4 ms·

It isn't ideal bringing politics into this, but in my opinion it isn't possible to discuss it without. This is a political distraction designed to distract BOT

It isn't ideal bringing politics into this, but in my opinion it isn't possible to discuss it without. This is a political distraction designed to distract BOTH sides (pro & anti Tory government). It is working fantastically since people are discussing this rather than the PM committing crimes, getting caught, and then changing the ethics code to avoid resignation (and multiple no confidence letters from back-benchers). Ultimately this is a consultation with no teeth. Industry are against it since it will add significant cost and regulatory problems, and with the UK already struggling under Brexit importation issues, it would be very self-destructive. It only really appeals to a very old, very pro-Tory demographic, that is rapidly disappearing. But again this is all a political distraction, they will do this consultation, milk it as much as they can, and then pocket it. Or just make it officially optional which nobody will utilize but have some technicality they can point to.

ShivShankaran 4y ago
rayiner 4y ago
I don’t follow UK politics. What are the crimes?
- OJFord 4y ago
  Allegedly breaking own just-introduced rules on gatherings for staff parties during pandemic. (Is what I assume GP is referring to.)
  - rayiner 4y ago
    Is that what passes for "committing crimes" in the UK these days?
    - gbear605 4y ago
      It’s particularly galling when the prime minister introduces very strict regulations, that even the queen has to abide by (infamously mourning for her husband alone), and then members of the administration throw large parties at the prime minister’s residence. Sure, it’s not that bad from an absolute perspective, and probably no one was hurt by it, but the public generally expects individual members of the government to abide by the law no matter what.
      - thawaya3113 4y ago
        Maybe Boris Johnson can go tell people who couldn’t mourn their loved ones, or people who got fined for mourning their loved ones, or grand parents that couldn’t meet their grand kids, etc. how him breaking the rules so he could have some parties and drinks that prevented them from doing all of that was not that bad from an absolute perspective.
        nprateem 4y ago
        gbear605 4y ago
        I only meant that it was unlikely that anyone got COVID as a result of the parties. The fact that all those people were unable to be with their loved ones while Boris was at an office party is absolutely horrible, and the fact that he didn’t abide by his own rules is reason to resign, as I see it.
      - thawaya3113 4y ago
        Of course, the other crime, that requires him to resign is lying to Parliament, except he changed the ministerial code so he wouldn’t have to resign.
      - rayiner 4y ago
        Lots of politicians in America violated their own stay at home orders, like Gavin Newsome. While I agree it’s bad, hypocritical, what have you, I wouldn’t say it’s “committing crimes”—even just from the perspective of expecting to be understood by others. I read the OP and thought I had missed some real news.
    - stubish 4y ago
      Yes, breaking the law is considered committing a crime. It might not be a particularly big crime and likely wouldn't normally warrant more than a warning. But when the people who just passed the law immediately go and break it, the crime itself isn't the issue. The problem is the attitude that the law doesn't apply to those in charge. It is literally the sort of thing that has caused revolutions. People want a just society.
    - rswail 4y ago
      Under convention, a British MP that is convicted of a crime is expected to resign. No Prime Minister has ever been issued a fine or committed a crime before. Johnson (and the UK treasurer) were both issued a fine for disobeying the COVID restrictions, while in Number 10 (and 11) the official residences. They offended numerous times, including immediately before a press conference to deliver more onerous restrictions, and before the funeral of Prince Phillip, where the Queen (like many others) was mourning alone. The Queen wasn't required to keep the COVID restrictions (she is literally "above the law"), but she dutifully obeyed them. It's not the nature of the crime, it's the complete lack of remorse or even the perception that there was any harm.
  - thawaya3113 4y ago
    There’s nothing alleged about it. The police charged him for it. And he accepted it.
    - OJFord 4y ago
      Ok. (Police charging someone with something doesn't mean guilty, but fine.) I haven't followed it, I think it's unintersting, I was just explaining what other commenter was referring to.
neilwilson 4y ago
"Industry are against it since it will add significant cost and regulatory problems, and with the UK already struggling under Brexit importation issues, it would be very self-destructive." That isn't the case is it. Lots of people with vested interests say there are issues, but it turns out they just want government to ease the path for their operations and bring in lots of immigrant lorry drivers so they don't have to pay a proper wage. Pandering to exporters and big business is why Brexit happened in the first place. There is no reason for the EU directive and it should be scrapped. The market can then decide what weights and measures are appropriate for their supply chain. That allows an increase in competition which is always a good idea. Very likely little will change other than milk will return to just being in pints, beer will have a pint label on it and we can sell things to the USA in the measures the USA uses, while potentially avoiding the relabelling required for US imports. The UK import mechanism is entirely under the UK's control. If it is onerous then now we are out of the EU we can streamline it. Given our very strong consumer laws we don't need the 'hard shell' approach so beloved by the EU. The extensive liability of the retailer will ensure standards are maintained via back pressure in the supply chain. There has never been a single suggestion by government that imperial measures will be required. Just that their use won't be banned as the primary measure - as it is now.
- smokey_circles 4y ago
  The brexit comments I find interesting, but pretending the metric system is meaningless or without reason is just daft. It's called standards. And standards make life easier. Shockingly poor opinion on an IT forum where we get to experience good and poor standards on an extreme scale.
- jmopp 4y ago
  Relabelling won't really be avoided as the US measurements are slightly different to the Imperial measurements. A US pint is about 95ml less than an Imperial pint
- hulitu 4y ago
  Last i looked the US gallon was different from Imperial gallon.
- 4y ago
nprateem 4y ago
Yes, a classic dead cat

ShivShankaran 4y ago

rayiner 4y ago

I don’t follow UK politics. What are the crimes?

