Author Topic: General political discussion Part II  (Read 39992 times)

Offline ShakaHislop

  • Shocktrooper of the Vinny Cable Nasties
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 5,314
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
General political discussion Part II
« on: August 14, 2019, 02:26:02 PM »
I hope the mods don't mind me creating this, but I feel it would be useful to have a place again for news/topics that don't quite fit into the other existing and active threads. I'm fine with this being merged with the original general political discussion thread, if and when that is unlocked.

Jared O'Mara: MP's office investigated over security failure

Allegations of a security failure at MP Jared O'Mara's office are being investigated by the House of Commons.

The BBC has learned the Sheffield Hallam MP's chief of staff, Gareth Arnold, was not vetted by Parliament.

Mr Arnold, who is running the MP's office in his absence, had access to sensitive casework and the MP's email account on the parliamentary network.

The House of Commons said it had taken steps to "prevent unauthorised access to Mr O'Mara's parliamentary account".

During an investigation by BBC podcast, The Next Episode, Mr Arnold, 26, said: "I am running a constituency office on behalf of an MP without the required security clearance from the parliamentary authorities. It's crazy isn't it?"

Mr O'Mara has said he is "taking time out" to deal with his "mental health and personal issues" after it emerged he sent sexually inappropriate messages to a female employee.
 
The BBC also found constituents were being blocked on Twitter by Mr Arnold, who sent antagonistic responses and memes to their queries.

Others say casework was not being dealt with, which Mr Arnold denies.

He said: "People have joked to me that I was basically the MP for Sheffield Hallam… that horrified me".

Since the BBC published the podcast, Mr O'Mara's Twitter account and website have been taken down and when the BBC visited his office on Monday morning, no-one was there.

Sinead Parkinson, a founding member of the Hallam Constituents Facebook group, said: "It's positive that Parliament are investigating the breach of security but it does not change the fact that Hallam constituents are still without an MP.

"His staff have evacuated the office, he has taken down his Twitter, and there is no phone or email communication. Action needs to be taken as we have no representation.

"Unless Jared O'Mara resigns we are left in this hopeless situation."

Tom Brake MP, who sits on the House of Commons commission in charge of the administration of the House, told the BBC: "These are disturbing revelations. Whatever pressures MPs' offices are subject to, constituents are entitled to be treated with respect."

In July, Mr O'Mara announced plans to resign from his seat days after Mr Arnold publicly quit his role by posting his resignation statement on Mr O'Mara's Twitter account.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-49325898

Offline ShakaHislop

  • Shocktrooper of the Vinny Cable Nasties
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 5,314
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #1 on: August 14, 2019, 02:29:15 PM »
Labour MP Naz Shah: Man who sent 'violent threats' and 'racist taunts' jailed

An MP feared for her family's safety after being sent an email containing "threats of violence", a court heard.

Stewart Hanson, 57, sent racist and religious taunts to Naz Shah, Labour MP for Bradford West, in October, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said.

The "vicious" email threatened the MP and her family, causing "alarm, harassment and distress", the CPS said.

Hanson, of The Woodlands in Tranmere, Merseyside, was jailed for 12 weeks at Wirral Magistrates' Court.
 
He earlier pleaded guilty to sending an offensive message by public communication.

Hanson used violent language, made religiously offensive comments, and threatened Ms Shah and her family in the email sent to the MP's work account on 20 October 2018.

He also accused her of anti-Semitism and suggested she had tried to silence the victims of the Rotherham child abuse scandal, the CPS said.

Ms Shah, who is Labour's shadow minister for women and equalities, contacted West Yorkshire Police who traced the emails to Hanson's account, the CPS said.

When Hanson was questioned by police he said he was "ashamed of himself", Alan Currums from the CPS said.

He said District Judge Nick Sanders "pointed out that Ms Shah's constituency is not a million miles away from that of Jo Cox".

He said an MP's public role "should not mean that they are targets of vicious, racist taunts and criticism that goes way beyond fair comment".

Mr Currums said Hanson, who has no previous convictions, has "lost his good name and his freedom" for "a vicious, racist and offensive email that has created fear, alarm and distress. A lesson to anyone who takes to their keyboard to peddle hate".

The judge increased Hanson's jail time from eight to 12 weeks to account for the religious hatred element of the crime.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-49335792

Offline Circa1892

  • Real Madrid 0 - 1 Liverpool - Parc des Princes, 27th May 1981 Remember?... About as intimidating as Bambi.
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 10,672
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #2 on: August 14, 2019, 02:43:41 PM »
The O'Mara situation is an absolute fucking scandal. Still haven't seen any demands for a by-election from any Outriders, even though this situation is directly impacting on people's lives...

Offline So... Howard Phillips

  • Penile Toupé Extender
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 9,872
  • All I want for Christmas is a half and half scarf
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #3 on: August 14, 2019, 03:21:22 PM »
The O'Mara situation is an absolute fucking scandal. Still haven't seen any demands for a by-election from any Outriders, even though this situation is directly impacting on people's lives...

Outriders???

Offline redmark

  • RAWK Scribe
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 19,316
    • Save Liverpool FC
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #4 on: August 15, 2019, 12:15:14 PM »
Outriders???

https://www.buzzfeed.com/markdistefano/heres-the-woman-behind-britains-most-divisive-twitter

Critics point to Cousins’ tweeting as emblematic of the pro-Corbyn internet’s tendency to swarm, pile on, troll, and blindly defend the Labour leader. There have also been clashes with mainstream journalists who've questioned her tweets.

Last month, Times columnist Hugo Rifkind replied to a Cousins tweet featuring a screenshot of a statement from a Jewish group called “Orthodox Jews of the UK”, defending Jeremy Corbyn over anti-Semitism. Rifkind wrote: “You have literally no idea what you are doing or talking about, do you?” Cousins would later clarify her original tweet, but the exchange did raise questions about where she and other pro-Corbyn accounts were getting their source material.

