Thread 30 Starmer - Magic Roundabouts

[DuncinToffee]

Pull up a chair for some friendly chit chat about politics and beyond

Taxes optional but greatly appreciated.

Previous thread
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/5395939-thread-29-starmer-paint-your-bandwagon?page=1

plus the Birmingham six, Guildford four and Lord Dennings "appalling vista"

So do I. It’s the one I always hear in my head.

I’m about to go for my fortnightly ecg. I have to lay still and quiet - it’ll be hard with an ear worm when I want to be jigging to the music in my head 🫣😂🤪

Also still willing to pay Afghanistan and Iran and cutting SEND budget as transport is encouraging lazy parents to stay in bed

In the Scandanvia with Simon Reeves series he does cover this in quite a bit of depth, including the pluses and minuses of their approach.

Now you’re really making me feel guilty. 😥

Some reports that Badenoch might have been creative with the truth about her offer to study medicine at Stanford.

I'll start a new thread soon, let's just fill this thread and hope for the best with the next 🐿

Me too.

That’s all because of the stuff about Rayner. A sign of intent.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/5402603-thread-31-starmer-september-rain

Obvious flagrant legal breaches based on discrimination plus you can't rock into a country in armoured vehicles.

Yeah because your disabled child will get themselves up and to to school 🤦🏼‍♀️

Im not sure what’s worse - that they say these things to people buy into them.

As for funding the Taliban and Iran - of course that will improve national security 🤦🏼‍♀️

Where do they find these people?

Is the Stanford story the beginning of moves to oust Badenoch?

I prefer Badenoch over Jenrick/Philps

"Yeah because your disabled child will get themselves up and to to school 🤦🏼‍♀️"
😂Yeah, the mornings are an absolute breeze.

This point about the ECHR is missing what Straw’s expertise is here and shouldn’t be ignored. He implemented the ECHR into UK national law via the HRA. Now I don’t think he’s wrong. You can provide a nearly the same guarantee to the GFA and Ireland. That is legally possible. And frankly, if the alternative is a British government that is Reform, you might think it quite sensible to protect the effect.

I read the Policy Exchange report. It seemed me to pretty credible. The objections are not legal but political. Politics changes. Do not think the GFA immutable. Or any treaty where the UK is a party. History tells that is completely wrong.

Reform are careful not to touch social services budgets. Throwing dementia patients out of care homes because their children are too lazy to look after them doesn't sit well with the public.

This is just sophistry. I cannot understand how any academic has got drawn into this quagmire. All it means is 'the UK can break or try to renegotiate the two treaties and the principles that underpin them'. Of course that's true! One might as well say 'moon made of rock'. So what? 🤷‍♂️

https://bsky.app/profile/gsoh31.bsky.social/post/3lxr7rweh4s2b

There is a lot of sophistry in the Policy Exchange GFA report, especially parsing sources to give an inaccurate impression. Here I'm cited discussing the impact of the the GFA on the NI legal order as a whole and it is presented as authority for the commitments only binding NI's devolved bodies:

https://bsky.app/profile/colinmurray.bsky.social/post/3lxrbxn2gr22x

I was thought this.

"All it means is 'the UK can break or try to renegotiate the two treaties and the principles that underpin them'. Of course that's true! One might as well say 'moon made of rock'. So what?"

Yep.

Where do they find these people?

In the gutter.

Good

Bye