POLITICS CORNER

[Stanley]

Me neither Ian but I think you knew that. Re. the candidate, I have ranked the three prospects, returned the vote and had it confirmed.

[Stanley]

See THIS for some bad news for Starmer this morning.
Labour MP Imran Hussain has quit Sir Keir Starmer's shadow ministerial team over his desire to "strongly advocate for a ceasefire" in Gaza. Mr Hussain was the shadow minister for the New Deal for Working People. He said he remained committed to Labour's agenda but that his view on Gaza differed "substantially" from the position Sir Keir has adopted. Sir Keir has called for humanitarian pauses in Gaza but has not supported calls for a ceasefire at this time. In a resignation posted on social media, Mr Hussain said he wanted to be a "strong advocate" for a ceasefire alongside the UN and multiple charities, calling it "essential to ending the bloodshed". "It is clear that I cannot sufficiently, in all good conscience, do this from the frontbench given its current position," he said. He said he had "unequivocally condemned" Hamas's attack on 7 October and believed that "every country has the right to defend itself", but that that should "never become a right to deliberately violate international law on protecting civilians or to commit war crimes". "It has always been my view, which I've made clear repeatedly in Parliament, that human rights are universal and that it is our duty to call out all those who violate international law," he said.
I can't fault his argument and it is another example of how divisive this action in Palestine is.
Otherwise, the general opinion seems to be that the King's Speech yesterday was more Sunak electioneering than serous politics. Is this what we are going to get for a year? A government obsessed with the GE and not minding the shop?
On the question of Labour and Starmer's hold on party discipline, 66 Labour MPs, including 17 front-benchers, have openly expressed dissatisfaction with Starmer's perceived position.
It raises the question I mentioned yesterday. Is he managing the Party well or badly?

[Stanley]

See THIS BBC report of the political interference in police decisions connected with Remembrance Day.
Rishi Sunak has said he will hold the Met Police chief "accountable" over a pro-Palestinian march set to take place this Saturday, on Armistice Day. The prime minister has criticised the timing of the demonstration in London as "provocative and disrespectful". Sir Mark Rowley rejected calls by campaigners to ban the protest, saying such a move would be a "last resort". Organisers insist their march will not go near commemorations and accuse the government of manufacturing a row.
Home Secretary Braverman has also had her fingers in the pie attempting to influence the Commissioner's decision.
Don't they realise that this isn't how government is supposed to work? You appoint a Commissioner and let them get on with the job. I think that these public warnings are more likely to trigger the idea of protest than calm them down.
What's actually happening is that Sunak is attempting to distract the public and divert attention from the dire state of his administration by attacking on what he assumes is a safe subject. I expect to hear him mouthing platitudes about 'our brave boys' any minute. He isn't fooling anyone.

[PanBiker]

One of the commentators made a point yesterday when they asked why, on Armistice Day would you want to ban a gathering that is effectively asking for a cease fire?

Dictionary

Definitions from Oxford Languages

armistice
/ˈɑːmɪstɪs/

noun

noun: armistice; plural noun: armistices

an agreement made by opposing sides in a war to stop fighting for a certain time; a truce.

Similar: truce, ceasefire, suspension of hostilities, cessation of hostilities, peace

[Stanley]

It now transpires that Braverman refused to make all the revisions of her article asked for by Downing Street and so in effect the publication is insubordination. How can Sunak not sanction her for this if he isn't going to look weak?
This is a Home Secretary who is out of control and working to her own rules. Her calculation is that Sunak daren't sack her because if he does she has the perfect starter for ten in a new campaign for the leadership.
This is not governance, it is chaos.

[Tripps]

I just discovered the following background information - ref Braverman and Starmer.
Can there be some connection between their personal relationships and their political attitude? Surely not - they went into politics to 'serve their constituents' and 'make a difference' didn't they? If they were on the Council (from Parish to County) surely they would have to 'declare an interest' in any proceedings at the very least.

