The case of Jared O'Mara should not be one of derision, but of concern.

The case of Jared O'Mara is  one  many political parties should consider 

In the 2017 general election, O'Mara contested the constituency of Sheffield Hallam, held by Nick Clegg, the former Liberal Democrat leader and former Deputy Prime Minister.^[24] He was selected in an emergency selection process for the snap election under the control of the National Executive Committee and regional boards, rather than by the local constituency party.

It was  a seat the party and Mr O'Mara did not expect to win 

True it we technically a  marginal seat 

eral election 2017: Sheffield Hallam^[24][21]

Party		Candidate	Votes	%	±
	Labour	Jared O'Mara	21,881	38.4	+2.6
	Liberal Democrat	Nick Clegg	19,756	34.7	-5.3
	Conservative	Ian Walker	13,561	23.8	+10.2
	UKIP	John Thurley	929	1.6	-4.8
	Green	Logan Robin	823	1.4	-1.8
	SDP	Steven Winstone	70	0.1	N/A
Majority			2,125	3.8
Turnout			57,020	77.8	+2.5
	Labour gain from Liberal Democrat		Swing	+4.0

But former Lib Dem was  still the odds on favourite  even after his disastrous decision to join the Conservatives in the Coalirion Government

General election 2010: Sheffield Hallam^[27][28]

Party		Candidate	Votes	%	±
	Liberal Democrat	Nick Clegg	27,324	53.4	+7.2
	Conservative	Nicola Bates	12,040	23.5	−6.6
	Labour	Jack Scott	8,228	16.1	-1.7
	UKIP	Nigel James	1,195	2.3	+1.0
	Green	Steve Barnard	919	1.8	−0.8
	English Democrat	David Wildgoose	586	1.1	N/A
	Independent	Martin Fitzpatrick	429	0.8	N/A
	Christian	Ray Green	250	0.5	N/A
	Monster Raving Loony	Mark Adshead	164	0.3	N/A
Majority			15,284	29.9	+8.5
Turnout			51,135	73.7	+11.5
	Liberal Democrat hold		Swing	+6.9

Indeed so unprepared was Mr O'Mara that he There was a story circulating in 2017 that O'Mara had to go out and buy a suit on the Tuesday before polling day, as it was only then he realised he might have to give an acceptance speech

After joining Parliament, O'Mara became a member of the Women and Equalities Select Committee, but resigned in October 2017, following the publication of offensive comments about women and gay men that he had made in 2009 and earlier.^[5][6]

O'Mara was suspended from the Labour Party on 25 October 2017, following further reports of online comments made before his election that have been described as racist, homophobic and misogynistic. It was stated that O'Mara was reinstated in the Labour Party in July 2018,^[ a claim he denied. He now sits as an independent MP.

On 27 July 2019, O'Mara announced that he would resign as a Member of Parliament in September 2019, after the summer recess. Three weeks later, it was announced that O'Mara had been arrested on suspicion of fraud. 

As a Liberal Democrat Blogger to their credit   points out

O'Mara has various physical health problems, including cerebral palsy. He also has a history of mental ill-health. We Liberal Democrats often talk the talk on health issues, and especially on mental health, but we also have to walk the walk. We can ill-afford to join those sneering at O'Mara, adding to his anxiety. Similarly, we cannot afford to lose sight of the fact that O'Mara is, in health terminology, an "adult at risk".

 To say there was a huge reaction to this on social media is something of an understatement. Some demanded O'Mara resigns and allows for a by-election. Some questioned Arnold's professionalism in making his differences with his employer public. Others lamented that such a "talentless" person ever won the seat in the first instance. But most were just captivated by the drama of it - yet another bizarre turn in the story of how our democracy has been transformed into a circus.
I have to say I'm a little uncomfortable with these tweets and the voyeuristic reaction to them. Politics, and the lives of those involved in it, should not be allowed to become akin to some Victorian freak show. People with disabilities do not deserve to become ridiculed - while Arnold focused on O'Mara's alleged "moral bankruptcy" (he does not reveal his reasons for this damning judgement) others were happy to add O'Mara's well-known health difficulties into the mix. None of this is helpful. Public shaming is nothing to be proud of.

There are of course a number of MPs who have  both physical and mental disabilities , but Mr O'Mara  seems to have really struggled in the Westminster atmosphere and Labour should exam it whether it should have sought to aid Mr O'Mara in his difficulties .

We see "Paper Candidate" pit up by all political parties and the 2017 surprise election forced parties to select candidates without enough scrutiny.

It comes as no surprise that a number of these  may have a dubious past and be unsuited  to represent their party in a legislator.

