This thread exists to discuss British politics.
Political issues related to Northern Ireland and the Crown Dependencies (the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man) are also considered on-topic here if there's no more appropriate OTC thread for them.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines before posting here.
As with other OTC threads, off-topic posts may be thumped or edited by the moderators.
- There is a dedicated thread to discuss LGBTQ+ rights in the United Kingdom. That doesn't mean it's always off-topic here, but unless something's directly linked to political events, that's probably a better thread for it.
- There's also a separate thread to talk about your favourite British Prime Ministers.
Recent political stuff:
- The vote to see if Britain should adopt Alternative Voting has failed.
- Lib Dems lose lots of councils and councillors, whilst Labour make the majority of the gains in England.
- The Scottish National Party do really well in the elections.
A link to the BBC politics page containing relevant information.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 3rd 2023 at 11:15:30 AM
Disasturbator
One would think knowing who was on the sex offender's register would actually benefit the public
Edited by Ultimatum on Feb 13th 2019 at 5:14:30 PM
New theme music also a box
If Wikipedia is to be believed it's the reverse: Allowing public shaming actually increases the chance that a sex offender will reoffend whereas a police-only register may actually work.
Disasturbator
I'd argue allowing the public to know would protect some people,too often something happens because of a lack of communication
New theme music also a box
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Sexual crimes have one of the lowest recidivism rates (only murder has a lower one). Also, most sexual offenders know their victims. So the actual risk for strangers from being near a sex offender is pretty low. And that's before lumping all kinds of offenses together and registering minors for sexual conduct with peers. Also, making names public leads to discrimination against not only the sex offenders themselves, but their whole families. The draconian restrictions put on sex offenders in the US also make them more likely to be unemployed and homeless, which increases their risk of reoffending (and committing other crimes).
Edited by Khudzlin on Feb 13th 2019 at 6:23:43 PM
Further on that Wikipedia article, the UK sex offender registry is a "closed" one so it would actually fall into the "might work" category. Most of the evidence cited on Wikipedia is about the US "open" versions, there is nothing there about whether the UK version specifically works. So I'll retract my objection on this basis.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Ten consecutive posts about something other than Brexit - What madness is this?
Back to normal service, The Guardian reports that Corbyn "faces frontbench exodus", which might sound a little more dramatic had he not already survived several.
Yeah, once upon a time this thread got into a lot of various (not always political) discussions. Now it's just the slow motion Brexit train wreck. A break from that topic was long overdue.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Disasturbator
> Which might sound a little more dramatic had he not already survived several
Still pretty bad all things considered
New theme music also a box
I barely even noticed that story given this is attempt what, five or six? Maybe they'd face less deselection votes from a spiky, defensive membership if they hadn't been doing this for three and a half years, but I imagine that at this stage anyone who would seriously ditch Labour over a resignation already has.
Not so sure. There are serious cracks showing between Corbyn and the part of Labour which supports a people's vote. And frankly, Corbyn "warning" May to not run down the clock again doesn't really have a lot of bite.
And then there is the whole thing with the "last minute or we threaten with extension" story. While the current government is uniquely incompetent, it extremely stupid for a chief negotiator to drop this kind of information, unless he wanted to be overheard.
So, what is the plan there? There are exactly two possibilities: May planning to threaten the ERG with either agreeing to her withdrawal agreement or the consequence being an extension (which I don't think will work), or May planning to lure the Labour M Ps who might vote for her deal in the last minute to avoid hard Brexit into a false sense of safety that she will extend anyway, so that she can drive the country over the cliff, hence pleasing the ERG and (in her mind) keeping the Tory party together.
In both cases the consequences would be dire.
A procrastination in of itself
There are also cracks between the Labour Brexiters and Corbyn, until I clicked the link I was expecting the threat to be of a shadow cabinet exodus if Corbyn backs a people’s vote, we’ve had that threat already.
