UK Politics

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Compel**

If they haven't all been fired by then...

**welshhoppo**

Agreed, firing someone because they don't 100% believe the thing they are doing is legal doesn't sit right with me.

**Kilkrazy**

The whole situation is an ugly mess.

Trump has taken a series of far-reaching decisions without bothering to consult the people whom he expects to carry them out, and without issuing clear instructions about all the necessary details.

This is because Trump does not view executive orders as a controversial but necessary piece of government function. He regards them as a cool photo and headlines opportunity.

Even without the involvement of any political feelings, the administrative and front-line staff are going to be resentful and distrusting of such slap-dash behaviour.

The sacked DoJ head would have been sacked anyway in a few days, once the Republicans got around to her level of political appointee, so she used the situation to make a point.

**reds8n**

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38805196

Trump state visit plan 'very difficult' for Queen

Theresa May's decision to invite Donald Trump to a state visit has put the Queen in a "very difficult position", a former head of the Foreign Office says.
In a letter to The Times, Lord Ricketts said the offer had been "premature".
A petition calling for the state visit to be cancelled has already gathered more than 1.5 million signatures.
On Monday, thousands of people across the UK joined protests against Mr Trump's travel ban on seven mainly Muslim countries.
The controversial immigration measures prompted an emergency debate in parliament on Monday.

Lord Ricketts, who was permanent secretary at the Foreign Office from 2006-10, said it was unprecedented for a US president to be invited for a state visit in their first year in the White House.
He questioned whether Mr Trump was "specially deserving of this exceptional honour".
"It would have been far wiser to wait to see what sort of president he would turn out to be before advising the Queen to invite him. Now the Queen is put in a very difficult position," he said.

No date has yet been announced for the state visit. Such events often include a stay at Buckingham Palace hosted by the Queen.
The Times says that Buckingham Palace has privately made clear it is unhappy at the perception that the Queen is being dragged into a political event.
Mrs May's office said on Monday she was "very happy" to extend the invitation to Mr Trump on behalf of the Queen.
The prime minister has been under growing pressure to say whether or not she was briefed on the US travel restrictions when she met President Trump in Washington last week.
The ban affects citizens from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. Critics have called it a "Muslim ban" although the Trump administration denies this.

Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson told MPs on Monday he would not comment on "confidential conversations" between the two leaders.
Mrs May faced heavy criticism when she refused several times to condemn the restrictions when asked during a visit to Turkey.
Downing Street later issued a statement saying she "does not agree" with Mr Trump's travel ban but that US immigration was a matter for the US government.

But during demonstrations in London on Monday, the crowd chanted slogans including "Shame on May".
Protesters packed Whitehall, causing the closure of Parliament Square. They held banners accusing Mr Trump of Islamophobia and Mrs May of appeasing him.
Demonstrations also took place in Glasgow, Edinburgh, Cardiff, Manchester, Newcastle, Sheffield, Oxford, Cambridge, Brighton, Gloucester, Leeds, York, Liverpool, Leicester and several other towns and cities.
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has said Mr Trump should not be welcomed to Britain "while he abuses our shared values with his shameful Muslim ban and attacks on refugees' and women's rights".

...

... so the Queen not impressed with Trump then ?

I don't like or agree with the ban in place but I don't think May could or indeed should have done anything -- publicly -- if she did know the ban was about to happen.

Can't expect the PM of the UK to leak USA policy really.

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

With any luck Queenie will set the Corgi's on him, who'll go straight for the head because his hair looks like a hamster.

**Mr. Burning**

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
With any luck Queenie will set the Corgi's on him, who'll go straight for the head because his hair looks like a hamster.

Is Phillip well? I'm pretty sure he could ask some pertinent questions of the Drumpf name, being an immigrant spouse, Toupees, nepotism. He's due to set the cat amongst the pigeons, one last hurrah!

**reds8n**

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
With any luck Queenie will set the Corgi's on him, who'll go straight for the head because his hair looks like a hamster.

1978 Ceauscescu
1994 Mugabe
2002 Assad
2003 Putin
2007 King Abdullah
2015 Xi Jinping

all of those are worse by far than Trumplethinskin.

...not sure a state banquet has been live tweeted by a head of state before but 1st time for everything.

