things Boris is a fool, he attached his apron strings to him for a long time for a reason, and now only complains when he is pushed out.
The sheer volume and manner of his complaints however sounds like a spoiled child.
|
The whole affair, all sides of it, are a mess and should be an embarrassment to all concerned. But it'll be like water off a ducks back I expect, they'll just carry on as they have been doing.
The odd thing is, while I obviously didn't know the detail, none of it really surprised me.
|
The question is, would any recent UK government in power done any better, and the answer is almost certainly NO. Many countries were similarly in headless chicken mode. And some have been so later in the pandemic waves even with the benefit of previous examples. Those that haven't have been authoritarian examples with subservient populations.
The only time a government in the UK could have coped with this would have been in the ten years after the war, when leadership, a led population and existing (or recently experienced) command and control was in place.
|
I absolutely agree with that, it's what I've been saying all along, and still do, when people have been criticising the govt. And of course they were handed a double whammy with trying to organise Brexit at the same time.
Nevertheless I reckon they could have done just as well (or badly, depending on your pov!) without some of the less pleasant behaviours.
|
He's a treacherous, lying b*****d.
Not necessarily in that order.
|
The one who drove his car to test his eyesight.
With his wife & child in the vehicle.
|
>> With his wife & child in the vehicle.
Only because his guide dog was at the vets getting his bits done.
|
Johnson is being saved becaus enot only is Cumming and unpleasant little worm, the media had done such a good job of convincing their readers of that fact that he has no credibility.
And Johnson is, perhaps, slightly less awful than Cummings.
Equally Johnson is riding the wave of successful vaccination, gradual opening and crap opposition with both Brexit & Covid should he need scapegoats..
It may have been the only time in history he could have been a successful PM.
|
Its probably the only time he would get elected.
|
>>>It may have been the only time in history he could have been a successful PM.<<
The same could be said of Winston Churchill. But he is feted as one of the greatest Britons ever.
* Cometh the hour, Cometh the man..
* There is no one in this world who does only good and never sins - biblical quotation.
* Let one who is without sin cast the first stone - I don't usually quote from him being a heretic in my religion's opinion...
But I don't care that Johnson has his faults. They are clearly visible but nevertheless if he guides us through this pandemic so that by 2023 it can be seen that we ended up in a far better position than equivalent countries he will also be feted.
Anyone who slags him off had better show that they could and would have done a better job. That means being in the position of a possible Prime Minister and the technical capacity to make the decisions needed. The only person who was in this position was Corbyn (ha ha ha ha - good luck with that one)
In reality the only person capable of doing a better job would be a scientist able to grasp all the techanical details of virology, sociology and economics and I suspect no one exists in the world who meets those criteria.
Cummings is a sore loser. Yes, some things of what he said may be correct but like everything in politics; it's how you dress it up. He failed on every count this week.
|
>>Anyone who slags him off had better show that they could and would have done a better job.
That's a bit silly.
|
>> >>Anyone who slags him off had better show that they could and would have done
>> a better job.
>>
>> That's a bit silly.
But my cat is up for the challenge.
|
|
I thought your cat had a job as Trumps hairpiece?
Last edited by: VxFan on Sat 29 May 21 at 21:18
|
He did and was doing quite well, but then chickened out after hearing about some of Trump's habits.
"Trump said. “When you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab ’em by the pussy."
www.vox.com/2016/10/7/13205842/trump-secret-recording-women
|
>> Anyone who slags him off had better show that they could and would have done
>> a better job. That means being in the position of a possible Prime Minister and
>> the technical capacity to make the decisions needed. The only person who was in this
>> position was Corbyn (ha ha ha ha - good luck with that one)
That's risible. Do you need to suggest a better team and manager before being OK to slag off (or just criticise) a footie performance?
Boris has been lucky with vaccination. That does not ameliorate for:
Care Home deaths and lies around them
Deaths and transmission in hospitals; mess ups and lies over PPE and lack of hospital capacity which lead to people being triaged for treatment or death last Spring
Utter failure of Test and Trace
Late lockdowns
Faffing with herd immunity
Corrupt deals for mates
Jobs for mates (Dido H in particular).
No wonder he's 'frit' of a full public inquiry
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 28 May 21 at 21:11
|
>> No wonder he's 'frit' of a full public inquiry
And the labour party would have made a better job of it? Dont forget the government is only the shop window for the civil service. Blame them
|
|
Z raises a good point there. MPs are even less expert on most things than civil servants, who are the specialist advisers to the MPs. In turn maybe they get specialist advice from elsewhere but the ministers are really only articulating what the civil servants tell them.
|
>>That's risible.
Just to add to the total lack of proper PPE in hospitals for several weeks.
|
Likes Israel = good guy
Likes Palestine = bad guy
QED.
|
|
I wouldn't say he came across as bitter, more like a general dislike of politicians.
|
Zippy, there was a pandemic on and the PPE was hard to come by. You can't just magic it up. They did try to, it went wrong and they got pilloried for that.
