Army Rumour Service

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Boris - The Prime Minister

First thoughts on PMBoris, will he make a difference?


  • Total voters
    609
I think BoJo is about to sail into very troubled waters, with a lot of it coming from his own back benches.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politic...down-rishi-sunak-furlough-update-brexit-news/


There is a debate scheduled for next Monday.


I think BoJo is going to be on the end of a lot of incisive questioning - a lot of it from his own back benches. And some of the criticisms will be difficult to defend against - such as why he is gradually edging back towards a more stringent lockdown for all ages when the risk of death is far, far higher in the over 65's and minimal below that.

Until now, BoJo has put his policies though without it being subject to scrutiny by parliament. I don't think he's going to be able to renew his powers 'as-is'. There is a move afoot among Tory MP's - who will align with the opposition - to force him to renew the bill on a monthly basis.

Which will both force him to explain a longer term strategy and mean that every decision of his will be subject to regular parliamentary scrutiny.

This is a self-inflicted wound by BoJo.

Wordsmith
This has been explained at length.
Children are at minimal risk but can then infect their elder relatives.
Boris has actually been consistent on this since he first wanted to reopen the schools.
 

Wee Hawken

Swinger
I said months back that Boris would be gone by Christmas, but said 'ill health' would be the reason. I still think he'll be gone but now think he'll be pushed out.
My guess is a bit longer than that, as he will need to declare a glorious victory over the nasty Europeans on 31 Dec - then probably gone by around Spring 2021, to the back benches alongside some journalism and a part-time sinecure with a bank or hedge fund.

Not altogether a bad bloke in many ways and certainly an impressive campaigner (barring some, er, integrity issues) but woefully out of his depth as PM - it's a shame he had to find out the hard way.
 
Not just the UK mate, Marseilles has just kicked the arrse out of it and is now on severe ROPs.
No bars, restaurants or gyms (as if a certain demographic ever would go there) open at all from Saturday onwards

Same was announced for Toulouse last night (although from now onwards not saturday obviously).
 

Wordsmith

LE
Book Reviewer
And, yet, a few posts ago you were bitching about policy u-turns.

Do you walk around the house pontificating too?

ETA: beaten by @Trackpen

Yep and you will also have seen my post pointing out:
  1. Rishi Sunak only changed direction after 6 months when a new economic policy was required.
  2. BoJo has not changed his policy on Brexit - he has red lines and is sticking to them.
  3. He's presided over half a dozen Covid 19 u-turns.
As I've also pointed out before, there is also substantial concern amoug Tory MPs.
Even Conservative MPs felt a sense of Downing Street pulling in different directions as backbenchers questioned the PM's priorities. One particularly peevish Tory described "the boss" as "AWOL", running a "Government with no strategy… a Government of third-rate hangers-on and sycophants".

Another said: "It's the inconsistency that is getting MPs down. Number 10 seems to spend a lot of its time panicking and lurching from one crisis to the next. We need a steady hand."

And
The revolt against the latest lockdown rules, being led by the 1922 committee chairman, Sir Graham Brady, certainly speaks of a disconnect between Mr Johnson and the party faithful who propelled him to power in July last year.

When the Tory back bench rebellion against the Covid restrictions is being lead by the chair of the 1922 Committee, it means concern is running deep in the Tory party; not at BoJo's leadership per se, but at his inability to come up with, articulate and stick to a long term Covid 19 strategy.

Wordsmith
 

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
Yep and you will also have seen my post pointing out:
  1. Rishi Sunak only changed direction after 6 months when a new economic policy was required.
  2. BoJo has not changed his policy on Brexit - he has red lines and is sticking to them.
  3. He's presided over half a dozen Covid 19 u-turns.
As I've also pointed out before, there is also substantial concern amoug Tory MPs.


And


When the Tory back bench rebellion against the Covid restrictions is being lead by the chair of the 1922 Committee, it means concern is running deep in the Tory party; not at BoJo's leadership per se, but at his inability to come up with, articulate and stick to a long term Covid 19 strategy.

Wordsmith
I won't try to pretend that it's all been going like clockwork, but U turns? A handy pejorative label, but covering a wide variety of situations. Personally, I am in favour of changes to policy in light of new circumstances or evidence, whilst I'm less positive about caving to the latest PR clanger.

The antipathy of the media to Boris, Brexit etc has overflowed into the reporting of the government's Covid response, resulting in all reporting being done through a very negative filter. That's not to say they've got everything right, more that they haven't got everything wrong (which is the impression given by MSM). IMHO they've done a pretty good job over all, remaining as agile as they could, and following the science.

The negative reporting has causeded the PM to give way on some areas he really shouldn't have, which has just led the Media to scream for more blood. Of course, where he has held his ground, the Media has screamed even louder.

The unrest within the Parliamentary party is of concern, but I think that we're a long way from a change of PM, regardless of what some on here might fantasise about.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
My guess is a bit longer than that, as he will need to declare a glorious victory over the nasty Europeans on 31 Dec - then probably gone by around Spring 2021, to the back benches alongside some journalism and a part-time sinecure with a bank or hedge fund.

Not altogether a bad bloke in many ways and certainly an impressive campaigner (barring some, er, integrity issues) but woefully out of his depth as PM - it's a shame he had to find out the hard way.
Out of his depth - is he really? He has had Covid-19 to deal with and has done so probabkly better than most in Parliament. He has a good team who have dealt with the constantly changing issue.

He has keep the EU in their box and not allowed them to walk all over us as Mrs May did.

He has had to go and help the Mayor of London as one of his major projects was in danger of going tits up.

