UK General Discussion:The Rt. Hon Alex Boris de Pfeffel Johnson, Populist Hero

[Estrella]

That actually seems like... a pretty damn huge scandal?

I don't think the old lady is sleeping well tonight.

[CumbrianLefty]

Also very typical that this has taken close to half a century to be "revealed".

[Conservatopia]

That actually seems like... a pretty damn huge scandal?

I don't think the old lady is sleeping well tonight.

Honestly I think it will blow over before the end of the week.  For a number of reasons:

1) As with many royal "scandals" the mainstream press and major parties won't comment too much about it
2) The palace pushed back quickly and quite hard and I expect many will consider the matter to be closed
3) It can't really be blamed on any particular political party
4) Labour attacking the queen would be terrible PR after last week's struggles
5) Ordinary people mostly don't care

[Blair]

That actually seems like... a pretty damn huge scandal?

I don't think the old lady is sleeping well tonight.

On its own it looks bad- not for the financial implication but more so for the discreet way it was done.

The crown didn't actually pay capital gains tax until 1992, despite the fact that the Queen had a private investment portfolio- which I assume is in the name of Elizabeth Windsor, rather than the various weird trusts that hold most the property owned by the crown.

As someone who is an apathetic republican I just assume this stuff has always happened; the palace did pretty much cover up the fact that the Queens Art Collector was a Soviet Spy!

[cp]

That actually seems like... a pretty damn huge scandal?

I don't think the old lady is sleeping well tonight.

On its own it looks bad- not for the financial implication but more so for the discreet way it was done.

The crown didn't actually pay capital gains tax until 1992, despite the fact that the Queen had a private investment portfolio- which I assume is in the name of Elizabeth Windsor, rather than the various weird trusts that hold most the property owned by the crown.

As someone who is an apathetic republican I just assume this stuff has always happened; the palace did pretty much cover up the fact that the Queens Art Collector was a Soviet Spy!

See also: Andrew, Prince; and Epstein, Jeffrey.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Also very typical that this has taken close to half a century to be "revealed".

More typical than that: it was 'revealed' at the time to a mild degree of fuss but then everyone forgot about it.

[njwes]

What does "FBPE" mean in the context of angry UK twitter politics?

[Silent Hunter]

"Follows Back Pro-European".

[Zinneke]

https://twitter.com/ta_mills/status/1359137705268043777/photo/1

[CumbrianLefty]

"Follows Back Pro-European".

Though if you want what it "means" in a more holistic sense, its the small but non-negligible section of the population (maybe 5% or so) who might describe themselves as more European than British.

And that has some unsurprising results - their contortions to defend the EU even over the fiasco that is their handling of the vaccine rollouts has been "amusing" to witness.

[afleitch]

'O'

That's the venn diagram of the SNP members who think trans inclusionism is misogynistic but who think Salmond's accusers were plotting harpies.

[vileplume]

That's the point though, the left (in its broadest sense, thus including the LibDems) in this country is ultimately going to coalesce around some sort of EEA/EFTA type arrangement with the EU. But only once the next GE is out of the way, in all probability.

And we *won't* be actually rejoining, not until I am in my 80s or thereabouts anyway.

Those could happen. It could also be that the left remains hopelessly divided on the issue and never coalesces around meaningful reform in the next 10-20 years. I'm more optimistic about a rejoiner movement taking off in 10ish years, but that's predicated on a fair dramatic set of policy failures on the part of the ruling party/caste (Scottish independence, Irish unification, a Suez-style diplomatic catastrophe).

The problem with Rejoining is that it's quite likely that the Tories/the mainstream right of British politics basically have a veto on it even if Labour's in power. The reason for this is that it's unlikely the EU and its member states (the French in particular) will allow a Bre-entry if there's any question about the country's total commitment to the project. If one of the two biggest political parties and roughly half the country (give or take) is against the idea, then letting the UK back in would be a recipe for instability and uncertainty that the EU simply doesn't need.

Seen as I can't see the Tories doing a volte-face on the European question over the next few decades or the public becoming overwhelmingly pro-EU and embracing a European identity, I can't see Rejoin happening even 15/20 years down the line. More likely what happens is the deal is renegotiated gradually meaning that frictionless trade, free movement (or free movement in all but name) etc. are restored but full membership is not.

