It is literally disinformation.
1 Like
I read Rory Stewartās autobiography in the summer. A government minister for ten years , various cabinet posts and leadership contender. He was Minister for Prisons as recently as 2019 , appointed in 2018 in the wake of a damning report on the state of HMP Liverpool, in which the inspector described it as the āworst prison he had ever seenā
The prison system nationally was in crisis with rising rates of violence , drug use and virtually no prospect of rehabilitation for any offenders. He identified overcrowding and under staffing as being the main driver in decline of standards and was the person behind the drive , along with the support of his then boss at Justice , David Gauke , who I think may have been invited into the new Labour Govt. or , at the least , has advised on this matter.
The people being released are those serving sentences of less than a year I think , a category of internees which Stewart said should be done away with altogether. I think itās to the credit of Starmer that heās taken up such a common sense policy , regardless of where itās come from and in spite of the wholely predictable flak that heās going to take from the right wing press.
5 Likes
Wonder who slashed police numbers? 
3 Likes
Well for starters Farage hasnt broken any laws even though heās been walking a tightrope. The issue of misinformation is a huge one and maybe one for another day.
Thereās lots of reasons why trials take longer to arrrive in the courtroom than others including scheduling, complexity etc.
The world isnt black and white. Sometimes you need to go through certain processes and get your ducks in a row.
This conversation is just weird. This stuff is kind of obvious.
3 Likes
The world is. Itās people who arenāt.
1 Like
I would be very cautious about that claim, just look at the spikes in Google Searches of basic election/referenda-related information after the event.
What is obvious to one can sometimes be completely unobvious to another person, particularly if the latter has had very little reason to have had contact with that. Thereās nothing wrong with that. Thatās nothing inherently wrong with ignorance, weāre all ignorant of something after all.
Itās priding oneself in ignorance that is a problem, in making grandiose claims without basic verification of facts (the latter of which we are all guilty of at least from time to time, well, at least i know I am). Itās the attitude towards ignorance that I think is a differentiating factor.
5 Likes
You do know colour TVs exist now too, right? You donāt have to see the world in black and white anymoreā¦
Not sure I agree with that, Iāll honestly have to ponder it.
1 Like
Thatās a fair shout.
1 Like
I would love to know what peopleās opinions on this are, especially with regards to land banks:
3 Likes
Two problems. First is that everyone is a NIMBY. The question is where to draw the line between genuine concerns and simple self interest.
In terms of the land banks, Iām surprised that they didnāt put something in the budget to address it, as it is a clear problem.
I would suggest that council tax should be applied to the land 12 months after planning permission has been granted, regardless of whether the houses have been built or not.
6 Likes
On the subject of housing, hereās a far better article from the same paper:
Absolutely spot-on.
2 Likes
It is literally not. If youāre given a 5 year sentence, youāre a serious criminal.
The same people who want 4 officers to attend somebodyās house for posting questionable things on X.
Except the article you linked only has this to say with the keyword āseriousā in it. This would have been obvious to you had you read the post where I included a screenshot literally from GOV.UK.
No one is getting a sentence for a serious crime cut short. They are getting a sentence for a lesser crime cut short, and are being released only if they have already completed their sentence for a serious crime.
And more to the point, āsocial media postersā are not getting locked up.
2 Likes
I call a sentence of 5 years or more serious. Do you not?
I think that puts a lot of faith in sentencing. Looking at the sentences handed down to the climate protestors, I would probably say I donāt consider something a serious crime just because of its sentence.
I prefer to look at the particular acts and crimes committed rather than use such mental shortcuts, thank you.
1 Like
Thatās a no then. Some people just canāt answer a very simple question.
or you simply donāt understand what you are reading. āSerious crimeā has a precise legal definition in the UK. It is really very simple, if it is on the list in the legislation, it is Serious Crime. If it isnāt, it isnāt. Oddly enough, what you think it should be governs remarkably few laws, as compared to as they written and passed into law.
5 Likes