I know some out of date stuff was provided. If I'd been in charge I think I'd have done that if I had nothing else, in the circumstances.
Would one not moan like a moany thing if you found the govt had been spending millions a year on refreshing the PPE just in case something like a pandemic came along? I don't think may people could have foreseen anything quite on this scale. By the same token there must be other potential major disasters which they should stockpile for. I can't think of any except a nuclear war maybe, but who expected a pandemic that would quickly cripple the world?
With hindsight it's too easy to criticise what happened.
btw I don't particularly like or trust Boris so this isn't defending him. It would have been the same for anyone, and was, in many other countries.
|
I think we will have to disagree on this one.
There have been warnings of an overdue pandemic for years. Some emergency back up stocks should have been available.
You manage the short date ones by releasing them for sale as needed and buying replacements.
Or, you mandate the companies selling them to keep a proportion in stock for the authorities in much the same way that there is a mandate for fuel suppliers to keep 10% of all fuel in stock for the authorities in case of emergency.
|
I guess it depends on your attitude to risk.
There's warnings of all sorts, famine, global warming through to war with Russia. Do we start revaluating those threats and start stock piling all manner of things? Food mountains, ammunition stock piles etc.
|
|
One thing I haven't heard mentioned is what NHS procurement's responsibilities were with respect to pandemic planning and PPE supplies?
|
Essentially, yes if it's feasible.
Europe (with the notable exception of Germany) didn't prepare for WW2. If Britain had, it might not even have happened.
Governments (especially where there are fair elections every few years) aren't very good at distinguishing the critically important from the simply urgent. Given our direction of travel, it seems unlikely that the planet will be habitable in 1,000 years.
Arguably a pandemic was a certainty and I'm pretty sure that was an assumption underpinning the contingency plans that did actually exist but were allowed to slide into a position of non-readiness.
Contingencies such as the sun exploding would be so disastrous that there is no prospect of recovery. No point in trying to make preparations. Yet what humans are doing to the planet is just as serious
The work, or at least the aims and purpose, of Extinction Rebellion is somewhat more important that Getting Brexit Done. But is it really on the to-do list?
|
I am coming to the conclusion that criticism of the government handling of the pandemic is skewed to support a preconceived political view - we don't like Boris!
Some criticism is justified - in particular the lack of contingency plans and equipment which meant that the first phase of the pandemic was poorly handled.
In the absence of a pandemic, how much criticism would have been levelled at the government of the day for the huge costs of maintaining such a contingency (warehousing, staffing, maintenance of kit, surplus capacity for oxygen, drug production etc etc. We may have now learned that it would not have been money wasted!
The assertion that care homes deaths are down to elderly being sent home from hospital is not wholly supported by analysis. Most infection was through care home staff - reported by Jenny Harries at the press conference 2 days ago.
Germany is held up as some sort of example of how to manage the pandemic - they did far better than the UK in the first lockdown having acted much more quickly, but since June 2020 have recorded 77,000 deaths vs 88,000 in the UK. Still better but hardly an outstanding success and their vaccine rollout lags the UK.
Italy Belgium, Hungary, Czechia, Poland have done worse than the UK in covid deaths per million. Spain, Portugal, France are not far behind.
None of this makes the outcome good - but reinforces the need for more balanced reporting and opinions of events. A full report on the pandemic is required - although I suspect if things follow the normal course of such things it will take 10 years or more.
Far better would be to breakdown the task into manageable chunks and deal with each more quickly - eg: contingency planning, vaccine funding and rollout, did government follow scientific advice, how was SAGE established, procurement processes etc.
|
|
I've come to the conclusion that a lot of people don't want to see anything wrong with Johnson's conduct in relation to just about everything despite mountains of evidence of his dishonesty and incompetence.
|
I think you may be right. Yet even before becoming PM he had his moments, plenty of them.
I know someone who won't hear a word against the govt in general. In his case it's because they have delivered Brexit for him.
SWMBO likes Boris because he's been faintly amusing on HIGNIFY once or twice. She also liked Ken Livingstone for the same reason, though Diane Abbott failed to make an impression!
|
|
The man is a fool, unfit for office. He was out of his depth with respect to pandemics. As we all were. As most of the world was. To judge him and blame him for that is ridiculous, specially when there is so much more other non pandemic stuff to beat him over the head with.
|
>>He was out of his depth with respect to pandemics.
But he didn't know what he didn't know. Dunning Kruger. There were experts.
|
>> >>He was out of his depth with respect to pandemics.
>>
>> But he didn't know what he didn't know. Dunning Kruger. There were experts.
In the early days the experts were practically useless AND contradictory, because they had no experience of a global pandemic either.
Sure they may know about virology, but they had no idea of how the sociology in a 21st century global environment would pan out with the virus.
|
>> The man is a fool, unfit for office. He was out of his depth with
>> respect to pandemics. As we all were. As most of the world was. To judge
>> him and blame him for that is ridiculous, specially when there is so much more
>> other non pandemic stuff to beat him over the head with.