OJFord 4y ago
Allegedly breaking own just-introduced rules on gatherings for staff parties during pandemic. (Is what I assume GP is referring to.)
- rayiner 4y ago
  Is that what passes for "committing crimes" in the UK these days?
  - gbear605 4y ago
    It’s particularly galling when the prime minister introduces very strict regulations, that even the queen has to abide by (infamously mourning for her husband alone), and then members of the administration throw large parties at the prime minister’s residence. Sure, it’s not that bad from an absolute perspective, and probably no one was hurt by it, but the public generally expects individual members of the government to abide by the law no matter what.
    - thawaya3113 4y ago
      Maybe Boris Johnson can go tell people who couldn’t mourn their loved ones, or people who got fined for mourning their loved ones, or grand parents that couldn’t meet their grand kids, etc. how him breaking the rules so he could have some parties and drinks that prevented them from doing all of that was not that bad from an absolute perspective.
      - nprateem 4y ago
      - gbear605 4y ago
        I only meant that it was unlikely that anyone got COVID as a result of the parties. The fact that all those people were unable to be with their loved ones while Boris was at an office party is absolutely horrible, and the fact that he didn’t abide by his own rules is reason to resign, as I see it.
    - thawaya3113 4y ago
      Of course, the other crime, that requires him to resign is lying to Parliament, except he changed the ministerial code so he wouldn’t have to resign.
    - rayiner 4y ago
      Lots of politicians in America violated their own stay at home orders, like Gavin Newsome. While I agree it’s bad, hypocritical, what have you, I wouldn’t say it’s “committing crimes”—even just from the perspective of expecting to be understood by others. I read the OP and thought I had missed some real news.
  - stubish 4y ago
    Yes, breaking the law is considered committing a crime. It might not be a particularly big crime and likely wouldn't normally warrant more than a warning. But when the people who just passed the law immediately go and break it, the crime itself isn't the issue. The problem is the attitude that the law doesn't apply to those in charge. It is literally the sort of thing that has caused revolutions. People want a just society.
  - rswail 4y ago
    Under convention, a British MP that is convicted of a crime is expected to resign. No Prime Minister has ever been issued a fine or committed a crime before. Johnson (and the UK treasurer) were both issued a fine for disobeying the COVID restrictions, while in Number 10 (and 11) the official residences. They offended numerous times, including immediately before a press conference to deliver more onerous restrictions, and before the funeral of Prince Phillip, where the Queen (like many others) was mourning alone. The Queen wasn't required to keep the COVID restrictions (she is literally "above the law"), but she dutifully obeyed them. It's not the nature of the crime, it's the complete lack of remorse or even the perception that there was any harm.
- thawaya3113 4y ago
  There’s nothing alleged about it. The police charged him for it. And he accepted it.
  - OJFord 4y ago
    Ok. (Police charging someone with something doesn't mean guilty, but fine.) I haven't followed it, I think it's unintersting, I was just explaining what other commenter was referring to.

neilwilson 4y ago

"Industry are against it since it will add significant cost and regulatory problems, and with the UK already struggling under Brexit importation issues, it would be very self-destructive." That isn't the case is it. Lots of people with vested interests say there are issues, but it turns out they just want government to ease the path for their operations and bring in lots of immigrant lorry drivers so they don't have to pay a proper wage. Pandering to exporters and big business is why Brexit happened in the first place. There is no reason for the EU directive and it should be scrapped. The market can then decide what weights and measures are appropriate for their supply chain. That allows an increase in competition which is always a good idea. Very likely little will change other than milk will return to just being in pints, beer will have a pint label on it and we can sell things to the USA in the measures the USA uses, while potentially avoiding the relabelling required for US imports. The UK import mechanism is entirely under the UK's control. If it is onerous then now we are out of the EU we can streamline it. Given our very strong consumer laws we don't need the 'hard shell' approach so beloved by the EU. The extensive liability of the retailer will ensure standards are maintained via back pressure in the supply chain. There has never been a single suggestion by government that imperial measures will be required. Just that their use won't be banned as the primary measure - as it is now.

smokey_circles 4y ago
The brexit comments I find interesting, but pretending the metric system is meaningless or without reason is just daft. It's called standards. And standards make life easier. Shockingly poor opinion on an IT forum where we get to experience good and poor standards on an extreme scale.
jmopp 4y ago
Relabelling won't really be avoided as the US measurements are slightly different to the Imperial measurements. A US pint is about 95ml less than an Imperial pint
hulitu 4y ago
Last i looked the US gallon was different from Imperial gallon.
4y ago

nprateem 4y ago

Yes, a classic dead cat