Westminstenders: The Brexit Apprentice

[RedToothBrush]

Theresa May is increasing looking like she is running an episode of the Apprentice with two teams trying to compete in their plan for Brexit. Complete with the obligatory reprehensible contestants.

On one side we have Team Creationists intent on hard Brexit and on the other we have Team Sensibles desperate to get a softer deal.
May herself has been held hostage by seasoned expert negotiators the DUP. Once No 10 has reported the deal was done, only for the DUP to say it wasn’t. Then it said, it would be settled today. But the DUP disagreed and said ‘the weekend’. Now its 'next week'.

Meanwhile the Queen has been messed about with a scapegoat over when her Queen’s Speech will be. It’s likely to be a week on Monday.
Meanwhile the Brexit department is also in chaos.

The Number two in the department was sacked and replaced by a Remainer, and the number three quit amongst reports that he no longer thought Brexit was achievable and that there was no way that the Great Repeal Act could pass through the Lords. He has been replaced by the Head of the infamous Arch-Brexit Whatsapp group.

Oh and Gove got hired. Nuff said on that one.

After some slight back tracking from David Davis, Hard Brexit is still on in all its glory. Negotiations are going ahead next week. Well that’s what we are saying. The EU, on the other hand, don’t won’t to go ahead until we have an officially sworn in government. Which seems pretty fair enough.

Tune in to find out which Team wins this week’ The Brexit Apprentice

Boris Johnson is welcome to keep digging if he wishes. That's what he is doing.

I wonder if in their minds, it's tied to the claims that it was a "eco" requirement that the cladding was used, thereby making the EU responsible? Easily debunked but that would require giving up forcing every story to fit dearly-held narratives.

I'm watching Brexit Wife Swap on catchup.

The Green Remain Wife askes the Leave Husband where he gets his information about immigrants taking all the benefits. He says : "Yeah you read it in the papers don't you?"

There is a petition going round asking for an inquest rather than a public enquiry intomthe grenfell tragedy
www.change.org/p/uk-parliament-this-government-must-carry-out-an-inquest-into-the-grenfell-tragedy-not-a-public-inquiry

This could be important. The lawyer who represented residents from a previous tower block fire says an inquest is much preferable to a public inquiry because it is a legal process and more independent of government.

There's a familiar face at the top of this article on the impact of fire cuts. BoJo is unspeakable. It isn't Labour that is making political capital but anyone who DOES have an example of that, do post. Is there no end to their shamelessness in promoting a vacuum of accountability and shoving blame is more important than explaining why he felt it would not endanger lives?

www.writeyou.co.uk/dangerous_tory_cuts_to_our_fire_rescue_service_need_to_end

Boris really isn't hitting the right tone is he. Really Boris did you need to squeal about yourself now?

Adam Wagner‏Verified account
@AdamWagner1
Follow
More

1. Thread on public inquiries versus inquests from someone who has acted in many of both #GrenfellTower
2. I don’t really agree with the people saying inquests are better for victims than public inquiries. That is not my experience
3. Key thing to understand: both inquests and public inquiries are independent from government. Both likely to be chaired by senior judge.
4. Another key thing: neither is allowed to "apportion" civil or criminal blame. Both may have to wait for criminal investigation
5. As @joshuarozenberg says, inquests would be suspended behind a public inquiry. There may also be civil (damages) claims after inquiry
6. Correct you will only have a jury in an inquest (though not always). My experience is it doesn’t necessarily make them better for victims
7. Aside from jury, large (Hillsborough-style) inquest OR public inquiry look the same. Both have human rights duty to expose state failings
8. For people saying victims will be better treated at inquest: not necessarily. Child abuse inquiry not a good example as it is badly run
9. Inquiries I have done (Baha Mousa, Al-Sweady, Mid Staffs) took great care to listen to views of victims - through testimony and lawyers

10. Up to inquiry chair or coroner to decide who is a “core participant” or “interested person”, but can be fights over this in both 11. Ultimately, Public Inquiry probably more suited vehicle to dealing with wider systemic issues. That’s what they are for. /end

According the Emma Dent-Coad the cladding was basically to smarten the outside as the council want to develop the area and build new non-social housing. That was prioritised over the interior.

Boris Johnson is simply having an enormous tantrum as his long held dream of becoming PM evaporates into thin air. Give him enough rope....

And of course Sadiq Kahn is showing him up. He won't like that.

flip agreed. Disgraceful little man

They also want to be seen to be 'regenerating' council estates.

Sorry Boris is the disgraceful little man
Not Sadiq who is only one of a few thatvis different any leadership atm

Boris simply doesn't get that people want facts and answers. Saying that the fire services got there so quickly IS a fact that we should be extremely grateful for. There might be a reason for cutting fire services and risk in London and various statistics and all that would at least explain cuts. But he doesn't do that, his get stuffed speech is everywhere so he feels attacked and needs to blame someone else and maybe (because Khan got a rough ride yesterday), he feels he has a target in his sights. Despicable.

Boris: Get stuffed!

Yes they got there quickly. But they had to call in reinforcements from Surrey and Essex.

What would happen if we had a major incendiary terrorist attack?

Tatiana absolutely not disagreeing with you. Firefighters working far longer than is considered safe for them also what might have happened because there were no local reinforcements. It's amazing they got there so quick given the circumstances but that's only ONE fact and in the context of the service generally (reinforcements from Surrey and Essex), totally out of context. It's contemptible.

He had no rights to claim anything about the Fire service. He is Foreign secretary. It's not cricket to comment on previous roles Boris as you well know

Also there will be a full internal enquiry about performan etc. Yes a truck was there within 6 mins. But how long until full compliment? Some residents claim that attempts to rescue and use hoses were delayed. This will need to be looked into

Boris you are dispeciable

Wasn't taking issue with you Citroen but with Boris's disingenuous comments, following your own.

Bojo keeps digging doesn't he?
Let him.
The disgusting man.

Take a look at this. It's about Boris claim that fire deaths reduced. He changed the way they were calculated

twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/875710145845710848

Letters sent out on 14th (The day of the tragedy) by the Management company have arrived at the flats opposite Grenfell warning about anti-social behaviour.

Oh you say, they could have been dated early and put in the post before the event.

Paul Brand‏ @PaulBrandITV
Incredibly, people in flats opposite #Grenfell today received letter warning them about anti-social behaviour, threatening legal action.
Residents here are shaking with rage. One woman ran up to me screaming through gritted teeth. Incredibly it was hand-delivered by TMO.

And this from a London GLA councillor

In @CityHallLabour 2013-14 GLA budget, I allocated funds for sprinkler systems. Boris & the Tories voted it down. t.co/thBWyaQDK1

Christ red it's almost like they want them to riot do they can clear them all away after
..
And I'm no conspiracy nutbag. Where is their humanity. No time to help.or organise but are holding meetings to organise threats

I knew what you meant @ever

I think reports of his intelligence have definitely been overestimated. By quite some way.

There might be a reason for cutting fire services and risk in London and various statistics and all that would at least explain cuts.

As a rule fire safety has improved and there are less fires - due to better regulations and better fire safety. This HAS reduced the number of fire related incidents. The role of the fire and rescue service has moved more to one that is about rescue from car accidents in the last 30 years.

But can you spot the obvious flaw here in the context of the Grenfell incident: the reduction in the number of fires and deaths, is reliant on good standards of regulation and good fire prevention measures...

If you don't ensure that money is there for that, and for the fire services to support and promote fire safety then you risk ending up with a knock on effect from the 'efficiency saving'.

The value of health and safety only ever become really apparent when it goes all too horribly wrong.

That's the point.