Asked where she got the statement from, Cousins repeatedly dodged a straight answer. “I'm not going to tell you,” she said. “I'm not going to tell you all my secrets. You don’t need to know, do you?”

“I do get advice from them,” she said. “But that’s the end of that.”

She eventually explained that there are several private Twitter DM groups where discussion goes on “all day”, with new pro-Corbyn lines posted alongside anti-Tory memes — which are often taken and repurposed from Facebook groups.

Asked whether Labour officials were in the groups speaking to the pro-Corbyn accounts, she said “Maybe”, smiling.

And what about Labour MPs?

“Maybe.”


Outriders are the twitter (and Facebook) users who have large followings and circulate the memes and messages that 'the Labour leadership' and those around it want circulating, outside of the mainstream media and (by using Outriders) looking like a large, popular 'movement'.
We Are Liverpool.

Online Lush is the best medicine...

  • FUCK THE POLICE - NWA
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 37,881
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #5 on: August 15, 2019, 08:39:58 PM »
Think it was missed a while ago but the canary has massively downscaled as loads of advertisers have binned them as they don’t want anything to do with them, bravo

Offline Zeb

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,054
  • Justice.
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #6 on: August 21, 2019, 08:46:58 PM »
This has been mentioned in passing before, but the failure of senior politicians to answer questions has now got an airing from Channel 4's head of news too. Having to lean on the Daily Mail's coverage as can't find a full transcript anywhere, and other coverage of the lecture hasn't copy pasted leaned on what was actually said as much as the Mail have done.

"And the voices of the standing Kop still whispering in the wind will salute the wee Scots redman and he will still walk on.
And your money will have bought you nothing."

Offline Jiminy Cricket

  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,273
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #7 on: August 21, 2019, 09:05:09 PM »
This has been mentioned in passing before, but the failure of senior politicians to answer questions has now got an airing from Channel 4's head of news too. Having to lean on the Daily Mail's coverage as can't find a full transcript anywhere, and other coverage of the lecture hasn't copy pasted leaned on what was actually said as much as the Mail have done.
Interesting. Of course, the same problem and debate in the US. But AFAIK, things have not changed there since I left a year ago. If politicians are not going to respect the public, know no shame, then I think journalists need to be more frank about the problem: call a lie, a lie. Anyone can make a mistake, but when a politician makes a basic mistake about something within their brief, they should be lampooned. Do it twice, they are liars. If they lie repeatedly, they are 'pathological liars' and should be labelled as such.

I'd like to see real-time fact checking (a team, via an earpiece to the interviewer or even backup interviewer) when politicians are being interviewed. And the correction occurring there and then, on camera. The bastards need to be humiliated.

Part of the problem is that politicians use social media instead of going to proper journalists. This needs to be tackled too. Maybe being interviewed should be mandated if politicians cannot be trusted to volunteer.
« Last Edit: August 21, 2019, 09:30:17 PM by Jiminy Cricket »

Offline oldfordie

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,803
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #8 on: August 21, 2019, 09:19:10 PM »
This has been mentioned in passing before, but the failure of senior politicians to answer questions has now got an airing from Channel 4's head of news too. Having to lean on the Daily Mail's coverage as can't find a full transcript anywhere, and other coverage of the lecture hasn't copy pasted leaned on what was actually said as much as the Mail have done.

A argument keeps getting made that our politicians must have the right to say whatever they want and that's true to a extent but they should not be able to deliberately tell lies. Johnson+Redwood are terrible liars. they should be dragged into Parliament and held to account, they should not be able to lie with impunity.
Krishnan Guru-Murthy is willing to take these MPs on and call them out, I wish other interviewers would do the same.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l51f5rnRCws
"Brexit is like a political Ponzi scheme. It was a political movement that promised impossible returns: a swift, painless, problem-free departure from the EU."

Offline Zeb

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,054
  • Justice.
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #9 on: August 21, 2019, 09:34:32 PM »
Interesting. Of course, the same problem and debate in the US. But AFAIK, things have not changed there I left a year ago. If politicians are not going to respect the public, know no shame, then I think journalists need to be more frank about the problem: call a lie, a lie. Anyone can make a mistake, but when a politician makes a basic mistake about something within their brief, they should be lampooned. Do it twice, they are liars. If they lie repeatedly, they are 'pathological liars' and should be labelled as such.

I'd like to see real-time fact checking (a team, via an earpiece to the interviewer or even backup interviewer) when politicians are being interviewed. And the correction occurring there and then, on camera. The bastards need to be humiliated.

Part of the problem is that politicians use social media instead of going to proper journalists. This needs to be tackled too. Maybe being interviewed should be mandated if politicians cannot be trusted to volunteer.

The British context to it, at least in 2017, was both Labour and the Conservatives trying to shield their leaders from any sort of awkward questioning. Which was at least partly a result of valid political considerations - May was useless at campaigning, the more she did it the more it killed the early voter belief that she'd at least be competent. While Corbyn's whole campaign was based on building up an image of him which creaks a lot when put under pressure, which is why McDonnell gets to do the friendly bank manager routine a lot more than one would expect for a shadow chancellor. Like you say, social media also feeds into it with managing image and presentation.