I agree entirely with that, there is so much to criticise that trying to pin coronavirus on him is ridiculous.
And that is Cummings problem. He{s accusing Johnson of stuff that people fundamentally don{t care about. And he{s also trying to drag them back to the hell of 12 months ago when they are trying to enjoy the more optimistic time of today.
I know that deaths in care homes are awful and a terrible thing, but the truth is it doesn{t really get under people{s skin, even if it should. How many times have care home residents been referred to us forgotten people, long before COVID'19 was invented.
I read an article this week, in the Times I think but maybe not, that suggested that it would be normality that would bring Johnson down, not the pandemic. Once the scapegoats of Brexit and the Apocalypse are past then Johnson will be faced with usual business, usual audience and usual media and I think that is likely to be his downfall.
He may be able to carry a crisis, but day to day normality is quite beyond him.
|
Ian Hislop nailed it on HIGNFY. Cummings is an arsonist pretending to be a firefighter.
IH also noted Gove was left out of the 7 hour evidence.
Last edited by: Manatee on Sat 29 May 21 at 23:12
|
My presumption was, like Sunak, Cummings thought they were competent (ie more capable than he was) and left them alone?
|
>>My presumption was, like Sunak, Cummings thought they were competent (ie more capable than he was) and left them alone?
You might be right but, such is the level of scepticism I have been brought to by the whole odious gang, I thought it was more likely that Cummings has decided to help Gove* knock Johnson off the top perch.
* and/or Sunak - I think he actually gave Sunak an upvote at one point, saying he had committed some COVID support when Johnson opposed it.
|
>> My presumption was, like Sunak, Cummings thought they were competent (ie more capable than he
>> was) and left them alone?
>>
>>
>>
Fairly unlikely on either, I would have thought.
|
>> My presumption was, like Sunak, Cummings thought they were competent (ie more capable than he
>> was) and left them alone?
A: I dont think Cummins thinks anyone is more competent than him
B: "leaving alone" is not a phrase he has even considered.
|
>>A: I don't think Cummins thinks anyone is more competent than him
Or righteous.
|
>> IH also noted Gove was left out of the 7 hour evidence.
Cummings entree into government was as a SPAD to Gove whilst the latter was wreaking havoc on education.
Sacked at insistence of PM (Cameron) who thought Cummings an Industrial Psychopath.
|
Having watched a couple of DM's lectures on yt, he comes across as someone who has a total disinterest in many that don't share his point of view or at least not at his level of interlect. He seems to me to be an intelligent person but quite obviously can't play nicely with others.
He must have known it would all end in tears, he made far too many enemies, not least in the ERG during the brexit campaign. Perhaps he did know how it would end but was drawn into government like a moth to a flame.
|
DM?
Sorry if I'm being dense.
|
|
Sorry my fault should have been DC, ie Dominic Cummings.
|
|
That's a relief, I thought I was losing it.
|
We need a phase for BJ equal to 'Teflon Tony', it seems absolutely nothing will stick to make some people open their eyes to him.
|
Blaming the Tories because they achieved government through somehow bad or unfair tactics is a little like coming second in an athletics race and blaming the winner for running too fast.
Blaming the public for voting Tory is to suggest they are foolish and stupid. Not a recipe for winning their support next time they are confronted by a ballot paper.
The Tories won power and maintain a poll lead as the opposition fail to present themselves as a credible alternative. Their perfomance was and (sadly) continues to be inadequate.
|
>> Blaming the public for voting Tory is to suggest they are foolish and stupid.
Yes quite, they are.
|
>>they are foolish and stupid.
That's regrettably often true whichever party they vote for.
|
>> The Tories won power and maintain a poll lead as the opposition fail to present
>> themselves as a credible alternative. Their perfomance was and (sadly) continues to be inadequate.
I can but agree, all the have to do is contrive to look credible and wait to pick up the pieces.
Separately, I deplore the attacks on the BBC and demands to defund it, a trap set by the Conservatives. For all its faults it is a treasure, a pearl beyond price. Apart from the news, who is going to do all the current affairs, science, arts, natural history, documentaries etc., not to mention the glory that is BBC radio - already damaged by cuts? Nobody, that's who. Amazon, Netflix, Sky won't do it in anything like the quality and quantity and they all cost the viewer more than the BBC for what they deliver. I can't believe there are very many households who genuinely never watch or listen to BBC output.
However - whatever else the pandemic has done for the government, it has given it 100's of hours of free airtime to make its case in those almost daily 'updates'. It shouldn't be a surprise that it still has a lead in the polls.
|
>>Separately, I deplore the attacks on the BBC and demands to defund it
Demands to defund it are ridiculous. Aside from anything else how will it be controlled if a handle is not kept on the cheque book? Ofcom? My a***.
THe main point is, though, that a funded PSB is essential. Otherwise you will only be shown stuff that someone can make money from showing you. You won't be shown stuff you need to see, or that a smaller group are interested in seeing, or that is higher quality just because or anything else.
