Cabinet ministers didn’t know that furlough was being extended or that “Stay At Home” was back until they saw it on the TV.
Mood among Tory MPs is seriously bad. Even those who think this is the right thing to do now are dismayed that it’s come to this.
“Shambolic. Rudderless ramblings. constituents getting in touch furious or in tears.”
“Grim grim grim”
“I think it could be his Suez”
Cabinet ministers didn’t know that furlough was being extended or that “Stay At Home” was back until they saw it on the TV.
He’s now presiding over something much worse
At what point do Whitty and Vallance walk? They were clearly unhappy with Tier 3, which was only unveiled 19 days ago.
At what point does the PM accept he is f***ed politically, ignores the polls & backbench grumbling, and focuses solely on saving the country?
True or not, shows trust is broken down locally as well as nationally
May 17: “Near normality” by end of July
July 17: “Significant normality” by Christmas
Sep 9: “back to normal by Christmas”
Oct 23: “some aspects of our lives... back to normal" by Christmas
TONIGHT: very different and better by spring
I hope if you’re reading this your next month isn’t too grim. And you have friends, family and income to get through it.
Anyway thanks for reading. Join me on @TimesRadio on Monday from 10am
More from Uk
Yesterday, of course, Jeremy Corbyn launched his Peace and Justice Project, to much excitement on here. Laudable goals too:
Take on Murdoch ✅
Green New Deal ✅
Support for food banks ✅
Speed up vaccine delivery in developing countries ✅
That's all excellent.
I'm not sure if anyone can argue with those four aims: they're irrefutable and all massively important. You bet I'd like to see Labour doing likewise; you bet I'm frustrated that it's so quiet on all of it.
HOWEVER...
Contained within the announcement was exactly the same selective blindness which makes the entire thing all too easy to shoot down - and again, means Corbyn is pretty unlikely to persuade anyone who's not already persuaded.
The sort of blindness which makes me tear my hair out.
Peace and Justice - sounds great, doesn't it? So why did the Peace and Justice project proudly announce the support of a corrupt criminal not remotely interested in either of those
Rafael Correa, former President of Ecuador. Let's run through his record, starting with the positives.
Slashed poverty from 36.7% to 22.5% ✅
Reduced inequality from 0.55 to 0.47 on the Gini index ✅
So far, so good. Except, um...
Take on Murdoch ✅
Green New Deal ✅
Support for food banks ✅
Speed up vaccine delivery in developing countries ✅
That's all excellent.
I'm not sure if anyone can argue with those four aims: they're irrefutable and all massively important. You bet I'd like to see Labour doing likewise; you bet I'm frustrated that it's so quiet on all of it.
HOWEVER...
Contained within the announcement was exactly the same selective blindness which makes the entire thing all too easy to shoot down - and again, means Corbyn is pretty unlikely to persuade anyone who's not already persuaded.
The sort of blindness which makes me tear my hair out.
Peace and Justice - sounds great, doesn't it? So why did the Peace and Justice project proudly announce the support of a corrupt criminal not remotely interested in either of those
We\u2019re delighted to have the backing of Rafael Correa, who cut poverty and inequality by record levels as president of Ecuador.
— Peace and Justice Project (@corbyn_project) January 8, 2021
There is no limit to what we can achieve when we bring people together to take on injustice.
Join us https://t.co/w6QOdSqkeC pic.twitter.com/aT8atxSYvy
Rafael Correa, former President of Ecuador. Let's run through his record, starting with the positives.
Slashed poverty from 36.7% to 22.5% ✅
Reduced inequality from 0.55 to 0.47 on the Gini index ✅
So far, so good. Except, um...
Just finished reading an article by Iain MacWhirter that is so full of demonstrable falsehoods & logical fallacies that it requires a firm response: So seeing as I’ve done one nuclear thread this week already, I might as well do another... 🧵☢️🏴🇺🇳
Iain is able to correctly identify that the submission that @SNP_SITW group made to the UK #IntegratedReview - and therefore wasn’t policy about an independent Scotland - but that’s where his grip on reality ends.
We called for unilateral disarmament, as I pointed out on Monday: https://t.co/DwHt9knqHh
Iain chooses to elide the fact that our submission was clearly not about policy in an independent Scotland, and therefore seeks to portray our request to the UK Government to be serious about its own commitments to multilateral arms control treaties — like the NPT — as SNP policy
Despite revealing that he knows a thing or two about internal SNP procedures, he then goes on to conflate two unconnected things — our submission, and a putative conference motion that the democratically-elected conferences committee (not the Leadership) decided not to accept
Iain is able to correctly identify that the submission that @SNP_SITW group made to the UK #IntegratedReview - and therefore wasn’t policy about an independent Scotland - but that’s where his grip on reality ends.
We called for unilateral disarmament, as I pointed out on Monday: https://t.co/DwHt9knqHh
Firstly, the easy part: our submission states @theSNP position clearly and unequivocally. It looks pretty unilateral to me \U0001f9d0 https://t.co/03btr7UBVh
— Martin Docherty-Hughes \U0001f3f4\U000e0067\U000e0062\U000e0073\U000e0063\U000e0074\U000e007f\U0001f3f3\ufe0f\u200d\U0001f308 (@MartinJDocherty) November 23, 2020
Iain chooses to elide the fact that our submission was clearly not about policy in an independent Scotland, and therefore seeks to portray our request to the UK Government to be serious about its own commitments to multilateral arms control treaties — like the NPT — as SNP policy
Despite revealing that he knows a thing or two about internal SNP procedures, he then goes on to conflate two unconnected things — our submission, and a putative conference motion that the democratically-elected conferences committee (not the Leadership) decided not to accept
