Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: BillyStubbsTears on February 13, 2020, 12:16:44 pm
-
Sajid Javid sacked as Chancellor.
Cummings has had it in for Javid for a while.
-
Laura Kuenssberg appointed Minister for the Media, Arts and Balanced reporting :(
-
''Sajid Javid now joins the long list of people who have been let down by Boris Johnson. During the general election, in a Q&A after a speech to the CBI, Johnson committed to keeping Javid as his chancellor after the election. Javid was doing an excellent job, he said. No other cabinet minister received a job security guarantee of this kind during the campaign''
Anyone who believes anything johnson says is a chump, look at his record.
-
Not sacked, though...just backed into an untenable position in the corner
Always saw Javid as a 'yes' man, so I'm impressed that there is (now was) someone in the government with a modicum of integrity.
-
Javid has never impressed me in terms of his understanding of macroeconomics. But he's going to look like John Maynard Keynes himself at the side of his successor. A truly scary right-wing free-market maniac.
-
It seems we have got a nodding dog in 10a Downing street now, The Chancellor has nothing to do now but take instructions from number 10
-
''Sunak’s rise up the ranks has been extraordinary. He has been chief secretary to the Treasury since last summer, but technically he was not even a member of the cabinet; he was just a minister with the right to attend. Being chancellor is his first full cabinet job''
A very brave decision.
-
It seems we have got a nodding dog in 10a Downing street now, The Chancellor has nothing to do now but take instructions from number 10
Actually, you're right there Filo.
Sunak's own political.beliefs are irrelevant. He is by a million miles the most inexperienced politician to become CoE, certainly since Victorian times. I suspect, ever.
Cummings will make the decisions. Sunak will announce them. Sunak doesn't have the authority or the party backing to stand up to Cummings and say "No". Javid did and that's why he had to go. Not because he was shit at the economics (he was). Because he was a challenge.
-
President Cummings wants to enjoy complete control, unhindered by either disagreement or rules.
This comes shortly after the go-ahead for the London phase of HS2, a scheme which is way outside the rules in the Treasury Green Book. Basically, all proposals put forward in future will no longer face a hurdle to show their viability in cost benefit terms.
This is the green light to vanity project central. Cummings (and circus ringmaster Johnson) will be able to enjoy free rein over spending priorities which will only be subject to financial appraisal after the event.
The centre of gravity in public spending commitment has moved in favour of an assumption that a project is worthwhile, without an evidence base.
A very disturbing move from a very disturbed individual.
-
The really strange one is Julian Smith - the bloke who managed to get the NI Assembly back up and running. Sacked for doing too good a job?
-
Johnson is turning out to be an unusual tory PM though. Rather than out and out austerity his instinct seems to be to turn the taps on.
Analysts on the BBC seem to think this change of chancellor is in order to allow a big splurge of spending on infrastructure projects like HS2 and Northern rail.
This might actually be no bad thing for the economy right now.
-
How comes it's ok for bojo to spend,spend,spend, but Jeremy Corbyn was classed as reckless??
-
Johnson is turning out to be an unusual tory PM though. Rather than out and out austerity his instinct seems to be to turn the taps on.
Analysts on the BBC seem to think this change of chancellor is in order to allow a big splurge of spending on infrastructure projects like HS2 and Northern rail.
This might actually be no bad thing for the economy right now.
I don't necessarily disagree with that argument RD.
My problem is that Cummings is determined to steamroller his way through the usual checks and balances. As I've said here recently, I know from bitter personal experience what it's like being close to someone like that. And if you're going to let a megalomaniac off the leash, you'd better be damn f**king sure that they are going to get EVERY decision right.
-
Swiftly,
I expect there will be a fair few Tories who are feeling a little bit uncomfortable about Boris spending.
The difference is, as far as I can see it, Johnson is targeting his spending chiefly at infrastructure. Railway lines and bridges. Things that will have a lasting impact and give Boris a legacy.
The worry with Corbyn is that he would placate the unions and spend a lot on raising the wages of public servants and generally spend a lot more altogether.
Johnson is looking to make savings in order to offset the cost of his pet projects.
-
RD.
Labour has had policies to strongly increase spending on infrastructure since the global crash. It's THE textbook way to get an economy firing on all cylinders after a bad recession. And our Government has been able to borrow at effectively zero interest to fund this. The tragedy of this last decade is that we've had a Govt that didn't understand this basic economics.
If Johnson Cummings is going to invest in infrastructure, that's good. But it's a decade late.
-
Is it ever too late to put something right?
-
BST
Yep. I know Labour had big plans for infrastructure, rail, broadband, low carbon steel, electric vehicle factories even. Much greater in scope than Boris is planning.
I suspect the unions would be expecting to see wage rises in the public services too. Not so much under this government though.
-
Is it ever too late to put something right?
[/quote
It is if you execute an innocent man. 😉
-
Given that we've had a decade of below- inflation pay rises for most, while the top few percent have been let off the leash, I don't think that would have been unreasonable.