[Flyersfan232]

What does "FBPE" mean in the context of angry UK twitter politics?

A cult

[Flyersfan232]

If Alliance get past DUP do they get dibs on First Minister?

No; since they are not a Unionist or Nationalist Party.  The rules on allocation are that the First Minister and Deputy First Minister must come from different communities; and the First Minister comes from the largest party of the largest community while the Deputy First Minister (which is an equal office: Co-First Ministers would be a better comparison) comes from the largest party of the other community.  The only exception is if the largest party is a cross-community party when they'd be First Minister and the largest party of the largest community would be Deputy First Minister.  The Alliance aren't finishing first in an election any time soon; so the First Minister will only realistically be a DUP or Sinn Fein politician.

Could they go back to the catholic unionist right role for it?

[TheTide]

"Follows Back Pro-European".

Though if you want what it "means" in a more holistic sense, its the small but non-negligible section of the population (maybe 5% or so) who might describe themselves as more European than British.

And that has some unsurprising results - their contortions to defend the EU even over the fiasco that is their handling of the vaccine rollouts has been "amusing" to witness.

One of the effects of the whole Brexit process was to bring out a noticeable pro-EU tendency, one that goes beyond the boring "it's in our economic interests to stay in".

[IceAgeComing]

I'm trying to decrypt what you are trying to ask there: I think you are saying that they could register themselves as being a Unionist party rather than being cross-community?

They'd never do that: it'd kill them as a party if they did since it'd split.  While a bulk of the party are probably small-u unionists and while it primarily gets support in more middle class Unionist areas - the places that were strongest for more traditional UUP style politicians where the DUPs style never played particularly well - part of the reason for that is the fact that its a cross-community party that does garner a non-zero amount of support from Catholics as well.  It also effectively guarantees them the right to hold the Justice Minister role since that's voted on a cross-community basis and the easy compromise solution is to give it to a prominent Alliance politician - indeed when Alliance refused to stand anyone in 2016 it almost scuppered power sharing months before it actually ended: they ended up having to give the role to Claire Sugden (an Independent Unionist; although the most progressive Unionist in the Assembly) because neither of the big two parties wanted it out of fear that it'd immediately put scrutiny of everything the PSNI did.

The current situation does limit the amount of power that the Alliance has but it does guarantee them at least some power as the biggest cross-community party and realistically that's not changing unless they grow signficiantly (and if they did there'd be pretty consistent calls for the community that wasn't represented in the two main offices to have a person involved in decision making as well and it'd likely happen) or unless the Greens or someone else end up having someone very suitable for the Justice Minister role and even then the Alliance might still qualify for a normal Minister.

[Blair]

"Follows Back Pro-European".

Though if you want what it "means" in a more holistic sense, its the small but non-negligible section of the population (maybe 5% or so) who might describe themselves as more European than British.

And that has some unsurprising results - their contortions to defend the EU even over the fiasco that is their handling of the vaccine rollouts has been "amusing" to witness.

One of the effects of the whole Brexit process was to bring out a noticeable pro-EU tendency, one that goes beyond the boring "it's in our economic interests to stay in".

Like with a lot of politics there's also a lot of projecting with it; they like their idea of the EU, not the reality of what it actually is.

The vaccine story has actually been quite a good test of various FBPE accounts to see if they have any critical thinking; I mean we've seen Von Der Leyen (and Macron) come out with comments that I believe are pandering to the anti-vaccine movement purely because they dropped the ball with getting enough vaccines.

These are comments that the same FBPE accounts would be screaming over if made by a UK politician in a similar context.

[Blair]

The fact that she's retweeting praise of herself certainly shows that the stories talking about her ego aren't exactly wrong.

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/scotland/2021/02/joanna-cherry-s-diary-why-i-was-sacked-coming-out-gay-aids-pandemic-and

The rather horrible news about the threats aside, this is one of the stranger NS diaries I've read.

[cp]

That's the point though, the left (in its broadest sense, thus including the LibDems) in this country is ultimately going to coalesce around some sort of EEA/EFTA type arrangement with the EU. But only once the next GE is out of the way, in all probability.