So we’ve got the press reporting that Corbyn’s shadow cabinet will collapse if he backs a people’s vote and that it will collapse if he doesn’t back a people’s vote, is it any wonder he’s fence sitting?
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
Oh, bother.
Theresa May 'scrapes the mould off jam'
I'm torn about this story. On one hand, it seems plausible given it's Theresa May. On the other hand, it was first reported by the Daily Mail. And I don't trust that rag one iota.
Edited by M84 on Feb 14th 2019 at 2:10:34 AM
Disgusted, but not surprised
Figure of Hourai
If it's visibly growing mould I've probably forgotten about it long enough it shouldn't be eaten.
Avatar Source
Oh, bother.
And even if that anecdote is true, it's not particularly applicable. Jam is one of the few foods where scraping off the mold might be enough to make it safe to eat.
From the article:
"Generally speaking, I wouldn't be worried about the mould doing any harm," he said. "I would just question how long it has been in the cupboard, but it's safe to eat."
"Jam's got a lot of sugar in it, which stops nasty bugs getting in it. It's been made by boiling... so it's a pretty safe product."
The article also pointed out that mould produces toxins, so even if you do cut it off it wouldn't necessarily make the food safe to eat (with the possible exception of jam as stated above).
It adds that while removing the mould - along with significant amount of the surrounding product - may work, there is no guarantee it would remove all unseen toxins.
Again though, I'm not sure we should be giving so much credence to something first reported by the Daily Mail. It's the pig head thing all over again.
Edited by M84 on Feb 14th 2019 at 2:47:16 AM
Disgusted, but not surprised
Figure of Hourai
I'm not giving credence to anything. Just stating my opini9n on mouldy jam even eith the science included.
Avatar Source
The story was in the Guardian too. And my only comment to it is: Don't do it. There are some circumstances under which it is okay to do it, but that only applies to bought jam with a high sugar content which got mouldy for a specific reason. In a truly poor house jam doesn't have time to get mouldy anyway, so you most likely can afford easily to throw it away and buy a new one.
Oh, bother.
Yeah, the story was in The Guardian. But The Guardian sourced the Daily Mail. The Daily Mail was the original source of this jam thing.
And I don't trust the Daily Mail. Yes, my opinion of Theresa May is very very low. But I don't think it's a good idea to trust the Daily Mail of all things just because the story is a jammy one.
It's just a tad disconcerting (though not too surprising I suppose) that even MP's are treating the story as if it were fact.
That said of course...I find it totally plausible that May actually said this and actually does this at home.
I just wish the original source was more reliable than the fucking Mail.
Edited by M84 on Feb 14th 2019 at 3:51:34 AM
Disgusted, but not surprised
I admit, I didn't really pay attention to the source...because frankly, I don't care what Thatcher in the Rye says about her personal habits. I care that she is either completely misreading her cabinet and the EU, or she is deliberately pushing a No Deal Brexit over the line because apparently British politics is currently driven by the demands of a minority in both major parties. There was a REASON why Tusk didn't just call out those who pushed Brexit without a plan, but also the lack of realistic leadership in BOTH the government party AND the opposition.
Oh, bother.
This kind of puts the time Jeremy Corbyn admitted he hated strawberry jam to schoolchildren when they claimed it was their favorite in perspective. The man is all about his homemade apple and raspberry jams.
Edited by M84 on Feb 15th 2019 at 4:14:57 AM
Disgusted, but not surprised
Disasturbator
I'll never vote for a man that hates strawberry!
New theme music also a box
Oh, bother.
Eh, I like strawberry jam just fine, but he's got a point. Raspberry jam is a lot better.
Disgusted, but not surprised
Captain of the Dead City
I love strawberries. Strawberry jam is a lesser version of the taste. Give me raspberry jam any day for your sandwich filler.
Prefer toast with marmalade though.
"...in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach."
You're all heathens. I'm with Paddington: marmalade. 
Figure of Hourai
Lime marmalade, please.
Avatar Source
At least the UK has a more sensible approach than the US (the UK registry is not accessible to the public).