In what comes as yet another in a series of difficult stories for the governing party, the Minister for Space, Research and Innovation Padanub has publicly come out against devolution. He becomes the second high profile Conservative to have done so, following LotHoL Baron Blackmore reiteration of past opposition last week.
The comments were made in a Commons debate on the “Referendum (Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland) Bill”, which devolves the ability to call independence referenda in the cases of Scotland and Wales and a border poll in the case of NI to the devolved institutions. The TPM bill has been backed by the Labour NI Spokesperson, however has been opposed by the Conservatives, Lib Dems and LPUK, with some suggestions it violates the GFA.
In the debate, Padanub described devolution as “awful, unwieldy and brings nothing useful to the table of the advancement of society and any attempts to further it are plain electioneering and pandering to nationalist sentiment.” The comments were hear heared by Akc8, who apparently leads the “New Britain” party, a fringe group.
In a recent Question Time session, the Business Secretary Tommy2Boys said they did not support the comments, however did not speak further on the matter.
This comes after the LotHoLs controversial calls for the end to devolution. The Conservatives at that time said those comments did not reflect their view, however the more Tory MPs say this line, the harder to distance themselves from it it becomes.
The Tories gave the following comment: “Don’t you have other stuff to report”
They followed that up with this comment:
“The government is fully committed to devolution where it is wanted and if it delivers measurable policy benefits. Indeed, we wish to see the devolution of Corporation Tax as soon as it is possible with a full consultation on the issue coming in the next few days. It was an off the cuff comment made by the Minister and they have had a stern talking to.”
The LPUK gave the following statement:
“This is a shocking view for a member of the government to have. I can hardly say I’m surprised given that this Tory government constantly ignore the Senedd. If the tories do not sack him, it looks like CCR has gone out of the window and that they think his views on devolution are acceptable.”
Yesterday morning, model-willem, Energy, Environment and Climate Change Secretary and a former Tory DL, FoSec and Home Secretary resigned from the government and defected to the Liberal Democrats. For the past 48 hours both the Govt and Willem have been tight lipped on the reasoning for this resignation, with the only Government statements on the matter related to the appointment of Willem’s successor, Sir_Myself. The Telegraph were lucky enough to get an interview with Willem, to discuss their resignation, the Tory defence plans, what life in the party is like and their political future.
Our conversation began on the topic of the resignation itself. Willem said it “started with me and some high positioned Tories, such as model-mili, MatthewHinton12345 and Brookheimer.” Willem went on, saying that “tensions rose”, and when he learned of “plans to take the Welsh Government to the Supreme Court again, over something that my Government did, without a notification”, this moment was the breaking point.
Willem confirmed that this lawsuit was over the Llanbedr Spaceport, the third such case relating to the matter. Willem said his issue with this was “they decided to go after policies I put in place without any word with me or the Leader of the Welsh Conservatives”.
We discussed some of the names included in the list of people Willem had tensions with, particularly Brookheimer and InfernoPlato, members of the old Conservative Party establishment, who had been perceived to have pushed Willem out of the leadership race. Willem confirmed that they have had greater influence in the party recently, with Brookheimer serving as Chairman, and that “the appointment of these Old Conservatives as Foreign Secretary and Home Secretary has a big influence over lots of policies and appointments in the party”. When asked if he considered this influence to be a positive or negative one, he went with the latter, saying “something I stood for when I wanted to become Leader was ensuring that new blood got a voice”, but that it seemed the “Conservatives are falling back onto the Old Conservatives, where new people don’t really get a shot.”
These same Old Conservatives had significant sway in the most recent leadership election, with one of the party’s grandees elected Leader. Willem said that those same people, with the exception of model-mili who “didn’t support anyone” were Yukub supporters. He described their “way of dealing with him” becoming increasingly harsh, saying questions were asked of him to do with “foreign affairs”, “Welsh government” and his “mental stability”. When pushed further on the mental stability questions, Willem said questions were raised about his ability to “handle pressure” and his “behaviour because of that”. He said “several people” made these comments, and that he felt a “campaign had been orchestrated” against him by the “Bullingdon” tories, “especially when the endorsements came rushing in from the Bullingdon Tories”.