Not sure what the answer is. I think embarrassing politicians trying to do it may be part of the solution. ITV did it to Johnson recently when he refused to answer questions on camera but still expected coverage of his speech. Make sure the avoidance of scrutiny is part of the story perhaps? Partly why I posted the story because it's moving up from local journalists complaining up to someone who'll back their journalists to try and get the questions asked. [edit: as oldfordie points out with the latitude likes of Guru-Murphy have at Channel 4 to call things out.]

edit: the speech transcript as sent out to press: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Nl6rIrW0HHnzxRwkJtANzYvqDG3WCv8Gpv8tA2iDsS0/edit (p.13 onwards is media's role in holding politicians accountable)
« Last Edit: August 21, 2019, 10:02:06 PM by Zeb »
"And the voices of the standing Kop still whispering in the wind will salute the wee Scots redman and he will still walk on.
And your money will have bought you nothing."

Offline oldfordie

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,803
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #10 on: August 21, 2019, 10:03:48 PM »
The British context to it, at least in 2017, was both Labour and the Conservatives trying to shield their leaders from any sort of awkward questioning. Which was at least partly a result of valid political considerations - May was useless at campaigning, the more she did it the more it killed the early voter belief that she'd at least be competent. While Corbyn's whole campaign was based on building up an image of him which creaks a lot when put under pressure, which is why McDonnell gets to do the friendly bank manager routine a lot more than one would expect for a shadow chancellor. Like you say, social media also feeds into it with managing image and presentation.

Not sure what the answer is. I think embarrassing politicians trying to do it may be part of the solution. ITV did it to Johnson recently when he refused to answer questions on camera but still expected coverage of his speech. Make sure the avoidance of scrutiny is part of the story perhaps? Partly why I posted the story because it's moving up from local journalists complaining up to someone who'll back their journalists to try and get the questions asked. [edit: as oldfordie points out with the latitude likes of Guru-Murphy have at Channel 4 to call things out.]

edit: the speech transcript as sent out pre-embargo: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Nl6rIrW0HHnzxRwkJtANzYvqDG3WCv8Gpv8tA2iDsS0/edit (p.13 onwards is media's role in holding politician's accountable)
I think Parliament should have the power to take action, MPs who tell factual lies should be dragged in front of a select committee and asked to prove what they say is true,we saw it happen with Johnson over his balloon lie, Johnson thought it was hysterical, he wouldn't have thought it was hysterical if the select committee had the power to issue a warning. he tried it again arguing China has frictionless trading with the EU so we should have it but the EU are punishing us, it's a outragous lie, the intent is to stir the s,,. theres no way Johnson got his facts wrong with any of these claims, they were both blatant lies.
"Brexit is like a political Ponzi scheme. It was a political movement that promised impossible returns: a swift, painless, problem-free departure from the EU."

Offline Jiminy Cricket

  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,273
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #11 on: August 21, 2019, 11:10:34 PM »
[...]

edit: the speech transcript as sent out to press: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Nl6rIrW0HHnzxRwkJtANzYvqDG3WCv8Gpv8tA2iDsS0/edit (p.13 onwards is media's role in holding politicians accountable)
Thanks for the link.

Offline Jiminy Cricket

  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,273
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #12 on: August 21, 2019, 11:12:20 PM »
I think Parliament should have the power to take action, MPs who tell factual lies should be dragged in front of a select committee and asked to prove what they say is true,we saw it happen with Johnson over his balloon lie, Johnson thought it was hysterical, he wouldn't have thought it was hysterical if the select committee had the power to issue a warning. he tried it again arguing China has frictionless trading with the EU so we should have it but the EU are punishing us, it's a outragous lie, the intent is to stir the s,,. theres no way Johnson got his facts wrong with any of these claims, they were both blatant lies.
So, give the Select Committee the power to sanction. The sanctions should be meaningful to have the desired effect. Any suggestions?

Offline Zeb

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,054
  • Justice.
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #13 on: August 21, 2019, 11:25:22 PM »
I think Parliament should have the power to take action, MPs who tell factual lies should be dragged in front of a select committee and asked to prove what they say is true,we saw it happen with Johnson over his balloon lie, Johnson thought it was hysterical, he wouldn't have thought it was hysterical if the select committee had the power to issue a warning. he tried it again arguing China has frictionless trading with the EU so we should have it but the EU are punishing us, it's a outragous lie, the intent is to stir the s,,. theres no way Johnson got his facts wrong with any of these claims, they were both blatant lies.


That's meant to be true so far as what is said in Parliament itself, in terms of lies having consequences, but I don't think it's a solution for things away from that. It's not even the lies, it's the refusal to appear for scrutiny which is the problem. Using something like that as even a sanction for campaign lies would be a problem because the trend already is to use unaccountable figures to represent a party's position. Something which has grown out of the social media focus especially. US campaign surrogates are usually (not always) paid members of the campaign staff so there's some accountability there whereas we get someone with a glorified blog, who may not even be a member of the party, representing the position of that party. Wouldn't think incentivising parties doing that more would be a useful answer? Already too many Guardian and Mail columnists filling in for elected representatives.
"And the voices of the standing Kop still whispering in the wind will salute the wee Scots redman and he will still walk on.
And your money will have bought you nothing."

Offline oldfordie

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,803
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #14 on: August 21, 2019, 11:38:30 PM »
So, give the Select Committee the power to sanction. The sanctions should be meaningful to have the desired effect. Any suggestions?
It's up for debate, I agree about any sanctions being meaningful, a slap on the wrist won't work neither will a small fine, obviously a lot depends on whether the MP has been dragged in front of the committee in the past, if they have then imo they are abusing their position as MPs. if they are abusing their position as MPs then they are putting their position as MPs at threat. the final punishment must be to strip them of the right to be a MP. Johnson and Redwood would be long gone if these laws were passed.
I feel really strongly over this to be honest, I find it incredible that a senior politician can knowignly tell outrageous lies and piss himself laughing when he gets pulled up. we can't go on like this, our politicians are getting out of control.
"Brexit is like a political Ponzi scheme. It was a political movement that promised impossible returns: a swift, painless, problem-free departure from the EU."

