Quote from: Gwydion on 16 March 2023, 11:21:07 AMI am continually surprised at the negative attitude people have towards the BBC. I think they got this one badly wrong initially but I'd rather have them than any of Murdoch's outlets or their clones.

Good shout there, I refuse to watch any SKY TV

Quote from: Big Insect on 16 March 2023, 10:35:25 AMSurely the real issue with all of this, is that Lineker breached his contract with the BBC.

Absolutely the point, which is consistently missed, it seems to me.  His 2020 contract seems clear enough.  He broke the BBC guidelines.
But there were two tweets, the first unsolicited one criticising the policy as 'beyond awful' and a second in reply to a challenge that he was 'out of order', saying that the language of the policy was 'not dissimilar to that used by Germany in the '30s' 
It was that which added fuel to the fire because it is not accurate in the first place and in the second because introducing analogies to the holocaust to an argument, any way shape or form, always gets a reaction.
Now, whether he did that on purpose or was just thoughtless is unclear but a reaction it certainly got, from MPs on both sides of the political spectrum, much of which was gratuitous breast-beating by the usual suspects.
Missed in all of this are the pros and cons of the government's Bill itself and the issue of the criminal gangs illegally trafficking refugees and migrants into this country. 

QuoteSurely the real issue with all of this, is that Lineker breached his contract with the BBC.

I think the wording of the contract was somewhat vague, as the spirit of it was more around ensuring political broadcasters and mouthpieces maintained "impartiality". A freelance sports presenter is a grey area as he was commenting in a personal capacity on an unrelated platform about his own views, not in any way the views of the BBC nor could they be mistaken as such.

Either way, the overreaction was unnecessary. His wording was mild, far milder than many other media platform pundits would use, let alone the general populace or the internet at large. Indeed, it was probably people taking what he said and blowing it way out of proportion to make a story out of it that made the whole thing so ridiculous.

I'm generally pro-BBC in principle, were they actually to present as impartial, though I find it interesting that the right constantly bash it for being too "woke" and the left bash it for being too conservative, so perhaps that's a balance of sorts. The cronyism with the government and their views in the upper echelons is a concerning trend, though one that is repeated across many industries and has likely always been there. Regardless, expressing personal views from a freelance perspective outside of your role and representation of a corporate entity should not be a punishable offence. Nor should questioning government policy or criticising the language used. The phrase "rhetoric reminiscent of" to me suggests he is referring to a trend towards stoking nationalist sentiments and blaming external forces for internal woes, it doesn't necessarily follow that it is a direct comparison to the policies and ideologies. Even if he did just mean it as an offhanded "just like the Nazis" remark...that's basically standard operating procedure for everything from tabloids to Twitter (well they're basically the same thing now) to brand anything disagreeable or authoritarian as Nazi or fascist, to the point it's largely lost its weight as a rhetoric tool. At least within internet circles, perhaps it still holds a bit of weight in "the mainstream". Plus he's a football pundit, not a political philosopher.

Of course from a government PR perspective, a storm in a teacup is much more entertaining and can distract people from discussing difficult, confusing and complicated things like actual immigration policies and the impact they might have.

Meanwhile, birthrates continue to fall, the population continues to age, the cost of living soars, fruit is left to rot in the fields for lack of workers, ecological disaster is largely ignored and long-term prospects look grimmer and grimmer, but at least we can sustain ourselves on a steady diet of outrage and self-delusion*. 

Probably the best summary I've seen/heard of the whole fiasco so far:



*I refer of course to the populace at large, not the esteemed gentlemen of this forum who have so far been reasonably civil and well-balanced... well, well-balanced for wargamers anyway! 

QuoteSurely the real issue with all of this, is that Lineker breached his contract with the BBC.

But has he though?  The BBC suspended him for 'breaches of impartiality guidelines' in their own words, which is where the grey area is.  The guidelines they are referencing only explicitly apply to presenters/employees within their news division so Lineker would be outside of that. 

If they want to go down the route of enforcing a blanket ban on any political commentary, through any media, for all BBC employees and contractors, then they can do that but I think it would come back to bite them in the backside pretty quickly.

QuoteThe rest seem to be an odd mix of unelectables of one sort or another, with a general drift to the extremes and an increasing void in the centre. 

I completely agree with that, the past 10 years have been so divisive.  If we think back to the Cameron/Miliband election there wasn't really much between the two parties.  Similar policies, similar presentation, etc.  But by the Corbyn vs Johnson election both parties had moved to the far left/right and we had this no-mans land in the middle with a lot of 'homeless' voters. 

I think the problem we're facing now is that Labour have moved back to that central ground while the Conservatives have pushed further to the right.

QuoteMayhap I am getting old, but I do think that the standard of politician has declined markedly. Perhaps we don't respect them as much as we used to, perhaps we are just cursed with a generation of non-entities, but I see nothing of much hope on either front bench.

