Model Telegraph

This op-ed was written by BigTrev-98, LPUK MP for South Yorkshire.

So I would personally align and extol myself with the virtues of liberalism. The freedom of choice, to decide what you consume, where and when, the freedom of speech, to say as you wish provided you are not doing so to incite or inspire fundamentalism, and economic freedom, where you are unperturbed by statism and are free to prosper as you wish, all of these values close to my heart and all of these values I wear proudly. 

I believe there is a place in my party, the Libertarian Party UK, for such a socially progressive, economically erudite identity. Indeed, we pride ourselves as a party just as much on the things we disagree with one another on, as we do the things we agree on fairly squarely. Active debate with respect is something that our political discourse sorely needs, and I firmly believe that a liberalised stance to such discourse is the only way to deliver it. I do believe that other parties could carry this cross equally to the LPUK, although not as effectively.

Perhaps the most natural beacon for such a move outside our own ranks is the Liberal Democrats. They are led by a social libertarian, /u/CountBrandenburg, they have a strong record for strong progressive social values and fiscal responsibility, and they are very much of the predilection that it is not wise to push and cajole your members to the very edge, much as some other parties of the past, who deemed themselves as liberal, may have done. However, I believe that such an opportunity has fallen amiss, for one simple fact: every other party in the political arena today has fallen foul of the sickening attack of paternalism on the freedoms we ought to enjoy. 

I do not believe that anyone in our political walk of life deems addiction to be a non-issue, indeed, well-funded programmes to tackle addiction and to facilitate rehabilitation (in the case of alcohol, recreational drug or gambling dependency) are welcomed by this writer. We do have a moral obligation to ensure that the tools are there for people to confront and defeat their demons. The objection I have on this matter is that paternalistic tendencies rely on the fact that one size fits all: if one person is an addict, another surely will be too. So the perceived vice is stigmatised and moralised out of the realm of public acceptability. 

My own view perhaps lies in the middle of this. By all means, we should provide the means for individuals to conquer their addictions wherever possible, but not everyone who has a drink, lights up or places a bet is an addict, and they deserve the freedom of choice, carefully balanced by the current state of public information filmography where consumers are well aware of the dangers. The current status quo appears to be hinging on a near-puritanical destruction of such perceived vices, yet it is far too wet, far too slick around the ears, to openly vouch for that.

Instead we get a lashing of the milquetoast. “Don’t worry, gambling addicts, we’ll stick a built in ‘NO BETTING’ timer on our app that you can activate or deactivate yourself at will! That will totally lead to you tackling your demons and won’t instead just draw you back into a vicious cycle by which we can deem your actions ungodly and relentlessly purge the source of your addiction to teach others not to enjoy themselves with fallacies which others take to obvious excesses!” This does nothing to handle addiction, its merely a faux-platitude which adds lashings of ginger beer and egg and cress sandwiches to an already watery picnic of “vice management”. 

I therefore think it is time to firmly grip the crux of liberal paternalism, and to wring the lies out of it. Freedom of choice, but only if you make the right choice. Freedom of speech, but only if you advocate for consumption of the right substances and don’t succumb to recreational wrongthink. Economic freedom, but god forbid you dare to spend your money on a prospective vice, for we’ll tax you up to the eyeballs!

Frankly, this is beyond the buzzword of the nanny state – it’s a “get back in your box, grandad” state. Anyone who dares to disagree is an old fuddy-duddy who wants smoke-filled bingo halls and casual racism and to give a barmaid a good slap on the behind for good measure. This isn’t the case at all – we know that the past was no halcyon era for those who consumed such substances recreationally with no want or weal of the prospective dangers, and came to see excess as a saddening way of life, as evidenced by the sad demise of Messrs George Harrison and Best. 

But that isn’t the alternative you are presented with now – we have public health campaigns, we have methods to tackle addiction should people seek that help, all we need now is to give those who can partake in the management of vices safely and securely the opportunity to do so without stigma or unnecessary reproach. I deeply fear that the bulk of political parties that the electorate put their faith in have irretrievably lost sight of that message.

In response to a motion tabled by the Libertarian Cymru the Leader Of The Welsh Conservatives has come out in favour of a justice devolution referendum. He apologised to the Welsh people that he ‘had ever tried’ to stop a referendum. In a passionate speech he said he couldn’t stand by after such a call for the referendum to deny it. He cited his political influence, David Cameron in his speech.

I’ve sat on that fact for many nights in my study and kitchen. I’ve sat wondering if I can’t truly call myself a Cameronite if I don’t do the same. The fact is I can’t.