You will see only enough to make a profit from you. Consider a village bus service relying in ticket sales.
The BBC's output should not be budget controlled. Their corporation overheads and running costs should be very tightly controlled, but not their content output.
A good quality FTA PSB is about the most important thing one can have in the media world.
I do think the BBC needs slapping back towards it's charter somewhat, and Bashir needs a good clubbing, but that shouldn't doom an entire concept.
Zero often says that it can't be biased overall if everybody is complaining about it, and I think that is a good point. I dislike its sensationalism, particularly in its headlines, but the information is there. A bit dumbed down these days, but there nonetheless.
I am not sure the Conservatives are after the BBC particularly, they just love righteously ganging up on stuff, as do most politicians. However, they know they can gang up on the BBC whereas Sky, for example, would simply tell them to pss off.
|
>> We need a phase for BJ equal to 'Teflon Tony', it seems absolutely nothing will
>> stick to make some people open their eyes to him.
>>
I wouldn't say that, the government's lead has been reduced to 6 points in the opinion polls. His personal approval rating is now down to 3 points ahead of SKS.
All seemingly down to Cummings revelations.
|
His personal approval rating is now down to 3 points ahead of SKS.
>> All seemingly down to Cummings revelations.
>>
Will it last?
|
>> Will it last?
Dunno, who knows what is around the corner.
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 1 Jun 21 at 11:44
|
That approval ratings and polls can vary by so much or over so short a period is evidence a large part of the electorate are either thick, or influenced by the superficial and immediate, or both.
People respond to hope and positivity in precisely the same way as they respond to ads which promise to make you 20 years younger, banish wrinkles, make hair and skin glow etc etc.
Boris has an excess of charm and positivity. It matters not that you dislike his policies or you think him incompetent. He has managed to persuade (or fool) sufficient of the public to believe in him consistently for the last 3 decades.
KS strikes me as a decent individual - intelligent, balanced, fair, thoughtful etc. But he does not inspire. He may have, but does not communicate a vision. He seems reluctant to take bold action to eradicate the far left of the party for fear of alienating a part of his support.
The reality of political leadership seems more about marketing, promotion, creating a brand, communicating a vision, motivating and energising. KS does not have this.
He will only succeed if BJ fails more profoundly than he has already:
- the Cummings revelations have barely scratched him,
- multiple covid failings are neutered by an effective vaccine rollout
- funding of the refurbishment of No11 is inconsequential despite a media spotlight
- a half baked brexit deal sold as the answer to the nations prayers has failed to derail him
Rational debate will not unseat him. It needs a truly radical change in the labour party to get any traction at all.
|
>>It needs a truly radical change in the labour party to get any traction at all.
It is certainly true that The Labour PArty needs to sor titself out, both from a message/marketing point of view, but also in real terms. Where do the unions, the radicals, the extreme and the moderate fit together?
However, as I said before, I think that the tedium of day to day reality will do for Johnson. He won't go out in a storm of disaster, but more likely in a cloud of ineffectual confusion and inefficiency.
|
The Labour party no longer understand who the working class are. The Islington crew who have taken the party over still think of them as dockers, miners and car workers, very few of whom still exist.
The present day working class are the shop workers, carers, cab drivers, couriers etc. But the great and good still aspire to marching along Whitehall with 10,000 striking miners, their banners flying high as they yell "Torys out".
But of course many of the new working class are self-employed, something those well to the left of centre have always despised.
Last edited by: Robin O'Reliant on Mon 31 May 21 at 18:08
|
I entirely agree
The Labour Party got all the Labour voters and it wasn't enough. They now need to work out how to get the Conservative and Liberal voters as well.
And I think that inevitably means ditching the "striking miners" and "Longbridge" image. But it means more than ditching it for an election campaign, it means convincing the voters that it is ditched full stop.
|
>> I know someone who won't hear a word against the govt in general. In his
>> case it's because they have delivered Brexit for him.
I know lots of people like this. This government, with Boris at the helm, is only in power because of Brexit. Their votes were swelled by the legions of non-Conservative leave voters who held their nose and voted Tory because 'getting Brexit done' was a bigger deal for them than party politics.
Imagine you're one of the millions who voted for him on this one issue, because they were taken in by his affable buffoon act, and because (in the words of a relative of mine) "He's a good upstanding bloke who has this country's best interests at heart". Then imagine how worrying it must be when every new piece of evidence comes to light that exposes what a cheat, liar, serial philanderer and generally nasty piece of work he really is.
Denial is not just a river in Egypt, as they say.
Last edited by: DP on Thu 17 Jun 21 at 14:13
|
Problem is, Brexit had to get done whichever side of the fence you were on, and only someone with no grasp of detail could get it done. In a way despite being a bumbling buffoon he was the man for the moment. He likes to think he is Churchill so let's hope he has the same fate and gets his ass kicked out when he fulfills his purpose.