He has an excellent Chancellor as one of his team who appears to be dealing with the catastrophic issues in the economy quite well.

Overall I think Boris is well up to the job as PM. A good PM is a delegator who can pick the people to do the job, again unlike his predecessor who had her hand on everything thus giving attention to nothing. Boris has delegated and seems to be working well under the circumstances. Often he is compared to Sturgeon but she has very few responsibilities compared to Boris and she is another who keeps every decision to herself and does not let the responsible Ministers do their job. Sounds good on Covid while the rest of Scotland falls apart!

Overall Boris is doing well and given some breathing space after Brexit and Covid then he will have the chance to come out with his own policies. Still over 4 years to the next election.
 
Mutual emnity aside, could you please explain how a hard border would breach the GFA when the GFA itself is silent on customs, duties and related infrastructure matters?

It's a serious question, so a serious answer please (i.e. not a "meme" or link to Pelosi's blather). I'd be grateful if you could explain.
Apologies for the delay.

My understanding of the GFA is that one pivotal piece is the freedom of movement within the island of Ireland. The UK has benefitted from being in a Customs Union within the EU which meant that goods could travel across internal borders free from tariffs and Customs intervention.

There is no real doubt that some kind of border checks / controls will be made when goods cross the border between NI and the RoI. While the Common Travel Area isn't predicated on membership of the EU (its been going for nearly a century) there is a risk that HMG will want to have some kind of control on who enters the UK post Brexit - given it was one of the main rallying cries for Leave - and and such checks will likely be done at the NI / RoI border.

Having fixed Customs posts is anathema to many in the island of Ireland. I would expect there would be a very real risk of them being attacked by various parties with an interest in having zero cross border checks. Any such attacks could eventually lead to a Garda / PSNI presence at the border, and in turn, the possible backup of the military.

Likely? No.

Impossible? Also, no.

Some interesting pieces below.




As an aside, I don't actually have any animosity towards you, just a mild puzzlement as to why you seem to take my posts in the manner you do.
 
Last edited:
Do you always get your chums to walk you home? It is clearly daylight so perhaps a long lunch! Boris won't raid pensions, the companies will do that to try and keep their business afloat!

Right that gives you plenty to Grrr about!
Companies can't "raid their pensions" you silly.
 
I like your comment - no chums visible and it looks to be way after 10pm. Cummings is probably still in the pub. Saint Boris of Churchilland can clearly do no wrong. It will be interesting when he raids pensions!

Hes screwed if he wants to raid mine

Brown shafted mine years ago

Edit @Bravo Bravo - I assure you he did way back when Blair was PM circa 2000 ish - Ok you can argue he didnt raid them as in take money out - he just crippled them with tax - thus ripping the value away.

Even caused some to collapse - of course it was only private sector schemes so only fat cats sufferred - oh and the working man.
 
Last edited:
My understanding of the GFA is that one pivotal piece is the freedom of movement within the island of Ireland. The UK has benefitted from being in a Customs Union within the EU which meant that goods could travel across internal borders free from tariffs and Customs intervention.

You understood wrong

The part that you were looking for was in the BBC article that you linked.

The only place in which it alludes to infrastructure at the border is in the section on security.

During the Troubles there were heavily fortified army barracks, police stations and watchtowers along the border. They were frequently attacked by Republican paramilitaries.

Part of the peace deal involved the UK government agreeing to a process of removing those installations in what became known as "demilitarisation".

Customs posts are not military barracks, police stations or watchtowers.

There is nothing in the GFA which refers to trade.
 
You understood wrong

The part that you were looking for was in the BBC article that you linked.





Customs posts are not military barracks, police stations or watchtowers.

There is nothing in the GFA which refers to trade.

That woosh noise you just heard...
 

Helm

MIA
Moderator
Book Reviewer
The Independent has thrown its weight into the ring with a world beating piece of journalistic mental and moral gymnastics...

How can this government criticise Labour’s ‘illegal wars’ when it’s breaking international law itself? | John Rentoul (behind a paywall)

Apparently, Boris Johnson's a hypocrite because the Defence Secretary lost his temper and told a former Blairite some home truths:

Ben Wallace, the defence secretary, caused a flutter in parliament yesterday when he rounded on John Healey, his mild-mannered Labour shadow, for “your illegal wars”. Healey had accused him of trying to make it harder to prosecute British troops over torture allegations, contrary to Britain’s obligations under international law.
Wallace hit back by saying that “much of the mess we are having to come and clean up today” was caused by “illegal wars” under the Labour government. Healey, who was a junior Treasury minister in Tony Blair’s government at the time of the Iraq war, responded: “That is not worthy of the office of the secretary of state for defence.”


So the Cindy thinks that there is moral equivalence between actually invading Iraq, and potentially disregarding part of a treaty where it is implicitly stated that where bad faith is shown by then it can be disregarded. Never mind that British soldiers have been hounded for years over trumped up allegations, as soon as the Cindy hears Saint Tony being maligned, it roars out of its hutch spitting fire and lettuce.

Okay, it's only the Independent, and its online paywalled circulation is rather less than General Melchett's Top Secret list*, but still this article should be applauded for its effort to twist and distort morality and reality into a textbook piece of whataboutery.

Kudos.




*"You and me obviously Darling..." etc
Did Wets write it?
 
I didn't hear a whoosh.

I did read you making a complete **** of yourself though.

Yay friday!

How very unlike you to come in all guns blazing and make a cock of yourself.

Said nobody, ever.

Knew you'd be the first to bleat.

Ha ha.

Now, hush.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top