Significant scandal has plagued the Conservatives recently, with questions over its handling of Northern Ireland, the Jas1066 comments and the “Space Force” ministry being raised. Willem there was “some tensions within the party on all issues” with the Jas1066 and Space Force controversies being the largest ones. Willem said “In both cases, lots of people were diametrically opposed, but they went on without really addressing much of the underlying problems”. According to Willem most divides fell into “newer people vs the Bullingdon Tories” divide, however in regards Space Force “everyone was all over the place” as the “decision was made in a hurry that left everyone a bit baffled”. He said Leadership tried to “manage the crisis” by making the Space force portfolio “bigger”. He also stated Model-Mili made the decision to appoint Padanub as Space Force Minister, and that he and the Foreign Secretary opposed it however, he “didn’t see opposition from the Prime Minister”. Willem said there was no space strategy being developed “as far as I know” and said the appointment was due to the current Minister “making known” his interest in space. There “wasn’t any reason to his appointment, not any clear objective” it was “just because he wanted to do something with space” according to the former Clib Leader.
Following more depressing polls for the Conservatives, showing them in second and facing a battle not to fall into third, there has been a press campaign, as the party attempts to put themselves onto election footing, with specific focus on the 11 billion extra funding for the Ministry of Defence. Willem said he “gets the reason why they are increasing military spending” and that he agrees the “defence budget needs more money” but he felt it was “a bit rushed” and “at the wrong time”. Raising your defence budget at the same time as “the national security bill” and “just when Australia does the same feels a bit weird” according to Willem, and that many domestic issues that required spending were being “demoted to second place” while the Conservatives were so focused on foreign affairs. Willem also confirmed what the Tory funding plans for this, saying “money that was saved for Ambercare [will be used] to partly fund this” a plan that will likely draw the ire of Labour.
On the topic of the sliding polls, Willem said the internal feeling was one of “defeat” but the polls have also “lit a fire under peoples asses”. However, Willem described blame and fault being passed around the party, with fault “shifting back and forth between people” and “nobody owned their faults for the drop” which caused some tension. According to the former DL, most people “didn’t blame Yukub for anything” however Willem disagreed with this attitude towards the PM, as the Leader is “responsible for anything that happens in the party and you need to show leadership”. Others in the party agreed with Willem on these issues and voiced their opinions, however “there wasn’t really much done with it”.
We finished our conversation on the future. His plan is to “continue as a Lib Dem” in frontline politics, saying he will “always fight for the people of the UK”. He be “focussing more on Wales”, a place that had “stole my heart”, and he felt he was “not done there yet”. He said he was unsure what he would do in Westminster, but was “sure that he’ll come back there as well”.
In an explosive new twist in the Stormont Executive Crisis, the Northern Ireland Secretary has said J_Ceasar signed off on the highly controversial Yellow Card poster, bringing new questions as to whether the UUP Leader and International Development Secretary J_Ceasar was untruthful in his original account.
The Yellow Card poster, published by the Foreign Secretary InfernoPlato, attacked the the Shadow Chancellor for “undermining the F4”, “undermining the UUP by changing permissions in servers” and “unilaterally sending policy to the SoS for NI”. The poster was highly controversial, with some labelling it was Westminster involvement in Northern Irish politics and for undermining Executive stability. The UUP Leader distanced themselves from the poster, apologising to the LPNI for it, condemning the poster and saying the “UUP were not involved in the creation of this [poster]”
However, the Northern Ireland Secretary appears to have thrown the UUP Leaders story into doubt, in answers to LPUK questions in the Commons today. In a Commons debate, resulting from the Baron of Leominsters statement on the Executive collapse. In answers to questions regarding whether InfernoPlato had involved himself improperly in the NI crisis, the Baron of Leominster stated that this was not correct, and that InfernoPlato had published this on behalf of the UUP, contradicting earlier statements from the party leadership. When asked if this meant J_Ceasar had agreed to the publication which he had not earlier stated, the Baron of Leominster said that the earlier comments had been a “miscommunication”. This would mean the UUP leader had signed off on something he subsequently condemned, apologised for and said he had nothing to do with.