Offline Jiminy Cricket

  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,273
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #15 on: August 21, 2019, 11:56:19 PM »
I do wonder, oldfordie, how all this will pan out. It surely cannot be allowed to continue. If nothing is done, it will actually only become worse. I think the Internet is to blame. I think solutions will be developed - they must - but it will take time. And, it is difficult to see now what those solutions will be.

Here's a question: how did society react to the somewhat analogous upheavals with the development of radio and then TV? Maybe even, to a lesser extent, with the development of newspapers (because there was no proper functioning democracy at that time anyway). I think the societal changes this time have bee so rapid and far reaching, we cannot let it evolve as it must have done in the past in the face large changes to how information is disseminated and consumed. This will take proper direction to resolve.

Offline Jiminy Cricket

  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,273
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #16 on: August 22, 2019, 12:01:39 AM »
Thanks for the link.
And I will finish reading it tomorrow. To be honest, her main points aside*, it's a bit of a crappy read considering that it comes from a journalist (or, the ten pages I've read - I started from where you suggested).

* Dorothy Byrne is certainly correct about Corbyn and Johnson, and the general associated problems.

Offline Zeb

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,054
  • Justice.
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #17 on: August 22, 2019, 12:03:55 AM »
Yeah, it was a speech.
"And the voices of the standing Kop still whispering in the wind will salute the wee Scots redman and he will still walk on.
And your money will have bought you nothing."

Offline Jiminy Cricket

  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,273
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #18 on: August 22, 2019, 12:10:52 AM »
Yeah, it was a speech.
I know, and even so. But then again, I do not make habit of reading speeches. I might be being overcritical.

Offline oldfordie

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,803
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #19 on: August 22, 2019, 12:25:24 AM »


That's meant to be true so far as what is said in Parliament itself, in terms of lies having consequences, but I don't think it's a solution for things away from that. It's not even the lies, it's the refusal to appear for scrutiny which is the problem. Using something like that as even a sanction for campaign lies would be a problem because the trend already is to use unaccountable figures to represent a party's position. Something which has grown out of the social media focus especially. US campaign surrogates are usually (not always) paid members of the campaign staff so there's some accountability there whereas we get someone with a glorified blog, who may not even be a member of the party, representing the position of that party. Wouldn't think incentivising parties doing that more would be a useful answer? Already too many Guardian and Mail columnists filling in for elected representatives.
Am not sure what you mean by Politicians refusing to be scrutinised, by who, the media interviews or Parliament itself, the 2 points are connected, the problem is a politician has knowingly told a factual lie to influence the public, he has to face some sort of scrutiny from Parliament.
MPs will find many ways to lie to the public, they can pass opinions they don't believe themselves, does Corbyn believe he can get a Brexit that unites the country, I doubt it, that's politics. same with Johnson arguing he thinks he can get a deal when we all know it's about laying the blame on the EU.
Am sure politicians will find ways of telling lies by passing it off as opinion but what they can't do is pass a opinion and then slip in "we can't stop Turkey from joining the EU"  that is not a opinion, it's either ignorance at first then a blatant lie after they've been corrected.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2019, 12:31:30 AM by oldfordie »
"Brexit is like a political Ponzi scheme. It was a political movement that promised impossible returns: a swift, painless, problem-free departure from the EU."

Offline Zeb

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,054
  • Justice.
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #20 on: August 22, 2019, 12:53:24 AM »
Am not sure what you mean by Politicians refusing to be scrutinised, by who, the media interviews or Parliament itself, the 2 points are connected, the problem is a politician has knowingly told a factual lie to influence the public, he has to face some sort of scrutiny from Parliament.
MPs will find many ways to lie to the public, they can pass opinions they don't believe themselves, does Corbyn believe he can get a Brexit that unites the country, I doubt it, that's politics. same with Johnson arguing he thinks he can get a deal when we all know it's about laying the blame on the EU.
Am sure politicians will find ways of telling lies by passing it off as opinion but what they can't do is pass a opinion and then slip in "we can't stop Turkey from joining the EU"  that is not a opinion, it's either ignorance at first then a blatant lie after they've been corrected.

The point Byrne is making in her speech is that politicians are just refusing to appear on anything where they have to answer challenging questions and/or be called out on lies. Having Parliament itself try to enforce some sort of scrutiny of lies told seems difficult, and perhaps a slightly different problem, - is a backbench MP really going to vote in committee for their party leader to be punished for telling a whopper? How about grossly misleading answers which aren't factually inaccurate? MPs can't even sort out a disciplinary procedure for serial sex pests in Parliament because of how political it gets. To my mind, solution is forcing politicians to pay the political price with the electorate by journalists amplifying the fact that they've lied - bit late after they've already been elected? Which is the problem of how to ensure journalists get chance to do that.

Bizarrely enough, Jen Williams (MEN) was on social media just now saying that she's getting flak from local politicians because she's asking questions of the councils round Manchester.

Quote
Weird culture at the moment that seems to have trickled all the way down from trump, via party leaders in this country, as far as some local officials and elected members. So worth reiterating that the press asking q[uestion]s is not a demonstration of an agenda.
"And the voices of the standing Kop still whispering in the wind will salute the wee Scots redman and he will still walk on.
And your money will have bought you nothing."

Offline oldfordie

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,803
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #21 on: August 22, 2019, 12:53:59 AM »
I do wonder, oldfordie, how all this will pan out. It surely cannot be allowed to continue. If nothing is done, it will actually only become worse. I think the Internet is to blame. I think solutions will be developed - they must - but it will take time. And, it is difficult to see now what those solutions will be.

