domjg
Member
Posts: 5,138
|
Post by domjg on Dec 9, 2021 10:40:19 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w I don't think it will ever change. That Establishment is actually more powerful than its Political Bosses. And of course the latter come and go like ships in the night. They simply don't have time to get to grips with the built in inertia and resistance to change. Watch Sir Philip Robert Barton KCMG OBE before the foreign affairs committee the other day to see The Blob in operation 'The blob' is likely to be conservative and resistant to change (this is nothing new, 'Yes Minister' was nearly 40 years ago now..) but I thought a conservative like you would see that as a good thing. It will also have decades of experience and technical expertise and an idea of what works and doesn't in very complex organisations and yes it will also be insular. But hey, let's just let Cummings and some of his pals do it instead. Can't be that hard can it?.. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,512
|
Post by Danny on Dec 9, 2021 10:51:37 GMT
You make fair points, although this is less about any legalities as it is about how the public see this and what this means for a politician's career who attended. Yes. It must be very simple by now for Johnson to have obtained a list of everyone who attended. If he published that list, pressure would arise for all maybe 50 of them to resign. And then there are the other parties elsewhere. He might lose important advisors, ministers, and paralyse the cabinet office. Its the same problem as not being able to sack Cummings because he was too important. Stratton was unjustly fired for trying to help with a defence. She was considered expendable. If she committed a sackable offence, obviously the partygoers did. Indeed that is one of your more intriguing ideas Danny. No idea if it’s the case or not, but like it all the same. It happens all over the world. It isnt a function of low light levels, but FALLING light levels. QED it isnt because there is not enough light but the body has down regulated production (or maybe sensitivity to vit D) to a benchmark level however much average light you get. Danny I am not so sure about your deprivation of liberty point. If for example someone was alleged to be a night time burglar they might well find themselves remanded in custody pending trial. An electronic tag alternative so you know where they are at night would in such circumstances be a retention of liberty all be it a prescribed exercise of it. Its still punishment before a trial. The just solutions would be either an imediate trial or full liberty until one can be arranged. Charges should automatically fail if someone is not given a trial date or full liberty within a reasonable time for processing the paperwork and lawyers preparing themselves. Not including time because there arent enough staff to do it and it has to wait. Historically I fancy a trial would have been pretty quick, though maybe itself less just. Anyone punished before their trial who are then found innocent should get compensation. Maybe that would engage minds in speeding things up. |
|
|
|
Post by catmanjeff on Dec 9, 2021 10:56:26 GMT
Internal friction within the Tory party breaking out...
Boris won't be undone by the opposition or the electorate, it's his own MPs.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,512
|
Post by Danny on Dec 9, 2021 11:01:24 GMT
Boris won't be undone by the opposition or the electorate, it's his own MPs. Yes. But notice how they are realigning the conservative party as the opponent of covid restrictions and placing labour as proponent of restrctions which enabed them to be imposed on the nation. Lab has the power to stop those restrictions at the parliamentary vote but wont. There is nothing inconsistent with tories holding parties if they dont believe the restrictions work. |
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on Dec 9, 2021 11:07:06 GMT
Bail:
There are custody time limits delineating how long someone can be kept on remand before brought to trial:
before covid they were:
182 days for either way offences and indictable only offences (this includes serious offences such as burglary and drug trafficking);
112 days for voluntary bills of indictment or where a fresh trial has been ordered by the court of appeal.
