Westminstenders: Throwing Boomerangs

[RedToothBrush]

British politics and media in a nutshell.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boomerang_effect_(psychology)#Political_beliefs

No EU progress, no discussion. Just this. Keep everyone in line by bouncing boomerangs.

Disaster capitalism looms, they just have to get us to the edge of the cliff before the centre reforms. That's it.

If the legal roads to stop Brexit are closed as David Allen Green says, then how do you force the political flood gates to open, especially with both the far left and the far right using micro-aggression against the public to keep the centre ground weak?

Answers on a ballot paper on 3rd May.

There has been no evidence of successful interference.

The response is do defensive. Who signs off on these responses?

Surely there are fair minded Tories who share concerns about both the Russian interference and the CA expenditure and influence? Regardless of your remain/ leave stance you can be concerned about psychographic profiling and bots.

The only way to get evidence of successful interference is for people to come forward and say I was undecided about my vote. Then I received this message from say BeLeave and that made up my mind for me.

The question of breach of spending limits isn't addressed and isn't strictly relevant to that particular petition of course.

• so defensive not do defensive.

No - and you’re already making me glad I missed it. Did Humphries let Gove rabbit away about the big bad EU and poor, ickle underdog Britain (who nontheless is a world beating trade powerhouse that will bend the entire WTO to its will)? Not a peep about Cambridge Analytica, Aron Banks, the Lords defeat, overall expect costs of Brexit, threat to the GFA or the Windrush scandal?

He was (briefly) quite good on Windrush. No challenges to anything Gove said, of course. And he didn't press Gove on "hostile environment" which - as far as I remember - was a stated goal of the last government.

But it did seem like a red-carpet "tell me all about your latest film" exchange rather than incisive questioning.

I understand that the records of the East India Company still exist. A company which was wound up in 1857, or thereabouts. Yet landing cards from the 1960s were chucked out. Could it be that the first have been preserved because the people going out there and becoming colonisers where white? And the landing cards junked because the people involved were predominantly black?

At what stage will May realise that if you treat people as though they are dirt, they are not likely to offer you any favours? India - want visas before they play ball. I sincerely hope the Commonwealth countries don't forget how their citizens have been treated.

Did we see this graph from a month ago.

Shows the last time populism this high was at the time of the Second World War. It's all a significant factor in the creation of that hostile environment the Windrush responses, the rise of UKIP , the referendum -everything.

Shocking to see it in a graph..

www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-15/geopolitical-risk-back-cold-war-highs

Peregina I think that exactly.

If the passenger lists with personal data on can be kept and are publicly available as historical documents of value by the national archives, I do not understand why the landing cards were not kept even with restricted access as military records are.

The value to the country is represented, demonstrated and understood by the existence of the passenger lists at the national archives.

Get ready for your eyebrows to go through the roof:

Kevin Schofield @ polhomeeditor
Remarkable story, this. HMRC refused to assist French authorities investigating firm over alleged money laundering, citing the fact they were Tory donors. John McDonnell says: “The Tories have serious questions to answer on this matter.”

www.buzzfeed.com/heidiblake/uk-refused-to-raid-lycamobile-citing-its-tory-donations?utm_term=.tuZ2e731xj#.ubQXg6LQDb
The UK Refused To Raid A Company Suspected Of Money Laundering, Citing Its Tory Donations
“It is of note that they are the biggest corporate donor to the Conservative party led by Prime Minister Theresa May and donated 1.25m Euros to the Prince Charles Trust.”

When BuzzFeed News first approached HMRC to ask about its response to the French request, the agency’s senior press officer strongly denied that Lycamobile’s donations would ever be cited as a reason not to conduct criminal raids. “No HMRC official would ever write such a letter,” he said. “This is the United Kingdom for God’s sake, not some third world banana republic where the organs of state are in hock to some sort of kleptocracy.”

However, after verifying the contents of the email seen by BuzzFeed News, another HMRC spokesman said that it was “regrettable”.

“We never take political donations into account when working out how to work with other countries, or indeed on our own, in enforcing the tax law,” he said, adding that the reference to Lycamobile’s links to the Tories and Prince Charles had been included only as “background” information. “But I can see how this is open to being read that way, which is why that should not be in there,” he said.

Well who is shocked at this? Anyone? Or simply duly pissed off at being shown an example of what you already suspect is going on?

I understand that the records of the East India Company still exist. A company which was wound up in 1857, or thereabouts. Yet landing cards from the 1960s were chucked out.

You can see records of passengers who sailed on the Titanic on display in a museum in a Belfast. I don't understand how data protection could be an issue (unless the records were digitised) nor why the historical value of these records didn't occur to anyone. The whole thing is bizarre.