Agree again, I don't think we're getting anywhere near the best people into our politics and to be honest why would they?  Competent, effective leaders are going to work in the city or for some big corporation, they're going to run their own businesses, they're going to go abroad and earn a fortune.  Why would you put yourself through the stress (and abuse these days) of going into politics?  So we end up with a few people who genuinely want to make the country better but lack the contacts/power to ever achieve much, and a load of uber-wealthy/privileged who see themselves as a class above and are there to ensure that the rest of us don't threaten their status.

QuoteMissed in all of this are the pros and cons of the government's Bill itself and the issue of the criminal gangs illegally trafficking refugees and migrants into this country. 

I don't think the Bill will achieve anything, it'll never get past any legal inspection and the Lords may well kick it back before it even gets to that point.  But I don't think it's actually designed to achieve anything either.  Tackling immigration has been a major policy of Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss and now Sunak, with none of them making any headway on it, so you have to ask why that is? 

There are loads of easier methods of dealing with it but they've never applied any of them.  They could setup a processing centre in France, an option offered by the French government but turned down by us.  They could setup centres anywhere in Europe for that matter and work within the migrant camps to provide information about how to apply for asylum rather than allowing vulnerable people to be exploited.  The small boats are launching across a relatively small strip of French coastline so they could pay for drones, CCTV or extra foot patrols to catch the people smugglers.  They could even look into the supply of the boats themselves.  If we're getting dozens of boats per day coming across then why not look at the manufacturer and supply line to find out who's buying hundreds of small boats per month.

So I don't think they want to fix the issue at all, I think it's something they need to keep happening so that they can point their fingers and give the public something to blame in their lives.  Immigration hasn't ruined our economy or driven down public services.  It certainly hasn't caused energy prices to go up or driven the NHS to the point of collapse.  But it's definitely an easy distraction to keep those things out of the news cycle.

QuoteI am disappointed that there isn't a party in the UK that I can generally agree with. I nod lightly to some Labour policies, and tip my hat to some Conservative viewpoints. Neither manages to convince me that they offer a competent, confident government. The rest seem to be an odd mix of unelectables of one sort or another, with a general drift to the extremes and an increasing void in the centre. 

Agreed, it is a very depressing line up of apparently poor performers highlighted by some slightly better ones if you can work out which those are.

QuoteThe general level of political discourse seems to be to label anyone who disagrees with your viewpoint as something nasty, and so can be comfortably dismissed without engaging in argument or debate. 

Has it not always been thus?  Is it that modern social media allows a more concentrated form of bile?

QuoteMayhap I am getting old, but I do think that the standard of politician has declined markedly. Perhaps we don't respect them as much as we used to, perhaps we are just cursed with a generation of non-entities, but I see nothing of much hope on either front bench.

I think that after WWII there were many who had fought and survived the war and all had had to live through it, which gave them a different perspective. Seemingly the main aspect to the modern crop is private education, Oxbridge, political position ... with a sense of entitlement. 

QuoteIt would be nice to have a reset, but to what? Proportional representation? Centrally funded political parties? Moving Parliament to Stafford? I don't know what will work. I see a gradual decline that no party has the policies or the guts to arrest.

Birmingham rather than Stafford?  I would at least like us to start with reforming the House of Lords, which is an achievable objective and I always mention this in my periodic emails to my MP.

QuoteI'm glad I'm old, and going to die soon, but I fear for my daughter and the following generations.

The upside to having had no children is a lower concern about events after one's demise.

QuoteIt's about the right of the individual to have a voice against the abuse of power.

Surrendering the right and the duty to criticise proposed breaches of natural justice to interpretations of contract law is a slippery slope to authoritarianism.

The whole fiasco is not one that bothers me but seems a variant of Godwin's Law.

Lineker could resign his post so as to be able to speak freely.  Surely the issue is about having a paid position that has certain restraints built into it.  The claim is he could get a bigger pay check elsewhere so let him do that and speak as he wishes on political matters.  The free market caters well enough for football and the BBC could concentrate on areas of entertainment and education that the free market fails to address because there is not enough money in it to make a profit.

I do wonder how many of the people attacking Lineker on social media would have voted for Hitler enabling parties in 1933. Assuming they had they been alive and German at the time.

Neither the pink nor blue Tories appeal, it seems the Lib Dems would sell their grannies to sit at the top table, I like much about the Greens but deplore their opposition to nuclear power, the extremes of left and right appal me, I am with the SNP on Scottish Independence but against their stance on nuclear deterrence (are they entirely unaware of events in the Ukraine?) so I am grateful that for strictly Scottish elections I am given, at least the appearance of, a more nuanced set of voting options by way of proportional representation.

I think membership of the upper chamber of the Westminster parliament should be decided in a similar manner to jury service with people selected at random to serve for a year.

By and large, and for all it's flaws, I think the BBC is an institution we should be proud of and should protect - mainly from the government of the day, whatever the colour of it's rosettes.

We have the interesting situation here (N. Ireland) of having been without a government more than we've had one the past few years because the children in the playground who thought they were always right and everyone else was wrong and would throw a hissy fit and storm off to prove it grew up and found the real world scary so moved into politics and ended up doing the same thing at the national level.