Here's a question: how did society react to the somewhat analogous upheavals with the development of radio and then TV? Maybe even, to a lesser extent, with the development of newspapers (because there was no proper functioning democracy at that time anyway). I think the societal changes this time have bee so rapid and far reaching, we cannot let it evolve as it must have done in the past in the face large changes to how information is disseminated and consumed. This will take proper direction to resolve.
Have you watched the Netflix documentary, The Great Hack? I think we are reacting for the good already,  I never realised just how much damage Cambridge Analytica has done all over the world. from campaign tactics to gathering social media info to target specific voters concerns, they have now gone bust officially, they've done a runner in realty. Facebook etc are now facing serious consequences for passing on data. I think laws will be passed to improve the situation so I think things will improve when it comes to internet exploitation.
"Brexit is like a political Ponzi scheme. It was a political movement that promised impossible returns: a swift, painless, problem-free departure from the EU."

Offline oldfordie

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,803
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #22 on: August 22, 2019, 01:26:21 AM »
The point Byrne is making in her speech is that politicians are just refusing to appear on anything where they have to answer challenging questions and/or be called out on lies. Having Parliament itself try to enforce some sort of scrutiny of lies told seems difficult, and perhaps a slightly different problem, - is a backbench MP really going to vote in committee for their party leader to be punished for telling a whopper? How about grossly misleading answers which aren't factually inaccurate? MPs can't even sort out a disciplinary procedure for serial sex pests in Parliament because of how political it gets. To my mind, solution is forcing politicians to pay the political price with the electorate by journalists amplifying the fact that they've lied - bit late after they've already been elected? Which is the problem of how to ensure journalists get chance to do that.

Bizarrely enough, Jen Williams (MEN) was on social media just now saying that she's getting flak from local politicians because she's asking questions of the councils round Manchester.
If Parliament pass a law giving them the power to legally compel a MP to appear before a select committee on a certain date warning the MP that refusal to do so will result in arrest then am pretty sure the MP will turn up to face the scrutiny of the select committee.
I understand people being concerned, MPs should have the protection to say what they believe while inside Parliament, they can voice a opinion to expose corruption or whatever it is they want to say, the point am making is telling a lie we know is untrue as it's factually wrong.there are no grey areas when a MP says we can't stop Turkey from joining the EU, it's not up for debate,it's no about opinion or freedom of speech or a MPs right to Parliamentary privilege. it's a blatant lie.
"Brexit is like a political Ponzi scheme. It was a political movement that promised impossible returns: a swift, painless, problem-free departure from the EU."

Offline Jiminy Cricket

  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,273
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #23 on: August 22, 2019, 12:24:04 PM »
Have you watched the Netflix documentary, The Great Hack? I think we are reacting for the good already,  I never realised just how much damage Cambridge Analytica has done all over the world. from campaign tactics to gathering social media info to target specific voters concerns, they have now gone bust officially, they've done a runner in realty. Facebook etc are now facing serious consequences for passing on data. I think laws will be passed to improve the situation so I think things will improve when it comes to internet exploitation.
Yes, but passing on (selling of) data* is only part of the problem; it is (anything goes) social media in general too.

There is a new law coming into force in California soon, the CCPA (other GDPA-type laws around the world too). The CCPA will have some consequences for the likes of Facebook. But, I think, maybe the only proper solution is that data collection can be made only for development purposes within the particular company holding the data. It cannot be sold or shared with anyone else, even another company within within the group. And then, if the company wantonly or recklessly ignores this, impose huge, crippling fines and long prison sentences for all those responsible.

Yes, I watched the Great Hack only a week or so ago. It is a pretty-well put together documentary. And, like you, I did not appreciate the reach of Cambridge Analytica. I knew they had been involved in an election elsewhere (Kenya, I think), but not all those other countries. And, I knew that Mercer (from the States) was involved - of course, nothing happening to him as far as I can tell.

Offline oldfordie

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,803
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #24 on: August 22, 2019, 12:59:53 PM »
Yes, but passing on (selling of) data* is only part of the problem; it is (anything goes) social media in general too.

There is a new law coming into force in California soon, the CCPA (other GDPA-type laws around the world too). The CCPA will have some consequences for the likes of Facebook. But, I think, maybe the only proper solution is that data collection can be made only for development purposes within the particular company holding the data. It cannot be sold or shared with anyone else, even another company within within the group. And then, if the company wantonly or recklessly ignores this, impose huge, crippling fines and long prison sentences for all those responsible.

Yes, I watched the Great Hack only a week or so ago. It is a pretty-well put together documentary. And, like you, I did not appreciate the reach of Cambridge Analytica. I knew they had been involved in an election elsewhere (Kenya, I think), but not all those other countries. And, I knew that Mercer (from the States) was involved - of course, nothing happening to him as far as I can tell.
Yeah.I think we are moving in the right direction when it comes to controlling how campaigners gather information to target voters concerns. I don't think think the documentary covered Arron Banks but he has also been doing it, his company sells insurance, he used customers personal details to contact them during the referendum campaign. this is illegal. this is more about making sure election campaigners know they will face serious consequences if they use personal data for election purposes.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2019, 01:02:44 PM by oldfordie »
"Brexit is like a political Ponzi scheme. It was a political movement that promised impossible returns: a swift, painless, problem-free departure from the EU."

Offline ShakaHislop

  • Shocktrooper of the Vinny Cable Nasties
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 5,314
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #25 on: August 22, 2019, 02:15:00 PM »
Conservative activist Jane Lax suspended over Nicola Sturgeon miscarriage joke

A Tory activist has been suspended by the party after she joked about Nicola Sturgeon's miscarriage on Twitter.

Jane Lax asked "Is that when she dropped a book?" in response to another Twitter user's claim that the first minister's miscarriage was "fictional".