... I reckon that , due to an unavoidable scheduling conflict, Charlie won't be available on the day -- busy elsewhere.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
https://twitter.com/Jezebel/status/826188703336902657

Would you have sex with this appalled British MP?

... WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE WORLD ?

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

Well, it's finally happening - the A50 bill getting its reading in the HOC.

Amendments and counter-amendments will be flying thick and fast.

Finally, 7 months after the vote, some bloody progress.

**Future War Cultist**

About time. I just hope they don't feth it up any further.

**welshhoppo**

It will pass through Parliament., and the sooner the better.

**Vash108**

Kilkrazy wrote:
The whole situation is an ugly mess.

Trump has taken a series of far-reaching decisions without bothering to consult the people whom he expects to carry them out, and without issuing clear instructions about all the necessary details.

This is because Trump does not view executive orders as a controversial but necessary piece of government function. He regards them as a cool photo and headlines opportunity.

It's like he would rather dictate policy from his oval office then listen to anyone else besides Bannen and Pence.

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Well, it's finally happening - the A50 bill getting its reading in the HOC.

Amendments and counter-amendments will be flying thick and fast.

Finally, 7 months after the vote, some bloody progress.

Sensible outcome?

Referendum on whether or not we should leave the Single Market. Right now, feels too much like a weak PM is desperately trying to appease some fringe lunatics within her own party, especially when the main Leave campaigns reassured nobody was asking that we leave the Single Market....

That done, then the will of the people. Plus, if it was a vote to remain with the Single Market, I'd greatly enjoy watching the Daily Express implode in a right wing bigotry storm.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Well, it's finally happening - the A50 bill getting its reading in the HOC.

Amendments and counter-amendments will be flying thick and fast.

Finally, 7 months after the vote, some bloody progress.

Sensible outcome?

Referendum on whether or not we should leave the Single Market. Right now, feels too much like a weak PM is desperately trying to appease some fringe lunatics within her own party, especially when the main Leave campaigns reassured nobody was asking that we leave the Single Market....

That done, then the will of the people. Plus, if it was a vote to remain with the Single Market, I'd greatly enjoy watching the Daily Express implode in a right wing bigotry storm.

I think that second referendum ship sailed weeks ago. I watched Keir Starmer speak in the House today. There's no appetite for another referendum...

**Graphite**

Who says there's no appetite for another referendum? The only people who ever say that are the folks who won the previous one!

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

Graphite wrote:
Who says there's no appetite for another referendum? The only people who ever say that are the folks who won the previous one!

I don't know if you watched the HoC debate earlier, but Labour have rolled up the white flag on A50. The tone from the Labour side was quiet and solemn. It was like a funeral. Corbyn looked as though he'd spent the previous hours downing shots in a nightclub and had just got back 10 minutes beforehand!

There's no fight in Labour for another referendum, and the Lib Dems have only 9 seats. Even with the SNP's 56, the numbers don't add up.

**Shadow Captain Edithae**

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Well, it's finally happening - the A50 bill getting its reading in the HOC.

Amendments and counter-amendments will be flying thick and fast.

Finally, 7 months after the vote, some bloody progress.

Sensible outcome?

Referendum on whether or not we should leave the Single Market. Right now, feels too much like a weak PM is desperately trying to appease some fringe lunatics within her own party, especially when the main Leave campaigns reassured nobody was asking that we leave the Single Market....

That done, then the will of the people. Plus, if it was a vote to remain with the Single Market, I'd greatly enjoy watching the Daily Express implode in a right wing bigotry storm.

What makes you think we'll have a choice regarding the Single Market?

The terms of Brexit are subject to negotiation with the EU. Parliament can pass all the amendments and resolutions and bills it likes, but they all mean jack gak if the EU says No. This is just pissing in the wind. The only thing Parliament can do, is authorise the Government to trigger Article 50 and begin negotiations.

Its all well and good Parliament demanding that the Government do X, Y and Z, but if the French and Germans and everyone else say no to X, Y and Z...now what?

**reds8n**

Graphite wrote:
Who says there's no appetite for another referendum? The only people who ever say that are the folks who won the previous one!

I don't think there is , overall.

