Follow TV Tropes
'Baroness Blood'? That's like something from a Supervillain.
Edited by kkhohoho on Sep 5th 2018 at 7:21:46 AM
Baroness Blood is the final boss after you defeat the shadow cabinet
There's actually an old Marvel villain named Baron Blood.
Here's his wiki entry.
There's also a movie named Baron Blood.
IMDB page for the movie
Edited by M84 on Sep 5th 2018 at 9:12:09 PM
How far after the Shadow Fire Minister does Baroness Blood come? And is the Dairy Cartel invo— oh no wait, wrong country...
Labour criticises Tories over key NHS roles going to party peers
Lord Prior of Brampton will become the third Tory member of the House of Lords in an influential position in the NHS when he takes up the role in November, subject to approval from M Ps.
He will work closely with Simon Stevens, the organisation’s chief executive, a former Labour special adviser on health, as it prepares to unveil its eagerly awaited 10-year plan for how it will spend the £20.5bn extra funding Theresa May announced in June.
Prior has previously said private healthcare firms should be allowed to take over struggling NHS hospitals and suggested the service’s basis as a tax-funded service might have to be rethought.
Labour claimed his appointment was part of a pattern of Tory grandees landing important NHS roles. Dido Harding, a Tory peer, businesswoman and friend of David Cameron, is the chair of NHS Improvement. Lord Ribeiro, a former president of the Royal College of Surgeons, is the chair of the Independent Reconfiguration Panel, a group of experts that advises the health and social care secretary, Matt Hancock, on which hospital units should close as a result of NHS plans to improve care.
Responding to Prior’s nomination by the government, the shadow health minister Justin Madders said: “Patients and their families will have real questions about the independence of the NHS under this government when key positions are repeatedly being filled by Tory party grandees.
“With the NHS suffering from catastrophic mishandling and underfunding by this government, we need leaders to champion and support the NHS not defend the actions of the Tories. The secretary of state must urgently clarify how he will guarantee NHS England’s independence through this appointment, and publish the justification behind rejecting other candidates without a direct link to the Conservative party.”
The British Medical Association (BMA), which represents most of the UK’s 250,000 doctors, also voiced unease. “The BMA has repeatedly warned of the dangers of over politicising the NHS. The appointment of Lord Prior, should it go ahead, sends entirely the wrong message both to the medical profession and to patients who want an NHS working in their best interests not in the interests of party politics. We need an NHS that is run by an independent board free of party political interference and therefore the government should seriously reconsider their choice of chair for NHS England,” a spokesman said.
Prior, a former Tory MP, was a health minister for NHS productivity in 2015-16. He is also the chair of University College London hospitals NHS trust and previously chaired the Norfolk and Norwich hospitals trust. He was also the chair of the Care Quality Commission, which oversees care standards in the NHS and social care in England, from 2012-15.
The Liberal Democrat MP Norman Lamb, a former health minister, who ousted Prior from his North Norfolk parliamentary seat in 2001, defended the move, which has to be ratified by the Commons health and social care select committee after a hearing next week.
“This is a really good appointment. David has a clear understanding of the NHS and what is needed to ensure it is sustainable and responsive to people’s needs. He is also independent minded and willing to challenge government when necessary,” said Lamb.
Hancock said Prior would “bring huge experience to this important role where he will help deliver the long-term plan for the NHS. He is enormously qualified, having led an NHS trust, been a former health minister and a chairman of the CQC.”
So Bo Jo furthers his commitment to freedom of movement whist operating within a union. Clearly got his Brexit and personal life mixed up:
And I've also found myself embroiled in arguments with Brexiteers, trying to explain to them that British Army troops wearing an EU flash doesn't equate to an EU army co-opting the troops. Oh my goodness, the UKIP is strong with them, the sheer level of affronted PRIDE.
Trying to explain how we wear patches depending on deployment, attachments, secondments, exercises, command exchanges. Yep, deaf ears, dog whistle.