Alas tho, don't forget Londoners re elected him as Mayor
|
>> That means being in the position of a possible Prime Minister and
>> the technical capacity to make the decisions needed. The only person who was in this
>> position was Corbyn (ha ha ha ha - good luck with that one)
So of two people one is a lying narcissist with zero grasp of detail and zero willingness to engage in it and a proven record of shifting to the winds and the other is Jeremy Corbyn but you imagine the first to be better suited. I think you are allowing your own prejudices and Corbyn's alleged Antisemitism to colour your view. We have no idea how 'Team Corbyn' would have done. Even if you assume Diane Abbott to be as stupid as some here say, and I vehemently disagree, the rest of his Cabinet, based on their shadow roles, were far more able people than Boris's current crew. It was mentioned a couple of times over the weekend's political reviews that they were chosen for the advocacy of, or at least willingness to accept, a hard Brexit, now out of their depth in a national crisis of near wartime proportions. A Narrow Gauge cabinet in a Broad Gauge crisis as on observer put it. Gove and Sunak are probably the only ones with any real skills to match the demands made of them.
It's nonsense on stilts to try and blame advisers as though the PM and Cabinet are just the public face. The fact is that they've repeatedly ignored advice from the Whitty/Vallance team to the point that there were times last year when they were on 'Resignation Watch'. Late last Summer the government was under a lot of pressure from a cohort on the back benches to put business recovery ahead of public health and ease up restrictions and/or avoid a circuit breaker lockdown. Opting for the former, in the teeth of scientific evidence that numbers were replicating those in early March, cost thousands of lives to add to those lost as a result of being late locking down in Spring.
The shambles around Christmas was all of Johnson's making.
If he's doing as well as can be expected then some people's expectations are astonishingly low!!
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 1 Jun 21 at 16:05
|
He's hardly on his own in that thought. The last election told us that.
The fact is that they've repeatedly ignored advice from the Whitty/Vallance team to the point that there were times last year when they were on 'Resignation Watch'.
Depends who you ask, people I know think the PM is run by Scientists in SAGE etc who are obsessed with lockdowns.
The bulk of people unhappy with him fall into two camps, unhappy for very different reasons.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 2 Jun 21 at 02:34
|
It is abundantly clear that individual attitudes towards Boris are driven more by political identity as much as reality. An example - the SAGE minutes in March 2020 confirm he largely followed the advice he was given, not ignored it as many would incorrectly argue.
He is completely amoral, opportunistic, and egotistical. This is not something new, he has been consistently successful deploying the same behaviours for the last three decades.
It is speculation as to whether a Corbyn lead alternative would have done better had they won in 2019. But as they would have had precisely the same problems with completely inadequate contingency plans in place, the start would have been no better.
What the last 5 years has reinforced in my mind is that elections and public opinion are not won by perfect human beings. The public reaction to the Cummings revelations thus far has been underwhelming, despite their seriousness.
|
>>It is speculation as to whether a Corbyn lead alternative would have done better
We don't have to guess what Johnson would do, we know.
He listened to scientists and their advice, I think, but kept trying to spin it or present it to make it palatable, justifiable or supportable in an political environment. He was prone to delaying decisions until the path became unavoidable or self-evident more than he was prepared to take a flyer. He seems to try to avoid betting on his own opinion.
I do not accept the whole "needless deaths" s***e. If the last year has proven anything it is that the virus cannot be prevented from spreading and once you're infected then your death or survival is out of Johnson's hands.
For every person whining about lockdown being delayed there is another whining about lockdown happening at all. For every person whining about restriction there is another whining that a restriction wasn't in place. All s***e.
On the other hand the vaccination approach and program has worked extremely well, and if we're going to hold him responsible for everything else then we probably need to largely credit him with that.
It makes no sense to find excuses/reasons to blame him for bad stuff and then work equally hard to exonerate him from good stuff.
The UK has ended up in a reasonable place and Johnson was nominally in charge.
Would Corbyn have done any better or worse? I have no idea. Corbyn seems like an honest man, but also seems like one the opposite of Johnson and prone to knee jerk decisions without thinking them through, and certainly without any interest in compromise or negotiation..
I'd have expected restrictions to be more draconian, welfare payouts to be higher, and a refusal to trust private entreprise restrictive in the vaccine arena.
I'd trust Corbyn with the economy like I'd trust Johnson with the NHS - Not.
Overall, I am sure that Corbyn would have done a different job - better or worse is impossible to know and typically the stance on that balance depends on party allegiances.
This insistence on hating, or loving, everything a politician does depending on party politics is ridiculous, tiresome and very shortsighted.
Honest judgement on motivation and results, not subjective opinion based on political position would be a far better approach.
I'm not holding my breath,
|
>> He listened to scientists and their advice
But didn't follow it.
|
|
You may have missed the larger point, I think.
|
>> I think you are allowing your own prejudices and Corbyn's alleged Antisemitism to colour your view.
WTF??? How did you get anti-semitism into this? Did I miss something?
|
>> WTF??? How did you get anti-semitism into this? Did I miss something?
I was responding to Netsur.