RhysDallen

He later condemned the turnout requirements imposed by the House Of Lords as ‘undemocratic’. He accused them of being too high and shifting the goalposts. This is a stark u-turn from the Welsh Conservatives who have forcefully opposed a referendum on Justice devolution, it also signals a huge break away from the previous stance of the Welsh Conservatives to oppose a referendum happening this term. It is believed they redlined a justice devolution referendum in talks with the Libertarians before agreeing to delay it by 5 months as a compromise position. RhysDallen only 16 days voted against a referendum on justice devolution in Westminster. Mr Dallen has conceded that he has tried to stop a referendum and has apologised for it.

When asked for comment the First Minister of Wales, /u/Secretary-Salami spoke to the Telegraph:

As the First Minister championing the justice and policing devolution referendum to be held, I am extremely pleased to see this change of stance by the leader of the Welsh Conservatives. It is only right that all parties of the Senedd accept the fact that the Welsh people have spoken loud and clear about wanting a referendum to be held. However it of course remains to be seen whether this change of stance is a personal one, or will the Welsh Conservatives and indeed the national party accept the facts and come to the same conclusion, that this is the only way to go forward. Whether you oppose or support the devolution of said powers, a referendum on the matter is the will of the people.

Secretary_Salami

The Leader of the Welsh Libertarians welcomed the u-turn and congratulated Mr Dallen for “standing strong in support of his principles and throwing off the immense pressure of his counterparts in Westminster.” He told us that the Leader of the Welsh Conservatives was right to describe the amendments as undemocratic and that with his support the policing and justice referendum has a deafening mandate.

The Telegraph decided to speak to the Shadow Minister for Finance and Wales about the matter of a justice devolution referendum to see if RhysDallen’s colleagues agreed with him. He told us the following on the matter of a referendum:

I was elected to the Senedd on a clear opposition to the Justice Devolution Referendum platform. In any forthcoming referendum, as per our manifesto commitments, I will campaign for a ‘No’ vote. I intend to stick to that until such a time a new election is called with a new manifesto drafted. Whatever the result may be, the true cost of justice devolution must be made clear.

Skullduggery12

This implies that he will not support a justice devolution referendum this term, this in direct contrast to the Welsh Conservative Leader who told us they would be backing a referendum this term but only if it was “free” and “fair” and if there was  “enough time provided for all the facts to be made clear and the cases heard then a referendum is what is on order”. It is clear that the Welsh Conservatives are now divided on this matter with Mr Dallen telling the telegraph that the “The Conservative Party is a party of British Values. Chief amongst which is democracy. Every person in society views differently what their mandate is on x or y.”

The Prime Minister indicated his party in Westminster still does not support a referendum meaning that several AM’s will be taking a different stance to their Welsh Leader as they oppose a referendum this term.  This is a sizeable shift from the leader of the Welsh Conservatives which has left his party divided and could lead to him taking some flak from his Westminster counterparts. 

*Written by Maroiogog, Labour Shadow NI Secretary*

Recently the Conservative Government submitted a bill with the intent to devolve control over Corporation Tax rates to the Executive.

This has been something that me and the then Executive discussed and were planning on doing back when I was Secretary at the end of the Sunrise Government. It is something that almost all parties running in the recent Stormont elections had in their manifesto, and likewise with the last Westminster election. It is indeed a move that is widely backed amongst the political spectrum by many, myself included.

What I am here to criticize is not the idea present in the bill but rather the circumstances surrounding its introduction.

Just this evening  (at the time of writing) we got the news that there will be an Executive. This bill was submitted a few days ago, after the first rounds of talks between Parties to form an Executive had fallen through and the Northern Ireland Secretary’s mediation had been requested.

The first glaring issue is that nobody in the North was informed, or talked to about the bill.

The Devolution of Corporation tax is not something that can just be done through a bill, but there also needs to be related discussion regarding how funding arrangements for the Executive will vary as a result of the measure. A whole set of details need to be agreed upon so that the Northern Irish institutions are well aware of how they can use their power upon the corporation tax. For example, who will collect the revenue from the tax and what effects would a change to its rate have on the block grant are the two most glaring examples of things which ought to be clarified in advance of the submission of any proposal.

The reason so many parties support the move to Devolve Corporation tax is so that the Executive can use it to make Northern Ireland a more attractive place to do business. It is obvious to anyone that it cannot do it if doesn’t know the practical aspects related to the implementation, making the whole thing useless.