-
BTW I should say I don't vote Tory.
In this last election, I voted Lib Dem knowing they had no chance of unseating the Tory MP. They are best placed to take this seat from him in future.
I didn't feel as though I could vote for Corbyn anyway.
-
Apparently Robert Buckland was offered the same deal as Javid - you can keep your job if you sack your advisor.
When he got back to his office after the meeting with Cummings/Johnson his advisor congratulated him on staying in his post: Thank you very much but I have some bad news for you!
Honour among Tories ehh. https://twitter.com/BenKentish/status/1228036904576307200
-
That's one of the biggest problems with zero hours contracts Wilts
-
BTW I should say I don't vote Tory.
In this last election, I voted Lib Dem knowing they had no chance of unseating the Tory MP. They are best placed to take this seat from him in future.
I didn't feel as though I could vote for Corbyn anyway.
You weren't doing. You were voting for your local MP and the Party who would best serve the country as a whole.
An easy mistake to make - especially as that view, (you were voting for either Corbyn or Johnson), was being heavily pushed by the media! If only people would take a minute to think about that...................
A read of Orwell's Animal Farm might be in order.
-
RD.
We've had enough interactions for me to have been pretty sure you'd not have voted for Johnson. And I do understand your lack of support for Corbyn. I voted for him through gritted teeth.
-
Well BST, according to NNK, you didn’t vote for Corbyn.
-
Well BST, according to NNK, you didn’t vote for Corbyn.
Apart from voters in Islington North, no one in the country had a box to tick with the name Jeremy Corbyn at the side of it. For some strange reason, that's how the system works!
-
Well BST, according to NNK, you didn’t vote for Corbyn.
Apart from voters in Islington North, no one in the country had a box to tick with the name Jeremy Corbyn at the side of it. For some strange reason, that's how the system works!
And here was me thinking that BST knew quite a bit about this here political system of ours.
-
Of course NNK is right in the strictest of terms.
But clearly, a vote for a Labour candidate was a vote that aimed at putting Corbyn in No 10.
Was Corbyn my preferred choice for PM among the ones on offer in December? Yes.
Was he my preferred choice of all the politicians who might have been available? Not by a million miles.
I voted Labour despite Corbyn. What you really want in a political party is a leader who makes people vote BECAUSE of them.
-
Back on topic
First they came for those with minds of their own; but I have no mind of my own, so I said nothing.
Then they came for those with human empathy; but I have no human empathy, so I said nothing.
Then they came for the competent; but I am not competent, so I said nothing.
Then they came for me - and now I'm a Government Minister.
-
Of course NNK is right in the strictest of terms.
But clearly, a vote for a Labour candidate was a vote that aimed at putting Corbyn in No 10.
Was Corbyn my preferred choice for PM among the ones on offer in December? Yes.
Was he my preferred choice of all the politicians who might have been available? Not by a million miles.
I voted Labour despite Corbyn. What you really want in a political party is a leader who makes people vote BECAUSE of them.
Of course I know that NNK is right in the strictest of terms.
However a few months ago I was shot down in flames for daring to write something similar to what you wrote (about voting for Corbyn).
-
Not sure that folk have grasped how big a change it is to remove Treasury spending rules.
You can make a case for revising those rules, as part of the normal process of updating the system. I would support that.
What Cummings is doing is removing the value for money framework that applies to project assessment. Whether something new emerges remains to be seen.
Without the backstop of VFM, it is not possible to see the worth of one project against another. It allows spending to flow according to political criteria alone. So if a proposal has electoral appeal, say in a marginal, it will get the go-ahead over a much more important scheme elsewhere.
It is how tinpot dictators dispense favours, paying back donors with lucrative supply deals, and buying votes with pet vanity projects.
-
VFM is a more user friendly way than saying business case and you're dead right Albie if it's thrown out it does mean they can do what they want. But as we know it looks as if there is some sort of unconventional master plan but basic economics doesn't or shouldn't change every time there is a new gov' it should be more tweakage to change direction more to the left right or whatever, but as we all know there are not many ways to run a business properly and keep it running. Scary days ahead.
-
One of Cummings "weirdo" little helpers has marked himself out as a promising talent;
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnson-under-pressure-to-sack-adviser-who-backed-compulsory-contraception-1742527
Think the unthinkable, eh!
Now lets think, I'm sure that compulsory action to prevent unwanted births was a key part of another political programme, some time back in the middle of the last century.
Nothing new under the sun, is there?
-
One of Cummings "weirdo" little helpers has marked himself out as a promising talent;
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnson-under-pressure-to-sack-adviser-who-backed-compulsory-contraception-1742527
Think the unthinkable, eh!
Now lets think, I'm sure that compulsory action to prevent unwanted births was a key part of another political programme, some time back in the middle of the last century.
Nothing new under the sun, is there?
The quotes shown there would be funny if they weren't so worrying. It's like part of a script from Til death us do part. Alf Garnett is alive and well and working in Westminster.