She married Rael Braverman, a manager of the Mercedes-Benz Group, whom Braverman described as a "very proud member of the Jewish community",[130] in February 2018 at the House of Commons.[131] Rael Braverman lived in Israel, and Suella Braverman told The Jewish Chronicle that she has "close family members who serve in the IDF".[132] As of 2021, they have two children: a son born in 2019 and a daughter born in 2021.[133][134] She lives in Locks Heath, Hampshire.[135]
Braverman is a member of the Triratna Buddhist Community, formerly the Friends of the Western Buddhist Order,[136] but is not a member of the Triratna Buddhist Order.[137] She took her oath of allegiance as an MP on the Buddhist Dhammapada.[1

The Labour leader, who offered unequivocal support for Israel at the party conference earlier this week, also expressed “deep concern” for his extended family, who are in Israel. Keir Starmer’s wife, Victoria, is Jewish and has family living in Israel. Stamer told LBC they “have a deep sense of shock at what is happening”. He continued: “I’ve never known a time of such incredible anxiety”. He also shared that he has seen “first-hand” the effects which the conflict is having on Jewish Communities in the UK. “We stand by our Jewish communities here,” he told LBC, “and we stand by Israel internationally”.

[Stanley]

See THIS BBC report on Suella Braverman for a deeper insight into the chaos in Sunak's Tory Administration.
Home Secretary Suella Braverman is facing questions about her future after defying Downing Street over an article accusing the police of bias. She claimed aggressive right-wing protesters were "rightly met with a stern response", while "pro-Palestinian mobs" were "largely ignored". The article was not cleared by Downing Street and suggested changes to the text were not followed, No 10 said. Some Tories have called for the home secretary to be sacked. It comes ahead of a Pro-Palestinian march for a ceasefire in Gaza, which is due to take place in central London on Saturday. Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer accused Mrs Braverman of undermining the police and said Prime Minster Rishi Sunak was "too weak to do anything about it". Former Conservative minister Sir Bob Neil became the first Tory to publicly call for her to resign over the article. Sir Bob, a frequent critic of Mrs Braverman, told LBC that her position was "untenable" after she had "gone over the line" with her comments.
Apart from the fact she is obviously pursuing an agenda favourable to her making a bid for Party leadership, there is the small matter of collective responsibility in Cabinet Government, something she has ignored ever since she first got the job.
One thing we can be sure of, this is a government in chaos.
HERE'S another insight into the state of the Tories.
Nadine Dorries' latest book The Plot claims that British politics is controlled, not by the voters, but by a shady faction, who have been at the heart of the Conservative Party for more than 20 years, pulling strings, pushing agendas and toppling leaders. The former culture secretary - and staunch ally of Boris Johnson - names some members of the alleged group. Others are disguised by, presumably lawyer-approved, nicknames. There is a Thumper, a Bambi, a Miss Moneypenny and most sinister of all - Dr No.
If you wanted to portray a parody of politics you could do worse than start from this flight of fancy. As for the assessment that MPs are pressing for more information, I would have thought that they would have better things to do than pander to the retirement plan of a clapped out MP who backed the wrong horse and assumed she'd get a peerage out of it.
As for Starmer, his attempts to do a Tony Blair and steal the Tory's mid-ground have resulted in a bland and at the same time fractured Labour Party. Any seeming success they are having is more due to the awful performance of the Tories than any Labour virtues.....

[Stanley]

