moonraker

But even you I hope can see that 75 % of cuts since 1985 are down to the Tories. That includes Thatcher despite the Falklands, if it were not for the Argentinians John Knott a Thatcher would have gutted the military in 1982/3.

That’s sounds reasonable, however you stated you wanted a genuine recall act, there are problems as I see it. One it is that it is difficult enough to get the electorate to engage in the democratic political process especially “ordinary joes (and Jill’s)” 20-40% is typical local election turnout territory. There would also have to be a trigger to initiate such a recall, in the case of Johnson and the charge he misled Parliament unless this were first “proven” to at least civil court standards should the electorate have the right to recall him? There would have to be a process that demonstrates that the reason for a recall is genuine not here say or biased media reporting. Johnson choose not to take the findings of the inquiry to his own electorate. Despite all his wailing and winging he has avoided the one part of the process that you deem would be democratic. To be genuine it must have a real prospect of succeeding, and as you rightly state must not be a mechanism for political activists to cause mischief. If in some future hypothetical recall scenario a sitting MP decides to jump before the process has run its course that cannot be seen as admission of “guilt”. Without due process of inquiry, evidence, witnesses and informed judgement an otherwise good MP may decide to move on and avoid having to defend themselves against baseless accusations and biased media reporting. So my initial view that whilst it passes the reasonable test it fails totally on the fairness, practical and due process test.

Please could you outline what a genuine recall act would look like, I am serious, because if you have one in mind I am sure we would all be interested in it.

I would concede it was extreme political naivety to make the pledge. The LD did not for a government the propped up a Tory one, by far a bigger act of naivety than the pledge and failed to extract key policy concessions from them, that was naive.

I would also add the time required to draft, debate, scrutinise and vote on legislation is so much more complex compared to a general manifesto of policy intent and direction.

You really do not understand how parliamentary democracy works do you. A manifesto is not a pledge, it is statement of policy intent, every Government has been in a position where it cannot deliver on some of its intent, there are numerous and valid reasons for this, but trying to discuss them with you has no intellectual or mind broadening value.

Blair certainly lied. Nick Clegg did not lie about tuition fees. It was in the LD manifesto however the Government whilst a coalition was led by the Tories and to form a coalition as the junior partner the LDs did not have sufficient leverage to retain everything in their manifesto. Of coarse you know that but as usual choose to be deliberately ignorant of reality. And as anyone who has a passing interest in politics knows manifestos are not promises but a statement of policy intent provided the circumstances following an election allow. The Tories have been in power for 13 years and we are in a far worse state than we were in 2010 but carry on believing in the unicorns and sunlit uplands your social superiors keep telling you exist. The sad thing about Clegg it was not parliamentary process that did for him but right wing press.

And he didn’t consult Acroba, more disregard for Parliament and democracy. He should have asked them for clearance to accept this job, apparently he informed them 30 mins before he accepted the post. Either he believes it outside their remit and therefore he had no need to tell them, or he knows he needs their OK but left it to the last minute, you decide which one the slimy entitled hog thinks. It would be so joyous if the6 blocked his appointment especially after the gas lighting over Sue Gray.

Why

Not difficult to find that answer for one seemingly so well versed in politics and parliamentary procedures. Simple answer is because he did the decent thing in an attempt, sadly failed, to avoid the ridiculous, despicable and dishonourable accusations that are being maliciously spouted by Johnson apologists and right wing rags. Our democracy has been abused and threatened for long enough, it is time to banish this Eton mess and their sycophantic hangers on from all aspects of public life. Sir Bernard Jenkins did the same thing over the Patterson report. Why do you always play the man not the ball?

Without divulging sources belief you me the U.K. MoD and armed forces are providing Ukraine with some very serious support and kit. I do agree after 13 years of Tory cuts our armed forces have been cut to the bone. An island nation that gave up its air based MP capability for 10 years thanks to unnecessary austerity, thankfully the military managed to retain knowledge and experience despite the politicians. Not sure how much longer they can mitigate the Tories defence policies.

Offensive action of the kind the Ukrainian forces have embarked on will obviously involve losses. Attacking prepared defences has a cost, lack of air cover is Ukraines biggest problem. The allied battle for Normandy suffered many notable setbacks despite a large proportion of the German units being sub par, defending is far simpler than attacking, it takes time, the age of the one day decisive battle ended 200 years ago. I do not know whether Ukraine will prevail, I do however firmly believe they have the will, the morale and increasingly the equipment to inflict more serious damage on Russias poorly led, poorly trained and increasingly poorly maintained military.

According to your early analysis Russia were going to achieve all their objectives in two - three weeks, that didn't go to plan. Yes Russia may run out of missiles at some point, or at least be so denuded of them that they are unable to launch any meaningful strikes. Add in Ukraines increasing air defence capability and Putin and his gaggle of war criminals are rapidly running out of options, and this is my biggest worry.

This from the longest standing political party in the U.K. This Tory current rabble have neither knowledge or respect of our parliamentary constitution and democracy. There continued displays of entitlement and failures to recognise and/or understands the needs and genuine concerns of the British people are beyond belief. Put them all in a rubber boat and send them over the horizon, hopefully to oblivion.

Yes it’s not difficult to spot the difference between the current bunch of nasty looneys and some of their dignified predecessors.

More snowflakery.

Possibly many viewed out of curiosity, you will need a larger sample size to draw any useful conclusion

Some all or a few, he is speaking for folks who are in afar worse place than you or I have ever been

I love the Tory snowflakes raging about a man who stands up for the oppressed and vulnerable.

David Attenborough being censored now,

It’s a myth that they have to claim asylum in the first safe country they reach, is not has been part of the UN rules for refugees we are signatories to. It is a rule for EU countries. There are numerous reasons people choose the the U.K. language and family ties being significant. Yet we still take fewer refugees than most civilised countries.

I didn’t need hindsight to predict that Brexit would be a shitshow and that the buffoon Johnson would make an even bigger mess than it might have been.

Just arrived back from Spain no shortages of fruit and veg there.

Other results not going our way is a massive pain, but all we can do is hold on and win.