[Oldmanmatt]

I have often despaired at the vagaries of our legal system (so liberal an yet, often, so useless at protecting the vulnerable), but it really needs a damn good looking at. Lying for political gain, should be a serious offence and carry significant tariffs. Prove it, or go directly to jail, do not pass Go and do not collect £200(in bribes).

It would be hard to prove what constitutes a lie for political gain, and what just constitutes an economic forecast...

Oh is that not what you meant..

Deliberately miss-quoting a poll?
350 million other lies?
The entire leave campaign?

Economic forecasts seem like exactly what they say they are.

[TobyD]

The Tories own Brexit.

Don’t think anything else please. It is their fault. They own it.

Let’s not forget that this has driven a wedge down the middle of the Conservative party ever since we joined. Thatcher kept it together (for a while) they (europhobes) forced Major out. Eventually they got rid of Cameron et al.,

Johnson started the whole fake news EU bent banana type story with his missives from Europe before he was fired from the Telegraph. The Tory press have backed and backed and backed anti Europe rhetoric for the last 30 years.

The discontent and disconnect posts have talked about - also aligned to poverty AND austerity which has driven much of this.

Austerity was a Tory policy.

Did you hear people moaning about EU migration or the EU whilst the good times rolled (c. 1997 > 2007) and people were better off and living standards rose?

Sure there’s lots of frustration at many things jumbled up in the leave vote but the cause of that is again at the door of the Conservative party.

\rantover

Its true that Cameron's weakness and attempt to placate the Eurosceptic contingent sired the  referendum but I wholly disagree with much of the rest of what you've said Tom. Some of it is incidental to the fact that the conservatives have been in government,  but in the continuing  Brexit  debacle both main parties are culpable. It has split labour as much as the conservatives it's less apparent  as they're in opposition however far more labour MPs  defected to form TIG, and daily labour MPs openly disagree with  Corbyn/ Abbot / Macdonald over antisemitism,  Julian Assange, Venezuela  etc etc. I really  see Brexit as a symptom of a  crisis  of national identity not as a specifically conservative problem. If you really want to blame someone,  I'd blame Aaron Banks and the assorted wealthy businessmen and financiers who funded the leave lobby likely not through  political  conviction but for personal financial interests.

[tregiffian]

One or two people with money backed Remain.
 Does Soros ring a bell?

[tomtom]

Toby - (rather than a big quote it’s easier to reply).

Brexit has only been a Labour Party problem since Corbyn was leader. Before then - there was (are?) a handful of leave minded Labour MP’s. But since the vote it’s clear that many labour constituencies are in leave areas - which sharpens the direction of the MP if they want to represent their constituents or possibly more importantly to them retain selection

So I would argue that the Tory split on brexit is driven by ideals (sic) about the evils of the European ‘state’ etc... whereas the much smaller Labour split is one of pragmatism and a few outliers (one of whom is leader).

Where I’ve stretched things in my OP is that some form of hardship/austerity would have come post 2008 whoever was in charge. But if Labour has won the election I would wager it wouldn’t have hurt the same type of people in the same way...

Has the raft of populism across the (western) world been driven by the aftermath of the 2008 crash and how it was handled? It’s an easy causality to assert - ill admins as pretty much every country has been affected - but if you looks that issues in Italy, Greece and of course USA/ Trump...

However our own particular brand of turmoil was not only sired (I like your Bullingdon reference there) by Cameron - but the cloning/breeding facility enabling his legacy to flourish has been carefully crafted by the Conservative party for the last 30 years.

They own it - don’t let them off that easily.

[Oldmanmatt]

One or two people with money backed Remain.
 Does Soros ring a bell?

Did you actually read Toby’s post, or is that just a knee jerk reaction to the mention of Banks?
I suspect the latter, in this case.

Interestingly, despite the attention he gets (possibly, even deserves) I don’t think I’ve seen Soros accused of either promulgating lies on the behalf of Remain or illegal campaign finance activities.
Where as, Banks, is, it appears, a fucking crook and probable Russian stooge.

There in “lie” the main differences. Leave have provably broken the law and lied (and continue to do so). The fact that you can now only reach for the “But Soros!” argument, puts you firmly in Alex Jones territory.