If you still need me to expand then I will.
|
I guess I don't, but I think you might have been better to skip over that bit.
Not that I am one to give advice on such behaviour.
|
It seems that Cummings was supposed to submit written evidence to the committee to back up his claims that Hancock repeatedly lied in cabinet meetings and to Joe Public. The deadline for him to submit that evidence was yesterday.
Err, I guess he must have forgotten.
|
>> Err, I guess he must have forgotten.
That or he's been paid off or promised something.
|
Promised something?
Don't think so. He knows exactly who he's dealing with.
"Wire transfer to this account in Grand Cayman" if he has any sense.
|
>>That or he's been paid off or promised something.
Not likely, really. Aside from anything else I cannot imagine anybody taking the risk of offering a bribe to such a mouth, already rpoven to be loose.
But he's done his worst, I can't really see that proof, even had it appeared, would have caused it to have any greater or more significant impact.
In the absence of new stuff, I'd say his bolt is shot. No real need to take the risk of trying to silence.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Wed 9 Jun 21 at 21:00
|
He probably has a lot more held back. That, under considerable pressure, Boris said some things which may or may not be justified is no surprise.
The interesting point is that the "Hancock revelation" has caused barely a ripple. Cummings will have to dig very deep to find some convicing dirt.
The man who drove to Barnard Castle to test his eyesight is evidently motivated by anger and bitterness rather than a desire to see justice done. He is, quite simply, not seen as a balanced or trustworthy source, and telling tales out of school is not a very "Bristish" behaviour.
|
|
The Hancock texts give a lesson that everyone should already know - once you send a text or email the contents are no longer your property and if you put something that you don't wish to be made public you are a fool.
|
|
Exactly. I always said to people "If you're not happy with it being printed and nailed to the company noticeboard then don't write it".
|
>> The Hancock texts give a lesson that everyone should already know - once you send
>> a text or email the contents are no longer your property and if you put
>> something that you don't wish to be made public you are a fool.
Exactly. Accusing colleagues of being 'totally expletive useless is pretty common currency. Usually though only the flies on the wall are witnesses; committing the comment to WhatsApp is just expletive stupid.
|
It may be common currency in the (un)Civil Service!! :-)
However I don't really remember senior people in the organisations I worked ever being quite so "forthright". And I remember being quite surprised to see the f word in an email, but it was from one of the European country Directors and I put it down to lesser understanding of what was and wasn't swearing, much the same as the 15yo German exchange student we hosted who was e***** all the time - but she (apparently) didn't realise it wasn't part of everyday language. Well, it is these days I suppose, but I'm going back 15+ years.
I suppose WhatsApp is a little less slacker than email in it's standards but it's pretty telling when your Eton-educated PM swears like he supposedly did, in writing too. Not a little disloyal too.
However this will soon go they way of most of this Government's appalling behaviours - i.e. it'll soon be yesterday's news. I don't know how this Government gets away with it so often.
|
>> I don't know how this Government gets away with
>> it so often.
>>
Probably because they do it so often.
|
In current times, writing anything controversial about an individual has got to be a matter of career suicide.
All you need is a disgruntled employee or customer to do a GDPR search and suddenly "Mr Smith is an utter prick" is added to his court case as ammunition.
|
|
Agreed, fairly standard through my working career so far that people spoke their minds with plenty of building site language. All so normal, I don't even notice until someone points it out. Very rare to see it in an email though.
|
In the board room, in my experience, judgements about others tend to be pretty frank but mostly focussed on skillset and supportiveness/trustworthiness. But I have never encountered it being done in writing. In fact most such meetings either have the rule that no mobile devices may be present or that they must be out on the table in front of you, exactly to avoid such a thing.
The further one moves down the hierarchy the more that judgements seem to be based on personality and how much a person is 'liked'.
Unwise commentary in writing is almost always the stock of inadequate and generally rubbish middle managers communicating within a clique. It comes from this idea that dragging someone else down is what you do when you can't pull yourself up and is based upon the idea that the more inadequate/insecure a person feels the more likely they are to try to select an appropriate group of people which they feel they can lead.
All "in my experience" of course.
|
>> is just expletive stupid
I don't have a problem with Johnson's morality, integrity or honesty. He's a politician, I expect little from any of them and mostly they're not relevant skills anyway.
But his stupidity is what should get his a*** canned. I take Zero's point that what we needed for the last 12 months was someone with little need or understanding of details, but we're not there anymore.
Now we need someone with a brain, which it seems pretty sure is not Johnson. Mind you, going by the last 10 days or so, I'm not sure it's Starmer, either.
|
>> >> is just expletive stupid
>>
>> I don't have a problem with Johnson's morality, integrity or honesty. He's a politician, I
>> expect little from any of them and mostly they're not relevant skills anyway.
>>
Unfortunately people follow examples and if the leader has morality, integrity or honesty issues then his subordinate see it as OK to be the same as does the next echelon etc. and in time the whole darn place becomes a cesspool of corruption, greed and dishonesty.
|
>> Now we need someone with a brain, which it seems pretty sure is not Johnson.