This has lead to opposition backlash, with the LPUK suggesting that J_Ceasar “actively misled” the public and other parties in Northern Ireland by his behaviour, and in a comment to the Telegraph Seimer1234 said “The confusion is deeply regrettable, and the UUP Leader should explain what has happened, as the apparently inaccurate statements has hampered Westminsters credibility significantly”.
The Labour Party NI Spokesperson and UUP Leader J_Ceasar have yet to comment.
This fresh new story will bring further questions over the Stormont crisis. With the UUP Leader now being accused of having misled the public, they will have to explain how they condemned something that they had signed off on. Whatever explanation is given, it will likely not undo the damage this poster has done to hopes of forming an NI Executive by the 6 day deadline.
*Written by MatthewHinton12345, FSoS and Defence Secretary*
It has become something of a pacifist shibboleth to prate about the changing nature of warfare, that asymmetrical combat demands a departure from the hulls, hardware and boots on the ground that people more often than not associate with Her Majesty’s Armed Forces. While an emphasis on counter-insurgency may have been fleetingly credible for the mid-2000s, when coming from authoritative and well-intentioned quarters at the very least, it has never been the case that an island nation with far-flung dependencies and global defence commitments could sensibly absolve itself of traditional military capability and engagement. Therefore, any attempt to advocate for such a transition can legitimately be classified as either ignorant or malign. Ignorant of the realities of warfare and malign to the United Kingdom’s, and that of our allies, prosperity and security. Fielding a broad and powerful range of planes, ships and vehicles that pack a punch and aid in the rapid deployment of the world’s most elite servicemen and women has never been more critical. It is not an either-or, and indeed it must not be one; we have and will continue to invest in cutting-edge conventional capability and nascent technologies too.
It remains a pellucid and sobering fact that now more than ever we must invest properly in defence. A resurgent Russia that makes incursions into sovereign airspace with ever-increasing frequency and assassinates foreign nationals on the soil of a nuclear power, coupled with a Communist dictatorship that is hellbent on flouting international law to subjugate the people of Hong Kong and colonise the South China Sea, mean the danger has never been more real. The threats the United Kingdom faces have never been more multifarious and exigent, and we must rise to the challenge, and our global obligations, to ensure we retain the ability and resolve to defend ourselves, our way of life and our international partners. That means retaining a deep and wide spectrum of capability, encompassing land, sea and air, not to mention sharp diplomatic and economic teeth, to ensure this country continues to punch well above its weight. It is beyond vital that the United Kingdom does not lose its nerve and relegate itself below other powers, cowering behind their weapons and promises for its protection.
This country is preeminent in many respects, and we remain at the forefront of military potency. In order to stay there, we must, as a nation, wake up and smell the coffee. While the government I am proud to serve in is acutely cognisant of the dangers this country faces, what is needed is a total shift in the national mood and an end to the somnolent complacency that the West has drifted into. It is time for everyone in NATO, and those affiliated with it, to honour the commitments they have made to spend 2% of GDP on defence, not just for themselves, but for the practical and indeed moral integrity of the security partnership that has been the lynchpin of our defence policy since its inception. Robust and responsible coalitions of like-minded democracies are incisive tools for fighting international roguishness and human rights abuses, and we must utilise them more to drive our common, democratic agenda forwards.
Having the means to back up words with actions is all well and good, but nations that sit idly by and put their fingers to their lips in obedience when atrocities are committed have not only lost their moral standing but are very unlikely to nail their colours to the mast and take decisive action when it is required. This is why the United Kingdom must now harness its newfound freedom and geopolitical blank slate to establish itself as an active, courageous and upstanding member of the international community. We must branch out and form new alliances while strengthening old ones so that the U.K. and those with whom we agree on the inviolable and sacred principles of democracy, tolerance and humanity can speak with growing authority and clarity to those who don’t share in our respect for those values. We must face up to the harsh reality and be prepared to back up our words with actions, for we can not afford to sit idly by. As those who wish to do us harm build themselves up, military, economically and politically, we must do the same. It is time for those who have been contributing to contribute more, and for those who haven’t to step up to the plate, for all of our collective good. What we are witnessing in Hong Kong is not an exception to the rule, or an anomaly, such encroachments on freedom will not recede. We must step up, for life as we know it, not only for us but for billions across the world, depends on it.