For those of you unaware:
Chuka Umunna is accusing Corbyn of driving centre-left M Ps out of the party.
No idea why this has come up, because there's been a distinct lack of elections to cause it.
Never let the lack of evidence get in the way of a good story.
It seems to be connected to the recent CLP no-confidence votes.
Chuka Umunna pleads with Corbyn to 'call off the dogs' after Labour centrists suffer no-confidence votes
The Streatham MP made the comments after leading pro-Israel MP claimed so-called moderates faced a “clear and present danger” of being run out of the party by hard-left factions.
Mr Umunna’s comments came after leading pro-Israel MP Joan Ryan and Luton South MP Gavin Shuker lost no-confidence votes among local party members.
Ms Ryan blamed the result on “Trots, Stalinists, Communists and assorted hard-left”, while Mr Shuker, who was elected in 2010, said: “I’ve not changed,. but the Labour Party has.”
“More motions such as this are expected by colleagues,” he will say.
“My message to our leadership: it is within your power to stop this so call off the dogs and get on with what my constituency, one of the most diverse communities in the nation, demands we do — without equivocation, fight this Tory Brexit. That is where all our efforts should be.”
Mr Umunna wil say the Brexit debate has normalised hatred and black and minority ethnic voters had “paid the price”.
He is expected to warn the Labour leadership it would be a “complete betrayal” of the party’s values to “act as a bystander and wave through this disastrous Brexit” and call for it to back a referendum on the final deal.
Mr Umunna has backed The Independent’s Final Say campaign, which features a petition to Theresa May that has been signed by more than 700,000 people.
Edited by Wyldchyld on Sep 8th 2018 at 4:35:44 PM
"Trots, Stalinists, Communists and assorted hard-left"? Yeah, I can see why someone who says things like that would be sacked.
From what I can see in the press, Chuka's speech does seem to be connected to the recent CLP no-confidence votes. Remember my previous post on the rightward shift of UK politics since the 1970s? Well, there's a disconnect between the grass roots (which the CLPs are more in line with) and Westminster (where MPs tend to be more right-wing). As a result, the Blairite MPs (currently the majority of MPs, hence them being described as 'mainstream' or 'moderate' or 'centrist') are at odds with the more left-wing membership.
On a tangent, there is a similar disconnect between the Tory MPs and their own grass roots, but in the opposite direction (the grass roots appear to be more right-wing than the MPs). As a result, the Tory MPs are increasingly nervous that they will experience a surging membership (similar to Labour's since 2015) in order to make Boris or Mogg the next PM so that Hard Brexit can be enforced.
Back to the Labour Party: There have been a recent spate of no-confidence votes by CLPs over dissatisfaction with how their MPs are representing their constituencies in Westminster. However, there appears to be two different situations at work, so it really depends on which MP is being discussed as to which situation has triggered their no-confidence vote.
Judging by what Chuka's been saying, he's focussing on the latter group of votes.
Edited by Wyldchyld on Sep 8th 2018 at 5:46:40 PM
The other big thing is that Conference is coming up, and the Corbynite left looks to be in an extremely advantageous position (especially thanks to the Momentum slate sweeping the field in the NEC elections), so the Blairites and Blue Labour (not interchangeable, but currently in a tense, fractious alliance) are mounting a desperate rearguard.
A year ago I wasn't particularly enthused by the idea of deselecting Labour M Ps and I strongly suspect Corbyn & Friends aren't either, but the more they carry on with this bollocks about Corbyn's evil Stalinist schemes the more I want them gone.
Hell, they're likely to get something they want on Brexit at the conference, the constant "left wing plot woe is me" nonsense...
And the proposed boundary changes would get rid of Corbyn's seat and threaten to remove Boris from parliament. No way at all these aren't politically motivated changes (alongside the "let's have 50 less M Ps" thing).
Well, periodic changes are always needed in FPTP district boundaries as otherwise population shifts will eventually lead to the formation of rotten boroughs. Also, "Boris Johnson fighting for his political survival" sounds fairly appealing to me.