Mrs Lax, who was treasurer of the Moray Conservative Association, then posted three laughing emojis.

A Scottish Conservative spokesman said the comments were "completely unacceptable".

He added: "As a result, Jane Lax has been suspended by the party pending a disciplinary procedure and has resigned as treasurer of the Moray association.

"Mrs Lax recognises she made a mistake and is extremely apologetic."

Mrs Lax, who is said to have been a member of the Moray association for two years, tweeted under the user name "Jane - SNP don't speak for me". She has now made her account private.

Ms Sturgeon revealed in 2016 that she had suffered a miscarriage five years earlier, while she was deputy first minister.

The first minister, who is married to SNP chief executive Peter Murrell, was in the early stages of her pregnancy and preparing to share the news when she lost her baby.

Ms Sturgeon spoke publicly about the miscarriage ahead of details being published - with her blessing - in a book by journalist Mandy Rhodes.

She said she hoped allowing the details to be made public would challenge assumptions about women who do not have children.

Speaking at an event at the Edinburgh Festival Fringe earlier this week, Ms Sturgeon described the "horrible, misogynist, really filthy, disgusting" abuse she receives online.

She also warned that social media was distorting political debate in Scotland and across the world.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-49433637

If you click on the link, there is a picture of her in the Question Time audience in May.

Offline Just Elmo?

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 4,691
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #26 on: August 22, 2019, 07:56:15 PM »
Conservative activist Jane Lax suspended over Nicola Sturgeon miscarriage joke

A Tory activist has been suspended by the party after she joked about Nicola Sturgeon's miscarriage on Twitter.

Jane Lax asked "Is that when she dropped a book?" in response to another Twitter user's claim that the first minister's miscarriage was "fictional".

Mrs Lax, who was treasurer of the Moray Conservative Association, then posted three laughing emojis.

A Scottish Conservative spokesman said the comments were "completely unacceptable".

He added: "As a result, Jane Lax has been suspended by the party pending a disciplinary procedure and has resigned as treasurer of the Moray association.

"Mrs Lax recognises she made a mistake and is extremely apologetic."

Mrs Lax, who is said to have been a member of the Moray association for two years, tweeted under the user name "Jane - SNP don't speak for me". She has now made her account private.

Ms Sturgeon revealed in 2016 that she had suffered a miscarriage five years earlier, while she was deputy first minister.

The first minister, who is married to SNP chief executive Peter Murrell, was in the early stages of her pregnancy and preparing to share the news when she lost her baby.

Ms Sturgeon spoke publicly about the miscarriage ahead of details being published - with her blessing - in a book by journalist Mandy Rhodes.

She said she hoped allowing the details to be made public would challenge assumptions about women who do not have children.

Speaking at an event at the Edinburgh Festival Fringe earlier this week, Ms Sturgeon described the "horrible, misogynist, really filthy, disgusting" abuse she receives online.

She also warned that social media was distorting political debate in Scotland and across the world.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-49433637

If you click on the link, there is a picture of her in the Question Time audience in May.

Give it a few months and she will be reinstated once this has all blown over, as is tradition.

Offline stevo7

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,645
  • Direct Action Now
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #27 on: August 22, 2019, 08:40:38 PM »
I'm sick of politicians lying.

Police, Nursing, Teachers even Lawyers have a code of conduct. Lie, their face disciplinary procedures and probably out of a job.

Where's the politicians?

Shouldn't a member of the public be able take a politician to court to show deceit/lying, and remove them from office.

Offline ShakaHislop

  • Shocktrooper of the Vinny Cable Nasties
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 5,314
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #28 on: August 22, 2019, 08:42:18 PM »
Union boss warns Jeremy Corbyn against 'stitch-up' over all-women shortlists in Labour safe seats

Posted On:
16th August 2019

The boss of Britain's biggest trade union has warned Jeremy Corbyn against “trading” seats earmarked for women candidates in order to let “favourite sons” run for the party.

In a hard-hitting letter to the Labour leader, Unison general secretary Dave Prentis said a “back-room stitch-up” could lead to the party “flipping” seats where an all-women shortlist (AWS) for Labour candidates currently applies.

All-women shortlists were first used by Labour in 1997, in a bid to drastically boost the number of female MPs.

But, in his letter to the Labour leader, Mr Prentis warned: “It has been the position of the Party for many years that where a woman is standing down, that seat remains an All Women Shortlist.

"In recent weeks, however, I am aware of discussions and ‘negotiations’ around the existing seats that seek to overturn that practice, flipping AWS seats and trading them around for what appears to be favourite sons taking up the safest seats.

“This I find deeply concerning and wish to flag up the inherent risks and dangers of meddling with a process that has served us reasonably well to date.”

PoliticsHome has been told that the row partly concerns the process of selecting the next Labour candidate selection for the City of Durham, where long-serving MP Roberta Blackman-Woods is due to step down before the next election.

The safe Labour seat is currently subject to an all-women shortlist, but there are fears the seat could be opened up to any candidate regardless of gender. In its place, the north-east seat of Blyth Valley would then become an all-women shortlist when incumbent Ronnie Campbell steps down.

Although he does not mention any seats by name, Mr Prentis, whose union is affiliated to Labour and provides a significant chunk of the party’s funding, warned that trading all-women shortlist seats could make it less likely for female MPs to get elected.

“UNISON has over a million women members, thousands of them active in our Party. They are strong, talented women from all walks of life – and like Angela Rayner and Eleanor Smith, I know many of them would make excellent MPs,” he said.

“Yet what we are witnessing at the moment is the current All Women Shortlists being used as bargaining chips primarily for the convenience of men to take or monopolise promised seats.

“After all our work over the decades we cannot return to the bad old days of back-room stitch ups and women being pushed further away.”