The case of Jared O'Mara should not be one of derision, but of concern.

Boris tells almost literal Porkies, and passes TV licence buck.

We  may have a sense of how a post Brexit Government may spin any fallout for the expected economic disaster  that many  even themselves predict.

Simply blame someone else or tell lies.


The Guardian tells us 

The prime minister has signalled that his government will not reverse policy by stepping in to subsidise the benefit, despite the Conservatives’ promise in the 2017 manifesto that it would be protected.“The BBC received a settlement that was conditional upon their paying for TV licences for the over-75s. They should cough up,” said Johnson, who is attending .Responsibility for funding free TV licences for the over-75s, which costs an estimated £750m a year, is being handed over to the BBC in June next year, under a deal struck with David Cameron’s government in 2015.Sign up to the Media Briefing: news for the news-makers Theresa May repeatedly urged the BBC to continue funding the benefit but the broadcaster announced in June that most over-75s would have to pay for a licence, with only the poorest protected.Theresa May repeatedly urged the BBC to continue funding the benefit but the broadcaster announced in June that most over-75s would have to pay for a licence, with only the poorest protected.In the 2017 general election manifesto, the Conservatives promised to maintain pensioner benefits, “including free bus passes, eye tests, prescriptions and TV licences, for the duration of this parliament”.The BBC hit back at Johnson, saying: “We’ve reached the fairest decision we can in funding free TV licences for the poorest pensioners, while protecting BBC services.“If the BBC funded all TV licences for the over-75s it would mean the closure of BBC Two, BBC Four, the BBC News Channel, the BBC Scotland channel, Radio 5 Live, and several local radio stations. It is a matter for the government if it wishes to restore funding for free licences for all over-75s.

 It is likely you could add S4C to that list.

The idea TV licences for the over-75s.was a gimmick , to give the impression that they cared about the elderly and faced with paying for it pushed It back to the BBC  and of course the ordinary licence payer .

It is up to us to show where the blame lies,  and its not for the BBC to cough up but those who decided on this policy i:e the UK government to pay for it.

Meanwhile  the humble Melton Mowbray pork pie is at the centre of an unlikely political dispute about British exports.

Boris Johnson had said pork pies are exported to Thailand and Iceland, but cannot be to the US due to red tape.

However the Melton Mowbray Pork Pie Association said the pies were not even exported to Thailand and Iceland.

Downing Street insisted pies were exported, citing producer Walker & Son - but the company said this was not correct.

Walker & Son told the BBC it had previously exported a "tiny amount" of pork pies to Singapore, but had not done so for "at least two years" and is now "entirely focused on the UK market".

When asked if the company had ever exported to any other countries, the spokeswoman said she was unsure.

Whilst the over  75 TV license  is a  appalling example of the government  creating a financial burden on the BBC , it may be that the government telling  almost literal porkies may a actual gift to the opposition.

Johnson may well go for an October election/

The speculation that Prime Minister Johnson will cal an early election this Autumn continues.He will be looking at he recent polls where, the Tories have an healthy lead over Labour  and have seemingly regained  votes lost to Farage's Brexit Limited Company.

Pollster/client(s)	Date(s) conducted	Area	Sample size	Con	Lab	Lib Dem	SNP	Plaid Cymru	UKIP	Green	Change UK	Brexit	Other	Lead
YouGov/The Sunday Times	22–23 Aug	GB	2,019	33%	21%	19%	4%	1%	0%	7%	0%	14%	1%	12%
Opinium/The Observer	21–23 Aug	GB	2,005	32%	26%	15%	5%	1%	1%	4%	0%	16%	1%	6%
YouGov/The Times	20–21 Aug	GB	1,687	32%	22%	20%	4%	1%	0%	7%	0%	12%	2%	10%
Kantar	15–19 Aug	GB	1,133	42%	28%	15%	5%	0%	0%	3%	1%	5%	1%	14%
YouGov/The Times	13–14 Aug	GB	1,625	30%	21%	20%	4%	1%	1%	8%	0%	14%	2%	9%
ComRes/The Daily Telegraph	9–11 Aug	GB	2,011	31%	27%	16%	3%	0%	1%	4%	0%	16%	2%	4%
BMG/The Independent	7–12 Aug	GB	1,532	31%	25%	19%	3%	1%	1%	6%	0%	12%	2%	6%
Survation	6–11 Aug	UK	2,040	28%	24%	21%	4%	0%	0%	3%	0%	15%	4%	4%

OF course as Theressa May found out  there can be a big difference  in an election campaign , where her forecasted landslide  turned into her loosing  and her majority.seats  

The next UK General Election is in 2022 if Johnson goes the full term, but he might consider  that three years is not enough for even his most optimistic forecast for a Brexit economy to see any fruition,

Certainly he would not like to go to the country if Operation Yelowhammer a secret Whitehall dossier on the impact of a no-deal Brexit, comes true

The leaked documents suggest the UK will be hit with a three-month "meltdown" at its ports, a hard Irish border and shortages of food and medicine as part of a series of "aftershocks" when it crashes out of the EU.