Julian McCrae @ julian_mccrae
#Windrush political blame game in full swing. Having got themselves into this situation, inevitable govt has to face this. But if want to prevent scandals like this happening in the future, need to go beyond blame. Key questions we need to answer...
^Given burden & consequences for people, policy should have mechanism built in to
tackle unintended consequences. How can we make sure such mechanisms identified
in the policy process? How can we help Parliament understand potential consequences when it votes through legislation?^
There must be more active review to catch when things are going wrong. What prevented Inspector of Borders and Immigration raising issues more effectively? How could we use Ombudsman system better to highlight individual cases?
Once cases started making headlines, need effective political mechanisms to rapidly resolve problems. Why did it take so long for politicians to address Windrush after first reports? Esp. how can PM strengthen No 10 machine, which should be flagging this immediately for her?

Sam Coates Times @ samcoatestimes
Ummmm. These are perfectly decent questions but important to remember the political culture of the time. Tories felt existential threat from UKIP surge and (self-inflicted) net migration nightmare. Media leaned into this narrative. In this context
Ombudsmen and whistleblowing mechanisms and beefed up No10 units can parp and beep and flag all they want. But ministers weren’t interested in the nuances because David Cameron and Theresa May didn’t want them to be because a they felt they needed to look tough
So by all means criticise the system. But to change anything you need to change the political culture.

And good luck with that...

Julian McCrae @ julian_mccrae
Actually political system seems to be working fine. Media picked up the cases, opposition raised them, govt reversed itself. TM taking far more pain than necessary due to v odd pause between politics becoming clear (when 1st Guardian article came out) and action

Sam Coates Times @ samcoatestimes
^If you think the “problem” only existed in last few months and becare of a bureaucratic snafu then you’d be right.
The reporting suggests officials and some ministers were raising concerns long before the Guardian started reporting these cases.^
I think pre 2016, the direction from Cameron and May was to look tough on migration. Not much concern about difficult cases. Special pleading for migrants given little attention
Imagine these cases had come to light in this way in the 2014 local election campaign. Concern at net migration thru roof with Tories unable to control numbers because of EU. Nigel Farage massive part of that debate. Would Tory MPs (and sympathetic media been so critical).

Julian McCrae @ julian_mccrae
Some pessimism from Sam re my Windrush comments. He may well be right, but see my responses for why I'm not sure its as dispiriting as he things...

Sam Coates Times @ samcoatestimes
I think - if there is one reason for optimism it’s that the situation now has responded. However this in my view is because the referendum has changed the politics of immigration for the Tory party, creating greater latitude for such issues to be raised. However...
... while on migration post referendum there is room for more nuance in policy making and response the structural picture is still bleak. Politicians today have become anaesthetised to criticism from previously trusted bodies. Political culture shuts down inconvenient narrattives
The day that you can say evidence based policy making is once again in fashion, is the day when we will ultimately agree...
What happened between 2010 and 2016 with the Tories and migration could easily happen again.

Perhaps with the complications of Brexit? Which many gvt figures definitely don’t want to hear?

Very astute observations by Sam Coates.

I'm an innocent. I'm very shocked.

I've always felt a kind national pride and faith that ultimately in the U.K. our establishment would stand up for what is right.

I believed that Berlusconi type behaviour would never happen here. But it does.

• We have politicians who lie and deceive and are rewarded with Cabinet posts.

•Electoral or referendum fraudulent expenditure with Cabinet knowledge .

•Overtly racist policy.

•Now state protection of corporate crime in return for party political funding.

Shocked doesn't cover it.

I've always felt a kind national pride and faith that ultimately in the U.K. our establishment would stand up for what is right.

So did my (English) DM. However, my DFs cynicism has been all-too-horribly proved correct. He grew up under Mussolini and has insisted ever since I can remember that there is nothing special about the English ...

I believed that Berlusconi type behaviour would never happen here. But it does

Because we've told ourselves it can't happen.

www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2018-04-16/worcestershire-buried-report-raising-urgent-concern-over-finances
Worcestershire buried report raising “urgent” concern over finances
Fifth county councatil at risk with independent reviewers stating need for “radical overhaul”

Worcestershire County Council buried a report by independent experts which called for it to take "urgent" action to address its finances, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism has learned.

The review criticised the local authority’s financial planning as “overly optimistic”, “counter-intuitive” and in need of “radical overhaul”. A senior member of the council described the decision not to share the findings with all councillors as “diabolical”.

And

The inspection team described the council’s future “transformation savings” - the main way in which it plans to balance its books - as “overly optimistic”. At the time the council was in danger of being £10.2m short of its £21.3m cost-cutting target.

CIPFA questioned why the forecast increase in demand for services was 2.5 times larger than the expected growth in resources. A more realistic assessment of the council’s finances projected an additional £26.4m gap in 2018/19 with a rise to £60.1m by 2020/21.

Plans to keep council tax increases below the maximum possible were described in the report as “counter-intuitive” given the situation facing the authority.

Worcestershire has since set its budget for the current financial year, including a total council tax increase of 4.94%, still less than the maximum allowed without a referendum, and spending ‘reforms’ totalling £31.6m - the equivalent of almost 10% of its current budget.

CIPFA also expressed concerns about attitude within Worcestershire’s leadership team, calling for a “sense of urgency appropriate to the real challenge”. This echoed the problems at Northamptonshire, where an independent inspection concluded in March that the council’s financial crisis had been caused by the complacency of senior officers and said “living within budget constraints is not part of the culture”.