They were extended beyond that under regulation until June of this year when the extended periods automatically came to an end and the above time limits were resumed.
|
|
|
|
Post by t7g4 on Dec 9, 2021 11:16:43 GMT
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,512
|
Post by Danny on Dec 9, 2021 11:20:38 GMT
Bail: There are custody time limits delineating how long someone can be kept on remand before brought to trial: So what happens if these limits are missed? After they have aready served six months in jail without trial? |
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on Dec 9, 2021 11:25:16 GMT
@danny
The CPS can apply to the court for an extension of a custody time limit, however there has to be good reason for such extension. If no extension is sought the prison authorities must release the prisoner on remand by the end of the custody time limit.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,512
|
Post by Danny on Dec 9, 2021 11:25:38 GMT
With insiders in the Conservative campaign admitting they may have lost and bookies now putting the Lib Dems as favourites, you do wonder whether Johnson will be able to survive as he will no longer be considered a vote winner. To lose Chesham and Amersham, go backwards in Old Bexley and Sidcup and potentially loss of North Shropshire. How long does the PM have left? Telling you voters every vote counts because you think you might lose is good tactics to try to ensure you win.
As to whether all this is bad news for Johnson, that might depend first whether anyone thinks it is his fault, and also whether anyone thinks someone else could do better. Also perhaps because you cannot change leader too often, whether this is yet the right moment.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,512
|
Post by Danny on Dec 9, 2021 11:26:58 GMT
@danny The CPS can apply to the court for an extension of a custody time limit, however there has to be good reason for such extension. If no extension is sought the prison authorities must release the prisoner on remand by the end of the custody time limit. The same good reason for requiring remand in the first place, so it becomes an eternal cycle? Just a tick box six monthly extension? |
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on Dec 9, 2021 11:29:34 GMT
Cont: They will also still be awaiting trial unless and until there is an order of the court dealing with the indictment in some way, this can be trial verdicts or the prosecution offering no evidence.
It should be noted bail is granted in the majority of cases (even in the Crown Court where the more serious maters are dealt with)the usual criticism of judges is that a defendant was granted bail not that they were remanded.
|
|
|
|
Post by catmanjeff on Dec 9, 2021 11:33:32 GMT
Based on my knowledge of a small number of Conservative members at a local level I know, they mostly knew that picking Johnson as leader, they were picking a highly flawed individual.
The main reason is that they thought he could reach parts that other Tories couldn't, and the 80 seat majority showed that to be true at the time.
The moment he becomes a liability (and especially if he loses them the safe seat of North Shropshire), that support rapidly falls away IMO.
He could be gone by spring.
|
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,138
|
Post by domjg on Dec 9, 2021 11:37:26 GMT
Based on my knowledge of a small number of Conservative members at a local level I know, they mostly knew that picking Johnson as leader, they were picking a highly flawed individual.
The main reason is that they thought he could reach parts that other Tories couldn't, and the 80 seat majority showed that to be true at the time.
The moment he becomes a liability (and especially if he loses them the safe seat of North Shropshire), that support rapidly falls away IMO.
He could be gone by spring.
"The main reason is that they thought he could reach parts that other Tories couldn't, and the 80 seat majority showed that to be true at the time." - I think that was only true when he was the only alternative to an opposition leader like Corbyn. |
|
|
|
Post by t7g4 on Dec 9, 2021 11:40:22 GMT
With insiders in the Conservative campaign admitting they may have lost and bookies now putting the Lib Dems as favourites, you do wonder whether Johnson will be able to survive as he will no longer be considered a vote winner. To lose Chesham and Amersham, go backwards in Old Bexley and Sidcup and potentially loss of North Shropshire. How long does the PM have left? Telling you voters every vote counts because you think you might lose is good tactics to try to ensure you win.
As to whether all this is bad news for Johnson, that might depend first whether anyone thinks it is his fault, and also whether anyone thinks someone else could do better. Also perhaps because you cannot change leader too often, whether this is yet the right moment.
This may well be a tactic, however, the bigger picture is if the Conservatives are going backwards or losing seats such as North Shropshire and polls putting Labour 4 points ahead suggests to me that unless a new leader is brought that brings back creditability then we could well see the party on course to be out of power. All this on the day he becomes a Father again (congratulations). LAB: 38% (+2) CON: 34% (-4) LDEM: 11% (+2) GRN: 6% (-) REFUK: 5% (+1) via @redfieldwilton , 08 Dec |
|
|
|
Post by catmanjeff on Dec 9, 2021 11:49:07 GMT
Based on my knowledge of a small number of Conservative members at a local level I know, they mostly knew that picking Johnson as leader, they were picking a highly flawed individual.
