Zompist Bboard Again

Well, you can prove almost anything with the results of the European election:

https://socialistworker.co.uk/art/44771 ... +Remainers

This is the Socialist Worker, remember. I remember when I was in college they'd try to sell me newspapers while I walked around Madison.

We have more candidates.


Dominic Raab
Who? Former Brexit Secretary
Why? He used to have ‘Brexit’ in his job description, until he resigned in protest against the government’s (i.e. his own) performance on the Brexit issue. Having helped to negotiate May’s deal, signing off on it and recommending it to cabinet, he nobly resigned in protest against it, before voting for it. As a result, he’s seen as a reliable, hardline Brexiteer voice, and he’s not Boris Johnson. His function here is as “respectable, compromise Brexiteer candidate” – someone who looks ‘solid’ enough to reassure the Brexiteers, while not being so rebellious that he scares the moderates.

Why not? Although he’s a Brexiteer, he’s not Boris Johnson. His public profile is low, he’s not particularly popular, he’s incompetent and rather dim, and he has very limited experience of government – joining Parliament in 2010, he served 2015-2016 and 2017-2018 in junior ministerial posts until becoming ‘Brexit Secretary’, a job with no actual work attached, because nobody else would volunteer for it, before resigning six months later. He looks and sounds rather boring and he’s going bald; neither activists nor the general public are screaming his name. His name came up during the Westminster sex dossier scandal, the allegation being that there was some sort of injunction against him related to sexual harassment of a woman; he denied this emphatically, and nobody’s said anything about it for the last two years, so it’s probably not true, but if it is and it came out during the campaign it could torpedo him. Has described feminists as “obnoxious bigots”, and called for more work to level the playing field for men, who currently face considerable sex discrimination compared to women – not sure if that’ll help or hinder him with Tory voters.

Chances: Very decent. To stop Boris, MPs need to arrange to put forward two alternative names. The Remainers and moderates can get together probably to nominate one of them (most likely Hunt), but they won’t be able to grab both slots, it would seem. In that case, there would have to be a pseudo-Boris, who Brexiteers will vote for. Dominic Raab is the bookmaker’s bet to be that man (if anybody is). If he goes through to the final ballot against a moderate, he’ll probably win.
Career Highlight: Explaining excitedly to an audience that he’d recently discovered that UK trade is quite reliant on ports, and that in particular he previously “hadn’t quite understood” that the Dover-Calais link was a major route for trade with the Continent.


---

Michael Gove
Who? Environment Secretary, former Education Secretary, former Justice Secretary, spawn of Shub-Niggurath, the Black Goat of the Woods with a Thousand Young.
Why? Again, he’s not Boris Johnson. He was a leading campaigner for Brexit, but immediately caved to May and hasn’t caused trouble since, showing that he’s a Team Player. While often foolish and certainly far too certain of his own genius, he may actually be somewhat intelligent. His route is similar to Raab’s – Brexiteer who isn’t Boris – but has more appeal to moderates and those who aren’t sure Raab is up to the job.

Why not? Gives everyone the impression that he’s actually a tentacled elder thing wearing a skin suit hat doesn’t quite fit; has the wild, void-piercing eyes of someone who will one day massacre the entire cabinet while giggling and chanting praise to Nyarlathotep. Remainers won’t like him because he ran the Leave campaign (in a rather dishonest way). Boris fans won’t like him because, as Campaign Chairman of Boris’ last campaign, he made a speech ripping Boris apart and declaring him unfit for office, before standing for the leadership himself. The party is divided into people Michael Gove has stabbed in the back, and people Michael Gove is planning to stab in the back. He was sacked by both Cameron and May, before in each case worming his way back into power with a disconcerting grin.

Chances: Credible. Same route as Raab, only in this version Raab trips over his own shoelaces at some point and the party needs a replacement. “Better the devil you know!” will probably be uttered at some point by people supporting his campaign.

Career Highlight: The various times he himself has pointed out it would be absurd for him to be Prime Minister. “I’m constitutionally incapable of it”, he said. “There’s a special quality you need, and I know that I don’t have it... if anyone wants me to sign a piece of parchment in my own blood saying don’t want to be prime minister, then I’m perfectly happy to do that.” Or on another occasion: “There are lots of other folk, including in the cabinet, who could easily be prime minister. I’m not one of them. I could not be prime minister. I’m not equipped to be prime minister.” “I don’t have what it takes,” he’s said, “I don’t think I could do that.” “I don’t want to do it and there are people who are far better equipped than me to do it.”