*Written by David Seimarsson, Editor in Chief of the Telegraph*
A Telegraph investigation has found comments from new Tory Leader of the House of Lords Jas1066, advocating the re-introduction of Section 28 as part of a Loyalist League manifesto, and labelling the subsequent apology for the manifesto “weak”.
This comes after the Baron of Blackmore Vales appointment as LotHoL in a recent cabinet reshuffle which saw model-willem and model-mili demoted to ECC and HCLG Secretaries respectively, and the promotion of MatthewHinton12345 and new Tory up-and-comer Brookheimer to DefSec and Home Secretary.
The comments in question were made during the last GE campaign, in the midst of the ill-fated LL manifesto row. The highly controversial manifesto contained promises to abolish devolution, establish sharia courts, end the use of puberty blockers for those under the age of 16 and re-introduce Section 28, a clause of the Local Government Act which stated
“shall not intentionally promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality” or “promote the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship”.
In the debate of the manifesto itself, Jas1066 laid out his support for a few of very of those very controversial policies, including S28. Jas1066 said he “firmly supported” the abolition of devolution; as the Welsh Assembly “cost in the region of £300 million” and that this was too much for a “country as culturally similar to England as Wales”. He said there was a “better argument for devolution to Stormont” as “bullets and bombs can be rather persuasive”, and that while he believed Britain should have “stayed strong in the face of terrorist threat”, they should not “break our word to the Republic”, an apparent reference to the Good Friday Agreement and the peace process.
In reference to S28, Jas1066 cited LGBT History Month as evidence that “councils promote sexualities” and that LGBT families were a “pretended family relationship” and to treat LGBT families as family in the traditional sense was “folly”. Jas would go on to say that there was a “thin line between promoting the freedom to do something and promoting something”, in reference to a comment regarding councils promoting the freedom of people to be LGBT.
The manifesto would go on to see significant backlash, and the puberty blockers and S28 pledges were withdrawn and apologised for by the LL, however Jas1066 attacked said apology in a comment saying “Weak, Weak, Weak”.
The Tory move to merge with the National Unionist Party was a risky one, however for some time it appeared that the opposition had spared its fire on the issue. However, with the appointment of Jas to Cabinet, they have opened themselves to significant attack, and must now face questions about what views they are willing to tolerate in their party.
The LPUK Deputy Leader Seimer1234 said the comments were “deeply troubling”, and that “homophobia has absolutely no place in government. The justifications given to supporting S28, a discriminatory and bigoted piece of legislation, are weak and illfounded, as are the arguments for aboltion of devolution. The Leader of the Lords should consider their position.”
*Written by MatthewHinton12345, First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Defence*
Her Majesty’s Yacht Britannia, decommissioned in 1997 without replacement, was an invaluable national asset by any metric. Unarguably, it was a symbol of national pride. Its elegant blue and white paint job, festooned with union jacks and manned by sailors of the Royal Navy, made it a potent symbol of the United Kingdom’s enterprising and outgoing spirit, proactivity, global engagement and national self-confidence. As the name would suggest, the Royal Yacht served primarily to convey our beloved Royal Family around the globe, not only strengthening the deep and special bonds we enjoy with our Commonwealth family but forging new partnerships with nations big and small.
However, Britannia’s magisterial name belied quite the profusion of functions. It doubled-up as a roving embassy, a venue for trade deals and other diplomatic agreements to be reached and acted as something of a national emblem, signifying Britain’s seafaring heritage and its unique status as the home of the world’s longest-reigning and prepotent monarch.