In a direct plea to the Labour leader, the Unison general secretary says: “Given our proud record and your personal support over the years, I hope you will intervene and voice your opposition to any changes being made that threaten or seek to diminish the existing AWS arrangement. Our policy must remain that where a female labour MP steps down, that specific seat must remain open to women only.”

A Labour spokesperson said: “Labour has more women MPs than all other political parties combined and we are committed to improving diverse representation at all levels of the party. In the next general election, women candidates will be standing in more than two thirds of our key target seats.”

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/labour-party/news/105954/union-boss-warns-jeremy-corbyn-against-stitch


Labour bosses accused of 'ignoring' local members after men allowed to stand for London safe seat

Posted On:
20th August 2019

Labour chiefs have been accused of "ignoring" local party members after a key London safe seat was opened up to male candidates despite a "unanimous" call to keep its all-women shortlist.

Members of the Vauxhall Labour Party have circulated a letter saying they are "deeply disappointed" by the decision to open up candidate selections in the local party to anyone regardless of gender when incumbent Kate Hoey steps aside at the next election.

The seat had previously been earmarked as one of a string of constituencies that Labour reserves for female candidates through all-women shortlists, and local members voted in July to maintain that status.

But HuffPost UK reported that Labour's ruling National Executive Committee had this week decided to allow men to stand in the seat - where Ms Hoey netted a 20,250 majority in 2017 - despite wider moves to boost the number of female MPs.

The move has triggered anger in the Vauxhall Labour Party, with a draft letter seen by PoliticsHome accusing the NEC of failing to "respect" local decision-making.

"As members of Vauxhall Labour Party, we are deeply disappointed by the decision of Labour's National Executive Committee to ignore the wishes of local party members who voted for the use of an all women shortlist (AWS) to find a successor to retiring MP, Kate Hoey," they wrote.

"Vauxhall Labour has long been in favour of AWS, is committed to the longstanding policy of replacing retiring female MPs via AWS and is fully supportive of moves to achieve at least 50% female representation across the PLP. The vote of Vauxhall Labour party in July was unanimous and united all parts of our diverse Labour movement."

The signatories add: "It is a long-standing principle that the NEC respects such local decisions by local members, and it is against the democratic nature of our party to ignore them. Vauxhall Labour members have not had the chance to select their MP for over 40 years - it would be deeply disappointing to begin this selection process by ignoring what local party members want.

"We ask the NEC to respect the decision of local members, abide by the democratic wishes of Vauxhall Labour Party and ensure that we are allowed to choose our next parliamentary candidate via an All Women Shortlist."

The draft letter to Labour's NEC has been signed by members representing different ideological wings of the Vauxhall party, including figures from the pro-Corbyn Momentum group, the centre-left Progress faction and the Unite and Aslef trade unions.

The missive to party bosses comes amid a row in Labour over which seats will be subject all-women shortlists as the party picks its candidates for a general election.

Dave Prentis, general secretary of the Unison trade union, wrote to Jeremy Corbyn last week to warn against "trading” seats earmarked for women in order to let “favourite sons” run for the party, while former minister Gloria de Piero warned the party risks "going backwards on equality".

But a Labour spokesperson said: "The Labour Party has more women MPs than all other political parties combined and we are committed to improving diverse representation at all levels of the Party.

"In the next General Election, women candidates will be standing in more than two thirds of our key target seats."

A party source meanwhile said Labour was on track to achieve a 50/50 split of female-to-male MPs by the end of the decade, with women already making up 72 out of the 102 candidates chosen to fight key target seats for the next election.

They pointed out that of the 10 Labour seats decided by the NEC this week, five will now be reserved for all-women shortlists, up from the four allocated previously.

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/labour-party/news/106024/labour-bosses-accused-ignoring-local-members

Offline ShakaHislop

  • Shocktrooper of the Vinny Cable Nasties
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 5,314
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #29 on: August 22, 2019, 08:47:17 PM »
Aren't men who would like to stand as Labour Parliamentary candidates in constituencies reserved for AWS disenfranchised?

Could a middle ground not be that 50% of the shortlists have to be women, with the other 50% open to men?

Offline oldfordie

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,803
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #30 on: August 22, 2019, 09:03:43 PM »
I'm sick of politicians lying.

Police, Nursing, Teachers even Lawyers have a code of conduct. Lie, their face disciplinary procedures and probably out of a job.

Where's the politicians?

Shouldn't a member of the public be able take a politician to court to show deceit/lying, and remove them from office.
Marcus Ball is trying to get Johnson prosecuted for lying, not going well.
https://twitter.com/MarcusJBall/status/1161605643884797953
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/14/johnson-quashes-supreme-court-action-over-350m-brexit-claim
"Brexit is like a political Ponzi scheme. It was a political movement that promised impossible returns: a swift, painless, problem-free departure from the EU."

Offline jason67

  • He likes the 15cm morning glory boy!
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,720
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #31 on: August 22, 2019, 09:20:43 PM »
I'm sick of politicians lying.

Police, Nursing, Teachers even Lawyers have a code of conduct. Lie, their face disciplinary procedures and probably out of a job.

Where's the politicians?

Shouldn't a member of the public be able take a politician to court to show deceit/lying, and remove them from office.
As long as you have people putting that big fat X on the voting slip nothing will change.

Because you know what? They've realised they can get away with it, and they will continue to do it until their power is taken away.

But unfortunately that's never going to happen.   

At last the TRUTH 26th April 2016

Still don't buy the s*n.