>> Mind you, going by the last 10 days or so, I'm not sure it's Starmer,
>> either.
Brains and a little learning (STEM perhaps more desirable than Greek mythology) can be useful, but I'd put sound judgement higher.
|
I'm not even sure sound judgement is a requirement - it depends whether the judgement aligns with personal opinion, although some are more easily swayed than others.
The quality that most separates the highly regarded leader from the rest is the ability to communicate a vision or idea or emotion. Substance of the arguments take second place.
The three prime ministers who most changed the fabric of society and politics over the last century were Churchill (won the war) Thatcher (unions and market economy) and Blair (first to use the media effectively, Iraq WMD, education, educ ....etc).
Many of the rest (eg: Brown, May, Cameron, Major, Callaghan etc) are decent, sincere, well meaning individuals, but footnotes in the century of political UK history post WW1.
None of the above mentioned were stupid, nor were any world class intellects. What separates them is a clear communicated sense of purpose. "Take back control" and "get Brexit done" are convincing but empty rhetoric.
Irrespective of political alliegence, Boris has communicated a sense purpose in which thus far Keir has failed. Boris has simply shrugged off any criticism, however justifiable, from the media, Cummings and Starmer. Like the afore mentioned "3" he will of course fail miserably - the only question is when!
|
|
Where is Attlee in your pantheon?
|
>> The quality that most separates the highly regarded leader from the rest is the ability
>> to communicate a vision or idea or emotion. Substance of the arguments take second place.
I notice you don't say "good" leader.
A con man has the ability to communicate a vision or idea or emotion.
There are singularities from time to time requiring a critically important decision (unlike the many non-critical ones where they may be several workable options). The man or woman with unerring judgement is the one you want then, even if he or she has the charisma of a damp rag.
|
Atlee could be a contender, although it is probably Bevan who should collect the plaudits for the NHS.
You are right I didn't say good. Effective does not equal good. Politicians need the qualities of a con man to be elected - convince even the politically neutral they are the person to vote for, if possible alienate no one, and instil hope and expectation in (a majority of) the voter.s
The opportunity to judge a politician in their capacity to make the right judgements under pressure is difficult until they come under real pressure. The "right judgement" may sometimes be an absolute, but in the real world may be a balance of compromises which please only some.
In a media dominated age, those with the charisma of a "damp rag" have little chance of election.
|
If there is an objective right answer, whether a compromise or not, then it isn't a judgement call.
Human nature is to pick a side and, after that, the majority of thinking power goes into building arguments in its favour and knocking down opposing views. That's demonstrable. Some people I know well can never be persuaded to change their minds about anything.
Good judgement is a skill, and a talent that some rare people seem to have innately. Smart people recognise their own bias in thinking and try to aim off for it but that isn't quite the same as an ability to think disinterestedly. Maybe there's some instinct involved as well but I don't know how to describe that if it exists.
Reagan was never accused of being intelligent and was mocked for his befuddled manner, but he is probably now considered to be in the top half of US presidents, mainly because of his judgement. Some, including Gorby, considered him to have been great. There is a time and a tide, but could you imagine Johnson being instrumental in bringing the cold war to an end?
|
I imagine that the Beeb must believe there is something in what he says, as they aren't obliged to give him airtime.
Whatever, I think there is, even though he can be seen as just being bitter. I'm not sure much he has come out so far with has really shocked me, though it's often not what you expect of senior figures. And I don't like the guy.
|
>>I imagine that the Beeb must believe there is something in what he says, as they aren't obliged to give him airtime
Anything which has the potential to damage the Johnson government, is good enough for the Beeb.
|
what a despicable worm that man is. He's not produced any proof to back up any of this.
|
He doesn't have to prove it, although I expect he is reasonably confident he can. Otherwise he could be ruined by a libel action.
The odd thing is that the revelations aren't especially shocking even though they should be. We're already familiar with Johnson's character.
Although Johnson became PM before Covid, I think his survival and enduring popularity with some of his fans might have something do do with the Conservatives treating all those pandemic briefings as propaganda opportunities.
|
|
I believe also he enjoys an element of blind loyalty from some for managing to deliver BREXIT.
|
>>>He doesn't have to prove it, although I expect he is reasonably confident he can. Otherwise he could be ruined by a libel action.<<<
Probably keeping the 'evidence' back. In the event of a libel action he would probably enjoy producing the proof and probably he has additional material that he would expose by producing the 'proof' now.
|
|
Nah, hes a shot bolt, noisy but rapidly being seen as a pathetic whiner
|
|
Iain Duncan Smith wheeled out to defend BoJo...
|
>> Nah, hes a shot bolt, noisy but rapidly being seen as a pathetic whiner
>>
Maybe by the BoJo fan club but elsewhere there is interest in what he has to say.
|
>>Maybe by the BoJo fan club but elsewhere there is interest in what he has to say.
Not much, I don't think.
It's not changing any minds. Those who didn't like Johnson continue not do and vice versa.