Doubt the result would be much different either, maybe a bit narrower but that's about it.

All we can really do is prepare for the worst and remember who said what as/when/if it goes wrong/better than expected.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

reds8n wrote:
Graphite wrote:
Who says there's no appetite for another referendum? The only people who ever say that are the folks who won the previous one!

I don't think there is , overall.

Doubt the result would be much different either, maybe a bit narrower but that's about it.

All we can really do is prepare for the worst and remember who said what as/when/if it goes wrong/better than expected.

If Brexit works, I claim full credit.

If it goes wrong, I'm off to some tax haven that doesn't have an extradition treaty, and dakka will never hear from me again.

**reds8n**

... Obviously best to wait and see first, but if things do start to get bad I'd advise anyone stuck in , so to speak, the arse end of nowhere -- especially in Scotland, wales & NI Ireland -- to move.

Probably to England.

' cause you know which areas will get hit hardest by whatever cuts are forced through/needed/etc etc right ?

**Ian Sturrock**

I live in the prosperous south-east. Still planning to move to Europe if the UK leaves it.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

reds8n wrote:
... Obviously best to wait and see first, but if things do start to get bad I'd advise anyone stuck in , so to speak, the arse end of nowhere -- especially in Scotland, wales & NI Ireland -- to move.

Probably to England.

' cause you know which areas will get hit hardest by whatever cuts are forced through/needed/etc etc right ?

I used to live in England for work/career, so I hear what you're saying.

Old clichés, but we'll have to wait and see, only time will tell etc etc

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ian Sturrock wrote:
I live in the prosperous south-east. Still planning to move to Europe if the UK leaves it.

You're not a banker are you?

**reds8n**

Ian Sturrock wrote:
I live in the prosperous south-east. Still planning to move to Europe if the UK leaves it.

You won't be alone I fear.

We've got a few academics at work who might be heading back, at least one as they no longer feel welcome in the country.

**Ian Sturrock**

Yeah, a lot of my academic colleagues are in a similar situation: the Brexit vote and the subsequent racist outbursts and anti-immigrant rhetoric have made most non-Brits feel unwelcome. I don't want to be part of a country that does that to my friends and colleagues.

But even apart from my principles -- there is my career, and the associated hard cash, to think of! I don't want to be isolated from the international research community, and this is already happening to academics in the UK even just due to the vote. It will get worse if May triggers Article 50, and worse still if the UK actually leaves the EU. I love living here, and my students and colleagues are amazing. But I'm off to Denmark or Malta or somewhere with a similarly world-leading games research culture, if the culture I'm trying to help build in the UK gets devastated by Brexit.

I recognise that I'm very lucky to have that option. Academic culture is unusual in that it gives its researchers the chance to work almost anywhere in the world. Just about every country is happy to welcome academics from anywhere, because the expertise and specialisms each of us brings are so unique. Oh, except Britain couldn't give a stuff about such things any more, due to the people being tired of experts...

**Howard A Treesong**

Politicians and other public figures supporting banning Trump from the UK are doing some popularist grandstanding and getting pats on the back on Twitter. Fact is that to ban the US president from your country is utterly absurd and grossly short sighted, it's not worth the financial and diplomatic fallout just to make a scene.

We need allies after Brexit, and some would have us cut off our nose to make some crowd pleasing statement, but that won't pay the bills, banning trump won't make us more friends. It also sets an awkward precedent, if Trump is the benchmark there's quite a few others we'd have to ban in future.

How can you have a dialogue and debate, and genuinely claim freedom of speech when you constantly want to gag and ban people of opposing political views?

**r_squared**

Trump doesn't have "opposing political views" to anyone, he's just cuffing it and spouting populist nonsense at the moment.

Besides, May got ahead of herself, by all accounts, and in desperation to make good terms and set the ground work for a "deal" with the US, she's overstepped the boundaries and offered him an audience with the Queen a year ahead of normal, for a new head of state, apparently.

This is why we should be concerned about her, and this government, racing around desperately trying to "prove" that this debacle will work and that they're doing what they can to achieve it. It's un-statesman/ (woman?) like and reeks of desperation.

Besides, Article 50, let's just get this fething gak show over with, activate that fething article and never talk of it again. Seriously, I fething hate going on any social media at the moment, everyone seems to have turned into an arsehole.