Offline stevo7

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,645
  • Direct Action Now
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #32 on: August 22, 2019, 09:23:48 PM »
Marcus Ball is trying to get Johnson prosecuted for lying, not going well.
https://twitter.com/MarcusJBall/status/1161605643884797953
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/14/johnson-quashes-supreme-court-action-over-350m-brexit-claim

Thanks for info. Its remarkable our law makers arent held to the same standards as our professionals ie police, nursing & teaching. A labour MP de-selected/by-election about lying recently. Why cant we prosecute the other liars.

Online Lush is the best medicine...

  • FUCK THE POLICE - NWA
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 37,881
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #33 on: August 22, 2019, 09:37:45 PM »
Thanks for info. Its remarkable our law makers arent held to the same standards as our professionals ie police, nursing & teaching. A labour MP de-selected/by-election about lying recently. Why cant we prosecute the other liars.
that labour MP was criminally convicted, Johnson hasn’t been, and of course there is the more general question of what is a lie and what is them just being wrong and if it is a lie then what is worth prosecuting (e.g. if they overestimate a budget forecast)

Offline stevo7

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,645
  • Direct Action Now
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #34 on: August 22, 2019, 09:57:04 PM »
that labour MP was criminally convicted, Johnson hasn’t been, and of course there is the more general question of what is a lie and what is them just being wrong and if it is a lie then what is worth prosecuting (e.g. if they overestimate a budget forecast)

Yes she lied to the police. And i'm not talking about forecasts/projections. I'm talking about lies that say after knowing the facts. If your doctor says you may 2 months to live with cancer thats a forecast. If your doctor says you dont have cancer when you do, its a lie.

Offline oldfordie

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,803
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #35 on: August 22, 2019, 09:58:16 PM »
Thanks for info. Its remarkable our law makers arent held to the same standards as our professionals ie police, nursing & teaching. A labour MP de-selected/by-election about lying recently. Why cant we prosecute the other liars.
Your welcome. I think the MPs are bringing it on themselves, they have been totally out of control the last few years.
that labour MP was criminally convicted, Johnson hasn’t been, and of course there is the more general question of what is a lie and what is them just being wrong and if it is a lie then what is worth prosecuting (e.g. if they overestimate a budget forecast)
Yeah, a good example is the £350 mill to the NHS. many people argued they didn't fall for the lie, I remember Gizzela Stuart laughing the day after the referendum when Farage admitted the NHS money wasn't true, Hartley Brewer laughing on QT arguing nobody believed it, nobody voted leave because of the NHS promise. everyone's agreed it was a lie but there's no way a politician could be prosecuted for it because it was a opinion, we can spend £350 mill on the NHS if we leave the EU.
 The £350 mill figure is something different, Johnson knew the figure was untrue. so this is not really a opinion, he knowingly told a massive lie that influenced millions of people to vote leave.
"Brexit is like a political Ponzi scheme. It was a political movement that promised impossible returns: a swift, painless, problem-free departure from the EU."

Online Lush is the best medicine...

  • FUCK THE POLICE - NWA
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 37,881
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #36 on: August 23, 2019, 12:08:45 AM »
Your welcome. I think the MPs are bringing it on themselves, they have been totally out of control the last few years.Yeah, a good example is the £350 mill to the NHS. many people argued they didn't fall for the lie, I remember Gizzela Stuart laughing the day after the referendum when Farage admitted the NHS money wasn't true, Hartley Brewer laughing on QT arguing nobody believed it, nobody voted leave because of the NHS promise. everyone's agreed it was a lie but there's no way a politician could be prosecuted for it because it was a opinion, we can spend £350 mill on the NHS if we leave the EU.
 The £350 mill figure is something different, Johnson knew the figure was untrue. so this is not really a opinion, he knowingly told a massive lie that influenced millions of people to vote leave.
its more a ‘would it stand up in court’, they’d probably argue that it was a hypothetical use of the money not a direct promise and barring a paper trail implicating them it’d be pretty difficult to convict even though it’s clear as day it was a lie

Offline oldfordie

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,803
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #37 on: August 23, 2019, 12:24:18 AM »
its more a ‘would it stand up in court’, they’d probably argue that it was a hypothetical use of the money not a direct promise and barring a paper trail implicating them it’d be pretty difficult to convict even though it’s clear as day it was a lie
Yeah it's a promise "we can" it's not a matter of fact either and thats the most important point when it comes to holding politicians to account for lies.
I don't know what you mean about the paper trail to be honest.
"Brexit is like a political Ponzi scheme. It was a political movement that promised impossible returns: a swift, painless, problem-free departure from the EU."

Online Lush is the best medicine...

  • FUCK THE POLICE - NWA
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 37,881
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #38 on: August 23, 2019, 12:37:09 AM »
Yeah it's a promise "we can" it's not a matter of fact either and thats the most important point when it comes to holding politicians to account for lies.
its that things can change from pre election to say a few years in eg a recession would halt a lot of spending promises

Quote
I don't know what you mean about the paper trail to be honest.
as in if there are emails from senior vote leave people saying they know it’s a total lie but let’s do this anyway

Offline oldfordie

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,803
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: General political discussion Part II
« Reply #39 on: August 23, 2019, 12:50:02 AM »
its that things can change from pre election to say a few years in eg a recession would halt a lot of spending promises
as in if there are emails from senior vote leave people saying they know it’s a total lie but let’s do this anyway
Yeah, that would prove they believed they were lying themselves but still not sure how it would stand up in court, they could argue they personally believed the promise wouldn't be honoured but others did. we heard what Cummings told Johnson after the ref result, Cummings told Johnson this promise has to be delivered, Johnson stamped his fist on the desk and said absolutely.
I think we have to stick to facts. if a politician claims 90% of world trade is done on WTO terms and he knows this is untrue then he should be dragged in for scrutiny.
"Brexit is like a political Ponzi scheme. It was a political movement that promised impossible returns: a swift, painless, problem-free departure from the EU."