Voting for them becomes even more fraught given the enforced sectarian divisions inherent in the system severely limit the choices regardless of policy preferences. Then again, they end up collapsing after a few months anyway so what does it matter? They'll still get their salary and lots of pats on the back from their cabals of course.

I do think previous posters have hit the nail on the head, politics has become so lacking in glory and prestige that the only ones drawn to it are those who thrive on the power and pain it brings, anyone else with a modicum of sense will do far better in the private sector. I'm sure there's always been a fair share of that in the past, but I can't think of any in recent memory who have exactly draped themselves in glory. The bar has been lowered so far that Ithoriel's idea of governance by lottery probably wouldn't make things much worse! Reminds me a little of G.K. Chestertons The Napoleon of Notting Hill...

Is there a solution though? In the age of endless social media outrage and 24/7 news runs of the slightest whiff of controversy, who but the most thick-skinned, arrogant and unpleasant humans would subject themselves to national politics? I'd say more power to local and regional councils but then I'm reminded of the events of the famous 2021 Handforth Parish Council meeting...

Do the politicians we get reflect the society we have, one that has come to worship emotion over reason and an obsession with image over substance? Will younger generations revolt against that and steer things back to a less chaotic path, or just burn it all down around them? 

I do wonder about these things, I'm generally an optimistic person and think humanity can, at its best, overcome any challenge, but I have a child growing up in this world and I do wonder what it will be like for him when he's my age as things seemed to be sliding ever downwards. Perhaps future historians will talk of the Late Information Age Collapse as we do the Bronze Age. I hope not...

QuoteBirmingham rather than Stafford? 

What's wrong with Stafford?

QuoteBut by the Corbyn vs Johnson election both parties had moved to the far left/right and we had this no-mans land in the middle with a lot of 'homeless' voters.  I think the problem we're facing now is that Labour have moved back to that central ground while the Conservatives have pushed further to the right.

True. For now. As a homeless voter I put Sir Kier aside from other politicians. Johnson, Sunak, Yousaf, Hunt, Dodds, Nandy et al all irritate me. Starmer I just find extremely boring. I tried to listen to his response to the budget and *yawn*.

Two that I think have potential are Kemi Badenoch and  Rosena Allen-Khan. They at least have a fire in their belly and the appearance of sincerity.

My problem is that I shouldn't be basing my political decisions on personality, but on policy and I agree and disagree with both sides on different issues.

Quote from: fsn on 16 March 2023, 05:14:36 PMWhat's wrong with Stafford?
True. For now. As a homeless voter I put Sir Kier aside from other politicians. Johnson, Sunak, Yousaf, Hunt, Dodds, Nandy et al all irritate me. Starmer I just find extremely boring. I tried to listen to his response to the budget and *yawn*.

Two that I think have potential are Kemi Badenoch and  Rosena Allen-Khan. They at least have a fire in their belly and the appearance of sincerity.

My problem is that I shouldn't be basing my political decisions on personality, but on policy and I agree and disagree with both sides on different issues.

I always misread Kemi Badenoch as Kermit Bad Enoch.

QuoteWhat's wrong with Stafford?

Infrastructure.

Quote from: mmcv on 16 March 2023, 02:52:07 PMI think the wording of the contract was somewhat vague....

I haven't seen the contract but his five-year 2020 contract included a £400,000 pay cut together with, apparently, an agreement to be 'more careful in his use of Twitter to push political causes'. 
When Davie announced the deal he emphasised that all BBC staff would be bound by strict new social media guidelines and said that "Gary knows that he has responsibilities to the BBC in terms of his use of social media,".
I've been retired for 14 years but during my careers in the army and MoD I had to abide by rules concerning use of, ham radio before the internet era, and social media later.  If you do not like the terms of a contract with your employer, then you find something else to do.
Be all that as it may, the BBC's handling of the affair has been a fiasco and the situation is now that Lineker and his fellow pundits seem to be a special case, and that cannot be a good thing.

Quote from: John Cook on 17 March 2023, 02:49:23 AMIf you do not like the terms of a contract with your employer, then you find something else to do.
Be all that as it may, the BBC's handling of the affair has been a fiasco and the situation is now that Lineker and his fellow pundits seem to be a special case, and that cannot be a good thing.

You don't seem to apply that argument to Alan Sugar, Andrew Neal or Clarkson.

"Birmingham rather than Stafford?"

Looking at international flood map projections, there will be no alternative to moving the capital, not just parliament, to Birmingham, probably next century, although the United Kingdom will have long ceased to exist by then.
65m sea level rise, when all the ice has melted, looks like:



As for this whole argy-bargy with some minor celeb, as someone else mentioned in the thread

Quote from: flamingpig0 on 17 March 2023, 07:51:21 AMYou don't seem to apply that argument to Alan Sugar, Andrew Neal or Clarkson.

Why should I? What have they got to do with Lineker?  This thread is not about them.  Strawman alert I think:-/