And we *won't* be actually rejoining, not until I am in my 80s or thereabouts anyway.

Those could happen. It could also be that the left remains hopelessly divided on the issue and never coalesces around meaningful reform in the next 10-20 years. I'm more optimistic about a rejoiner movement taking off in 10ish years, but that's predicated on a fair dramatic set of policy failures on the part of the ruling party/caste (Scottish independence, Irish unification, a Suez-style diplomatic catastrophe).

The problem with Rejoining is that it's quite likely that the Tories/the mainstream right of British politics basically have a veto on it even if Labour's in power. The reason for this is that it's unlikely the EU and its member states (the French in particular) will allow a Bre-entry if there's any question about the country's total commitment to the project. If one of the two biggest political parties and roughly half the country (give or take) is against the idea, then letting the UK back in would be a recipe for instability and uncertainty that the EU simply doesn't need.

Seen as I can't see the Tories doing a volte-face on the European question over the next few decades or the public becoming overwhelmingly pro-EU and embracing a European identity, I can't see Rejoin happening even 15/20 years down the line. More likely what happens is the deal is renegotiated gradually meaning that frictionless trade, free movement (or free movement in all but name) etc. are restored but full membership is not.

I'd be inclined to agree with that analysis if it weren't for the fact that the same conditions existed from the 70s-90s but with the parties' roles reversed. Prior to 1973, Labour was the party more hostile to EEC membership (both parties had pro and anti wings), but that didn't stop the Tories from petitioning for membership nor the EEC from granting it.* Flash forward 25 years and Labour had performed pretty much a volte face on the issue and became the more pro-EU of the major parties.

I agree a Rejoiner movement won't be viable as long as there's a roughly 50/50 split in opinion on the matter and until then a series of small adjustments will be made to put humpty dumpty back together again in all but name. Sadly, with the lot in charge of Labour right now, even that faint hope is unrealistic.

*Worth keeping in mind, as well, that the EEC/EU have seen the UK as a strategic partner no matter how bolshie or bigotedly anti-European the government of the day might be. Total commitment was never a condition for joining. Opposition to UK entry into the EEC prior to 1973 had more to do with DeGaulle's desire not to dilute French power or increase American influence in Europe by the back door.

[vileplume]

That's the point though, the left (in its broadest sense, thus including the LibDems) in this country is ultimately going to coalesce around some sort of EEA/EFTA type arrangement with the EU. But only once the next GE is out of the way, in all probability.

And we *won't* be actually rejoining, not until I am in my 80s or thereabouts anyway.

Those could happen. It could also be that the left remains hopelessly divided on the issue and never coalesces around meaningful reform in the next 10-20 years. I'm more optimistic about a rejoiner movement taking off in 10ish years, but that's predicated on a fair dramatic set of policy failures on the part of the ruling party/caste (Scottish independence, Irish unification, a Suez-style diplomatic catastrophe).

The problem with Rejoining is that it's quite likely that the Tories/the mainstream right of British politics basically have a veto on it even if Labour's in power. The reason for this is that it's unlikely the EU and its member states (the French in particular) will allow a Bre-entry if there's any question about the country's total commitment to the project. If one of the two biggest political parties and roughly half the country (give or take) is against the idea, then letting the UK back in would be a recipe for instability and uncertainty that the EU simply doesn't need.

Seen as I can't see the Tories doing a volte-face on the European question over the next few decades or the public becoming overwhelmingly pro-EU and embracing a European identity, I can't see Rejoin happening even 15/20 years down the line. More likely what happens is the deal is renegotiated gradually meaning that frictionless trade, free movement (or free movement in all but name) etc. are restored but full membership is not.

I'd be inclined to agree with that analysis if it weren't for the fact that the same conditions existed from the 70s-90s but with the parties' roles reversed. Prior to 1973, Labour was the party more hostile to EEC membership (both parties had pro and anti wings), but that didn't stop the Tories from petitioning for membership nor the EEC from granting it.* Flash forward 25 years and Labour had performed pretty much a volte face on the issue and became the more pro-EU of the major parties.