---


Sajid Javid
Who? Home Secretary.
Why? Hasn’t made a total pig’s ear of being Home Secretary. Is BAME. Looks yonger than he is; capable on TV. Very, very right-wing. Wants to put muzzles on children, do “everything we can” to avoid granting asylum to anybody, remove government funds from any organisation that criticises the Israeli government, and wage war against the swarm of “Asian paedophiles” targeting good white children. Has denounced Labour, human rights groups and the UN as being “on the side of the extremists”. Talks of the “unique burden” upon Muslims to prevent terrorism. His heroines are Ayn Rand and Thatcher; his wife once threatened to divorce him if he didn’t stop continually re-reading The Fountainhead, aloud, to her (he claims it’s only one scene he’s continually re-reading as guidance). When he was a young man, Thatcher picked him out of the crowd at a fundraiser and prophetically intoned: “Sajid, you will protect our great island!”; as a minister, he’s refused to accept any of the government’s artworks on his walls, and just has a great big picture of Thatcher looking down on him instead; he’s been called “the first of the children of Thatcher” by fellow devotees. Made Vice President of Chase Manhattan at 24, moved to Deutsche Bank where he had a £3m-a-year salary, and took a 98% pay cut to become an MP.

Why not? Failed to be clear on Brexit: thought to be a Leaver, he switched to support Remain in the campaign (he claims it’s only because he was asked to, so that’s OK), but since then has been a Leaver and has repeatedly pushed May further toward hard Brexit... but never resigned or really prominently criticised her Brexit policies. Widely assumed to be a Muslim. Star has faded somewhat as he’s failed to get involved in Brexit, and hasn’t done anything that extraordinary at the Home Office.

Chances: Moderate. Javid’s play will be to try to change the rhetoric of the election. If it’s just an election on Brexit policy, he’ll lose (he’s not exactly ‘out of step’ with the party, but he’s not been at the forefront of that issue and won’t push it as hard as others will). But if he can move people’s minds back to the question of who would be a good leader of the Tory Party for the next decade, then Javid – very solid right-wing credentials, seems likeable, handsome, not hated by the public and at least a theoretical demonstration of diversity – will be near the top of people’s lists. He could get enough MP votes to reach the final two, and at that point he’d probably be a live contender against anyone other than Boris. However... while he probably would have won a year ago, and may well win next time, I think the focus on Brexit will just be too great for him.

Career Highlight: The Windrush scandal. Javid used his BAME status, and a rare (for a Tory) moment of empathy and decency, to push hard on Windrush in order to topple a Home Secretary from his own party, succeeded, and then took her job. Whether this is a great moment of doing the right thing despite party allegiance, or a great moment of egotistical backstabbing, or both, may be matter of debate.


---

Andrea Leadsom
Who? Former Leader of the House. Former Environment Secretary.
Why? Leadsom was the last challenger standing against May last time, so may feel it’s her turn. Two years as Leader of the House has made her CV more credible and has probably deepened her relationships with other MPs. She can also point to some experience outside politics: she used to be a debt trader. She came to prominence in the referendum as one of the most effective spokespeople for the Leave campaign, and has continued to occupy a very hard Brexit position. As a leading member of the Pizza Club, she’s been a key figure in agitating against May and against May’s deal. She’s a woman.

Why not? Leadsom’s interviews have... well, she and her supporters have blamed the ‘gutter press’ and the dishonest efforts of homosexualists to smear a good woman, but at the very least it’s fair to say she’s sometimes made comments that were ill-chosen. Asked in the last leadership campaign what distinguished her from May and why she was a better candidate, she replied: “I see myself as one, an optimist, and two, a member of a huge family... I am sure Theresa will be really sad she doesn’t have children... I feel that being a mum means you have a real stake in the future of our country”, admitting May “possibly has nieces, nephews, lots of people. But I have children”. Regarding caring for children, Leadsom’s made clear her thoughts on male care-givers: “let’s face it, most of us don’t employ men as nannies... you can call that sexist, I call that very sensible. We know paedophiles are attracted to working with children.” Regarding the free press, she once tried to stop an interviewer asking her questions, on the grounds that “It would be helpful if broadcasters were willing to be a bit patriotic!” by not questioning government policy. Although she’s been an ardent Leave supporter, she earlier admitted that leaving the EU “would be a disaster for our economy.” She’s advocated a return to fox hunting, and opposed same-sex marriage on the grounds that marriage should be reserved only for Christians. She herself is an admitted Christian. She used not to believe in climate change. She lied on her CV, changed her CV, admitted changing her CV, and then bafflingly lied about never having changed her CV. All together, many people have the impression that she is, at best, very naive when it comes to public relations, and at worst rather stupid.

