|
Post by atmosphere on Jul 21, 2024 12:47:51 GMT
How long are we giving Rayner?
Gone by Christmas for me. Starmer knows she needs phasing out.
|
|
|
Post by bigmartin on Jul 21, 2024 12:52:16 GMT
The fact that it was specifically a Border Force boat, rather than an immediate emergency rescue by the Coastguard, might matter. It might be THAT particular fact that's important. There might be subtleties that you are missing (that possibly matter as the missions of the two may be very different). My understanding from reading at least 10 articles on this is that Border Force were able to do this because the French/EU are more open to negotiations with Starmer than they were with Sunak/Conservatives. Which isn't far fetched. After all, who would you rather negotiate with in business? Someone who basically maligns you at every turn, or someone who you actually can do business with. I recall Sunak going after Starmer like a child that had has it's Milky Bar snatched from him at the mere suggestion that Starmer intended to try to renegotiate better agreements than the Tories had managed to. "They're not going to give you anything that they wouldn't give us" he stated. Quite ridiculous, very arrogant (of course) I thought at the time. And here we are. In two weeks, relations are improving. Business is being done. There's also that obvious possibility that everyone else is wrong, including the entirety of the UK press of all colours. But not you. You're right. I’m struggling to understand this “we were allowed” line. As I’ve read the article we were asked to help with a rescue of migrants in French waters. Given the rescue was apparently led by the French and the migrants were in their waters surely it was a given they’d be returned to France. Very much not a given. You need to read more about the treaties and the differences between what the Coast Guard can do and what Border Patrol vessels can do. It matters. If it was "a given" that they'd returned to France why is this the first time that it's happened? There's a third point. Perhaps right wing newspapers in the UK such as the Telegraph, Mail and so forth have gone all in with Labour and have started to propagandize in their favour after the election. Of course I'm kidding. But the serious point is that if those newspaper could somehow put an anti Labour spin on this do you not think they would?
|
|
|
Post by bigmartin on Jul 21, 2024 12:54:59 GMT
How long are we giving Rayner? Gone by Christmas for me. Starmer knows she needs phasing out. Why? What's she done? And, does he? I thought they got on really well. Curious. I'd be disappointed if so, not least because she upsets conservatives by doing controversial stuff like wearing trousers and stuff. What do you think is afoot?
|
|
|
Post by desmond on Jul 21, 2024 12:56:50 GMT
Guess as good a place as any for this. Just noticed that David Davis has agreed to lead a campaign for a review into the Lucy Letby trial suggesting her conviction was not “beyond reasonable doubt” My first thought is that it’s unlikely to be the case but when you think how quickly GMP and Stepping Hill were happy to go after the female nurse in their murder case before finally realising it was the male nurse is quite frightening.
|
|
|
Post by desmond on Jul 21, 2024 13:02:11 GMT
I’m struggling to understand this “we were allowed” line. As I’ve read the article we were asked to help with a rescue of migrants in French waters. Given the rescue was apparently led by the French and the migrants were in their waters surely it was a given they’d be returned to France. Very much not a given. You need to read more about the treaties and the differences between what the Coast Guard can do and what Border Patrol vessels can do. It matters. If it was "a given" that they'd returned to France why is this the first time that it's happened? There's a third point. Perhaps right wing newspapers in the UK such as the Telegraph, Mail and so forth have gone all in with Labour and have started to propagandize in their favour after the election. Of course I'm kidding. But the serious point is that if those newspaper could somehow put an anti Labour spin on this do you not think they would? Those vessels can do very little in foreign waters without being asked. I would suggest it unlikely the French would ask for help and say “by the way you have to take any rescued” back home with you. No big deal either way as the end result is peoples lives were saved but it does seem a strange set of circumstance
|
|
|
Post by atmosphere on Jul 21, 2024 13:19:24 GMT
How long are we giving Rayner? Gone by Christmas for me. Starmer knows she needs phasing out. Why? What's she done? And, does he? I thought they got on really well. Curious. I'd be disappointed if so, not least because she upsets conservatives by doing controversial stuff like wearing trousers and stuff. What do you think is afoot? She'd embarass us on the world stage. I think she seems a decent girl but I think she'd suit a less prominent role. The lads at the Golf Club last night were saying the reports were that Starmer is phasing her out. I don't think it means they don't get on.
