Boris Johnson's post-truth government marks the end of the Nolan consensus

I believe(probably wrongly) that a sizeable number of Conservatives are essentially Remainers at heart particular now they can see just what a mess Brexit is. If members of the current cabinert resigned when caught out for improper behaviour there would be very few of them left. The number of barely competent Brexiteers is so small that they have to stay whatever.

The era of President Cummings is giving rise to a very nasty smell in government. It's high time Parliament took control of the executive. COVID-19 has shown just how unprepared they are when things don't go right.

Which of course, turns him from 'sound' and 'trusted' to 'unsound' and 'duplicitous' immediately

Glad to have put a smile ? on your face MaizieD!

And to put your mind at rest GagaJo, I question right wing articles in the mail and elsewhere just the same. I’m renowned as a nitpicker amongst my political friends, of all persuasions!

Peter Oborne isn't a Brexiter any more, Dinahmo. He recanted about 2 years ago.

So what 'facts' in the article GagaJo posted are incorrect, Sparkling?

Why can't people post something for discussion, warts and all?

TBH I thought that was the purpose of posting articles

eazybee

*I agree with that too, Callistemon. Particularly when the politicians they support are weak/lazy. It moves from advising to leading by default*.

Rather like posting articles without researching them first.

I have just read the article referred to above. It provides links to various sources, should one wish to research further.

I assume that you are aware that Peter Oborne, who wrote the article, has been the political editor of the Spectator and Telegraph and commentator on the Daily Mail, all of which are right wing papers. He is also a Brexiteer. I think those credentials should encourage any Tory to believe his writings.

What I think is very amusing is that you can look at the 7 Nolan principles and you don't have to be particularly Right, Left, or Centrist to know that every single one of them has been violated by our current government.

To deny this all you have to be is determinedly ignoring the truth.

Just to copy and past an article without checking the facts is a pointless exercise. We can all read articles, many with just an element of truth. See the weaknesses of both side fairly.

So when someone posts a Mail article, do they need to announce the right wing leaning and Tory bias of the paper? Does the poster need to give the credentials of the journalist?

Also pertinent is the fact it was intended for an overseas readership. It isn’t just the British left wing who feel that the UK are adrift morally. Unfortunately we’re part of the right wing drift towards corruption in politics, following the US example.

Personally I have no problem with sources being left or right wing, as long as I’m aware of it - I can then read an article and make my own judgement. The same applies to the Alistair Campbell article - interesting but hardly non partisan.

Rather like posting articles without researching them first.

How would 'researching' the article have made any difference, eazybee?

Would it have meant that as it was from a left wing source it had absolutely no validity?

I sometimes think that it is no mystery why the UK is galloping towards fascism.

eazybee, it is an interesting article. The main content is true.

What is your issue with the article?

I agree with that too, Callistemon. Particularly when the politicians they support are weak/lazy. It moves from advising to leading by default.

Rather like posting articles without researching them first.

What about all the cronyism - awarding huge contracts to relatives/ friends without any tendering process. This should be much more in the public eye.

MaizieD, much more clearly expressed than I am capable of!

The article that GagaJo cites was actually written by Peter Oborne. She just copied and pasted a bit from it.

Whataboutery is irrelevant to this discussion. Opposition to this government is still perfectly legal and is healthy. Their 78 seat majority doesn't mean that no-one is allowed to have concerns and criticisms. Nor does everyone have to suddenly lose their critical faculties and think like the people who voted for them.

The New European has published a similar article by Alistair Campbell

www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/alastair-campbell-committee-of-public-life-lord-michael-nolan-1-6749219

For anyone who doesn't read the Peter Oborne article the principles are:

Honesty.
Openness.
Integrity.
Selflessness.
Objectivity.
Accountability.
Leadership (as in leading by example).

It is open to any concerned member of the public to contact the Committee on Standards in Public Life

They can be contacted on: [email protected]

GagaJo

I agree with that too, Callistemon. Particularly when the politicians they support are weak/lazy. It moves from advising to leading by default.

Yes, we think politicians run the world but that is far from the case in most countries in fact.

Leighton Andrews was a Labour politician. He didn't hold his current academic position when Blair was PM.

I agree with that too, Callistemon. Particularly when the politicians they support are weak/lazy. It moves from advising to leading by default.

Yes, Leighton Andrews was Labour AM for Rhondda for many years, if you didn't realise.

I think I worry more about the insidious influence of such SPADS such as Campbell, Cummings and others.

I just copied and pasted Pantglas2.

It's an interesting article.

Not to dismiss his thoughts on the subject of Nolan vis a vis Boris but you omitted to state that he is a Labour politician so hardly unbiased, GagaJo! I wonder whether he referenced Nolan /Tony Blair similarly or did he escape Scot free?