Chances: Unclear. As with Gove and Raab, her route is as a Brexiteer alternative to Boris. She’s even less popular than those two, both with Tory activists and with the general public, so I doubt she has much chance (she was the last rival to May last time because few people stood and everyone else bowed when when their defeat was inevitable). However, she’s apparently well-connected among MPs – and if she does well in early ballots, support could coalesce around her.
Career Highlight: Her tenure as City Minister was legendary among civil servants. She was described by one civil servant there as “the worst minister we ever had. … She found it difficult to understand issues or take decisions.”

---

Kit Malthouse
Who? Good question. The overwhelming response to his candidacy seems to have been “wait, you mean, that’s a person?”. Allegedly, he’s not only a person, but also “Minister of State for Housing and Planning”. Good for him.
Why? The Malthouse Compromise was quite famous a couple of months ago as the unofficial leading rival to May’s plan (it says we should agree with the EU that we’ll get a better deal than member states do, and we’ll solve the Irish Border Question through magic that will be revealed to us in the future but we should have faith in now. Sorry, technology, not magic. “Technology”). It turns out, the plan was actually named after a guy, Kit Malthouse, and as a result Malthouse thinks he should be Prime Minister. [the Compromise was described as “bonkers” by the EU, and voted down 374-164 by Parliament.]

Why not? Because, as Malthouse himself explains, “nobody knows who I am”. Nor does there seem to be any evidence that those who bother to find out who he is will find the endeavour rewarded.
Chances: None. Barring miracles.
Career Highlight: His name was used for a bad idea.


----


Graham Brady
Who? Chairman of the 1922 Committee (until this week).
Why? Presumably, after a career of anonymity, he’s enjoyed being mentioned in the press in recent months and would like this to continue. More seriously, he does presumably have connexions among MPs.
Why not? He’s unpopular among MPs and basically unknown in the party except as a name attached to his job description. Those who supported May don’t like the fact he effectively removed her from power. Those who didn’t support May don’t like the fact he failed to remove her from power for so long.
Chances: Probably nearly zero, unless he knows something we don’t, and I don’t think he does.
Career Highlight: Forcing a Prime Minister from his own party from office.



There are at least nine further potential candidates deliberating whether or not to jump in.

It might be quicker to list people not running. Top of that list are Philip Hammond (no chance, too Remain), Jacob Rees-Mogg (backing Boris), and Amber Rudd (rumoured to be backing Boris, in exchange for a top cabinet post).

I could read Sal talking about Tories all day.

Did May simply vanish? I imagine her wandering the halls, perhaps forever, buttonholing MPs to plead that they pass Her Deal.

Is Liddington running? I remember him from John Bull's parody scripts.

Salmoneus wrote: ↑Tue May 28, 2019 5:08 pm Andrea Leadsom
...She herself is an admitted Christian...

Perhaps best qualify that - put a TM after it, or maybe do what my dad does and spell it "Chrisschun" or similar. She's the kind of conservative evangelical epitomised by groups like Christian Concern, and as such causes no end of general headaches for the rest of the church, which is not helped by the fact that they appear to be in the ascendant at the moment.

zompist wrote: ↑Tue May 28, 2019 5:47 pm I could read Sal talking about Tories all day.

So could anyone. He's in danger of bringing the entire internet grinding to a halt.

zompist wrote: ↑Tue May 28, 2019 5:47 pm Did May simply vanish? I imagine her wandering the halls, perhaps forever, buttonholing MPs to plead that they pass Her Deal.

Given her tenacity, that's very probable. But she's had to go to Brussels for her final European summit first, ironically.

zompist wrote: ↑Tue May 28, 2019 5:47 pm Is Liddington running? I remember him from John Bull's parody scripts.