Toby’s take is quite balanced and makes a few good points, but I think he’s underplayed the Con’s role in the current social divisions that are the bed rock of this crap.
Thatcher, in many ways, dragged the country out of the shit. I remember the ‘70s and the Labour government and unions that had all but destroyed the economy. The “Us and Them” thing (always present) had really grown during that time. Thatcher’s policies created wealth, for many, but were based on co-opting the upper  echelons of “Us” into the ranks of “Them”, by creating the “stake holder” economy (creating home owners and share holders, out of those who could scrape up a little seed money) and simultaneously forcing the remaining “Us” deeper into the hole. Recreating the massive social divide of an earlier age. That was unsustainable and now it’s coming back to haunt us all.
Basic, underlying, social injustice aside (not easy, because it’s fucking evil), strategically, the current government’s greatest failing, over the last decade of miss-rule, has been allowing huge numbers to drop off the bottom end of the “Them” category. I think it’s a result of over focus on the whims of their wealthier donors, the (relatively) wealthy, reliable voters of the Boomer generation and increasing contempt for the “Us” echelon.

A sort of selfish, survivor bias, comfort bubble, miasma; had settled on certain individuals and groups (occasionally, I feel the presence of such, in this thread and used to live there myself), where those without “have only themselves to blame” and other tropes.

Well, sow the seeds of storm (or something, something, blah, blah) and reap the rotating column of air, pendant from a Cumuliform cloud or words to that effect. It’s not as if this hasn’t happened to virtually every civilisation recorded in history, is it? Oh, yeah, it is. The scale changes, we’re not quite at barricades and open revolution (though I think we might be closer than we care to admit), but these divisions will take generations to heal (or possibly, now, one really bad Flu season, if voting analysts have earned their peanuts (that’s a joke about age related divisions in society, not me wishing ill upon any sector, in any sort of “real” way))


A word from our sponsors:
Todays episode of the “Fuck me! How many nested clauses?” Show, is brought to you by The Early Morning, Small bladdered Puppy Company and Already at Four Double Shots of Espresso LTD...

[petejh]

I've always chuckled whenever people bring up the 350 million on the side of the bus thing. I hardly listened to a word any of the prominent leave politicians had to say during the campaign, and I clearly remember thinking when I saw a picture or a news snippet of the 350 million thing 'that's probably a load of balls, I wonder what the actual figure is on the bottom line after you do the accounting'. But that's just me being all intelligent and having a mind of my own and not being easily led I suppose, unlike all those poor dumb lambs.

I place '350 million' in the same pot I place 'imminent recession'. Designed to capture the mind of people unable to do their own basic research.

If selling the leave side by claiming 350 million could be saved*  is a lie for which prison time should be served then we better lock up the majority of advertising professionals right now, along with just about every politician who ever walked the earth.
^{*Please read the small print, actual rates may vary and you may not get back your original investment.}

[Oldmanmatt]

I've always chuckled whenever people bring up the 350 million on the side of the bus thing. I hardly listened to a word any of the prominent leave politicians had to say during the campaign, and I clearly remember thinking when I saw a picture or a news snippet of the 350 million thing 'that's probably a load of balls, I wonder what the actual figure is on the bottom line after you do the accounting'. But that's just me being all intelligent and having a mind of my own and not being easily led I suppose, unlike all those poor dumb lambs.

If selling the leave side by claiming 350 million could be saved*  is a lie for which prison time should be served then we better lock up the majority of advertising professionals right now, along with just about every politician who ever walked the earth.
^{*Please read the small print, actual rates may vary and you may not get back your original investment.}

Great idea Pete! Glad you suggested it.

[danm]

Shit, something is up, I find myself agreeing with Pete again!

What is quite apparent is that a large proportion of Leave voters haven't changed their minds, even with evidence that the Leave vote was corrupt, and knowing that economically we are fucked if we Leave without a deal, and are likely to be significantly worse off even with a good deal.

The Guardian gets a good slagging earlier in this thread about their reporting on Brexit, and editorially I'd tend to argue that no paper is any better, they all stick to a fairly tight narrative pandering to their core readership. However, their video reportage series "Anywhere but Westminster" breaks the mould a little bit, in that it actually gives some air time to other views.

It dispels the myth that all Brexiteers are the same for example. For every ruthless disaster capitalist rubbing their hands at the prospect of deregulation and fragmentation, there will be a dozen desperate minimum wage workers, living off food bank hand outs, living in a safe seat where FPTP makes their vote worthless. Their Brexit is a drowning man clutching at straws.

I'm desperate for us to stay in and avoid this massive act of self harm, but I don't for a second think that is even going to begin to solve the huge problems stacked up for a lot of this countries population.

[Oldmanmatt]

Shit, something is up, I find myself agreeing with Pete again!