The main reason is that they thought he could reach parts that other Tories couldn't, and the 80 seat majority showed that to be true at the time.
The moment he becomes a liability (and especially if he loses them the safe seat of North Shropshire), that support rapidly falls away IMO.
He could be gone by spring.
"The main reason is that they thought he could reach parts that other Tories couldn't, and the 80 seat majority showed that to be true at the time." - I think that was only true when he was the only alternative to an opposition leader like Corbyn.
Agreed.
In addition, the times were different. While Brexit was going through, Boris' personality, and vague optimism worked well.
We are now dealing with the hard reality of Brexit delivered and a global pandemic. That needs someone with an eye for detail, a precautionary approach based on evidence not instinct, and being able to build a team with the broad skills required.
Boris just surrounds himself with pro-Brexit nodding dogs, who won't challenge his world view. A good leader doesn't need to have all the answers, but understands how surround themselves with people that do, and shelving your ego.
|
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on Dec 9, 2021 11:49:59 GMT
@danny
I do not make any moral argument one way or the other I am simply setting out the law.
custody time limits shall not be extended unless the Prosecution can show good and sufficient cause and that they have acted with all due expedition, they must also have applied for the extension prior to the expiry of the original limit. Courts have said that the limits are a maximum and not a target and that the Courts will look at the size, nature and complexity of the case in determining whether the standards have been met. The prosecution must show that they have acted competently and brought the case to trial as fairly, reasonable and quickly as in the circumstances is possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by tancred on Dec 9, 2021 11:52:30 GMT
Johnson was chosen to deliver the Brexit totem - and that's it. May - who was far more level headed than Johnson - was not well regarded by the public, so they chose a buffoon instead just so they could hold on to power. That said, May would probably have won again against Corbyn and Hunt would have been the logical successor instead of Johnson.
|
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on Dec 9, 2021 11:55:25 GMT
Something that has occurred to me having watched Angela Rayner this morning is why Sir Keir Starmer is not constantly on our television screens as Tony Blair was when he was opposition leader. Is he not making himself available? Or are the broadcasters not accepting his offers (balance?). It just seems odd to me that at this time the leader of the Labour Party is not making hay by taking up as much airtime as possible!
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,717
|
Post by steve on Dec 9, 2021 12:02:33 GMT
Danny
Given the 100,000+ people charged with indictable offences every month in the UK .
While in an ideal world it would be lovely to charge , prepare evidence ,call witnesses , arrange attendance for everyone, call a jury if required, ,arrange court time, arrange appropriate and robust defence and prosecution all in the time permitted with no deprivation of liberty or restriction of activities for the defendant and of course presumably instant trials and verdicts because otherwise there is a potential deprivation of liberty during the procedure.
It won't happen.
Because it's a la la land suggestion.
In the real world these things take time.
The period between prosecution and court appearance can be reduced with greater resources than the current regime provide but there's always going to be a period.
If the defendant is charged with a serious offence involving physical injury or is likely to commit similar offences while at liberty based on previous behaviour or is likely to intimidate witnesses there will also always be a limited role for remand in custody.
|
|
|
|
Post by steamdrivenandy on Dec 9, 2021 12:03:56 GMT
Something that has occurred to me having watched Angela Rayner this morning is why Sir Keir Starmer is not constantly on our television screens as Tony Blair was when he was opposition leader. Is he not making himself available? Or are the broadcasters not accepting his offers (balance?). It just seems odd to me that at this time the leader of the Labour Party is not making hay by taking up as much airtime as possible! There were some comments a few days back that Labour have offered people for balance interviews etc on the Marr show etc but recently they've not been taken up. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,717
|
Post by steve on Dec 9, 2021 12:32:22 GMT
SDA
Because the Tories are running scared the BBC notorious interpretation of balance seems to amount to not interviewing opposition party senior figures either.