No sign of him yet.

Meanwhile, it is a truth universally acknowledged that the front-runner in a Conservative Party leadership election never wins. How many people saw this coming? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48445430

zompist wrote: ↑Tue May 28, 2019 5:47 pm Did May simply vanish? I imagine her wandering the halls, perhaps forever, buttonholing MPs to plead that they pass Her Deal.

Here you go.

zompist wrote: ↑Tue May 28, 2019 5:47 pmI could read Sal talking about Tories all day.

I know, right? I LOLed at the description of Gove. I can scarcely believe he was born only three years before me and not a century-and-a-half.

alice wrote: ↑Tue May 28, 2019 12:47 pm Well, you can prove almost anything with the results of the European election:

https://socialistworker.co.uk/art/44771 ... +Remainers

This was written 2 years ago about the general election where Labour made significant gains from both Leavers and Remainers.

MacAnDàil wrote: ↑Wed May 29, 2019 1:54 pm

alice wrote: ↑Tue May 28, 2019 12:47 pm Well, you can prove almost anything with the results of the European election:

https://socialistworker.co.uk/art/44771 ... +Remainers

This was written 2 years ago about the general election where Labour made significant gains from both Leavers and Remainers.

Bloody hell, so it was. That's my credibility shot to pieces for the next few decades at least.

alice wrote: ↑Wed May 29, 2019 7:20 am

zompist wrote: ↑Tue May 28, 2019 5:47 pm I could read Sal talking about Tories all day.

So could anyone.

No, they couldn't.

Vijay wrote: ↑Wed May 29, 2019 8:34 pm

alice wrote: ↑Wed May 29, 2019 7:20 am

zompist wrote: ↑Tue May 28, 2019 5:47 pm I could read Sal talking about Tories all day.

So could anyone.

No, they couldn't.

I impolitely disagree. Great posts, Sal.

zompist wrote: ↑Tue May 28, 2019 5:47 pm I could read Sal talking about Tories all day.

Thank you (and others). Glad to amuse (and/or inform) somebody.

Did May simply vanish? I imagine her wandering the halls, perhaps forever, buttonholing MPs to plead that they pass Her Deal.

Well, she's still Prime Minister - she's staying on until there's a replacement. The PM is working on behalf of the Queen, and apparently it's impolite to, in effect, ditch the Queen before you can recommend a replacement for yourself.

But she has no power before she announced her resignation, and she has even less now. Parliament has nothing to do, the summer holidays are coming up, she's the lamest possible duck... so yeah, other than the odd diplomatic trip she's pretty much just going to be wandering the halls for a bit now. And yes, she's tasked her sucessor with getting her deal through, compromising, and finding the centre ground. These recommendations I don't think are being heeded wholeheartedly...

Is Liddington running? I remember him from John Bull's parody scripts.

Weirdly, I can't find anything conclusive. He's been pretty silent, to the extent that I thought he'd ruled himself out, but I can't find him actually saying that. I suspect he won't bother, because he'd get thrashed - he's strongly Remain, and tainted by association with May. It's a shame, because he's one of the few adults in cabinet.

Speaking of Remainer adults, apparently I spoke too soon: Hammond is now considering running after all, if nobody else (like Lidington) comes forward to represent his views. He's suggested a second referendum, and has publically mulled voting to bring down a Tory government if it attempted No Deal, so... whether he runs or not, he won't win.

And speaking of speaking too soon: it seems Brady isn't actually officially running yet, as some people reported. He's resigned his current job, but he hasn't officially declared his candidacy for a new one. Possibly because candidates need two nominations to get on even the preliminary ballot, and I don't know if he can find two other people to support him...


In other news:

- McVey's weighed in on a current issue, which is whether Muslims should be allowed to opt out of having their children learn about the existence of homosexuality in public schools. [there's a school, there have been protests in streets, teachers have been getting death threats, etc]. It's a tricky issue for people like McVey: on the one hand, Muslims, but on the other, the gays. She's opted for the line that "parents know best" what their children should be taught, so the poor Muslim children shouldn't be confused by these newfangled ideas if their parents aren't in favour. [and then when those children are adults, she can condemn them for failing to integrate into tolerant British society...]