See THIS for the element of political news that I considered more important than any discussions about Braverman's job application.
Funds committed to reforming adult social care in England have been cut by 58%, according to the National Audit Office (NAO). More than £1bn of the £1.74bn agreed with the Treasury for system reform has been diverted to other care priorities. The watchdog says the government has "scaled back" its plans and is "behind schedule even on its revised plans". The government says it remains committed to reform. The National Audit Office is the UK's independent public spending watchdog, and holds the government to account through its audits. According to its report, the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) may now only spend £729m on its planned system overhaul until 2025. In December 2021, the government announced a 10-year vision to improve adult social care, which included a cap of £86,000 on the amount that a person would pay for social care in their lifetime. It was due to be introduced in October 2023, but in Chancellor Jeremy Hunt's Autumn Statement last year it was postponed by two years, and up to £7.5bn was committed to the sector to help ease immediate pressures.
Remember when Johnson said he had an 'oven-ready' solution for the social care crisis? The NAO clearly shows us what the government's priorities are. In case anyone has missed the news the growth figures for the first three quarters of 2023 were 0.3%, 0.2% and 0.0% so Hunt's efforts have failed and Sunak's pledge on the economy is, like his other four pledges, in tatters. This is a government in terminal decline....
As for the latest information we have about Braverman, the policing row and the general matter of her performance as Home Secretary.... I think it must be obvious to anyone with an ounce of common sense that she has no interest in protecting the show of respect for the Fallen but is simply using the occasion to manufacture an overt attack on Sunak in pursuit of her ambitions to take the Party Leadership. She is pandering to her supporters on the Far Right of the party, people like the egregious Lee Anderson, deputy leader of the Party. He says that she is 'only saying what many are thinking'.
I have news for him and his friends, many more think that Braverman is a cynical, heartless pursuer of personal power and will use any tool to hand to further that quest. The furore she has stirred up is more likely to encourage dissenting demonstrations than hinder them. She is now in the strange position for a home Secretary in that she is hoping there will be trouble at the Cenotaph as this will prove she was 'right' and bolster her standing with the Far Right.
This is a symptom of a Party in terminal decline.

[PanBiker]

In the local forest that is now Pendle & Clitheroe Constituency. At the Hustings today, Jonathan Hinder was selected via paper and electronic ballots to be the Labour Party Parliamentary Candidate for the Constituency.

[Tripps]

Could do worse. A bit light on personal detail though, and it does not seem to be readily available elsewhere.
He waves his hands up and down too much when he speaks in public. I think they teach it them on the course.
Must have a strong chance, but a lot can happen in the next year.

[Stanley]

See THIS BBC account of Sunak's reaction to the troublemakers yesterday.
Rishi Sunak has condemned "violent, wholly unacceptable" actions by far-right groups and "Hamas sympathisers" after protests and clashes in London. About 300,000 pro-Palestinian protesters marched to call for a ceasefire, in the biggest UK rally since the Israel-Gaza war began. Counter-protesters made up the "vast majority" of the 126 arrests, police said. Most were to "prevent a breach of the peace". Clashes were reported by police at London's Cenotaph and in Chinatown. The prime minister condemned "violent, wholly unacceptable" actions by far-right groups and "Hamas sympathisers". "All criminality must be met with the full and swift force of the law," he said in a statement posted on X, formerly Twitter.
He evidently decided that stating the bleeding obvious wouldn't get him into trouble. The trouble-makers seem to have been from the far Right, More likely to be approved of by Braverman and Anderson.
Braverman didn't get her 'I told you so moment' (But there is always today's Remembrance Service at the Cenotaph) But at the moment she seems to have successfully defied Sunak and this diminishes him. As Laura Kuenssberg says elsewhere, Prime Ministers need to be feared in order to wield authority and Sunak has tried too hard to be all things to all men in the Party. Number 10 is not feared......

[PanBiker]

Could do worse. A bit light on personal detail though, and it does not seem to be readily available elsewhere.
He waves his hands up and down too much when he speaks in public. I think they teach it them on the course.
Must have a strong chance, but a lot can happen in the next year.

Intrigued to know where you are getting the information from David?

No arm waving at all at the Hustings and over the last year or so that I have had his acquaintance I never noticed it either. He is a pretty normal local bloke in my book and has had the new title for about 18 hours now and ready to take on our useless incumbent MP.

[Tripps]

Intrigued to know where you are getting the information from David?

Google - and a bit of persistence, and a lot of spare time. Local election results, Facebook and Twitter etc.

It was hand waving (palms open towards him, then up and down), not arm waving that iritates me. Nearly all politicians do it.

He stood for the council too in May, but was far from successful. I'd want to know a lot more about him before voting. If he wants to keep himself totally private - he's in the wrong business. There are clues to the possibility of a larger family political dynasty.

Graduate entry policeman make me smile, and think of Beiderbecke's Sgt (Later- Inspector) Hobson.

" Dominic Jephcott is a young, enthusiastic, graduate police officer. Well-spoken and knowledgeable about police procedure, he is however singularly incompetent – spending most of his duty hours investigating hypothetical crimes, and using his notes for his next thesis."