-
One of Cummings "weirdo" little helpers has marked himself out as a promising talent;
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnson-under-pressure-to-sack-adviser-who-backed-compulsory-contraception-1742527
Think the unthinkable, eh!
Now lets think, I'm sure that compulsory action to prevent unwanted births was a key part of another political programme, some time back in the middle of the last century.
Nothing new under the sun, is there?
The thing is though he is right. You only have walk around most town centres for five minutes to see the proof of this. Eugenics is an excellent idea. We have enough brain dead, workshy trash roaming the streets without breeding more.
-
One of Cummings "weirdo" little helpers has marked himself out as a promising talent;
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnson-under-pressure-to-sack-adviser-who-backed-compulsory-contraception-1742527
Think the unthinkable, eh!
Now lets think, I'm sure that compulsory action to prevent unwanted births was a key part of another political programme, some time back in the middle of the last century.
Nothing new under the sun, is there?
The thing is though he is right. You only have walk around most town centres for five minutes to see the proof of this. Eugenics is an excellent idea. We have enough brain dead, workshy trash roaming the streets without breeding more.
Most of them, it seems, voted leave. So which category do you fit into AL?
-
I like this. comments made in 2014 being condemned by mostly the same people who are willing to forgive rapists and drug dealers for making mistakes in the past and want deportations stopped.
I don't agree with the comments, but don't see any reason for them to stand between him and a job he maybe the best suited for.
If racial comments are the test of being in government Lammy should have gone years ago.
-
Selby.
Where in God's name to start with that contribution?
1) What does it matter when he made those factually wrong and morally bankrupt points? The question is, if he BELIEVES them, should he be advising Government? Neither he nor the Government have said anything to distances themselves from his idea that the poor should be compulsorily sterilised, and the decades-old racist bullshit that genetics defines intelligence. If he doesn't REALLY think that, don't you think he has a responsibility to make that clear before he gets a job as a Govt adviser?
2) The people who were deported last week had served their time for whatever crimes they committed. So what on earth the connection is between a) What they had done and been penalised for and b) what Sabisky apparently believes and has been given a job for, God alone knows.
3) Did you see anyone in here "forgiving rapists"? If you did, then please point it out. If not, please think a bit before you post.
4) The comments I personally made were not about forgiving anyone. They were about the spellbinding hypocrisy of Class A drug USERS being in the Cabinet and enforcing the deportation of Class A drug sellers. I usually find in a discussion that it helps to read and absorb what people actually say, not answer what you think you'd like them to have said.
-
I like this. comments made in 2014 being condemned by mostly the same people who are willing to forgive rapists and drug dealers for making mistakes in the past and want deportations stopped.
I don't agree with the comments, but don't see any reason for them to stand between him and a job he maybe the best suited for.
If racial comments are the test of being in government Lammy should have gone years ago.
Racial comments do appear to be the test of being in government.
This bloke has not only made comments about sterilisation of working class girls but also about a supposed difference in intelligence between black and white people.
When asked if Johnson distanced himself from these remarks his spokesman refused 10 times to answer that question but instead said that Johnson's views on racial difference were well known and on the record.
Johnson's views on race of course are that black people are 'piccanies' with 'water melon smiles'.
-
Selby.
Which Government is David Lammy a member of? And what raCIST things has Lammy said?
-
Some big fans of eugenics on here, what a shock. Can we just rename the off topic forum the racist holding pen and have done with it?
-
Sabisky has just resigned.
That leaves 2 Eugenics fans in Downing St......Cummings and Johnson.
-
Fascinating. Cummings' first encounter with the real world as Supremo ends up with him realising he's not omnipotent.
This shows precisely why Cummings needs to be controlled and contained though. He has no self-control mechanism. He's employed Sabisky because he sounded like the sort of disruptive influence that Cummings wants in Government. But he clearly didn't do due diligence on what Sabisky actually thought. Or if he DID, it never dawned on him that the majority of right thinking people would be disgusted at it.
And there is the issue with Cummings. He wants to shake everything up, but the problem with doing that is that you don't know what the outcome is going to be.
This time, the outcome is just a little embarrassment for him and Johnson. But what happens when he starts "shaking up" the way we do foreign affairs? Or economics? Or education? Make stupid mistakes on those things and the results can be catastrophic.
So like I say. I hope this is the first sign of people in Government putting him in a box. Preferably with a life firmly nailed down.
-
I guess Billy you have yet to see the news reports today that Trump is sending his chief of staff over to the UK to discuss the Huawei problem with the representative of the UK government - one Mr D Cummings.
#takingbackcontrolfromunelectedadvisors
-
Well Kwasi Kwarteng has raised the odds today.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/andrew-sabisky-resigns-news-eugenics-boris-johnson-cummings-kwarteng-a9341436.html%3famp
Racists shouldn't be allowed to enter No10?
I assume that's aimed at the man who wrote about picaninnies with watermelon smiles and Muslim women looking like letterboxes?