- Raab's accused Lidington of treason. Back when, when Raab was Brexit Secretary, he attempted to overthrow government policy by secretly coming to a private agreement with Ireland, which would have been to accept May's deal only with the backstop removed. He now says that Lidington personally intervened to persuade the Irish to pretend to demand the backstop, which was invented by remainers just to punish Britain. He's previously angrily accused the Irish of having leaked his secret talks to May.

- it should probably be mentioned that the Lib Dems are having their own leadership election, as Vince Cable has stood down. It's a shame - Cable's a smart and honourable guy, who maybe should have been leader ten years earlier. He added greatly to Lib Dem credibility in the last years of the previous decade, when throughout 2007 and 2008 he regularly appeared on TV as the lone Jeremiah of the coming financial meltdown, and then spent 2009 and 2010 on TV explaining what we had to do to get out of it - he became both respected and liked as a result. But, somewhat self-effacing, he was happy to back up Nick Clegg, and although he was about the only prominent LD who was visibly chafing against the reins of the coalition, his reputation was inevitably damaged by it. He took over after Farron as effectively a caretaker, but between both main parties melting down and brexit going on, and his own likeable but uncharismatic style, he struggled to get any TV time for his party. He did, however, drive the party into an all-out, 'bollocks to Brexit' Remainer campaign, which seems to have lead to at least a temporary revival for his party, so I guess he's quitting while he's ahead, and he'll be, for the most part, warmly remembered by his party.

- speaking of which: tonight, a shock Yougov poll (on general election intentions) has the Lib Dems in first place, on 24% - Brexit Party on 22%, Tories and Labour tied on 19%. First things: it's just a poll. Although Yougov have a very good reputation. Second: although it's on GE intentions, people's responses are necessarily coloured by the fact we've just had local and european elections and no general election is actually scheduled. Once such a campaign does start, people's minds will be concentrated and generally the top parties rise in the polls. Also, the main parties will at least try to respond to popular concerns between now and the election. And, of course, the LDs could indeed win a plurality of the vote, and still be awarded no seats, so...

But it's still a shocking poll. Nothing like it has ever happened before. And the numbers do make sense. The LDs seem to be gaining by defections from the Greens, which makes sense - outside one or two constituencies they have no hope of winning any seats, so there'll be a tranche of Greens who vote tactically, probably for the LDs. The Tories, meanwhile, will apparently regain some of the votes lost to the Brexit Party, which again makes sense, since the Brexit issue will be a little less dominant in the general (though still the major issue!).

Surely, you'd think, Labour must respond... and yet so far Corbyn refuses to budge on his Brexit policy of "avoiding being seen in public and not answering any questions"...


- oh, and the votes of people of EU origin were systematically excluded from the elections. As in, millions of them. You see, five things had to happen in order for EU citizens (a term that nobody in the UK realises still includes all of us!) to vote:
a) they had to register to vote
b) their local council had to send them a form
c) they had to fill out the form, confirming that they weren't voting in their country of origin, and send it back
d) it had to be received by a certain date by their local council
e) their local council had to process the form by a certain date.

They mostly did a). But nobody ever told them they had to do c), so when many councils didn't do b), they didn't know to complain until it was too late. When a-c did happen, very often d) did not happen. And when d) did happen, the councils just didn't do e). So far, there's no evidence of a conspiracy, although certainly nobody could pretend to be shocked if it turned out council workers in certain areas simply didn't want EU citizens to vote. Councils, however, are radically underfunded, and because Parliament refused to admit that time was passing, they only had two weeks to do all this (from when it was confirmed the elections would be happening to when they happened), which is already pushing the royal mail's ability to send a letter on two journeys at what must have been a time of very high volume use.


- oh, and because car companies thought brexit was happening at the end of march, car manufacturing dropped 50% in april. But not to worry, that's not in any way a sign of what will happen when brexit actually does happen!

Salmoneus wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2019 5:38 pm - speaking of which: tonight, a shock Yougov poll (on general election intentions) has the Lib Dems in first place, on 24% - Brexit Party on 22%, Tories and Labour tied on 19%. First things: it's just a poll. Although Yougov have a very good reputation. Second: although it's on GE intentions, people's responses are necessarily coloured by the fact we've just had local and european elections and no general election is actually scheduled. Once such a campaign does start, people's minds will be concentrated and generally the top parties rise in the polls. Also, the main parties will at least try to respond to popular concerns between now and the election. And, of course, the LDs could indeed win a plurality of the vote, and still be awarded no seats, so...

