UK Politics - I Protest

[Spockydog]

Cold War Steve gets it. 

 

[Werthead]

Very muted response this morning to the Jennifer Arcuri news. Her admitting she had a four-year affair with Johnson isn't the issue, but it does resurrect the issue with her profiting from £127K of taxpayer's money on his say-so.

[mormont]

Not on his say-so. It appears it was more like, everyone knew she was screwing him, but nobody said so publicly. And the people who knew included the people who were considering her application. And they bent the rules so she could get it. Everyone understood what was going on, but nobody told anyone to do it and nobody said it in so many words. It was all nudges and winks. So Johnson can now hold his hands up and say he really didn't do anything wrong, and his supporters can demand a smoking gun, and there isn't one, and he sails on.

[Spockydog]

"Bloody Anglo Saxons. Coming over here, with their inlaid jewellery and their shit burial traditions."

I saw ADF once, at the Royal Albert Hall. They were supporting Doves and had the fucking bare face cheek to criticize Tony Blair and his illegal war on the Iraqi people. 

Probably the first and last time a hail of drinks had been thrown at the Albert Hall stage.

[Derfel Cadarn]

Good to see the BBC News showing no quarter in asking serious questions about the Boris Johnson/Jennifer Arcuri scandal.

Undeclared personal interests etc, ie they were shagging while he was London mayor and she was given public money.

Oh wait... no mention.

[Stannis Eats No Peaches]

1 hour ago, Derfel Cadarn said:

Good to see the BBC News showing no quarter in asking serious questions about the Boris Johnson/Jennifer Arcuri scandal.

Undeclared personal interests etc, ie they were shagging while he was London mayor and she was given public money.

Oh wait... no mention.

Who’s got time for that when there’s some doubt about the exact date Harry and Meghan got married?!

[HexMachina]

9 hours ago, Derfel Cadarn said:

Good to see the BBC News showing no quarter in asking serious questions about the Boris Johnson/Jennifer Arcuri scandal.

Undeclared personal interests etc, ie they were shagging while he was London mayor and she was given public money.

Oh wait... no mention.

Don't worry, I'm sure the government will commission some investigation or report that finds no evidence of wrongdoing. Just like there's no such thing as institutional racism, and the police acted reasonably at the Sarah Everard vigil. The UK is a utopia folks!

[Heartofice]

I don’t know why they ever bother to do these reports. All that happens is that anyone whose preconceived narrative doesn’t fit the results, basically decides the report is bogus and calls it a stitch up anyway. 

[mormont]

That's not what usually happens, in fact.

What usually happens with reports on equality issues is that the government cherry-pick the recommendations to do what they were going to do anyway and not do the hard stuff, or they ignore the report altogether.

The current report is unusual in that the authors of the report did the cherry-picking for the government, ignoring any awkward questions or data to reach the conclusion that the government told them to reach and even going further, to claim that the UK is a role model on questions of racial equality. It's ridiculous, of course, but it's the conclusion the government set out to reach, that Conservative supporters want to believe and that the Conservative party are happy to defend.

It's certainly not unprecedented for a government-comissioned report to reach a predetermined conclusion that suits the government, but it's not business as usual (as the people doing them usually have some integrity in order to lend them credibility), and this is a particularly egregious example.

[Heartofice]

Which data was ignored?

[mormont]

Well, to take an example I'm professionally familiar with: in analysing access to higher education, the report looks at how many people from each ethnicity go into HE. But it ignores the data that show that black students are much more likely to drop out and much less likely to get a first, and that graduates from a minority background - even those backgrounds with higher HE participation rates than white people - earn a lower median wage after graduation. It has a narrative (access to HE isn't institutionally racist!) and ignores the awkward data that doesn't fit that narrative.

There are numerous other examples on crime and justice, healthcare, etc.

[Heartofice]

11 minutes ago, mormont said:

Well, to take an example I'm professionally familiar with: in analysing access to higher education, the report looks at how many people from each ethnicity go into HE. But it ignores the data that show that black students are much more likely to drop out and much less likely to get a first, and that graduates from a minority background - even those backgrounds with higher HE participation rates than white people - earn a lower median wage after graduation. It has a narrative (access to HE isn't institutionally racist!) and ignores the awkward data that doesn't fit that narrative.

