UKH

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/03/phillip-lee-quits-tories-l...

Whatever effect it has, watching that video was deeply satisfying.

In reply to tehmarks:

I’m happy he has joined the opposition to Bojo, but I’m a Liberal Democrat and he doesn’t seem to be very liberal. Sharing a party with someone who campaigns to ban HIV positive migrants from entering the UK makes me uncomfortable. Couldn’t Change UK or whatever they are called now have taken him? We live in strange, strange times.

In reply to tehmarks:

I can't even feel a glimmer of pleasure at the slow collapse of this ghastly government and it's failed project for dread of what comes next. They've infected us with their virus, with or without them we're fu*ked now it's off their backbenches and in the wild.

jk

In reply to tehmarks:

He’s still got a majority once you count the sex offender vote.

jcm

In reply to Gone:

I'm sorry to side track here. But do you believe it is a good idea to allow HIV positive migrants into the country then? 

In reply to elliott92:

I thought we'd gotten over this sort of stigma long ago? What's the difference between an HIV-positive migrant and an HIV-positive Brit?

In reply to jkarran:

Why? I can't imagine it could be any worse than no deal and five years of a Johnson government. What comes next could be very positive.

In reply to tehmarks:

At the risk of being awarded a few dislikes... there’s a slim chance that an HIV positive Brit might have paid a few taxes to help with the burden of healthcare. 

In reply to birdie num num:

There's also a slim chance that a migrant will contribute positively to our economy and society, and so also help with the burden of healthcare. Because surely our immigration system already copes with health tourism, so that surely can't really be a concern?

In reply to birdie num num:

Ahh the mysterious schrodingers migrant both simultaneously sponging off the state and taking our jobs....

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Not once he's sacked 21 rebels tonight.

Jk

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Not any more he hasn't.... it now stands at -21 by my count

In reply to tehmarks:

Who knows? 

I just felt the impulse to add to some of the inane comments on this thread.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Johnson appears to be cornered, his career and ego about to become parliament's plaything as he's compelled to break all his recent electioneering promises in the run up to an election. People are going to get very dangerous.

Jk

In reply to balmybaldwin:

Isn't it -42? Each loss to the opposition benches changes the difference between government and opposition by 2.

In reply to balmybaldwin:

-42 ish if they're minded to vote against him. There must have been a few Labour and independants in with the government tonight.

Jk

In reply to jkarran:

Yes, it's going to be very nasty for a while but I do think there might now be light at the end of the tunnel - without a GE, nothing really changes and the paralysis and acrimony just goes on.

In reply to tehmarks:

I watched the whole pageant on BBC Parliament because I wanted to see it in real time rather than via reporting in the terrible lefty rag that I usually rely on.

My first reaction, before even celebrating the positive result, was that parliament urgently needs modernising. It might be less entertaining but our representatives should be able to vote on iPads in 10 seconds without the speaker yelling about ayes, nays and divisions.

They aren’t very productive are they?

In reply to Robert Durran:

so it does....

In reply to jkarran:

I'd imagine the first one he's going to break - well, not counting the one about not proroguing Parliament, obviously - will be the one about not seeking an electoral pact with Farage.

jcm

In reply to Robert Durran:

I'm struggling to see what you've got in mind. I guess Scotland have lost some Tories after Davidson quit, so things looking pretty great for the SNP. Given the state of the UK, I'd be looking afresh at independence myself if I was in Scotland.

There's enough angry leavers to make sure we can't possibly get a reasonable government elected - although I'm not convinced there's enough to be governed by a majority Brexit-Tory party. So some kind of deeply divided hung Parliament, it is then, for a change. I guess there's an outside chance of a 2nd referendum, but I can't see a positive outcome from that: either we still leave the EU, probably by the crap WA; or Brexit is overturned by a small margin and there's an appalling backlash and further rise of the far right.

In reply to pasbury:

I watched most of it on Parliamentary TV too (as I'm sure a lot of people here did). Particularly good speeches from Hilary Benn, Ian Blackford, Tom Brake, Caroline Lucas, and Anna Soubry, I thought.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Well, I admit I've remained obstinately optimistic ever since the 2017 election, but I'm envisaging a remain coalition, a second referendum leading to revoking article 50. Then a big shake up of UK politics, perhaps, with the tory party self destructed, some sort of proportional representation. Working for positive reform from within the EU, working to address the problems which led to Brexit.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Just supposing a future referendum gave Remain more than a small margin? Anything over 52% would be significant, and if it got up to about 56% + it would surely be the end of the argument, because it would then be double the alleged 'huge' victory of the Brexiters in the first referendum. In that case, I think it would be a bit like ending smoking in pubs (which many people said was going to be a huge issue): I think the whole thing could conceivably fizzle out in a few days. Because the vast amount of Leave voters in 2016 were not very extreme, committed neo-fascists, and hadn't got a big agenda of hatred.