But it's still a shocking poll. Nothing like it has ever happened before. And the numbers do make sense. The LDs seem to be gaining by defections from the Greens, which makes sense - outside one or two constituencies they have no hope of winning any seats, so there'll be a tranche of Greens who vote tactically, probably for the LDs. The Tories, meanwhile, will apparently regain some of the votes lost to the Brexit Party, which again makes sense, since the Brexit issue will be a little less dominant in the general (though still the major issue!).

As far I have seen from this poll, the Greens have also gained (going up to 8%) so I don't think Greens moving to Lib Dems is the main movement here. It would appear it's mainly ex-Labour Remainers who shifted to Lib Dem (or the Greens) for the Euro elections deciding to stay there in the end for the general.

Sorry, I was comparing to the European elections, not to the status quo ante bellum. The Greens are up in this poll relative to the last general election, but they're down relative the last European elections - they've dropped four points and the Lib Dems have risen 4 points, and while it's too simplistic to say it's a simple transfer, that probably is the main source of the new support.

Updating you on a couple more hopefuls (in the most generous sense of that word):

James Cleverly
Who? I literally did not know who this was until I looked him up. To be fair, though, I do recognise him now that I’ve seen his picture. He’s done some TV interviews and stuff. He’s apparently the Parliamentary Under-Secretary* for Exiting the European Union. Has been since, oh, April, it seems. He only entered Parliament in 2015. He’s also been Deputy Chairman of the Conservative Party, but so has everyone – they have several at a time and the job is so inconsequential I can’t even find a list of the current ones, let alone who’s been one in the past.

Why? He’s both a Conservative and black (which is largely why I recognise him). Well, probably mixed-race, but black by the standards of the Conservative Party (his mother was from Sierra Leone). He’s from London. He says “No Deal is better than No Brexit”, but they all say that, so. Oh, and he’s released an video online mocking the bad online videos of Rory Stewart**. And he has Brexit in his (newly-acquired) job description. I mean, he doesn’t really, but that’s what everyone thinks of DEXEU as, so that’s good enough.

Why not? I still don’t know who he is. He’s toyed with eliminating the minimum wage, and he voted to cut benefits for the disabled. He’s admitted having watched porn, and he’s taken illegal drugs. He defended the other black Conservative, Shaun Bailey, against allegations of bigotry, explaining that Bailey’s point was simply that learning about Islam and Hinduism, rather than “their own Christian culture” can drive black people into lives of crime. Yes these objections are just taken from his wikipedia page... because ]I don’t know who he is. He’s allegedly the 49th most famous Conservative politician, but I wonder how many people are just confusing him with someone else.

Chances: Well, maybe he’s really good! But it seems unlikely. With no reputation or experience and, so far, no policies, his prospects don’t look great. I suspect they’re not meant to. Before becoming an MP, Cleverly was in the London Assembly*** (this may also be why some people have allegedly heard of him), and one of the few things I can find out about him is that he’s been mentioned as a possible candidate for Mayor in next year’s elections – the leadership contest circuit is probably a good way to boost his name-recognition with the mayoral nomination in mind.
Career Highlight: In 2015, he became an MP.



Mark Harper
Who? He’s less well-known than James Cleverly. How less well-known? I don’t know. Yougov only poll on their top 91 Conservatives, and Harper isn’t well enough known for them to have measured how well known he is. I recognise neither his face nor his name. It turns out, though, he’s actually someone a lot of people will have seen around at some point. He’s been an MP since 2005, and he’s been a party spokesman on armed forces welfare issues, the Shadow Minister for Disabled People, a junior minister at the Cabinet Office, Minister for Immigration, Minister for Disabled People, and even Chief Whip. I actually remember lots of the stories he’s been involved in, I just have this weird shadow in my memory that occludes any awareness I may ever have had of him as a person.