[PanBiker]

Google - and a bit of persistence, and a lot of spare time. Local election results, Facebook and Twitter etc.

Aha, I see, entry level stalker tools. Well done for the effort. Time will tell, he is young (relatively) and keen, can only give him a go. It will probably be the last time for my direct involvement.

[Tripps]

Aha, I see, entry level stalker tools.

Yes- just like everyone else these days, and there is no question of 'stalking'.
Perhaps an over developed sense of curiosity. What else did you think I had?
Saturday night is usually a low spot - I renewed my Driving Licence last week.

His public website seemed a good place to start - https://www.jonathanhinder.com/

The lady he chooses to be photographed with is Dame Nia Griffith, MP for Llanelli.

Poor result in the Local Ribble Valley election. All part of the learnng curve though. Ribble Valley

I'm sure the gaps in his CV will be filled in the next year, before the election, whenever it comes - but not by me.

[PanBiker]

The lady he chooses to be photographed with is Dame Nia Griffith, MP for Llanelli.

Indeed, and a bit further down canvassing teams in Barlick, Colne, Clitheroe and Nelson over the last few months. Lots more of that to go.

[Stanley]

I'm afraid I don't put anywhere near that effort into my selection of a candidate David. I work on the assumption it will be a lottery however good my research is and so go by instinct. (A Parliament as good as the 1947 Labour administration is a once in a lifetime occurrence, I am not sanguine about it happening again so don't get into too much angst about the selection of a candidate.)
Up to press this morning the political news is still being dominated by Braverman and I have an idea she will be pleased with that. See THIS report from the BBC.
Rishi Sunak is under intense pressure over Home Secretary Suella Braverman, after a weekend in which she was accused of emboldening far right activists who carried out violence on the streets of London. This is not the only major issue facing the prime minister - here are four reasons why this is will be a big week in Westminster.
Read on for more. The main item could possibly be the court decision on Rwanda as a destination for failed asylum seekers.
The thing that strikes me as an observer is that none of the prospects facing Sunak and his government are optimistic and none of them are anything to do with the economic and political problems we face as a nation. Further, nobody else in Cabinet is giving a straight answer when asked about Braverman's right wing hard line stance. They are all looking sideways at Sunak to see which side of the fence he comes down on. Problem with that is it's not at all certain that Sunak will give any opinion. He is just as likely to carry on and hope the furore dies down because any decision he takes will either anger his Rabid right wing or the moderates.

[Big Kev]

nobody else in Cabinet is giving a straight answer when asked about Braverman's right wing hard line stance. They are all looking sideways at Sunak to see which side of the fence he comes down on. Problem with that is it's not at all certain that Sunak will give any opinion. He is just as likely to carry on and hope the furore dies down because any decision he takes will either anger his Rabid right wing or the moderates.

He's sacked her.

[PanBiker]

Indeed he has, pity he had to be forced. An Ironic posting in the cabinet shuffle as well, That bloke Cameron who buggered up our membership of the EU has been made Foreign Secretary! They are scraping the bottom of the barrel.

[Tripps]

Good grief. . . . .
Cameron Greensill

What do we want? A general Election. When do we want it? Next Thursday.

[Stanley]

Quite David!

[Stanley]

I think we all knew that Sunak was having trouble controlling his ministers and evidently he has decided that there is only enough time left to do one major reshuffle of his sorry government before they are immersed in the thick of electioneering. (There is a school of thought that will say that this re-shuffle is in itself the start of the GE campaign.) I have a suspicion that part of his thinking bringing Cameron back is so that he can share responsibility with someone else for whatever the end result of the General Election is.
The political news will tell you all you need to know about the thought processes of a Party Leader forced hard up against unwelcome decisions by rebellious and incompetent ministers. I was drawn to THIS report that ministers are considering billions in cuts for benefits.
Ministers have drawn up large benefit changes for people who are unable to work due to health conditions, the BBC has learned. The changes, affecting hundreds of thousands of people from 2025, would save £4bn from the welfare budget. The proposals would see many more people forced to find work despite suffering from a range of physical and mental health conditions. The Department for Work and Pensions said reform would be gradual. The proposals follow the announcement in March that the government wants to scrap the controversial Work Capability Assessment, which is used to determine if people can receive additional benefits payments due to a health condition.
Eligible claimants currently receive £390 a month on top of their universal credit payment. If the proposals are enacted, people who, for instance, are in severe pain while awaiting an operation or have some mental health conditions, such as depression and anxiety, may not receive the additional payment but would be expected to look for work. The BBC understands the changes would initially affect new claimants. Existing recipients of the benefit payment would eventually be brought into the new system, towards the end of the decade, but would be given transitional protection if their benefits were to be cut.
I know I am a suspicious old bugger but what a good time to float a proposal alike this! A government short of money and with a stagnant economy cuts benefits to disabled people. If that isn't a definition of modern Tory governance I don't know what is!
One final thing, when Braverman shuffled off stage left she made menacing comments about us hearing more of her (and presumably her rabid right wing friends). Mr Sunak could be in for interesting times.....