The politics of envy that have debased 21st Century public discourse, compounded by the base puerility of those who espouse the anti-monarchist regurgitations that belong in a sixth-form college, render talk of a successor vessel too controversial or unfashionable to embark on. Unfortunately for its detractors, the facts speak for themselves, with HMY Britannia travelling more than a million nautical miles around the globe during her four decades of service, and in doing so promoting British interests internationally and securing up to £3 billion for the Exchequer through drumming up deals for Britain in just four years.
It is clear that as we extricate ourselves from the insular and arid conglomerate that is the EU, we must be ready to burst back onto the world-stage with excitement, enthusiasm and poise. There would be no better way than to declare Britain open for business than to commission a spiritual successor to Her Majesty’s Yacht Britannia. This should be done in the form of two multipurpose, cost-effective and cutting-edge hybrid vessels funded jointly by the MoD, DfIT and DfID budgets, respectively. Such catalysts for inward investment would more than justify their existence even if their sole purpose were to function as HMY Britannia did, with their cost coming in at just under £300 million, less than a Type 31 Frigate. Yet, these vessels would undertake international development duties too.
These flexible ships would not only, therefore, serve British interests, but would act as workhorses for charity and humanitarianism, delivering aid, medicine and innovation to the countries that desperately need it. Beyond their construction, these ships could be creatively staffed with recruits from across the Commonwealth Realm, allowing the next generation of soldiers, sailors and pilots to accrue experience and opportunity on what would be ships of their own kind. More importantly, such an arrangement would see our militaries auspiciously link arms with key strategic partners like Australia, Canada and New Zealand, with the added bonus of adding to the prospective cost-effectiveness of this project. To burnish the thrifty credentials of Britannia 2.0, private business have displayed quite the eagerness to contribute to its funding, with proponents like The Baron Jones of Birmingham mooting innovative funding proposals, ranging from National Lottery involvement to scaled donations from export-facing companies. Senior Royal Navy figures are also seized of the benefits of a successor, to the extent the late Vice-Admiral Sir Donald Gosling reportedly bequeathed £50 million unto the project.
During my tenure as Secretary of State for International Trade, I came to recognise the manifold arguments in favour of this bold and brilliant scheme. With the private sector clamouring to be involved, military consensus firmly behind the proposals and propitious noises coming from the aid sector, there is very little in the way of material obstacles to the concept of a new Royal Yacht. We must now seize the initiative and make the dream a reality, so that global Britain makes the splash it has the potential to.
Op-ed written by Shadow Cabinet Office Minister Maroiogog
We all remember the days of FPTP. 650 seats, each with its own MP representing the small-ish stretch of land. Love it or hate it our current 100 seat proportional mechanism has brought in all sorts of huge changes in the political landscape. The one I am about to talk about is one of the most minor ones, that is for sure, but still we should shed some light on it.
Something that always used to win votes back in the day were local issues. If you had a candidate which was from the local area and knew what residents struggled with and made sure to make noise about those same issues you were guaranteed a better result than expected.
This however appears to not be the case anymore, or at least not to the same extent. Independent candidates barely exist anymore, with just one standing last February. Politicians stand in many different seats back to back in different general elections and nobody seems to bat an eye. Half the house doesn’t even represent a precise constituency anymore, but rather very large areas of our country.
Could it be that the electorate simply is somewhat not interested in having a “good local MP” anymore? After all the current constituencies are often so large it is impossible for a single person to represent them in the same way they would’ve represented citizens of a town back in the day. How could one somewhat regularly canvass all areas of mid & west wales for example? Or the Highlands?
The implementation of the list seat system also brings new interesting dynamics. Firstly, each stretch of land is now represented by multiple people. The responsibility of raising concerns for specific areas now rests on many shoulders rather than just one, meaning the choice of each of those shoulders became a lot less important. The way voters behave has also changed: why reward a particularly good candidate with your constituency vote if they don’t have a realistic chance of winning if they can get in on the list anyway?
This leaves politicians with an easy choice: that to let go of the localism. And we can’t really blame them. The expectation to be able to remain as in touch with the locals as they once were is simply unrealistic with the new boundaries. Where once sat 650 minds writing legislation and taking up frontbench jobs now only 100 sit but with the same expectations placed upon them, they have a lot less time to wander around residential districts with canvassing boards or going to small events.