There are numerous other examples on crime and justice, healthcare, etc.

Is that all black students? What minorities are you talking about?

[mormont]

Yes, that data reflects the facts for all black students. The same is true for other ethnic minority groups (at least for attaining a first). And 'minority' in the sentence above refers to all ethnic minorities, since we are talking about race as a factor. That appears clear from context.

If you're interested in further reading on this point, the news is literally full of analysis from people much more expert than I am explaining the numerous flaws of this report.

[Heartofice]

19 minutes ago, mormont said:

Yes, that data reflects the facts for all black students. The same is true for other ethnic minority groups (at least for attaining a first). And 'minority' in the sentence above refers to all ethnic minorities, since we are talking about race as a factor. That appears clear from context.

If you're interested in further reading on this point, the news is literally full of analysis from people much more expert than I am explaining the numerous flaws of this report.

Ok so why do you think that is? And how relevant is it?

I ask because the report lays out the facts that just going by hourly median pay, there are many ethnic groups out performing whites, in fact most do or the difference is very small.

In terms of education ethnic minorities  are out performing white pupils in many areas. So why is there supposedly a difference after higher education ?

[HexMachina]

2 hours ago, Heartofice said:

I don’t know why they ever bother to do these reports. All that happens is that anyone whose preconceived narrative doesn’t fit the results, basically decides the report is bogus and calls it a stitch up anyway. 

Yep I hate when people go into these reports with preconceived narratives: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53428248

[mormont]

25 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

Ok so why do you think that is? And how relevant is it?

I ask because the report lays out the facts that just going by hourly median pay, there are many ethnic groups out performing whites, in fact most do or the difference is very small.

In terms of education ethnic minorities  are out performing white pupils in many areas. So why is there supposedly a difference after higher education ?

See earlier posts re: cherry picking and doing the reading yourself.

I would also add that I have 25 years' experience in front line advice work in higher education. I know a little bit about drop-out rates, degree results and graduate prospects, about why some students don't apply to prestigious universities, about the lack of support networks, why some students with second class degrees get good jobs and some don't, how race, disability and socio-economic background all contribute to dropout rates and underachievement, and why the word 'supposedly' does not belong in that sentence above and why anyone who would use it there needs to read up on the subject before engaging in a discussion because they need to do a whole lot of catching up and I don't have the time or inclination to catch them up. Sorry.

[Raja]

1 hour ago, mormont said:

There are numerous other examples on crime and justice, healthcare, etc.

Indeed. It's all a bit amateurish. Even a cursory reading of the report makes it quite evident. Two more examples below

 

[Heartofice]

13 minutes ago, HelenaExMachina said:

Yep I hate when people go into these reports with preconceived narratives: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53428248

What do you think you are saying with this post?

 

4 minutes ago, mormont said:

See earlier posts re: cherry picking and doing the reading yourself.

I would also add that I have 25 years' experience in front line advice work in higher education. I know a little bit about drop-out rates, degree results and graduate prospects, about why some students don't apply to prestigious universities, about the lack of support networks, why some students with second class degrees get good jobs and some don't, how race, disability and socio-economic background all contribute to dropout rates and underachievement, and why the word 'supposedly' does not belong in that sentence above and why anyone who would use it there needs to read up on the subject before engaging in a discussion because they need to do a whole lot of catching up and I don't have the time or inclination to catch them up. Sorry.

How about actually answering the question instead of trying to hold the high ground because supposedly you know better than everyone who wrote the report.

[BigFatCoward]

7 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

 

How about actually answering the question instead of trying to hold the high ground because supposedly you know better than everyone who wrote the report.

No, thats fine, as long as everyone accepts i know best about all policing matters. As such the report was right and the 'vigil' was nothing of the sort and the press, politicians and social media 'experts' kneejerk reactions were fucking idiotic.  

[Heartofice]

3 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

No, thats fine, as long as everyone accepts i know best about all policing matters. As such the report was right and the 'vigil' was nothing of the sort and the press, politicians and social media 'experts' kneejerk reactions were fucking idiotic.  

How is that what I said ?