**Kilkrazy**

The Economist said the May/Trump/State Visit screw-up is a sign of how the UK's peri-Brexit status has made the country's negotiating position weaker not stronger in dealing with the USA and Trump.

**r_squared**

Kilkrazy wrote:
The Economist said the May/Trump/State Visit screw-up is a sign of how the UK's peri-Brexit status has made the country's negotiating position weaker not stronger in dealing with the USA and Trump.

That's not really much of a surprise to anyone surely?

I've already mentioned that he only respects strength, as the freedom girls sang back in January 2016, "deal from strength or get crushed everytime."
He genuinely believes, and lives by that gak. We need to get ourselves together, and have something he really wants, to gain some leverage, or were going to get steamrollered by a weak Tory government into accepting something that puts America first, and us, somewhere else.

**Future War Cultist**

Howard A Treesong wrote:
Politicians and other public figures supporting banning Trump from the UK are doing some popularist grandstanding and getting pats on the back on Twitter. Fact is that to ban the US president from your country is utterly absurd and grossly short sighted, it's not worth the financial and diplomatic fallout just to make a scene.

We need allies after Brexit, and some would have us cut off our nose to make some crowd pleasing statement, but that won't pay the bills, banning trump won't make us more friends. It also sets an awkward precedent, if Trump is the benchmark there's quite a few others we'd have to ban in future.

How can you have a dialogue and debate, and genuinely claim freedom of speech when you constantly want to gag and ban people of opposing political views?

Good question. Also, why would you ban Trump (who's not got a war to his name yet) but continue to happily let Saudi Arabian leaders come here? It just opens up a big messy can of worms.

**Whirlwind**

Howard A Treesong wrote:
Politicians and other public figures supporting banning Trump from the UK are doing some popularist grandstanding and getting pats on the back on Twitter. Fact is that to ban the US president from your country is utterly absurd and grossly short sighted, it's not worth the financial and diplomatic fallout just to make a scene.

We need allies after Brexit, and some would have us cut off our nose to make some crowd pleasing statement, but that won't pay the bills, banning trump won't make us more friends. It also sets an awkward precedent, if Trump is the benchmark there's quite a few others we'd have to ban in future.

How can you have a dialogue and debate, and genuinely claim freedom of speech when you constantly want to gag and ban people of opposing political views?

It's a bit more than populist grandstanding when you are opposed to bigotry and racism which Trump is endorsing. It's not like he is even targeting the correct countries. The number of people that have killed americans from the countries that he has banned is exactly zero. However neighbouring countries that have been responsible for thousands of American deaths haven't been mentioned. There also appears to be no surprise that there is an exact anti-correlation between those countries banned and those Trump has business dealings with.

The question is at what point do you think it become serious enough to actually take some action? When he rounds up all muslims in the US and puts them into camps? When he starts torturing people? When he starts gassing people?

It appears that we should drop everything and bend over and take anything people like Trump want to do simply so we can get some scraps from the table. I know people wanted to get British values to be 'king' but I didn't realise those values are "suck up to whoever, regardless of how nasty and evil they are just so we can get a dog biscuit". On the other hand maybe that really was what people were voting for with Brexit and "British values" and I was sadly misguided that it was something better than this when people spouted off such nonsense.

You can have freedom of speech but that doesn't mean we still shouldn't condemn bigotry, hatred and the evil emanating from Trump.

As for the A50 vote. Well even if we do Leave; it's not the end we just have to start the fight to rejoin again. We could always take a leaf out of the Brexit manual and lie through the back teeth about how much the UK government is a dictatorship and that we need the EU to allow democracy to regain a foothold and how much of a joke Boris Johnson is (oh wait the last one is true)...

**Silent Puffin?**

Howard A Treesong wrote:
Fact is that to ban the US president from your country is utterly absurd and grossly short sighted,

Banning?

The petition is to stop the state visit, not prevent him from entering the country.

I would have been absolutely hilarious if the Scottish Government had banned Trump from entering the country though

From Westminster's reaction to this it is quite clear just how 'strong' a position we actual have when we start negotiating this wondrous 'free trade' deal with a protectionist president......