This situation where being a “good local MP” has fewer benefits than under FPTP but has become somewhat harder though has very little to do with what citizens ideally want from politicians. The desire to be able to meet and talk to your local parliamentarian and the desire to have the needs of your local community discussed in parliament surely hasn’t suddenly vanished?
So, is there political potential in parties’ and candidates making a push to appeal more to those voters who may be driven more by local concerns rather than national policy? If we look at the last election we can see the independent model_trev gained 25% of the vote in Yorkshire South having practically no political experience. Model-amn achieved a similar feat in London South East. Both of them ran on very locally focused programmes and were rewarded, if they had the backing of some bigger party it is likely they would’ve either won their seats or achieved an even better result.
Given there still is some potential in localism, why aren’t parties bending over backwards to try and get a piece of the cake for themselves? Nobody can know for sure, and it is something which is most likely down to each candidate and how they decide to run their campaigns, but it is still bizarre nobody is exploiting this. The first party that ends its fixation with Westminster and whose MPs start to represent the areas which they represent will no doubt fare off well in the susquent election.
Official polling conducted by the Telegraph in conjunction with the Electoral Commission, show that there has been a notable swing towards the LPUK, with the party having a serious shot at taking multiple Labour and Conservative held seats. The polls show some good news for Labour too, however the Tories have seen a retraction it appears from their GE results.
In Scotland, the seat of Lothian and Fife currently held by BHjr132, where the party got a majority of votes in the last election, brings concerning news. They have fallen to second place, with 23%, while Labour, who did not contest the seat last time, are out in front with 29%. The Tories and LPUK take third and fourth with 20% and 18.5% of the vote respectively. The Lib Dems benefited immensely last time out from the absence of a Labour and Conservative candidate in the seat, however based on this polling face a significant threat from either a Blurple endorsed candidate or a Labour one.
North Yorkshire brings some good news for the incumbent Conservative Climate Change-Energy-Environment Secretary ReglarBulgarian, with the party out in front with 33% of the vote. In second is the LPUK, who did not stand here last time, with 23.1%, perhaps fuelled by the parties strong hold on several other Yorkshire constituencies. Labour are on third, with 22.9%. The polls bring further disappointing news for the Lib Dems and indeed for the DRF, who find themselves in fourth and fifth. The two parties came second and third last time out, however are now polling at just 11.5% and 6% each, as the public appear to move away from the smaller parties to the now “Big Three”. Should the Libertarians endorse the Conservatives again, this seat looks a safe bet, however if the LPUK are emboldened by these polls and run a challenger, the seat may be under some threat from Labour and the Libertarians.
In the LPUK heartlands of the South-East, Sussex appears to be solidifying into a safe seat for the party. The party, which won the traditionally marginal seat by just 10,000 votes last time around, has 33.4% of the vote, an 11 point average on second place Labour with 22.4%. The Tory support base here is 20%, while the LDs find themselves on a relatively strong 14.5%. The LPUK look to be in a strong position here, and a Conservative endorsement would likely seal the seat for them. However, if the Tories were to run with possible LD backing, they could put up a challenge to LPUK MP captainrabbit2041.
Back in Yorkshire, Humberside brings similar good news for the LPUK. They’re on 30% of the vote here, ahead of second place Labour on 24%, Tories on 23% and the Lib Dems on 12%. Long time MP Nstano benefitted from the lacklustre Labour campaign here last time and won a significant majority. Tory backing will make this seat safe as houses, however a Conservative candidate could possibly put this seat into contention for the traditional major parties.
Glamorgan and Gwent, a Labour stronghold, doesn’t like to be going anywhere fast without a united right wing candidate. Labour, who won a large majority here last time out, are leading with 40%, with the Conservatives in second place with just 21%. The LPUK are on 18% with the LDs on 13%, and in a major shock, Plaid all the way down on 3%. Plaid came third here last time, receiving over 100,000 votes. These polls are a showcase of a party in deep crisis, as they crater in their strongholds of Yorkshire and the devolved nations.