It doesn't seem entirely coincidental that boundary changes determined under the current government would seek to remove the Leader of the Opposition from the Commons entirely and give a good shot at removing one of the obvious political rivals to the current PM.
The report indicates that the entire thing is done pretty by the numbers, they’ve assigned each region a number of seats and then within each arch region assigned sub regions a number of seats.
Boris can parachute in anywhere and Corbyn isn’t going to have any trouble getting nominated for whatever seat emerges from his area.
The problem is that they’re removing 50 seats, we need more seats, not fewer.
Brexit: May knew leave campaigners may have broken financial rules
In a formal response to a high court challenge over the legitimacy of the vote, lawyers for the prime minister are attempting to dismiss the action brought by Britons living in France, Italy and Spain.
By suggesting flaws in the referendum process were already anticipated, Joseph Barrett, the barrister who wrote the response, is implying there is nothing new for the court to investigate.
Edited by Wyldchyld on Sep 10th 2018 at 5:10:35 PM
The thing is, even if the leave campaigners broke spending limits, the vote had no power one way or another. May's under no obligation to reverse Brexit just because the referendum was a shambles from start to finish - it was "advisory" after all.
It does appear that the new constituency lines were drawn up in a very questionable way, but in a manner that suggests more incompetence than malice. The new constituency of Poplar and Canning Town, for instance, contains neither Poplar nor Canning Town. I suspect that in addition to the rather suspect data the Electoral Commission was operating off (the 2015 end-of-year voter rolls, which leave off over two million people who voted in the 2017 general election and which favour Conservative demographics more than simple population weighting would due to their higher percentage election turnout), they decided to go for some innovative digital solution rather than mapping the boundaries out by hand and through on-the-ground surveillance.
Wait are constituencies being done based on registered voters instead of population? That’s a serious change to the formula isn’t it?
This should be being done based on the 2011 census data.
Of course it is. Do you think the Tories would authorise any sort of boundary change condition that might negatively impact their seats?
Tories were only governing conservative party in western Europe to support Hungarian far-right in EU vote
The Conservatives whipped their 19 ME Ps to oppose action against Hungary, with just one defiantly voting for the motion.
The European Parliament voted by a two-thirds majority, 448–197, to start the Article 7 process against Hungary, which has been accused of violating press freedoms, undermining judicial independence, and waging an antisemitic campaign against a leading Jewish businessman.
The Conservatives, who lined up with the continent’s far-right, argued the motion was “politicised” and counterproductive, but critics at home accused them of deliberately cosying up to Mr Orban to win his support in Brexit talks.
Arriving in Strasbourg, a grateful Mr Orban heaped praise on the British government, telling reporters: “We would like to have a fair Brexit because we love the British and because we cooperated always well – and you deserve a good deal, a fair deal.”
Ahead of the vote, Conservative MEP home affairs spokesperson Daniel Dalton said the motion “crosses a boundary by politicising what should be a purely legal matter”. He argued that ME Ps should have “no role to play” in triggering Article 7, though the text Article in fact specifically gives powers to the European Parliament.
If the Article 7 procedure is taken to its conclusion it could see Hungary stripped of its voting rights at the European Council.
Green MEP Molly Scott Cato told The Independent: “The self-inflicted harm from Brexit leaves us vulnerable, having alienated our closest friends and allies. This can be the only explanation for Tory ME Ps choosing to vote to protect Orbán and his rotten regime, which has clearly failed to protect freedom of speech and the rule of law.
“Law breaking by the Leave campaigns also makes clear that Brexit risks to democratic standards at home, something that seems to have been influenced by the Tories decision to sit with unsavoury far right characters like the Sweden Democrats in the European Parliament.”
Edited by Wyldchyld on Sep 13th 2018 at 10:13:37 AM
Well, there is a reason why I think that the EU will be better off without the UK....
Community Showcase More