|
|
|
Post by bigmartin on Jul 21, 2024 13:25:15 GMT
Very much not a given. You need to read more about the treaties and the differences between what the Coast Guard can do and what Border Patrol vessels can do. It matters. If it was "a given" that they'd returned to France why is this the first time that it's happened? There's a third point. Perhaps right wing newspapers in the UK such as the Telegraph, Mail and so forth have gone all in with Labour and have started to propagandize in their favour after the election. Of course I'm kidding. But the serious point is that if those newspaper could somehow put an anti Labour spin on this do you not think they would? I would suggest it unlikely the French would ask for help and say “by the way you have to take any rescued” back home with you. The only part I have not been able to fathom is whether it's a "first time event" because there's never arisen a circumstance of a BORDER FORCE patrol boat being the one on hand to help rescue survivors (as opposed to the Coast Guard) to help. It could be a first because there's never been a Border Force boat in this situ, or it could be a first because previous Border Force rescues have not been allowed to return those rescued to French soil. Given that I read that this situation had to be negotiated then I'm assuming it's the latter. In which case it's a genuine first. But if someone were to come on here and show that it was the former then I'd accept that. Either way though it's technically the first time this precise situation arose. Again, without wanting to ride the horse too fast, why would right wing inclined newspapers report it as such otherwise? I hardly think the Telegraph and Mail are looking for, and spinning reasons to report good news from the current administration.
|
|
|
Post by Nik on Jul 21, 2024 13:29:22 GMT
Why? What's she done? And, does he? I thought they got on really well. Curious. I'd be disappointed if so, not least because she upsets conservatives by doing controversial stuff like wearing trousers and stuff. What do you think is afoot? She'd embarass us on the world stage. I think she seems a decent girl but I think she'd suit a less prominent role. The lads at the Golf Club last night were saying the reports were that Starmer is phasing her out. I don't think it means they don't get on. I know you're 100% on the wind-up here, but if he was phasing her out, he wouldn't have appointed her as deputy Prime Minister by choice less than 3 weeks ago. He could habe picked someone else at that point.
|
|
|
Post by desmond on Jul 21, 2024 13:29:57 GMT
I would suggest it unlikely the French would ask for help and say “by the way you have to take any rescued” back home with you. The only part I have not been able to fathom is whether it's a "first time event" because there's never arisen a circumstance of a BORDER FORCE patrol boat being the one on hand to help rescue survivors (as opposed to the Coast Guard) to help. It could be a first because there's never been a Border Force boat in this situ, or it could be a first because previous Border Force rescues have not been allowed to return those rescued to French soil. Given that I read that this situation had to be negotiated then I'm assuming it's the latter. In which case it's a genuine first. But if someone were to come on here and show that it was the former then I'd accept that. Either way though it's technically the first time this precise situation arose. Again, without wanting to ride the horse too fast, why would right wing inclined newspapers report it as such otherwise? I hardly think the Telegraph and Mail are looking for, and spinning reasons to report good news from the current administration. I w no real thought on how the papers have reported things (quite possibly they’ve reported it correctly) it’s the “being allowed” comment I find strange given we were responding to their request for help.
|
|
|
Post by atmosphere on Jul 21, 2024 13:31:42 GMT
She'd embarass us on the world stage. I think she seems a decent girl but I think she'd suit a less prominent role. The lads at the Golf Club last night were saying the reports were that Starmer is phasing her out. I don't think it means they don't get on. I know you're 100% on the wind-up here, but if he was phasing her out, he wouldn't have appointed her as deputy Prime Minister by choice less than 3 weeks ago. He could habe picked someone else at that point. That wouldn't be phasing out though would it? That would be knocked out with a blunt instrument. Let's see what happens. I could see the merit in replacing her with somebody else and giving her a different role where she's proved she can be a huge asset. Why would any of these views wind anybody up?