[PanBiker]

Lancashire Telegraph - Jonathan Hinder

[Tripps]

I did a long post earler then thought better of it, and deleted it. Happens quite often -lucky you.

In it were the words

"I think William Hague is involved in this somewhere. Don't ask me why".

Looks like I wasn't far wrong - here from The Telegraph -

"William Hague: I told David Cameron return to politics was a great idea
Former foreign secretary denies he masterminded shock appointment but was aware of ex-PM’s move",

And there was I dismissing conspiracy theories that some mysterious cabal made the decisions, and thinking that we lived in some sort od democracy, and that 'we the people' chose who ruled us. How quaint.

After reading Suella's letter below - I would not rule out that Cameron is being lined up as a 'caretaker' leader for when Sunak is deposed, which may be sooner than I had thought. He would surely not accept being Leader of the Opposition after their inevitable forthcoming election defeat.

PS Later that same day - Suella Braverman's resignation sacking letter. Worth posting in full I'd say - It's a corker.

Thank you for your phone call yesterday morning in which you asked me to leave Government. While disappointing, this is for the best.

It has been my privilege to serve as Home Secretary and deliver on what the British people have sent us to Westminster to do. I want to thank all of those civil servants, police, Border Force officers and security professionals with whom I have worked and whose dedication to public safety is exemplary. I am proud of what we achieved together: delivering on our manifesto pledge to recruit 20,000 new police officers and enacting new laws such as the Public Order Act 2023 and the National Security Act 2023. I also led a programme of reform: on anti-social behaviour, police dismissals and standards, reasonable lines of enquiry, grooming gangs, knife crime, non-crime hate incidents and rape and serious sexual offences. And I am proud of the strategic changes that I was delivering to Prevent, Contest, serious organised crime and fraud. I am sure that this work will continue with the new ministerial team.

As you know, I accepted your offer to serve as Home Secretary in October 2022 on certain conditions. Despite you having been rejected by a majority of Party members during the summer leadership contest and thus having no personal mandate to be Prime Minister, I agreed to support you because of the firm assurances you gave me on key policy priorities.

These were, among other things:
1. Reduce overall legal migration as set out in the 2019 manifesto through, inter alia, reforming the international students route and increasing salary thresholds on work visas;
2. Include specific ‘notwithstanding clauses’ into new legislation to stop the boats, i.e. exclude the operation of the European Convention on Human Rights, Human Rights Act and other international law that had thus far obstructed progress on this issue;
3. Deliver the Northern Ireland Protocol and Retained EU Law Bills in their then existing form and timetable;
4. Issue unequivocal statutory guidance to schools that protects biological sex, safeguards single sex spaces, and empowers parents to know what is being taught to their children.
This was a document with clear terms to which you agreed in October 2022 during your second leadership campaign. I trusted you. It is generally agreed that my support was a pivotal factor in winning the leadership contest and thus enabling you to become Prime Minister.

For a year, as Home Secretary I have sent numerous letters to you on the key subjects contained in our agreement, made requests to discuss them with you and your team, and put forward proposals on how we might deliver these goals. I worked up the legal advice, policy detail and action to take on these issues. This was often met with equivocation, disregard and a lack of interest.