There is also another dilemma, the fact that trying to alter a Devolution settlement without the consent of either the people or their representatives set an awful precedent, especially given the complicated history of Northern Ireland. Devolution shouldn’t be something where there can exist a sort of “implied consent”, even in a situation like this where the stance of any Executive may seem obvious the step of asking should always be taken. Setting the precedent of avoiding this step now may lead to unwanted consequences later, it should be avoided.

But the lack of contacting relevant people by the Government was staggering. The Northern Irish Secretary informed that the bill was submitted without his knowledge. It is particularly telling about how this Government is run when cabinet members aren’t informed about the submission of bills relevant to their briefs. It seems as though those at the top do not understand why there is a cabinet spot dedicated to Northern Ireland and have yet to understand what their job is. This is of course very saddening for all those who, like me, believe a productive working relationship between any devolved Governments and Westminster to be key. I would urge the Prime Minister to get a grip of the internal workings of his own Cabinet, and ensure proper scrutiny is given to potential bills.

The Tories withdrew the bill earlier today, a save on the goal line if you will. Although they realized their mistakes eventually we must ask ourselves, can we trust a Government which acts like this to work in the best interest of Devolution and of Northern Ireland. A Government that with one hand sends their Secretary so try and find a solution to the Executive crisis and with the other submits a bill behind his back without proper scrutiny of any of the parties it would affect should ask itself questions surrounding its own work ethic and procedures.

*This Letter was organised by the Times newspaper group.*

To the Conservative Press Office,

We, the undersigned press organizations, are expressing concern about the abrupt removal of jgm0228 from the Government Press Office.

The maintenance of free and open journalism requires politicians to be accountable to the general public. The ability for press organizations to question politicians must be maintained.

As a result, the actions taken by the government pose a risk to this principle. The government claimed that journalists who ask questions and write articles would be provided with the ability to access the press room. By removing those who meet that burden, there is a significant risk that the message is sent that those who write stories that inconvenience those in power will face punishment.

We therefore ask that an apology be given, a reinstatement of press permissions be issued, and a promise be made that journalists in the government press room will be treated with the respect they deserve.

Signed,

The Times

The Telegraph

The Independent

Model Unfiltered

The Sun

The Scotsman 

The Government is panicking. The old Tory boys like the Foreign Secretary think they are born to rule. Following a term of scandal, incompetence and division, preceded by terms of an increasingly moderating and milquetoast approach to governance, the British public appear to be snapping back. En masse, voters are abandoning the party that once thought of itself as the natural party of government, and choosing a new type of politics. A bold, radical party determined to deliver real change, not piecemeal reform. My party is that party. 

The Libertarian’s can absolutely overtake the Tory Party, people are tired of them and their old politics. Their stances have flip flopped countless number of times and in the bid for political power they’ve done deals with the Labour Party becoming labour-lite when it comes to economic issues. They are now in shock that centre-right voters would abandon them for a party opposed to higher taxes and reckless spending. The recent polling was a shock to the Conservatives. It should not have been. A culture of complacency, demonstrated by a government that has appointed Space Force Ministers without a strategy, ran roughshod over the union by a vindictive and abusive approach to the devolved institutions and flagrant deceiving of parliament, has set in. It has numbed them to the swelling anger in the British public. My party will listen to you, unlike the Government.

As soon as we saw the polls narrowing, we saw three bills on the docket and countless statements from ministers. Personally I do find it amusing that the Tories are now talking tough on Defence spending given infernoplato and many Tories in the last cabinet argued against more defence spending and teamed up with the marxist and anti NATO Shadow Chancellor to cancel investment into our Armed Forces. No one should trust a word the Tories say , and only the Libertarians can ensure that additional defence spending happens and that if it happens it will be well spent to benefit National security. The Tories were against VAT rises then for. For the triple lock on taxes then against. For defence investments then against then for. The fact is you can’t trust the Tories to deliver, nothing stops them doing another deal with the hard-left labour party in a bid to keep political power. We should judge the Tories by what they’ve actually done rather than what they promise.

It’s telling that this government only got off its backside when their poll numbers fell, to record lows. But this tells us what we’ve known  for a long time , that the Tories are only concerned about power and will do just about anything to get there. One term they’ll defend free market policies, the next terms they’ll do deals with marxists. People are sick of politicians who will do anything or say anything. That’s why voters are drifting to principled parties who stand on a platform and stick to it. Voters know what they are getting when they vote LPUK instead of some centrist waffle.