|
|
|
Post by bigmartin on Jul 21, 2024 13:35:49 GMT
The only part I have not been able to fathom is whether it's a "first time event" because there's never arisen a circumstance of a BORDER FORCE patrol boat being the one on hand to help rescue survivors (as opposed to the Coast Guard) to help. It could be a first because there's never been a Border Force boat in this situ, or it could be a first because previous Border Force rescues have not been allowed to return those rescued to French soil. Given that I read that this situation had to be negotiated then I'm assuming it's the latter. In which case it's a genuine first. But if someone were to come on here and show that it was the former then I'd accept that. Either way though it's technically the first time this precise situation arose. Again, without wanting to ride the horse too fast, why would right wing inclined newspapers report it as such otherwise? I hardly think the Telegraph and Mail are looking for, and spinning reasons to report good news from the current administration. I w no real thought on how the papers have reported things (quite possibly they’ve reported it correctly) it’s the “being allowed” comment I find strange given we were responding to their request for help. Maritime Law mate. There's no such thing as a polite request for help in the sense of "do us a solid, please give us a hand" at sea. At sea that request for help is a polite order. If you're in the area you MUST help. I was delayed on the Ben My Cree last year for about 3 hours for this precise reason. Fishing vessel put an SOS out and within half an hour we're looking through the windows at literally dozens of shipping vessels of all sizes and shapes put in a holding pattern by the Irish Coastguard.
|
|
|
Post by Count de Stockport on Jul 21, 2024 13:36:07 GMT
Rare species of wildlife…(reply to Timberwolf comment in Friendlies thread). Combined votes cast in the three Stockport constituencies in the general election July 2024 (five largest parties). Lib Dem’s 44,733 Labour 40,554 Conservative 25,424 Reform 18,621 Green 8,258 Starkly at odds with the 81 voters in the poll at the top of this thread, and the general tone of this place. Since when was this thread obliged to be proportionately representative of how the people of Stockport voted? If you don’t like the thread, don’t read it!
|
|
Mozzer
Contributor
Posts: 1,308
|
Post by Mozzer on Jul 21, 2024 13:36:35 GMT
Guess as good a place as any for this. Just noticed that David Davis has agreed to lead a campaign for a review into the Lucy Letby trial suggesting her conviction was not “beyond reasonable doubt” My first thought is that it’s unlikely to be the case but when you think how quickly GMP and Stepping Hill were happy to go after the female nurse in their murder case before finally realising it was the male nurse is quite frightening. Private Eye has a piece on this in its latest issue. Goes over nearly two full pages, it's quite technical in places and I'm not in a position to summarise it well enough. It's not the work of professional trouble-causers though (PE itself says it can make no judgement either way) and to my inexpert eye there appears to be some grounds to question the strength of some of the evidence against her. That doesn't mean she's not guilty, but if there becomes room for doubt, that changes things. Parts of it, whether she's guilty or not, make you question the fundamental purpose and fairness of the process anyway. One point, relating to pointing out errors in the interpretation of insulin results which were critical in two cases of attempted murder, was deemed inadmissible at the appeal because it was regarded as a challenge to existing evidence and not as new evidence. I understand that you can't have appellants simply trying to rerun a trial in the hope of getting a different verdict, but surely you should be allowed to run new challenges to existing evidence if an expert witness can provide it?
|
|
|
Post by Nik on Jul 21, 2024 13:39:36 GMT
I know you're 100% on the wind-up here, but if he was phasing her out, he wouldn't have appointed her as deputy Prime Minister by choice less than 3 weeks ago. He could habe picked someone else at that point. That wouldn't be phasing out though would it? That would be knocked out with a blunt instrument. Let's see what happens. I could see the merit in replacing her with somebody else and giving her a different role where she's proved she can be a huge asset. Why would any of these views wind anybody up? It's also not phasing her out either, it's giving her the second-most important role in government.
|
|
Mozzer
Contributor
Posts: 1,308
|
Post by Mozzer on Jul 21, 2024 13:40:06 GMT
I know you're 100% on the wind-up here, but if he was phasing her out, he wouldn't have appointed her as deputy Prime Minister by choice less than 3 weeks ago. He could habe picked someone else at that point. That wouldn't be phasing out though would it? That would be knocked out with a blunt instrument. Let's see what happens. I could see the merit in replacing her with somebody else and giving her a different role where she's proved she can be a huge asset. Why would any of these views wind anybody up? He's put her in charge of a flagship policy. If he was going to phase her out, he'd have bumped her down, not given her a high-profile job. Incidentally, it's unlikely the SoS for housing, communities and local government is going to embarrass us on the international stage any more than, say, Boris Johnson and some people thought he was a right laugh.
|
|