This Government

It is always time to move on but I’m afraid that when our Prime Minister says it I worry that it is a euphemism to avoid scrutiny and refusing to be held to account.
So to limit my reply to the Covid 19 crisis. Once the crisis is over I would want the following:
1. Answers to the question as to why there was not enough PPE equipment in hospitals or care homes during March and April and why even in May some places did not have enough.
2. Answers to the question as to why the elderly were taken from hospitals without any testing and put back into care homes. This action effectively condemned thousands to die.
3. This would then beg the question about why countries who did test and trace have far fewer deaths than we did. Why didn’t we adopt a similar policy, the evidence shows it could have saved thousands of lives.
4. Why were there large sporting events such as the Cheltenham Festival and a major European match in Liverpool with a team from Spain when Spain were already suffering large numbers of Covid deaths. In the last few days it has come to light that many scientists were calling for an earlier lockdown. So, why was the lockdown delayed?

I don’t want to pre-judge what the answers might be but am I confident that these questions will be answered? Not really, Boris Johnson does not deal with detail, he blusters his way through which works well in good times, but less well in dangerous, critical times. The Parliamentary Liaison Committee has the job of scrutinising our government. He avoided one of its twice-yearly meetings last year. But in a largely under-reported news item the Chairs of the Defence Committee, Tobias Elwood and of the Foreign Select Committee, Tom Tughenhad, two Tory critics of our Prime Minister we’re stopped from participating in the Liaison Meeting at the end of May because Boris Johnson knew they would be problematic. On the pretext of size and areas of questioning they were omitted from being invited.
Our Prime Minister has many qualities but attention to detail, acceptance of any scrutiny accompanied by detailed questioning, an ability to listen to criticism or leading a transparent government are not among those qualities.

A further issue need to be considered in the “time to move on”. 
1. Social mobility and closing the poverty gap. (Perhaps ask Marcus Rashford to be part of it any group looking at this!!) but if I went into this I would still be writing at midnight.

Our very own Trump.

Nope, heard it was a bit messy though? 

There is more to this story than is being said, I wonder what it is.

All aircraft need repainting at some point, it prolongs fuselage life meaning it can remain in service longer without replacement.

Having said that, it seems the normal costs are iro £150k, not £900k. So you would have to assume there are upgrades happening too.

If that is the case, why not admit it? Why let the narrative go as it has?

Finally, depending on the actual colour scheme, it is probably going to make the air to air refuelling task impossible in that the colours won't be suitable, therefore reducing the fleet.

my 'favourite' bit of the thread might be this story


A Brexiteer Tory MP has urged the government to let his dogs keep their freedom of movement rights after Britain leaves the EU.



Bob Stewart, the MP for Beckenham, said his "French-speaking" hounds crossed the Channel regularly on their EU "pet passports".



Millions of Britons are set to lose the ability to live and work freely on the continent at the end of the year as a result of the UK's departure from the bloc

granted, but it was something that was being pushed for before the Government declined and then did a U-turn


read all the other stuff and you just think. wow.

Brexiteer wants freedom of movement for his dogs. to that MP I say, "No Sir, do f**k off"

I agree it was such an obivious thing to do to extend the scheme in these exceptional times .
What gets my goat is the childish way all politicians behave when the government rightly changes it's mind ,the triumphalism and shouting about a uturn etc
It's the same on both sides and all it achieves is everyone digs in,its immature and doesn’t help in any circumstances .

This is an interesting point. 

I feel it comes from both sides really. If the government could actually accept they were wrong or changed their minds, rather than lie and say you misunderstood then probably the oppositions wouldn't be celebrating at every change like its Sammy Igoe at Wembley. 

But it's also the same way around, perhaps if the opposing parties didn't celebrate so much then maybe the government would admit it more? 

I feel like its a chicken & egg situation.

In truth, I think it's probably more driven by the media, than the politicians themselves. And it works both ways. Anything Corbyn related and the Sun etc. were more than happy to water themselves laughing and claiming a victory. Look how Boris cocked up his own government's advice when Starmer showed him up and the entire left (including myself) had a field day. Because of that, the Tories then came out denying it and started quoting wrong parts of the website to actually prove how they were right all along (when they weren't) and what was really a small matter became the main story in the UK for a few days. 

Probably because politics over the past 4 years has become very polarised. Brexit/ remain, Corbin / BJ, Anti-Trump / pro-Trump. Whereas Cameron and May were both PMs who tried to find a consensus (you might not agree) BJ is one who sees politics in a very partisan way and who has boxed himself into a corner of being a right-wing Conservative since being made leader and was dependent upon those votes to achieve his leadership. You’ve only got to see the clamour from some of his MPs to want him to play a strong law and order response to the recent protests. Some of them really do want him to act as Trump would.
BJ will likely get beaten by Starmer in PMQs when it comes to the argument and we can expect him to respond by blustering something about “moving on”, or quoting something he’s done, irrespective of whether he’s been forced into it by others or whatever. Whatever happens, BJ has 4/5 years to do what he set out to do and his majority allows him freedom to do that without much scrutiny of how he does it. 
In the end BJ will trumpet What he’s done not How it’s done and he won’t care about PMQs because in time I suspect he’ll avoid it as much  as he can. The means always justifies the end with Boris. And in some cases he will be right, but not all.
UTG!