According to the documents, published in the Sunday Times, petrol import tariffs would "inadvertently" lead to the closure of two oil refineries, while protests across the UK could "require significant amounts of police resources" in a no-deal scenario.

A senior Whitehall source told paper: "This is not Project Fear - this is the most realistic assessment of what the public face with no deal. These are likely, basic, reasonable scenarios - not the worst case."

By 2024 if he was to win in 2019 however even if the worst forecast were to prove true he could conceivably still argue that it is all be fault of the EU and created a Trade agreement with the US  however unfavourable  , that would be hard to revoke.

He may well have also built an  state that has reversed much of the last decades of Human Rights and Welfare  legislation and a division of class that sees the poor and dispossessed exclude from the democratic process in the same way the Republicans are doing in the USA.

Indeed  just as Thatcherism  emasculated the left in Britain and  left a legacy that resulted i Blairism which despite its hype did  nothing to reverse Anti-Trade Union legislation  and son ditched an "ethical foreign policy " for Neo-liberalism.

Indeed  with Corbyn presumably gone Labour could  end up with a Blair clone who receives the same backing from the real power in the land he did,  

3-2-1 No-Deal Brexit

It occurs to me that the No-Deal  Brexit arguments put forward by the government especially the Prime Minister, and the likes of the final clues in the game show 3-2-1 for their interpretation which could mean anything.

The likely prize of a No-Deal Brexit.

I am sadly old enough to remember  the UK game show  It ran for ten years, between 29 July 1978 and 24 December 1988, with Ted Rogers as the host.

It was based on a Spanish gameshow called Un, dos, tres... responda otra vez and was a trio of three shows in one: a quiz, variety and a game show.

The show was a huge success, consistently pulling in large ratings. The first series, though intended as a summer filler, attracted up to 16.5 million viewers and subsequent years never failed to peak below 12 million. The show occupied a Saturday early evening slot for most of its run.

The final Christmas special, broadcast on 24 December 1988, attracted 12.5 million viewers, but an eleventh series was not commissioned. Ted Rogers claimed in an April 1996 interview that "The Oxbridge lot got control of TV and they didn't really want it. It was too downmarket for them. We were still getting 12 million viewers when they took it off after ten years. These days if a show gets nine million everyone does a lap of honour."

At the beginning of part three, Ted would decode the clue and reveal the prize which the final couple rejected before the end of part two. Another act would then perform and leave another clue, leaving three on the table. Ted would then re-read one of the earlier two clues, before the couple chose their second item to reject before that prize was then revealed to them. 

The clues became notorious for being almost impossibly difficult and obscure, having only a remote connection to the prizes, which contestants sometimes did not appear to grasp even after Ted had revealed it to them. It has often been suggested that the clues had more than one possible explanation, allowing the producers to control which prize the contestants received. Indeed, in one episode, Ted jokingly said to confused contestants, attempting to make a decision: "well, the rhymes could mean anything, as you know.".

Here's one example

Another example.

A wishbone brought on by Sonny Hayes came with the clue "Take one that never changes, add a pub and a precious stone, bring them all up-to-date, and now, you're on your own.", which the contestants rejected hoping it referred to Dusty Bin. Rogers' explanation of the clue was: "'Take one that never changes', well, that could be Dusty Bin which of course is where you might throw a wishbone. 'Add a pub and a precious stone', well, that doesn't point to Dusty. 'Bring them all up-to-date, and now you're on your own.'. Well, what about the wishbone? Sonny said 'a large wishbone', so what might a large wishbone come from? Something larger than a chicken. Turkey, maybe? Now, 'one that never changes.' is a constant, a pub can also be an inn, there's a lot of precious stones but how many go with 'constant inn'? How about opal? Yes, Constantinople, up to date, the pride of Turkey, you've rejected a 3–2–1 holiday!".

So it was more of lottery, than a exercise in brainpower as Todgers said "well, the rhymes could mean anything, as you know.". IT  is the perfect analogy of a No-Deal Brexit  it is possible that it could lead to grand prize, but unlike the game show  the chances of winning the Dustbin seem far more likely