Politics Thread 6

[KK]

Tabloids not covering themselves in glory again, though it has now been reported everywhere:

Former EastEnders actress Katy Jarvis says she felt "degraded" and "hurt" after a newspaper splashed pictures of her working as a shop security guard.

On Sunday, the Daily Star revealed the actress, who played Hayley Slater, was now working at a B&M store in Romford.

It prompted an outpouring of empathy on social media, as many actors noted the uncertain nature of the profession.

Speaking to the BBC's Victoria Derbyshire Show, Jarvis said the tone of the story was "really quite nasty".

"To be honest, on Sunday morning I woke up really embarrassed and made to feel quite ashamed," said the 28-year-old, who now works alongside her sister.

"Over my career I've done by best to try and stay away from social gatherings, get-togethers and celebrity things, to keep my private life as private as possible.

"So to wake up with my kids and see myself on the front of the pages just for simply having a job in between my acting, it really did hurt me."

She added: "It took me a day or so to let it all digest and realise I had nothing to be ashamed about."

Jarvis first made her name starring as Mia Williams in the 2009 British drama film Fish Tank, before heading to Albert Square for a year-long stint which ended in February 2019. The east Londoner explained she's worked in a range of jobs to support her acting career - including as a waitress and for a credit card company.

She admitted she's been "overwhelmed" by the support she's received from her acting colleagues, like Kathy Burke, who comically re-interpreted the headline of the tabloid story - or non-story, as she saw it.

More: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/50125396

You can see why the Daily Star Sunday would run it though, as it's a 'big' exclusive by their standards, for what is a rapidly failing newspaper (sales of just 176,949).

[Lex-Man]

Is it that much of a big deal. It must be annoying when you're trying to do your job and people keep coming to talk to you, but there shouldn't be any shame in doing a job.

It's totally not in the public interest to know and shouldn't have really been printed.

[Garth]

The article - British journalists have become part of Johnson’s fake news machine:
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opende ... s-machine/

[KK]

Peston responded to that yesterday: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opende ... er-oborne/

[Samuel_1]

All 19 LD MPs abstained from voting for an amendment to safe guard the NHS from further privatisation. strawberry float the Lid Dems

https://evolvepolitics.com/jo-swinsons-lib-dems-refuse-to-support-motion-to-halt-nhs-privatisation/?fbclid=IwAR2293B-qwaRDXmuMlFe3SRezWV71XiXp9u4YW2R0sGqwgQrdd4IalhTcxM

[Tomous]

All 19 LD MPs abstained from voting for an amendment to safe guard the NHS from further privatisation. strawberry float the Lid Dems

https://evolvepolitics.com/jo-swinsons-lib-dems-refuse-to-support-motion-to-halt-nhs-privatisation/?fbclid=IwAR2293B-qwaRDXmuMlFe3SRezWV71XiXp9u4YW2R0sGqwgQrdd4IalhTcxM

Wouldn’t have swung it but why would they abstain?

[Errkal]

Because if they voted against it they would burn a bridge with the tories that odds are will need a group of mps after another election.

Or if they voted for it they would burn a bridge with labour that odds are will need a group of mps after another election.

[Tomous]

Because if they did they would burn a bridge with the tories that odds are will need a group of mps after another election.

And instead burn bridges with voters concerned over the Tories destroying key principles of the NHS.

[Knoyleo]

Because if they voted against it they would burn a bridge with the tories that odds are will need a group of mps after another election.

Or if they voted for it they would burn a bridge with labour that odds are will need a group of mps after another election.

The motion called for the withdrawl of the 2012 Health And Social Care Act, which they helped implement, and they're still too cowardly to even admit to their past deeds, let alone attempt to undo them.

Wow, who knew the Lib Dems were a terrible party nobody should vote for?

[Errkal]

Because if they did they would burn a bridge with the tories that odds are will need a group of mps after another election.

And instead burn bridges with voters concerned over the Tories destroying key principles of the NHS.