It's where balance becomes intentional or unintended bias.
|
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on Dec 9, 2021 12:37:15 GMT
steve steamdrivenandyAngela Rayner seems to get on to ITV and Sky (not sure about the BBC), what seems curious is that the Leader does not appear on any channel?
|
|
|
|
Post by alec on Dec 9, 2021 12:39:52 GMT
We appear now to have confirmation from the Electoral Commission report that Johnson lied to Lord Geidt about the donations that paid for the No 11 refurbishment. If true, and the Electoral Commission is independent, that would - ordinarily - require a minister to resign forthwith.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,512
|
Post by Danny on Dec 9, 2021 12:44:28 GMT
Based on my knowledge of a small number of Conservative members at a local level I know, they mostly knew that picking Johnson as leader, they were picking a highly flawed individual.
The main reason is that they thought he could reach parts that other Tories couldn't, and the 80 seat majority showed that to be true at the time. The moment he becomes a liability (and especially if he loses them the safe seat of North Shropshire), that support rapidly falls away IMO.
He could be gone by spring.
The problem though is that Johnsons led the leave campaign. Thats is really why be became con leader. Had someone else led leave then likely they would now be PM. Thats also why Cummings came to downing street. The difficulty is if you change PM. just what sort of replacement do you go for? Do you go for another leaver, when the brexit issue is likely losing its pull and many traditional tories are likely to want a closer relationship to the EU? Or do you choose another hard liner, and then you are stuck with him (probably) for some time even if brexit gets worse and worse. It isnt at all clear this is a good moment to ditch Johnson. It might be a good moment for a tory split whch loses its majority and precipitates an election thereby handing all the problems to labour (preferably as a minority government so they cant act as they want anyway). Then Johnson would likely resign but it wouldnt matter so much who replaced him in opposition. The christmas party affair has the ability to hurt con. But precipitating Johnson's departure isnt desireable just at this minute for them. It isnt really obvious he is to blame, and could quite honestly have not known anything about an office party. That doesnt mean he can afford to lose all the people who went to it. But as I keep saying, I dont see all these people as unusually immoral. If they went to a party, they honestly believed it would do no harm. In all likelihood the whole machinery of downing street believes the measures are pointless, but policy is to follow sage advice. In turn, sage's job is not to give balanced advice and they especially deny they are making a rounded decision based upon an overall national interest. They say they are producing the worst credible case. The worst that could happen. Not even what they think is likely to happen. So what we have ended up with is government abdicating responsibility by deferring to medical advice, which itself is not a rounded balance of interest but an extreme worst case which most likely is not going to happen, and based upon experience is certain not to happen. A disatrous virtuous circle. |
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Dec 9, 2021 12:51:16 GMT
First Ashes Test, Brisbane (day two of five)
England 147 all out: Cummins 5-38
Australia 343-7: Head 112*, Warner 94, Robinson 3-48
Australia lead by 196 runs
When I said yesterday I expected the Aussies to post a first innings score of 400, I wasn't expecting them to almost get there in a single-day's play. :-(
England really are dismal; their only hope now is a massive covid outbreak in the Australian camp; they might just be able to beat a South Australia Sheffield Shield team. I wonder what the odds on a 5-0 series whitewash are now.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,512
|
Post by Danny on Dec 9, 2021 13:12:06 GMT
Hmm. Talking about the availability of NHS beds. News just reported 1 in 10 of nhs beds is currently occupied by someone healthy who cannot be discharged because there is nowhere for them to be moved to. Care services at home presumably worse able to cope than last year, when they were less able to cope than the year before..... A number I heard a week or so ago was that only 6% of nhs beds are occupied by covid cases. So on that basis, if we sorted home care we would have plenty of hospital capacity for more covid cases. Theres about a million cases crrently in the Uk, so we might reasonably have enough NHS capacity for another 1.5 million. Though I dont see cases rising to 2.5 million. Rather omicron will supplant delta and esablish a new plateau level. Might even be lower than the current million cases. It will be interesting to see where the SA cases plateau. As I suspected, these numbers sggest bed blocking is currently more of a problem for the NHS than covid.