Worcestershire has already had its children's services have already been taken out of its control due to a damning ofsted report according to the article.

Worcestershire has already had its children's services have already been taken out of its control due to a damning ofsted report according to the article.

Not really close enough to London to matter though, is it ?

www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/apr/19/backbench-mps-motion-force-vote-eu-customs-union

A glimmer of light ... ever hopeful.

www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2018/04/19/brexit-the-public-must-be-trusted-with-the-facts

New poll showing leavers favouring EEA.

Sam Coates Times @ samcoatestimes
For years there have been suspicions that HMRC acts with an eye on political expediency and serving political masters. This is always vehemently denied.

Then something like this comes along

He then linked to the above mentioned HMRC story about Lycamobile and the French money laundering investigation.

So widespread rumours about corruption at HMRC for sometime then.

Are there any functioning departments atm?

Environment doesn't seem to be doing too bad. Shit, Gove and Brexit. Its doomed.

Torygraph exclusive - EU rejects Irish border proposals. www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/04/19/exclusive-eu-rejects-theresa-mays-brexit-irish-border-solution/

"The EU has comprehensively rejected British proposals for avoiding a hard border in Northern Ireland in a move which will cast serious doubt on the UK’s ability to leave the customs union, The Telegraph has learned... Senior EU diplomatic sources said that Mrs May’s plan for avoiding a hard border in Northern Ireland was subjected to a “systematic and forensic annihilation” this week at a meeting between senior EU officials and Olly Robbins, the UK’s lead Brexit negotiator. "It was a detailed and forensic rebuttal,” added the source who was directly briefed on the meeting in Brussels on Wednesday. “It was made clear that none of the UK’s customs options will work. None of them... It now sends the Cabinet and Whitehall back to the drawing board and raises the serious prospect that Mrs May will have no choice but to remain in the EU customs union if she wants to avoid a hard border in Northern Ireland."

That sounds like the formal review of the NI talks - being held between Olly Robbins & Barnier's no. 2 - on the 18th.
They are halfway through the scheduled time and it was generally expected the review would be negative

Yes it's that, BCF.

This bit from the article made me snort:

Although British negotiators were fully aware of EU scepticism towards the British plans, the complete inflexibility on the part of the European Commission and EU member states is understood to have left them shocked.

From RTB's post:
Given burden & consequences for people, policy should have mechanism built in to tackle unintended consequences. How can we make sure such mechanisms identified in the policy process? How can we help Parliament understand potential consequences when it votes through legislation?

The mind boggles. This explains a lot.
Maybe there are members who see Parliament as just an extension of the Oxford Union?

If the EU is capable of taking apart proposals in a systematic and forensic manner, then surely Westminster should be capable of taking proposals apart?
Unless of course - and much more likely - the consequences really are exactly as intended, and making things really difficult for huge numbers of Britons was intentional, and HMRC really are knowingly operating a big brown envelope operation reminiscent of the Chicago Machine.

.....the consequences really are exactly as intended, and making things really difficult for huge numbers of Britons was intentional,.....

Who could possibly think that? Oh wait -'Citizens of nowhere', Britons of 50 years standing being asked to prove that they are British?

Imo, part of the problem is that the govt are so used to forcing their way on (at least the bottom 90% of) the UK population
of the media & everyone else letting them get away with vague promises that are immediately binned once the spotlight shifts to another issue

that they are totally shocked and unprepared to deal with a strong group who remain focused on the important issues and require any fine words to be nailed down & signed in a legal document.

The govt & supporters were outraged that the UK is being held to what they agreed on NI last year
because they are not used to being held to their promises longer than a week

• before the Uk public is carefully distracted by something else

The govt is actually having to work at serious business and it is totally ill-equipped to handle this
The inadequacy of most Uk politicians over the last 40 years was mitigated by a highly professional civil service

The civil service now, although deliberately run down, could still make the best job of a very weak situation for the UK,
but the govt is only listening to SPADS and Beleavers in Britain, not experts

This deliberately ignorant stupidity is why I rate the chances of having a transition followed by an EEA-EFTA type of arrangement at only 50:50,
at least without an interim period of chaos & deep recession.

The govt is actually having to work at serious business and it is totally ill-equipped to handle this

Which doesn't bode well for future international negotiations ... potential partners will either run rings around us or (more likely ) send us their equivalents of Johnson, Fox and Davies (probably being glad to be able to get rid of them for a while).

If I were batting for Brexit, I would keep this gem very quiet:

Although British negotiators were fully aware of EU scepticism towards the British plans, the complete inflexibility on the part of the European Commission and EU member states is understood to have left them shocked.

It might make nice TeleMainExpress headlines for a day. But in reality you're just admitting to the who world that you really are as stupid as people have said you are.

Still the curious silence from the Leaver trollbots, I note.

Most days I end up with my head in my hands trying not to despair. I don't get how people haven't yet linked to the dire consequences on public sector funding, e.g. education etc.