In reply to Robert Durran:

I really do hope so!

In reply to birdie num num:

There is, but the UK has already decided to help with the burden of overseas HIV infections via its overseas aid budget. To say that we will help fund overseas treatment, but you aren’t welcome in our country, so please stay overseas, is horribly stigmatising. There are many people who could contribute many great things to our country who happen to be HIV positive, and a blanket refusal is unjust and often ridiculous considering that someone who knows they are HIV positive is likely to be having treatment to stop them passing it on. The USA used to have such a discriminatory policy, and health authorities welcomed it when Obama revoked the ban as it was not seen to be helpful from a public health and disease prevention standpoint. The requirement for a negative test would just, in many parts of the world, enable corrupt doctors to provide a negative test paperwork without an actual test. As HIV is not transmissible once an effective antiviral medication is at work, the way to treat this epidemic is for new migrants to be able to discuss their sexual history with a GP on entry to the country without stigma, for accurate testing and treatment if necessary.

”Illness is neither an indulgence for which people have to pay, nor an offence for which they should be penalised, but a misfortune the cost of which should be shared by the community.” Nye Bevan

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

You’re far too cynical about BJ. He’s at least declared his intentions.

The more grotesque alliance would be the mysterious Jeremy Corbyn..(or JC mysterious) Wee Jimmie Krankie and a few political transvestites...transient defectors. Now There’s a government to relish.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

I think essentially disenfranchising that much of the electorate would be destructive. I doubt they would see it as the end of the argument.

I'm afraid I would think that losing a 2nd referendum would radicalise people who before 2016 felt alienated and screwed over by globalisation, voted leave, but were normal. I think the far right would have a field day recruiting from that pool.

In reply to jkarran:

17 I think signed some sort of "labour for a deal" letter today. I presume the usual lexiters

In reply to Robert Durran:

I like the idea of all of this, and I don't know what will happen so perhaps I should be optimistic, just for the sake of it.

I really can't go this far. My view on the problems that led to Brexit is that they're not fixable. People are unhappy with the society they live in - they've not got the kind of jobs they want, the kind of schools they want for their kids, the kind of healthcare they think they should get from the NHS, etc. The nationalism expressed by Brexit is rooted in a fundamental unhappiness with the way the world is, and it's not going to be fixed by changing the EU, since it was nothing to do with the EU in the first place.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

You are right. Nothing good can come out of this, whichever way it goes. On the other hand, can you imagine anything good coming out of these very same people losing their jobs and nothing in their lives improving, after the government chases a extreme Brexit and enacts the most deregulated economy they can get? Can you imagine how dangerous that would get?

Basically, the worst case scenario of one outcome is extremism and potential civil war, while the worst case of the other is outright insurrection.

Letting this genie out of the bottle in this extremely divisive way and doing nothing to bring people together in the aftermath was a catastrophically moronic idea.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

They'll be radicalised and mobilised just the same when leaving makes their lives worse. They'll be offered a scapegoat, the eurosceptic bastards and their press won't bear the blame.

Ultimately we have to choose the least worst option then work to solve the problems which lead to brexit and those of the aftermath, whichever path we take.

How Cameron sleeps at night...

jk

In reply to Gone:

There may be good grounds for the ban given many who contract HIV in the 3rd world do so through the casual acceptance of incredibly unsafe practices and continue to harbour some very odd views when it comes to contagions.  Is it really right to knowingly introduce that risk into a UK population who assume a different approach to rick from their sexual partners?

On the issue of being made to satisfy medical requirements to immigrate, an array of tests is quite standard for any immigrants to many countries.  I had to go through the arrival x-ray process for TB when I first came to the UK on a working visa.  An awkward event, a little unnerving, but I don't see it as particularly illiberal; the country is more than welcome to set any manner of policies at its border and I don't think they can be so easily categorised.

At the very least, its not black and white and worth considering there is more than one valid opinion on this sort of thing.  It's hardly damning of the Lib Dems to accept that sort of plurality into their midst.

In reply to ebdon:

I know... it sounds like some kind of paradoxical thought experiment, but as incredible as it may seem, most of us, in the 1980’s, drew our dole and beavered away for cash on the black economy.

In reply to Pan Ron:

Poor old Rick. Always the scapegoat...

In reply to tehmarks:

Imagine what might have happened if we'd had an even remotely credible opposition through this fiasco. They could have absolutely cleaned up and put the Tories out of power for a decade.  Even with a second bite at the cherry it doesn't look like that'll happen.

In reply to birdie num num:

It’s impossible to be too cynical about Johnson. He doesn’t have a fibre of integrity in him. 

In reply to pasbury:

I did too; I clicked on what I thought was a video in a Guardian article, but it was actually a link to the live stream. I like our odd traditional quirks - but you are right, they aren't productive and Parliament needs modernising. Before that though, it needs MPs to stop acting like schoolchildren, falling asleep in the House, and generally not appearing to take their role seriously. It's like a bizarre private members' club to which the country is held ransom.