Calculated risk I guess, I assume they figured it will go mostly unnoticed and so the people that will vote lib because of Tories and Corbyn will still do so.

[Garth]

https://constitution-unit.com/2019/10/2 ... of-brexit/

twitter.com/ConUnit_UCL/status/1187315048177438720

[Moggy]

KK has gone too far this time.

twitter.com/pointlesslettrs/status/1187400362149502977

[Drumstick]

All 19 LD MPs abstained from voting for an amendment to safe guard the NHS from further privatisation. strawberry float the Lid Dems

https://evolvepolitics.com/jo-swinsons-lib-dems-refuse-to-support-motion-to-halt-nhs-privatisation/?fbclid=IwAR2293B-qwaRDXmuMlFe3SRezWV71XiXp9u4YW2R0sGqwgQrdd4IalhTcxM

https://fullfact.org/health/liberal-dem ... atisation/

[Oblomov Boblomov]

All 19 LD MPs abstained from voting for an amendment to safe guard the NHS from further privatisation. strawberry float the Lid Dems

https://evolvepolitics.com/jo-swinsons-lib-dems-refuse-to-support-motion-to-halt-nhs-privatisation/?fbclid=IwAR2293B-qwaRDXmuMlFe3SRezWV71XiXp9u4YW2R0sGqwgQrdd4IalhTcxM

https://fullfact.org/health/liberal-dem ... atisation/

Don't spoil their fun with facts, Drummy.

[Jenuall]

All 19 LD MPs abstained from voting for an amendment to safe guard the NHS from further privatisation. strawberry float the Lid Dems

https://evolvepolitics.com/jo-swinsons-lib-dems-refuse-to-support-motion-to-halt-nhs-privatisation/?fbclid=IwAR2293B-qwaRDXmuMlFe3SRezWV71XiXp9u4YW2R0sGqwgQrdd4IalhTcxM

https://fullfact.org/health/liberal-dem ... atisation/

Don't spoil their fun with facts, Drummy.

It was an amendment about existing regret, effectively designed to put pressure on the government around this issue - there was no benefit in abstaining from such a vote other than to reinforce the viewpoint that not enough people care about it.

[Oblomov Boblomov]

All 19 LD MPs abstained from voting for an amendment to safe guard the NHS from further privatisation. strawberry float the Lid Dems

https://evolvepolitics.com/jo-swinsons-lib-dems-refuse-to-support-motion-to-halt-nhs-privatisation/?fbclid=IwAR2293B-qwaRDXmuMlFe3SRezWV71XiXp9u4YW2R0sGqwgQrdd4IalhTcxM

https://fullfact.org/health/liberal-dem ... atisation/

Don't spoil their fun with facts, Drummy.

It was an amendment about existing regret, effectively designed to put pressure on the government around this issue - there was no benefit in abstaining from such a vote other than to reinforce the viewpoint that not enough people care about it.

Yeah I do still agree they should have voted for it. I wrote to them a few days ago to express my concern (I am a paid up member) but haven't had anything back yet...

[Samuel_1]

All 19 LD MPs abstained from voting for an amendment to safe guard the NHS from further privatisation. strawberry float the Lid Dems

https://evolvepolitics.com/jo-swinsons-lib-dems-refuse-to-support-motion-to-halt-nhs-privatisation/?fbclid=IwAR2293B-qwaRDXmuMlFe3SRezWV71XiXp9u4YW2R0sGqwgQrdd4IalhTcxM

https://fullfact.org/health/liberal-dem ... atisation/

This would have placed political pressure on the government and indicated a parliamentary majority for that course of action, but would not have guaranteed any action.

So to suggest that “19 Lib Dem MPs refused to support a motion to stop privatisation of the NHS” exaggerates the motion by implying it would definitely have stopped privatisation of the NHS if it had a majority.

