Depends on your definition of elite I guess, but she is an MP, former long-term high profile government minister and TV personality of sorts.That's pretty elite in terms of profile, reach and influence.
Westminster Politics
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
My question was genuine as i read a brief biography that she comes from working class worked in NGOs wnvironments and she went up to the ranks. She became elite because she is in politics? Or is not liked because she is tory? I dont know her at all. Thats why i ask. It might not be liked because is not from the politcal spectrum that you like (not particularly you i mean) but IMO elite is something else
I know what you mean. She's fairly dim and has more been a useful idiot to the likes of Johnson, who she was fiercely loyal to.
It's debatable how much influence she had, although she nearly sold off (and probably destroyed) Channel 4, one of the very few TV stations which has consistently criticised the government over its record.
She's certainly not conventional elite, ie Etonian, moneyed background etc...more a Lee Anderson-style working class right winger they can dangle in front of the masses.
The elite is a tongue in cheek comment who think everything is dominated by the elite such as Linekar etc.
Can’t afford £1000 rent but I am all of a sudden able to afford it when it is frozen at that. Great solution, why did no one think of it before!
Well what do you suggest?
don't think about more supply and prioritise density of supply.....just keep subsidising demand!! fecking morons.
But we all know why supply is never taken up as the major priority issue... NIMBY's worrying about foreigners coming into the neighbour and "disturbing the tranquility", and home-owners that are desperate to justify their unsustainable mortages based solely on ludicrous house price increases.
But we all know why supply is never taken up as the major priority issue... NIMBY's worrying about foreigners coming into the neighbour and "disturbing the tranquility", and home-owners that are desperate to justify their unsustainable mortages based solely on ludicrous house price increases.
tbh, if the question was actually framed as 'fixing the problem tomorrow' then i sympathise. However that comes across so poorly and weak. That is a golden opportunity to push labour policy.
that's basically my point. If the question was stupid, i sympathise. Obviously no opposition can have policy enacted "overnight' to fix the mess you lot are in. However that is usually the opportunity to pivot the actual policy, which was completely missed as UK labour are playing so "small target" that they are missing every golden opportunity.
The man who eats his own books is now into eugenics
I think the problem. Is you need a vision to have a policy. Not only empty electioneering which seems to be Starmers strategy alongside purging any dissenting voices from the party.
That anyone can believe that Labour don’t have policy and direction to make things better… is evidence of the right wing press (ie everything bar one or two publications) suggesting as much.
Labour stated policy and targeted doctrine is still left of Blair and Brown. It’s not even close either.
Labour stated policy and targeted doctrine is still left of Blair and Brown. It’s not even close either.
Just don’t see why voting Labour wouldn’t be an automatic reflex action after having the Tories in power for so long. Why would anyone who is left politically even think twice?
Why could not the left coalesce behind Labour to, at the bare minimum, remove as many Tories as possible?
What in the actual feck?
I'd say it's more to do with the fact that Labour barely talk about their (significant) policies tbh, and trying to get Starmer to state anything clearly about a policy before it has been put through 15 focus groups is like trying to teach a warthog how to tapdance.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65301099
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is being investigated by Parliament's standards watchdog over a possible failure to declare an interest.
Mr Sunak is being investigated over whether a declaration of interest was "open and frank", under rules set out by the commissioner for standards.
The BBC understands the probe relates to a childcare firm his wife has shares in.
The commissioner decides whether an MP has broken rules after an inquiry.
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is being investigated by Parliament's standards watchdog over a possible failure to declare an interest.
Mr Sunak is being investigated over whether a declaration of interest was "open and frank", under rules set out by the commissioner for standards.
The BBC understands the probe relates to a childcare firm his wife has shares in.
The commissioner decides whether an MP has broken rules after an inquiry.
You could make a good maths question out of that. If your wife has 10% shares in a company, and they get increased funding by x amount, how much would you stand to gain?
Because a vote for Starmer gives him and his politics legitimacy, but doesn't actually solve anything.
This country has so many issues and all Starmer is proposing is austerity mk 2, a continuation of the Tory's hateful immigration policies, and less corruption. He's also worryingly authoritarian.
More so than Tories already in power?
Hell, less corruption sounds like a positive step.
He'd probably run them very close on that front if his background is anything to suggest.
Going into a ransacked premises and taking something from it is looting surely? Should the CPS not have prosecuted? Are the CPS responsible for law regarding deportation?
Theft or Burglary both carry penalties sufficient for the deportation threshold.
Theft or Burglary both carry penalties sufficient for the deportation threshold.
Fair enough if that's how you want to look at it but you can't blame me for being slightly worried that a man who pushed for tougher sentences for trivial offences is potentially going to be PM in a country where protesting is illegal.
(Go on Jezza!)
Would Starmer / Labour work to reduce / remove those anti-protesting laws if they were in power?
Doubt it.
Christ, that sucks.
Are we discussing the post-riots? If so, wasn't that an extraordinary event that required extraordinary action?
Better get back to stopping the boats