The Tories have given Labour ground on major issues of the day adopting their rhetoric and reasoning on the economy. Are they really shocked that Labour are rising in the polls after they have given them so much ground? The fact is that the Conservatives will never be able to out spend Labour and voters would rather opt for socialism rather than socialism lite. Given the chaos in the Labour Party it is Tory incompetence and complacency that has allowed them to rise to the top. The so-called tactical geniuses in the Tories aren’t so clever after all.

This Conservative government provides no vision for this country. Whilst I have many disagreements with Labour, at least they are upfront about what they want. It’s becoming increasingly clear that if you believe in free markets, and free enterprise, that the Tories are not the party for you. The LPUK now speaks the right wing of British politics.

When I first entered politics /u/ggeogg was very welcoming and helped me find my footing in Westminster.  To me he will always be a figure I look up and to admire. I can still remember when the then Minister without portfolio presented his plans to shake up Britain. The Conservatives and Libertarians had just delivered Brexit and now had a majority in parliament. 

For the first term in many terms the right had an opportunity. When the Tories presented their plans to me, they were not concerned by the backlash they would receive or the whining of the Labour Party. Back then the cabinet had vision and was not afraid of debate or backlash. We had a government with an ideology with a vision.

Now if the slightest controversial bill is tabled, the Tories zip their mouths.  They run away from real debate, they refuse to answer questions on what their economic ideology is. They allow Labour and TPM outrage to dictate their policy positions. This is not the same party I coalitioned with back in the first Blurple government. We need a government that is not afraid of the mob, we need a government with vision, and the courage of its convictions in private property to stand up against the left. The Conservatives are not providing it.

Only a government involving the Libertarians will present a real vision for the country and push for real change. I hope the Tory party reflects on themselves and finds a vision. I hope for the best and that in the future we can reconcile to make the positive case for free-markets and capitalism. It may after all with the parliamentary arithmetic be the Tories only path back to power.

This article was written by /u/Friedmanite19, The Leader of the Libertarian Party UK

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.”

Labour have yet to comment.

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”.

At the beginning of the term the Clegg government took the controversial decision to abolish the Minister for Veterans Affairs which had been set up in the first Blurple government. Both the Libertarians and Labour pledged in their manifestos to retain the role. Earlier in the term the MP for Black Country and LPUK Defence spokesperson tabled a motion urging the government to reinstate the position. The motion passed 48 votes to 45 with a turnout of 99%.

Since then the government has been quiet on the issue and has not responded to the motion’s passage. The Leader of the LPUK questioned the Prime Minister on this motion on the 28th May. The Prime Minister told the House of Commons that he did not believe that the appointment of a Veterans’ Minister is especially relevant or useful when such a role can be adequately fulfilled by the Secretary of State for Defence. He also said the composition of the government was best left to the government and not parliament when he justified ignoring parliament on this matter.

The appointment of a space force minister into the MOD has raised some eyebrows in Westminster and is especially controversial considering the government’s stance on the veterans affairs motion. Earlier this evening markthemonkey888 wrote a letter to the Defence Secretary attacking the government fiercely. He accused the government of using the welfare of veterans as a  political football and putting their welfare on the line. He said the government’s moves were blatantly disrespectful to veterans. 

The Telegraph asked the Leader Of The Opposition to comment and they spoke to us:

“It is quite disheartening to see that the Conservative Party have ignored the will of parliament by deciding to not follow M481 and re-establish the position of Minister of State for Veterans Affairs, however considering that previous motions haven’t been responded to in a satisfactory manner by this government in the past I am not surprised that they’ve continued to ignore M481.

At the same time I believe that the people are starting to recognise this negative attitude from the Conservatives and their recent decline in the national opinion polls indicates that people are growing tired of this behaviour and warming up to the positive vision that is being proposed by the Labour Party.”

ARichTeaBiscuit

The LPUK Defence spokesperson markthemonkey888 told the Telegraph that’s it” an absolute shame that the Tories claim to represent veterans yet purposefully ignore a motion passed by the House of Commons. The government needs to step up and start being accountable to the house and the British people”

The Defence Secretary told the Telegraph the following:

“As a former Minister for Veterans’ Affairs myself, I am capable of, and passionate, about, standing up for the rights of veterans as the Secretary of State. I have been taking a personal lead on our veterans policy and do not require a junior minister to assist in that duty.”

MatthewHinton1234

The government is often finding itself at loggerheads with parliament and with the tories tumbling in the polls sliding behind Labour, it’s clear they have a tough few weeks coming up ahead with a collapse in the Northern Ireland Exec and a Justice devolution referendum.  The Telegraph will be here to cover the news and turmoil in Westminster.

*Written by David Seimarsson*

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.