I agree a Rejoiner movement won't be viable as long as there's a roughly 50/50 split in opinion on the matter and until then a series of small adjustments will be made to put humpty dumpty back together again in all but name. Sadly, with the lot in charge of Labour right now, even that faint hope is unrealistic.

*Worth keeping in mind, as well, that the EEC/EU have seen the UK as a strategic partner no matter how bolshie or bigotedly anti-European the government of the day might be. Total commitment was never a condition for joining. Opposition to UK entry into the EEC prior to 1973 had more to do with DeGaulle's desire not to dilute French power or increase American influence in Europe by the back door.

It's not the same condition as the 70s because back then Labour still had a large pro-EEC faction the pro-EU faction of the Conservative Party has all but died. So yes if the pro-Europe movement could be rebuilt within the Conservative Party to the extent that a section of the party elite as well as non-negligible portion of the membership wants to Rejoin, then Rejoining would become likely. However the Tories are basically unanimously opposed and in order for that to change it would probably require a sea change in the public's attitudes with an large and consistent majority (probably 60%+ as there was for the EEC in the '70s) favouring that course of action.

I agree with the point that the EU sees the UK as a strategic partner and will seek to keep the country as close to them as possible, which will likely be achieved by changes to the deal in the coming years anyway. Obviously in their ideal world the UK would re-join as a constructive and totally committed member, however without a (near) consensus for re-joining across either the political class or amongst the general public, the chances of the UK being either a constructive or committed partner is practically nil. This means that I doubt any application by a Labour government would be accepted, remember the process for EU ascension is a very slow one anyway and a UK application is bound to hit many snags. It'd probably end up being kicked into the long grass, only to be ultimately retracted upon the Tories returning to power.

[rc18]

That's the point though, the left (in its broadest sense, thus including the LibDems) in this country is ultimately going to coalesce around some sort of EEA/EFTA type arrangement with the EU. But only once the next GE is out of the way, in all probability.

And we *won't* be actually rejoining, not until I am in my 80s or thereabouts anyway.

Those could happen. It could also be that the left remains hopelessly divided on the issue and never coalesces around meaningful reform in the next 10-20 years. I'm more optimistic about a rejoiner movement taking off in 10ish years, but that's predicated on a fair dramatic set of policy failures on the part of the ruling party/caste (Scottish independence, Irish unification, a Suez-style diplomatic catastrophe).

The problem with Rejoining is that it's quite likely that the Tories/the mainstream right of British politics basically have a veto on it even if Labour's in power. The reason for this is that it's unlikely the EU and its member states (the French in particular) will allow a Bre-entry if there's any question about the country's total commitment to the project. If one of the two biggest political parties and roughly half the country (give or take) is against the idea, then letting the UK back in would be a recipe for instability and uncertainty that the EU simply doesn't need.

Seen as I can't see the Tories doing a volte-face on the European question over the next few decades or the public becoming overwhelmingly pro-EU and embracing a European identity, I can't see Rejoin happening even 15/20 years down the line. More likely what happens is the deal is renegotiated gradually meaning that frictionless trade, free movement (or free movement in all but name) etc. are restored but full membership is not.

I'd be inclined to agree with that analysis if it weren't for the fact that the same conditions existed from the 70s-90s but with the parties' roles reversed. Prior to 1973, Labour was the party more hostile to EEC membership (both parties had pro and anti wings), but that didn't stop the Tories from petitioning for membership nor the EEC from granting it.* Flash forward 25 years and Labour had performed pretty much a volte face on the issue and became the more pro-EU of the major parties.

I agree a Rejoiner movement won't be viable as long as there's a roughly 50/50 split in opinion on the matter and until then a series of small adjustments will be made to put humpty dumpty back together again in all but name. Sadly, with the lot in charge of Labour right now, even that faint hope is unrealistic.

*Worth keeping in mind, as well, that the EEC/EU have seen the UK as a strategic partner no matter how bolshie or bigotedly anti-European the government of the day might be. Total commitment was never a condition for joining. Opposition to UK entry into the EEC prior to 1973 had more to do with DeGaulle's desire not to dilute French power or increase American influence in Europe by the back door.