What is quite apparent is that a large proportion of Leave voters haven't changed their minds, even with evidence that the Leave vote was corrupt, and knowing that economically we are fucked if we Leave without a deal, and are likely to be significantly worse off even with a good deal.

The Guardian gets a good slagging earlier in this thread about their reporting on Brexit, and editorially I'd tend to argue that no paper is any better, they all stick to a fairly tight narrative pandering to their core readership. However, their video reportage series "Anywhere but Westminster" breaks the mould a little bit, in that it actually gives some air time to other views.

It dispels the myth that all Brexiteers are the same for example. For every ruthless disaster capitalist rubbing their hands at the prospect of deregulation and fragmentation, there will be a dozen desperate minimum wage workers, living off food bank hand outs, living in a safe seat where FPTP makes their vote worthless. Their Brexit is a drowning man clutching at straws.

I'm desperate for us to stay in and avoid this massive act of self harm, but I don't for a second think that is even going to begin to solve the huge problems stacked up for a lot of this countries population.

Exactly.

[TobyD]

Interesting posts all. Would it be a stretch to agree that the objection to the EU is largely a proxy for a more widespread malaise? Yes, there are a few idealogically opposed to it ( Rees-Mogg et Al, Leadsom, Gove, Corbyn , McDonald, Abbot ) but mostly people are generally fed up and feel the need to do something. Sadly, leaving the EU will only make them more fed up.

I meet people every day I'm at work that genuinely seemed to have believed the 350 mill stuff and are now baffled that the NHS isn't rolling in it.

[TobyD]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p07632fx

A great episode of beyond today, in which Nick Robinson explains whether Brexit is solely a conservative matter... Spoiler alert, it isn't. In his opinion of course. He argues it well though.

[Will Hunt]

If anybody else gets campaign literature through from that odious Brexit Party, feel free to copy my subject access request and send it off to them. They must respond within 30 days. I expect they've got stock answers prepared for this. Any ideas of how this could have been spiced up but still within the threshold of non-chargeable requests would be welcome.

To whom it may concern,

I received campaign literature from your party in the post today. This was addressed to [name and address].

Under GDPR legislation, please provide me with the following information within the statutory deadline:

1. A copy of all of my personal data which you hold.

2. The recipients that you disclose my personal data to.

3. The period that you intend to store my personal data for or the criteria that you use to determine how long you will hold my data for.

4. Details of how you made the decision to send me your campaign literature. i.e. why have you decided to send it to me when you have chosen not to send it to other people whose personal data you hold.

5. Details of the safeguards you provide if you have transferred my personal data to a third country or international organisation.

Kind regards

[Name]

[teestub]

Isn’t your info just off the electoral register? And so Is this just to waste some of their time?

[tomtom]

Is that cheaper to post than a turd in a Jiffy bag?

[Will Hunt]

Isn’t your info just off the electoral register? And so Is this just to waste some of their time?

The info will be from the electoral register, but I'd like to hear it from them. The other questions such as why they've chosen to send it to me as opposed to anybody else on the electoral role might be more illuminating but I'm expecting a stock answer with no real meaning behind it.

Yes, it's mainly to waste a miniscule amount of their time. If they've thought about it (which I'm sure they have), they'll have all their answers prepared and a very efficient system for sending them out. However, they're a party set up in a hurry to fight a particular election, so maybe they haven't done all that and this will be a pain in the arse for them. Hopefully they fail to reply and I can then report them to the ICO.

[Will Hunt]

The gammons have responded thus:

D
Rest assured we do not hold any of your data.

The leaflet that you received was an "electoral address".  Candidates and political parties have a right to send an "election address" by Freepost, either addressed to each individual elector or unaddressed to each postal address.  This applies to elections for the UK or Scottish Parliament, for the Northern Ireland Assembly or National Assembly for Wales, or for the European Parliment, or a particular referendum.This type of Freepost mailing does not constitute direct marketing.

We don't collect or store any personal data from this, most parties will send you an election address. You are not on a marketing list.

Kind regards

ear Will,


Many thanks,

The Brexit Party

Can that be true? To send information they have to have held or processed my data somehow? Even if it is taking a list of names and addresses from the electoral register and putting them through a mail merge, that is processing data.
And presumably there is some decision-making process behind who to target, but maybe that is non-personal and they're just hitting certain postcodes?

I'd like to come back for a more detailed answer if possible.

[Bradders]

The gammons have responded thus:

D
Rest assured we do not hold any of your data.