This is from the full fact piece. So even though voting in such a way wouldn't have guaranteed anything, it would have "put pressure" on the government concerning any further NHS privatisation. So why the Hell are the Lib Dems abstaining on such a vote?

[Lex-Man]

All 19 LD MPs abstained from voting for an amendment to safe guard the NHS from further privatisation. strawberry float the Lid Dems

https://evolvepolitics.com/jo-swinsons-lib-dems-refuse-to-support-motion-to-halt-nhs-privatisation/?fbclid=IwAR2293B-qwaRDXmuMlFe3SRezWV71XiXp9u4YW2R0sGqwgQrdd4IalhTcxM

https://fullfact.org/health/liberal-dem ... atisation/

This would have placed political pressure on the government and indicated a parliamentary majority for that course of action, but would not have guaranteed any action.

So to suggest that “19 Lib Dem MPs refused to support a motion to stop privatisation of the NHS” exaggerates the motion by implying it would definitely have stopped privatisation of the NHS if it had a majority.

This is from the full fact piece. So even though voting in such a way wouldn't have guaranteed anything, it would have "put pressure" on the government concerning any further NHS privatisation. So why the Hell are the Lib Dems abstaining on such a vote?

I don't think anyone's arguing that the Lib Dems were wrong to vote against it, just that the way it's being reported is overstating what the bill would have done.

[Samuel_1]

All 19 LD MPs abstained from voting for an amendment to safe guard the NHS from further privatisation. strawberry float the Lid Dems

https://evolvepolitics.com/jo-swinsons-lib-dems-refuse-to-support-motion-to-halt-nhs-privatisation/?fbclid=IwAR2293B-qwaRDXmuMlFe3SRezWV71XiXp9u4YW2R0sGqwgQrdd4IalhTcxM

https://fullfact.org/health/liberal-dem ... atisation/

This would have placed political pressure on the government and indicated a parliamentary majority for that course of action, but would not have guaranteed any action.

So to suggest that “19 Lib Dem MPs refused to support a motion to stop privatisation of the NHS” exaggerates the motion by implying it would definitely have stopped privatisation of the NHS if it had a majority.

This is from the full fact piece. So even though voting in such a way wouldn't have guaranteed anything, it would have "put pressure" on the government concerning any further NHS privatisation. So why the Hell are the Lib Dems abstaining on such a vote?

I don't think anyone's arguing that the Lib Dems were wrong to vote against it, just that the way it's being reported is overstating what the bill would have done.

Sure, but it's another indication of what the party stands for. Their new leader's voting record is awful. Even though they may be the "party of remain" I don't think they're deserving of any votes from people who
view themselves as progressive.

[Moggy]

All 19 LD MPs abstained from voting for an amendment to safe guard the NHS from further privatisation. strawberry float the Lid Dems

https://evolvepolitics.com/jo-swinsons-lib-dems-refuse-to-support-motion-to-halt-nhs-privatisation/?fbclid=IwAR2293B-qwaRDXmuMlFe3SRezWV71XiXp9u4YW2R0sGqwgQrdd4IalhTcxM

https://fullfact.org/health/liberal-dem ... atisation/

This would have placed political pressure on the government and indicated a parliamentary majority for that course of action, but would not have guaranteed any action.

So to suggest that “19 Lib Dem MPs refused to support a motion to stop privatisation of the NHS” exaggerates the motion by implying it would definitely have stopped privatisation of the NHS if it had a majority.

This is from the full fact piece. So even though voting in such a way wouldn't have guaranteed anything, it would have "put pressure" on the government concerning any further NHS privatisation. So why the Hell are the Lib Dems abstaining on such a vote?

I don't think anyone's arguing that the Lib Dems were wrong to vote against it, just that the way it's being reported is overstating what the bill would have done.

Sure, but it's another indication of what the party stands for. Their new leader's voting record is awful. Even though they may be the "party of remain" I don't think they're deserving of any votes from people who
view themselves as progressive.

There’s no realistic path to PM Corbyn without them.