News onto the refurbishment scandal. Since this has concluded falsehoods were perpetrated, the question becomes who did this and misled Johnson, if Johnson really didnt know. And did this same unreliable person do the same about parties.
|
|
|
|
Post by jib on Dec 9, 2021 13:29:35 GMT
@danny
"The problem though is that Johnsons led the leave campaign. Thats is really why be became con leader. Had someone else led leave then likely they would now be PM. Thats also why Cummings came to downing street."
Let's tidy up the narrative here.
Johnson tried to become Leader immediately after Cameron. He was sabotaged by Gove.
Johnson then proceeded to undermine Theresa May throughout her Premiership.
I've written before, as have others today, that Johnson will only be tolerated until he becomes a liability, at which point he'll walk the plank via 1922 Committee.
|
|
|
|
Post by jayblanc on Dec 9, 2021 13:55:02 GMT
The 1922 Committee is a fair bit defanged as their power in recent times has come from "Do this, or the Backbenches will kick off about Europe again!" but Brexit has been an existential crisis for the Conservative Party. There's no longer a unifying Europe shaped gravity-well for the 1922 Committee to slingshot things around when they want to bully the Front Benches. The current loudest voices against Johnson are from those in the North East who see a string of broken promises to 'loaned voters' putting their re-election chances in the bin. But paradoxically, being at risk of losing your seat makes you less powerful a voice in the party than the people who can assure they will still be MPs after an election.
If the knives come out for Johnson, it'll be from his own Front Benches.
|
|
|
|
Post by steamdrivenandy on Dec 9, 2021 14:04:14 GMT
@danny "The problem though is that Johnsons led the leave campaign. Thats is really why be became con leader. Had someone else led leave then likely they would now be PM. Thats also why Cummings came to downing street." Let's tidy up the narrative here. Johnson tried to become Leader immediately after Cameron. He was sabotaged by Gove. Johnson then proceeded to undermine Theresa May throughout her Premiership. I've written before, as have others today, that Johnson will only be tolerated until he becomes a liability, at which point he'll walk the plank via 1922 Committee. You mention the '22 JIB and it does seem odd there's been nothing that I've heard or seen about MP letters and yet in past episodes there's been lots of speculation about who and how many. Have the Press forgotten the process or are they keeping a lid on such discussion? |
|
|
|
Post by tancred on Dec 9, 2021 14:06:03 GMT
Danny Given the 100,000+ people charged with indictable offences every month in the UK . While in an ideal world it would be lovely to charge , prepare evidence ,call witnesses , arrange attendance for everyone, call a jury if required, ,arrange court time, arrange appropriate and robust defence and prosecution all in the time permitted with no deprivation of liberty or restriction of activities for the defendant and of course presumably instant trials and verdicts because otherwise there is a potential deprivation of liberty during the procedure. It won't happen. Because it's a la la land suggestion. In the real world these things take time. The period between prosecution and court appearance can be reduced with greater resources than the current regime provide but there's always going to be a period. If the defendant is charged with a serious offence involving physical injury or is likely to commit similar offences while at liberty based on previous behaviour or is likely to intimidate witnesses there will also always be a limited role for remand in custody. One of the biggest problems in our legal system is that too many offences require a jury trial. Juries should be reserved for very serious offences with long terms of imprisonment if found guilty - i.e. GBH and above. There is no reason why a judge, or even a panel of three judges, cannot accept responsibility for determining the guilt of a defendant for the majority of cases. |
|