Cummings is a worm who long ago burned his own credibility. I assume that he's said all the really bad stuff so it would seem that he has permanently screwed his career with little impact.
On this latest one of Johnson considering who and how many were dying against the cost and impact of lockdown, I should b***** hope that was considered. And in any case, hasn't that been the argument from all the anti-lockdown people?
I think at one point I said that the vulnerable should take responsibility to protect themselves not see the whole country locked down to protect them. And, in case you don't realise it, that is *exactly* the future.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Tue 20 Jul 21 at 15:25
|
Few would credit Cummings with much credibilty - he is a spent force, angry, bitter, the architect of much that Boris did before he was fired, and entirely capable of massaging a story.
I suspect he is telling the truth - but not all the truth. Just enough to try and sink the Boris "boat". His core skill is in manipulating the media and opinion - a balanced narrative is not part of his persona.
Time will tell whether the media and public fall for someone more flawed than the PM.
Last edited by: Terry on Tue 20 Jul 21 at 17:01
|
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-57880118
But the Leave campaign has come in for criticism over its use during the campaign of a controversial claim that the UK was giving £350m a week to the EU.
Questioned over this, Mr Cummings said it had been a trap "to try and drive the Remain campaign and the people running it crazy, so they would start arguing about it".
Cummings' biggest credibility issue is he is an arch-revisionist and the above is a perfect example of it.
A trap?
My ringpiece.
|
|
Cummings and Harry Windsor have a lot in common.
|
|
From over here it's not all that clear just how far down Harry has taken his credibility. Or indeed how much people care.
|
|
He is getting a regular kicking from the tabloids, particularly over appearing on Oprah and other tell all shows after saying he was leaving the firm for some privacy.
|
There's another one that SWMBO used to like but has fallen from favour.
Maybe me next? :-)
|
>>Maybe me next? :-)
Dunno, were you thinking of appearing on Oprah?
|
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-57880118
Dominic Cummings: I discussed ousting PM after 2019 election landslide
WTF does he think he is, he wasnt even elected
Unbelievable
|
|
I bet Boris wishes he'd just canned his a*** after the loooonnng trip to the opticians.
|
>> I bet Boris wishes he'd just canned his a*** after the loooonnng trip to the
>> opticians.
>>
Ruth Davidson said pretty much the same thing today.
|
Karma's a bitch.
If he'd done the right thing back then Cummings would be getting even less attention.
In my experience it's very rare that doing the right thing bites your a***, whereas it's a virtual certainty if one tries to do nothing.
There are two problems with karma; it's slow and sometimes a bad shot.
|
>> WTF does he think he is, he wasnt even elected
The justification seems to be that Johnson had no idea how to be PM.
The idea would only have flown if he could have got the support of Tory MPs.
|
>> WTF does he think he is, he wasnt even elected
The teensy weensy flaw in that argument being that neither was the Prime Minister.
|
|
Except of course his constituents and then the party.
|
>> Dominic Cummings: I discussed ousting PM after 2019 election landslide
>>
>> WTF does he think he is, he wasnt even elected
>>
>> Unbelievable
He does come across as a supercilious worm, which is what will probably prevent him achieving anything.
Laura Kuenssberg may be my new favourite BBC Editor though.
|
Oh yes. She appears to be able to skewer all politicians of all colours without resorting to the usual BBC leftward bias.
She sounded genuinely shocked at Cummings' revelations.
|
LK has been part of the Cummings circus all along. Was very obvious he was her source for a lot of information. I think he also said something about that weeks ago when he first broke Cover.
Yes, journalists need to build up contacts and trust to get stories that their bosses want but I do feel she was used by Cummings to control the message. And of course she now gets the “interview”.
I do believe most of what Cummings is saying is true but it just goes to prove even more how much of a nasty man he is. Almost as nasty as Boris.
But, where does Gove fit in to all of this? Cummings is his best mate isn’t he going back years? Did Gove not at one time refuse to support Boris years ago calling him out? Whole lot is intertwined!!
That’s politics for you.
|
Of course Cummings has said what he has because he wants to and on his own terms. He could have just blogged it, but the BBC gives him better exposure for it.
LK did her best to sensationalise it, but the unbelievable is such an everyday occurrence with this shower that it was an uphill task.
I have no doubt it's substantially true. If it wasn't, the writs would be flying.
Last edited by: Manatee on Wed 21 Jul 21 at 11:45
|
|
Much as nasturtiums have been cast as to the identity of his Father, he is very clearly his mother's son.
|
As soon as he talked about unelected officials seeking to oust an elected Prime Minister he lost whatever credibility he had.
Politics exists inside the PM's family (any PM - look at Cherie Blair) so to start saying 'Carrie wanted this or Carrie wanted that' is just stupid. We all know it happens and why wouldn't it?
I make decisions about my business having had a conversation with my wife. She is a sensible person who can see things from a different perspective. The one post war PM who really failed was Edward Heath and of course he had no one to talk to.
|
Cummings - Fullchat