In reply to tehmarks:

I'm glad to say I saw it live and quite a lot of the evening debate

Ken Clarke looked like a sleepy Teddy Bear but slowly worked up to a Roman Candle spitting ridicule on the Boris-Cummings-JRM project.

JRM lolling back on the benches was rather bizarre

It felt as if normal sensible politician grown-ups were making a come-back - heartening

In reply to Pan Ron:

this is solved by education not blanket bans. The immigrants need decent healthcare advice, plus the UK population with the benefit of a longer education here need to know not to make assumptions. Are you saying there are people who would take precautions with a holiday romance in Africa but not if the African person is their new neighbour?

TB is not HIV. First off, it is curable. Not only would you not have to worry that a positive test would deny you entry for the rest of your life, separate you from family that have already migrated,  mess up your work career, etc. But also, HIV is a bigger issue amongst gay migrants. This policy would disproportionately affect gay people more than straight people, and putting up more barriers for gay people from outside uk is not what the world needs right now. Just encourages homophobia entrenched in society.

In reply to Pan Ron:

Wow. What about all the people who contracted HIV in the womb, from compromised medical work, in their marriages or who lacked sexual health education they've subsequently received as part of their treatment? You'd have saved a lot of words if you just said they're savages.

jk

In reply to Pan Ron:

I had have an HIV test and a chest X-ray for TB when I went to work abroad.  Ironically, I was  going to work at Tygerberg Hospital in an area of Cape Town that had one the highest rates of HIV and TB infection in the world.

In reply to jkarran:

I believe I speak for Brexit Britain when I say; f*ck ‘em.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Then you are wrong, again.

In reply to Pan Ron:

This begs the question, is it true that many who contract HIV in the 3rd world do so through the casual acceptance of incredibly unsafe practices and continue to harbour some very odd views when it comes to contagions?  A textbook demonstration of rhetorical argument using circular logic on your part.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Bread and circuses. That's why a clown is the PM. We can play that game too - maybe a national holiday commemorating the brave people who voted to give a kick in the pants to the EU. Celebrations for all - it will be mandatory that everyone flies the flag on their homes and on their person, and carries a crooked banana in their right hand.

I'm only half-joking - we will need some kind of measures to counter the resentment, but the kind of actual changes needed as you say - will not happen. To protect the thin fabric we'll need some kind of gestures and a certain amount of window dressing.

In reply to SenzuBean:

*bendy banana

Glad to have made this important contribution.

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Fixed - thanks

In reply to birdie num num:

Why?

In reply to Pan Ron:

Or to summarise your argument more succinctly "Where de white women?"

ha ha.

In reply to tehmarks:

Those of us finding a certain amount of joy in watching the Tory party gradually destroy itself (and yes, I am one such person) - it would be worth taking a moment to consider what this could really mean.

The UK political system is not set up well to handle multiple significant parties, it's pretty much built around the notion of there just being two main ones.

The Tories exist first and foremost to represent right-wing voters in the UK; they don't, on the whole, create such voters and those voters won't just vanish if the Tories implode.

So what next..?

Electoral reform to something properly supporting multiple smaller parties operating in coalition, with new and old parties representing better-defined positions, sounds good - but I'll believe it if I see it. And even if we do head that way, it won't happen instantly.

In reply to skog:

Reform can't happen while there's a vested interest to the contrary. I'd say that a large part of the vested interest to the contrary is about to partially implode - which in the long term can only be a good thing, even if the short-term consequences are unpleasant, dangerous even.

Brexit has made clear that our system as it stands is a shit way of representing the population. I'd like to think that, having been highlighted, it won't survive the next decade.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Nothing much may still change - you still have Corbyn et al wanting to 'respect the will of the people'.

In reply to Blanche DuBois:

I’m not sure. It was an impulse.

In reply to Yanis Nayu:

Perhaps. But Johnson is necessary. Without him, nothing of any significance would happen.

In reply to birdie num num:

Pardon?  I feel like I've just overheard a fragment of a conversation and caught the most improbable eavesdropping ever.

In reply to birdie num num:

Good point! Boris is channeling Guy Fawkes...lighting some fireworks under Westminster.

In reply to Dave Garnett:

Birdie should have stuck to trying to be be funny. 

In reply to SenzuBean: and carries a crooked banana in their right hand

 The old joke going back to my youth ran

Why is a Labour Government like a banana?

IT starts off green, turns yellow and is never straight

In reply to birdie num num:

I’m interpreting “things of significance” here as the attempted destruction of his party and country. I guess it’s significant...

In reply to birdie num num:

Which Johnson? Hope it's not this one https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49594793

The family dinner at ma and pa Johnson's might be a frosty affair on Sunday.

In reply to Offwidth:

I'm finding some of his recent witterings to be fairly hilarious!