You have manifestly and repeatedly failed to deliver on every single one of these key policies. Either your distinctive style of government means you are incapable of doing so. Or, as I must surely conclude now, you never had any intention of keeping your promises.

These are not just pet interests of mine. They are what we promised the British people in our 2019 manifesto which led to a landslide victory. They are what people voted for in the 2016 Brexit Referendum.

Our deal was no mere promise over dinner, to be discarded when convenient and denied when challenged.

I was clear from day one that if you did not wish to leave the ECHR, the way to securely and swiftly deliver our Rwanda partnership would be to block off the ECHR, the HRA and any other obligations which inhibit our ability to remove those with no right to be in the UK. Our deal expressly referenced ‘notwithstanding clauses’ to that effect.

Your rejection of this path was not merely a betrayal of our agreement, but a betrayal of your promise to the nation that you would do “whatever it takes” to stop the boats.
At every stage of litigation I cautioned you and your team against assuming we would win. I repeatedly urged you to take legislative measures that would better secure us against the possibility of defeat. You ignored these arguments. You opted instead for wishful thinking as a comfort blanket to avoid having to make hard choices. This irresponsibility has wasted time and left the country in an impossible position.

If we lose in the Supreme Court, an outcome that I have consistently argued we must be prepared for, you will have wasted a year and an Act of Parliament, only to arrive back at square one. Worse than this, your magical thinking – believing that you can will your way through this without upsetting polite opinion-has meant you have failed to prepare any sort of credible ‘Plan B’. I wrote to you on multiple occasions setting out what a credible Plan B would entail, and making clear that unless you pursue these proposals, in the event of defeat, there is no hope of flights this side of an election. I received no reply from you.

I can only surmise that this is because you have no appetite for doing what is necessary, and therefore no real intention of fulfilling your pledge to the British people.
If, on the other hand, we win in the Supreme Court, because of the compromises that you insisted on in the Illegal Migration Act, the Government will struggle to deliver our Rwanda partnership in the way that the public expects. The Act is far from secure against legal challenge. People will not be removed as swiftly as I originally proposed. The average claimant will be entitled to months of process, challenge, and appeal. Your insistence that Rule 39 indications are binding in international law – against the views of leading lawyers, as set out in the House of Lords will leave us vulnerable to being thwarted yet again by the Strasbourg Court.

Another cause for disappointment – and the context for my recent article in The Times – has been your failure to rise to the challenge posed by the increasingly vicious antisemitism and extremism displayed on our streets since Hamas’s terrorist atrocities of 7th October.

I have become hoarse urging you to consider legislation to ban the hate marches and help stem the rising tide of racism, intimidation and terrorist glorification threatening community cohesion. Britain is at a turning point in our history and faces a threat of radicalisation and extremism in a way not seen for 20 years. I regret to say that your response has been uncertain, weak, and lacking in the qualities of leadership that this country needs. Rather than fully acknowledge the severity of this threat, your team disagreed with me for weeks that the law needed changing.

As on so many other issues, you sought to put off tough decisions in order to minimise political risk to yourself. In doing so, you have increased the very real risk these marches present to everyone else.

In October of last year you were given an opportunity to lead our country. It is a privilege to serve and one we should not take for granted. Service requires bravery and thinking of the common good. It is not about occupying the office as an end in itself.

Someone needs to be honest: your plan is not working, we have endured record election defeats, your resets have failed and we are running out of time. You need to change course urgently.

I may not have always found the right words, but I have always striven to give voice to the quiet majority that supported us in 2019. I have endeavoured to be honest and true to the people who put us in these privileged positions.

I will, of course, continue to support the Government in pursuit of policies which align with an authentic conservative
agenda.”“

[Stanley]

As you say David, a notable resignation letter in which she comprehensively rubbishes his premiership, I wonder whether she is implying that she could have done better?
The BBC have made her letter the headline political news... See HERE for their version. I get the feeling reading this that her sacking is unfinished business as far as she is concerned and much now depends on how many Tories agree with her....
Probably of more immediate interest to the voters will be the Autumn Statement, in affect a budget, that happens a week today on the 22nd of November. The political classes will be in seventh heaven for a while chattering about the re-shuffle but what J Hunt does in a week will have more effect on ordinary people......