Why? He says it’s important to have new thinking and fresh ideas, from someone outside the top team, which he certainly is. His thinking isn’t really new, because he’s been around since 2005, but nobody else seemingly remembers hearing about him either, so it seems new.
Why not? Aside from his superficial anonymity, when you re-acquaint yourself with what he’s been involved in, it’s mostly unpopular things that he failed to accomplish. He worked on changing constituency boundaries to benefit the Tories, but it failed. He promoted the ‘exciting opportunity’ of selling off the nation’s forests, but it never happened (police had to step in to rescue him from a mob when he announced the idea publically). He worked on Lords reform, but it never happened. He worked hard to ensure that net immgration decreased, which it didn’t. He was forced to apologise for sending vans through the streets with “Go home” written on the sides. He was in charge of several welfare payment systems, which were plagued by failures. He supported the ‘very sensible’ idea of banning fat people from receiving welfare, but that never happened. At the same time, he failed to make any savings. He supported repealing fox hunting, but that didn’t happen either.

Chances: I kid you not, the man’s own wikipedia page hasn’t yet noticed he’s running. Given that nobody’s heard of him, I suspect he has to maintain it himself, and he may, let’s charitably suggest, be busy right now.

Career Highlight: When he was Immigration Minister, he spearheaded an drive to push employers to conduct checks on whether their employees might be illegal immigrants. He was then immediately forced to resign as Immigration Minister because one of his personal employees was an illegal immigrant.




* “No one who hasn’t been a Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State,” explained the Duke of Devonshire once, “has any conception of how unimportant a Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State is”. The highest (de facto) political rank in this country is to be one of the four Great Officers of State – the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Foreign Secretary and the Home Secretary, more or less in that order. Next come the other Secretaries of State – excluding Home and Foreign (PM and Chancellor aren’t SofSs), there are 16 of these, they’re all in Cabinet and head government departments of varying importance. The Leaders of the Lords and Commons are of equivalent rank, and currently the Party Chairman is also a ‘Minister without Portfolio’ in Cabinet. Next are a couple of weird posts that haven’t been fitted into the normal rank system, who ‘attend’ Cabinet but aren’t ‘members’ of it, like the Attorney General, the Chief Whip, and the Chief Secretary to the Treasury. After these, there come the Ministers of State, who have narrower portfolios and who are subordinate to a department head (Minister for Women, for instance, is a job within the Home Office), and some of whom are subordinate to others (the Minister for Women and the Miniter for Equalities, for instance, are subordinate to the Minister for Women and Equalities). However, by law there can be no more than 50 paid Ministers (Secretaries are Ministers, but not all Ministers are Secretaries), so there’s also the overflow position of Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (or plain ‘Parliamentary Secretary’, or ‘Parly-Sec’ - ‘Parliamentary’ indicating they’re MPs, unlike the ‘Permanent (Under-)Secretaries’, who are civil servants). There can be 83 paid ministers+parly-secs, and 12 more unpaid.



**Rory Stewart (who, tangent, has now admitted smoking opium, one-upping Jeremy Hunt, who’s only admitted smoking cannabis – and let’s be honest, while using Class A drugs, even when sojourning through Persia as in this case, is of course a bad thing, I can’t deny that opium has got to be one of the most Conservative drugs you could confess to taking...) has been trying to do an O’Rourke, wandering around the place recording pointless videos of what he’s been doing. But people have noticed – and he’s admitted – that he’s actually just pretending to hold his cameraphone to record them. Actually someone’s just using a camera, while he holds his arm out in front of himself unconvincingly to demonstrate his common touch.


***an elected body of absolutely no power or responsibility. Their job is to ‘hold the Mayor to account’, but they have no actual legislative or administrative powers. All they can do is periodically ask the Mayor (and some others) questions, which they refuse to answer. It’s an extremely well-paid job that exists purely to give dozens of minor politicians a platform for media grandstanding, and presumably something of an ego boost.

Salmoneus wrote: ↑Sat Jun 01, 2019 4:39 pm“No one who hasn’t been a Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State,” explained the Duke of Devonshire once, “has any conception of how unimportant a Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State is”.

This reads like a Terry Pratchett quote. (and indeed, your posts about British politics have explained some of Discworld's politics...)

Ramdon thought that is not specific to the UK: I think we should just get rid of the idea of 'illegal immigrant'. I mean what's the actual difference between a 'legal' and 'illegal' immigrant? Some paperwork. And who the hell wants to do paperwork anyway? We should just say 'paperworkless immigrant'.

"undocumented" gets used in more or less that way.

Who in the name of all that is holy is Sam Gyimah?