The final area polled was Tyne and Wear, held by Tory Joecphilips, which has turned somewhat towards Labour and Libertarians according to this poll. The Tories got just 3,000 more votes here than Labour in the General Election, and just 13,000 more than the LPUK. The poll shows Labour well on top with 36%, the LPUK on 25.71% and the Tories on 25.21%. TPM are fourth with 5% and Lib Dems fifth with 4%. These numbers are a significant shock, with the Tories falling to third in their own constituency, and Labour surging into a 10 point lead. Its advantage Labour in this seat, which could be a bellwether for what’s shaping up to be a nationwide three horse race for Number 10.
Yesterday evening, Labour Shadow Chancellor jgm0228 appointed former Chancellor of the Exchequer u/whatasadlifejane to the position of Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury. The appointee, who was described by Labour as having an “extensive history of economic knowledge”, has a long history in British politics, serving most recently as Leader of the People’s Action Party. However, in research conducted by the Telegraph, three old articles have been unearthed casting some doubt onto the credibility and character of the ShadCabs newest member.
The first article, published by “Zentith”, described the former Chancellor as a “terrorist sympathiser” who had been providing advice to the then Home Secretary. In the article they are quoted as describing democracy in the UK as “oppressive” and “illegitimate”. An article written by the former Chancellor is also quoted by Zentith.
We found this article which is entitled “In Defence of Terror”. The article describes the democratic system of governance as “illegitimate” as it “tramples over those who disagree in pursuit of social consensus”. The article goes on to discuss the legitimacy of terrorism, which the author equates to voting for a party that wishes to abolish welfare, invading another country or the use of nuclear weapons. Terrorism is described as “political participation” by the writer, who finishes with this quite extreme quote
> If we are to encourage people to vote, encourage them to serve in the military, or even just to obey the law, then we must also encourage them to commit these acts of terror. Rather than denouncing these groups, they should be celebrated as bastions of liberty and free expression. These people are, in principle, the guardians of our embryonic society, and must, in principle, be an example for us to follow; not in ends, but in means. TERROR IS VIRTUE.
The final article found was one written by the Guardian. Included is a quote from the former Chancellor, who says that all crimes without a victim should be legalised, and goes on to include “supporting terrorism” among necrophilia, incest and polygamy. They also describe the government as the “largest supporter of terrorism in the UK”.
The Shadow Chief Secretary whatasadlifejane gave the following quote
“ if you read the comments you’ll see I’m arguing that society is inconsistent because our government and institutions promote terrorism that favours them but not that which opposes them, so to be consistent it must either implicitly accept the legitimacy of terror regardless of backing, or refuse the legitimacy of all terror – which would include the use of force by the state to accomplish political objectives, something which we *need* for policing and basic law and order to function”
The Prime Minister yukub gave the following comments to the Telegraph
“”While being quick to praise the “extensive experience” of their new Shadow Chief Secretary, they seem to glance over the blatantly unsavoury, harmful and dangerous views propagated by them. We hope Labour takes these comments into consideration when weighing up whether the individual in question should retain their post. Frankly, we feel that they should apologise and must explicitly denounce these views, resign from their front bench position and show appropriate regret. We call on Labour to stand strongly against support for terrorism and uphold British democracy.”
The LPUK Leader and Economic Spokesperson Friedmanite19 gave this comment to the Telegraph-
“The comments made by the new shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury are abhorrent and it’s shocking labour would appoint them to their frontbench. I’m hardly surprised when they keep stalin1953 on their frontbenches who talked about the Satanic Verses and justify Iranian human rights abuses. It’s clear Labour can not be trusted with national security and this recent appointment shows they don’t take terrorism seriously”
Lib Dem Leader u/thechattyshow gave this comment to the Telegraph-
“This is a troubling statement from the Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury, and one we reject wholly. Celebrating terrorist groups is an incredibly dangerous ideology and it’s worrying to see Labour promote people with this view.”
We reached out to Labour, and are awaiting a comment. The article will be updated when one is provided.
