The double-standards and hypocrisy of the Govt and its outriders - on almost all fronts - is dizzying. I get that it is a deliberate strategy, but really struggle to understand how so many people are taken in.
Just a few examples... 1/7
The sanctity of international commitments, Treaties and contracts. If we are prepared to breach them when it suits us, how outraged can we really be when the EU, or China, or Russia, does the same? 2/7
The Ministerial Code. Breaches by Patel and Johnson are waved away. But breaches by Nicola Sturgeon are, it seems, in a different category. 3/7
The right to protest. Draconian powers to curtail the right to protest pass through the Commons without a murmur of criticism. Covid restrictions receive anxious scrutiny. 4/7
Free Speech and cancel culture. Free speech champions are coming to enforce free speech in Universities. While those whose humour might offend should be removed from the BBC. 5/7
The Covid response. Clap for carers; pay for NHS staff. International comparisons (I'm old enough to remember when they were invidious, and 'too early'). The need to learn lessons. 6/7
I don't know if the Govt's supporters don't see this; or, more worrying, that they see it and simply don't care. Unless people, in sufficient numbers, do start caring, things are only going to get worse. 7/7
PS: Take any of these areas (breaches of international law; the Ministerial Code; free speech; etc), and try to articulate the Govt's position in a coherent way.
I can't find a way to do it.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
In the Sarah Everard case, there is an emerging trope - criticising those who have 'politicised' her death, and intimating that the protests would not be welcomed by her family and friends.
There are a few things here worth unpicking. Thread. 1/9
First, I am not sure on what basis people are presuming to know what Sarah's family and friends are going through, and how they are reacting to the way things are unfolding. My guess is that they have a wide range of views and thoughts. 2/9
Second, it is worth distinguishing between the publicity which Sarah's death and the investigation into it is attracting; and the broader debate about womens' safety, the role of the police and the right to protest. 3/9
Sometimes the news cycle works in ways which are incredibly jarring.
Here are three instances, from the last week, of what may be called 'cancel culture'. 1/5
First, the latest manifestation of the 'war on woke', featuring Piers Morgan and Ian Murray. We are supposed to be outraged by the 'silencing' of these people. 2/5 dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9…
Second, the Government's latest attempt to silence protestors (the Bill is due to receive its second reading on Monday). I don't think that we are supposed to notice the silencing of these people. 3/5 politics.co.uk/comment/2021/0…
These (by @hayward_katy and @NashSGC) have set me thinking about Brexit and the NI Protocol in a new way.
The EU has had to be, and will continue to be, *reactive* in the Brexit process. And it is difficult to assess how to react when faced with the UK Govt. THREAD 1/11
The EU's first choice would (I think) have been that the UK did not choose to leave the EU, but rather worked within EU structures. But, it was the UK's sovereign choice to leave, and choose to leave it did. 2/
The question was then how to manage the process of Brexit. The integrity of the single market, and the protection of the GFA, quickly emerged as the EU's primary aims. 3/
A quick thread on football and the law; VAR and judicial review; or, if you will, Callum Hudson-Odoi and Shamima Begum.
There are, first, a lot of (superficial) similarities, and, then a lot of important differences (as you might well imagine). 1/11
Both VAR and judicial review involve some sort of external oversight (via the courts and Stockley Park) over decision-makers (referees and the Govt). 2/11
In both, there are questions about the deference which should be accorded to the decision-maker - or the intensity of review. Are we only interested in 'clear and obvious' errors? 3/11