The EU is not the EEC, and of course in 1973 we hadn't already left that organisation. You seem to be ignoring the nearly half century of history since 1973.

The EU will continue to seek 'more Europe', regardless of whether member states get cold feet. The EU we left will rapidly diverge to a point where they won't want us to 'spoil' their plans, like removing vetoes etc, and neither would such a trajectory be acceptable to the British public. I mean we haven't been gone long and the EU is already cosying up to China and Russia. We aren't going to rejoin.

[CumbrianLefty]

There isn't going to be a significant *rejoin* movement for a fairly long time. And for the reasons already stated, it will likely only happen if there is a move to some sort of "two tier" EU.

[Zinneke]

That's the point though, the left (in its broadest sense, thus including the LibDems) in this country is ultimately going to coalesce around some sort of EEA/EFTA type arrangement with the EU. But only once the next GE is out of the way, in all probability.

And we *won't* be actually rejoining, not until I am in my 80s or thereabouts anyway.

Those could happen. It could also be that the left remains hopelessly divided on the issue and never coalesces around meaningful reform in the next 10-20 years. I'm more optimistic about a rejoiner movement taking off in 10ish years, but that's predicated on a fair dramatic set of policy failures on the part of the ruling party/caste (Scottish independence, Irish unification, a Suez-style diplomatic catastrophe).

The problem with Rejoining is that it's quite likely that the Tories/the mainstream right of British politics basically have a veto on it even if Labour's in power. The reason for this is that it's unlikely the EU and its member states (the French in particular) will allow a Bre-entry if there's any question about the country's total commitment to the project. If one of the two biggest political parties and roughly half the country (give or take) is against the idea, then letting the UK back in would be a recipe for instability and uncertainty that the EU simply doesn't need.

Seen as I can't see the Tories doing a volte-face on the European question over the next few decades or the public becoming overwhelmingly pro-EU and embracing a European identity, I can't see Rejoin happening even 15/20 years down the line. More likely what happens is the deal is renegotiated gradually meaning that frictionless trade, free movement (or free movement in all but name) etc. are restored but full membership is not.

I'd be inclined to agree with that analysis if it weren't for the fact that the same conditions existed from the 70s-90s but with the parties' roles reversed. Prior to 1973, Labour was the party more hostile to EEC membership (both parties had pro and anti wings), but that didn't stop the Tories from petitioning for membership nor the EEC from granting it.* Flash forward 25 years and Labour had performed pretty much a volte face on the issue and became the more pro-EU of the major parties.

I agree a Rejoiner movement won't be viable as long as there's a roughly 50/50 split in opinion on the matter and until then a series of small adjustments will be made to put humpty dumpty back together again in all but name. Sadly, with the lot in charge of Labour right now, even that faint hope is unrealistic.

*Worth keeping in mind, as well, that the EEC/EU have seen the UK as a strategic partner no matter how bolshie or bigotedly anti-European the government of the day might be. Total commitment was never a condition for joining. Opposition to UK entry into the EEC prior to 1973 had more to do with DeGaulle's desire not to dilute French power or increase American influence in Europe by the back door.

The EU is not the EEC, and of course in 1973 we hadn't already left that organisation. You seem to be ignoring the nearly half century of history since 1973.

The EU will continue to seek 'more Europe', regardless of whether member states get cold feet. The EU we left will rapidly diverge to a point where they won't want us to 'spoil' their plans, like removing vetoes etc, and neither would such a trajectory be acceptable to the British public. I mean we haven't been gone long and the EU is already cosying up to China and Russia. We aren't going to rejoin.

What, when its diplomats are caught protesting for Navalny and sent home?

And I don't think the UK can really lecture people on the dangers on cosying up to China, even though I agree with you its absolutely scandalous how cynical the Germans are acting, all so that their car industry doesn't make a loss during the pandemic.

[Conservatopia]

https://www.buxtonadvertiser.co.uk/news/politics/council/whaley-bridge-election-battle-looms-between-ruth-george-and-edwina-currie-3131467

A blast from the past...

[CumbrianLefty]

George had an excellent result in winning the seat a year ago, so Currie has her work cut out.