These quotes are without doubt, offensive and extremist. Describing terror as a virtue, calling for the legalization of the support of terror and saying it should be encouraged in our society, are perhaps some of the most shocking British politics has seen for quite some time. It also chimes squarely against the Labour attack on the Conservatives, for having two MPs who voted against a motion to “commemorate the 2015 Paris attacks”. While the Labour Leader has shown an unwillingness to move against members who make controversial comments, this may be a bridge too far.
*Written by David Seimarsson, Editor in Chief of the Telegraph*
Labours Shadow Defence Secretary Stalin1953 is in a wave of controversy today, after delivering a speech during the LPUK non-proliferation motion debate today, which appeared to defend Iranian anger at the Satanic Verses, and made light of Iran’s capacity to build a nuclear weapon in 2-5 years.
The Shadow Defence Secretary’s began by saying that “no one country has the right to impose their system on another country”, and urging the parliament not to “bow to foreign policy hawks”. Stalin1953 goes on to say “Does this House know what the biggest reason is for why Iranians hate the West? Because we always insult them, because we fear them, because we refuse to talk, because we always provoke them, and most of all, because we don’t understand them.”
On Iranian human rights abuse, he says that Britain “should not subject our standards on them”, saying Britain has “our own share of human rights abuses”, listing austerity, food banks, the number of homeless and poor individuals, attacks on the UK Human Rights Act, participation in CIA detention and torture, domestic and elderly abuse along with “Veterans that are sent to war to kill or be killed and are left behind by a ‘patriotic’ government.” and other examples as proof of British human rights violations. He would also say British sanctions made Britain “guilty of making the lives of the Iranian people harder”
Stalin1953 then poses the question “First of all, is there any proof that Iran poses a threat to the UK?”, saying that Iran only hates the USA, saying “As far as I know, Iran and the UK have had a great relationship since the late 13th century,” These comments did not mention the seizure of a British flagged tanker, the UKs brief plans for JCPOA withdrawal, the Iranian strikes on bases housing UK troops and the detention of the British ambassador in january. He follows comments regarding the US-Iran relationship with “Now, I am not saying that Iranians do not resent us, for we have inflicted our share of destruction on them,” and begins to list off past wrongs committed on Iran by the UK. These included the Anglo-Soviet invasion during World War II, due to perceived Iranian support for Nazi Germany, buying rights to Iranian oil and the Satanic Verses controversy, the mention of which has lead to severe backlash in the commons. This refers to the fatwa issued by Iran calling for the death British-Indian author Salman Rushdie for his book the Satanic Verses, which lampooned Islam. The inclusion of this event has lead to LPUK DL Seimer1234 calling for the shadow defence secretary to resign, and has been criticised by BigTrev-98 and Yukub, the Prime Minister.
During the furore, Shadow Minister for ME and Africa apth10 asked for the motion proposer to name examples of conflicts initiated by Iranian backed proxies, and was then answered by BigTrev-98 with several examples.
This scandal will undoubtedly result in significant attack from the Government and UO parties, with several already sharpening the knives. An ME Shadow Minister not knowing about Iranian proxies and the Shadow Defence Sec defending Iran, will be yet another crisis Labour will have to manage, one of several in the past two weeks alone.
Foreign Secretary InfernoPlato said in a comment to the Telegraph “I think the remakes are ill advised and ignorant. I’m not surprised the Labour Shadow Defence sec doesn’t know their history”.
LPUK Foreign Affairs Spokesperson Seimer1234 said of the comments in a statement to the Telegraph “These comments are deeply disturbing, and indicative of a party that is so eager to please Tehran in terms of ignoring human rights violations and national security risks. The Shadow Defence Secretary needs to go now. On the motion itself, I support the revised JCPOA wholeheartedly, however the motion raises necessary points of clarification.”
Liberal Democrat Foreign Affairs Spokesperson CountBrandenburg was contacted but has yet to comment.
Shadow Minister for Middle East and Africa apth10 said on their question regarding proxy conflicts “I was just trying to seek clarification on which recent proxy conflicts have been caused by Iran, shouldnbt be hard for y’all to raise some examples” and had no comment regarding Stalins speech.
We contacted the Labour Press Office who has yet to comment.
Model Telegraph 