The leaflet that you received was an "electoral address".  Candidates and political parties have a right to send an "election address" by Freepost, either addressed to each individual elector or unaddressed to each postal address.  This applies to elections for the UK or Scottish Parliament, for the Northern Ireland Assembly or National Assembly for Wales, or for the European Parliment, or a particular referendum.This type of Freepost mailing does not constitute direct marketing.

We don't collect or store any personal data from this, most parties will send you an election address. You are not on a marketing list.

Kind regards

ear Will,


Many thanks,

The Brexit Party

Can that be true? To send information they have to have held or processed my data somehow? Even if it is taking a list of names and addresses from the electoral register and putting them through a mail merge, that is processing data.
And presumably there is some decision-making process behind who to target, but maybe that is non-personal and they're just hitting certain postcodes?

I'd like to come back for a more detailed answer if possible.

First off, if you're doing this as some sort of extremely unsophisticated DDoS attack, I.e. to do nothing other than waste their time then that strikes me as rather petty and pointless. Surely if you disagree with them then the decent and more productive thing to do is a) write to them explaining why, b) vote for other parties or c) actively campaign for parties or policies you do agree with.

However, you peaked my interest so I've had a quick look.

What you received is normally classed as 'direct marketing'.

Source - pages 2 & 4

However, according to Regulation 63 of the European Parliamentary Elections Regulations 2004, they are correct in asserting that they have a right to send you a postal communication relating to the election only:

63.—(1) An individual candidate and the nominating officer of a registered party which is included in the statement of parties and individual candidates nominated for the election or a person authorised in writing by that officer at a European Parliamentary election is, subject to such reasonable terms and conditions as the universal service provider concerned may specify, entitled to send free of any charge for postage which would otherwise be made by a universal service provider either—

(a)one unaddressed postal communication, containing matter relating to the election only and not exceeding 60 grammes in weight, to each place in the electoral region which, in accordance with those terms and conditions, constitutes a delivery point for the purposes of this paragraph; or
(b)one such postal communication addressed to each elector.

Significantly, that right applies even if you have asked them not to send you any direct marketing.

All political parties have access to the electoral register and, therefore, your name and address when you are registered to vote.

My understanding is that in completing the mailing to you the party have acted only as a data processor under the DPA, and not as a data controller. If so, they won't hold any of your data; they will simply process it for the purposes of the mailing they are entitled by law to send you. That also means they have no obligation to reply to a Subject Access Request from you, as that only applies to data controllers.

Source EU GDPR article 15

Article 15

Right of access by the data subject

1.   The data subject shall have the right to obtain from the controller....

As to how/why they've decided to send it to you, I suspect they've just sent them to as many households as they can afford, and just addressed it to the first person on the roll at each address. I don't think you actually have any right in law to find out why they've sent it to you but could be wrong. If it helps, I had one too 

[Will Hunt]

Good knowledge, Bradders. Childish it may be, but by my standards it's positively grown up.

[teestub]

However, you peaked my interest so I've had a quick look.

Straight to the Eggcorns thread for you!

[Bradders]

Blast! Out pedanted!! 

[tommytwotone]

Good knowledge, Bradders. Childish it may be, but by my standards it's positively grown up.

FWIW it's worth I did the same, but Bradders is right - as they are a political party they will have been given access to electoral roll data.

Still worth doing though, if only on the off-chance that they come back saying they hold nothing on you at all, and have not shared your data etc...and at a later date it's found that they have in some way done something shady in respect of data protection law. Not that the individuals concerned have form for that type of thing of course.

[TobyD]

In the upcoming EU elections it seems that the tactical remain option is basically lib Dems if you live in England, I'd rather vote green in many ways but tactics seems to trump ethics on this one, any thoughts?

[abarro81]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yorkshire_and_the_Humber_(European_Parliament_constituency)

Greens beat Lib Dem in last EU election (though that was when LD were getting a kicking) so I'm not sure it's clear-cut what's the best tactics in terms of getting remain-focused MEPs. I'm working on the assumption that it's not too crucial as either Green or Lib Dem will be a vote for an explicitly remain party, and some of the impact of the election is what it says about the nation's mood, which seems most likely to be measured by the total votes for explicitly Brexit parties vs total votes for explicitly remain parties... I'm pretty happy to vote LD or Green, but happy to be argued round to either one!

[teestub]

I think Magid Magid is on the Green ticket too, seemed to do a pretty decent job in Sheffield from what I saw.

[SA Chris]

In the upcoming EU elections it seems that the tactical remain option is basically lib Dems if you live in England, I'd rather vote green in many ways but tactics seems to trump ethics on this one, any thoughts?

I'll have to vote SNP on the same ground...