Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party.

[najaB]

Was it a question about DR Congo, or by an audience member from DR Congo? Both are mentioned but are not necessarily the same thing!

Both.

 

[Magdalia]

To compare that to population by age:

Thanks for these. Are they the ONS numbers from the 2021 census please?

Can you provide a link that shows the full data series also including years 0-64 please?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Words [insert expletive] fail me:

Minister Chris Philp's Rwanda question raises eyebrows

The Question Time audience were surprised when Chris Philp answered an audience member's question about DR Congo.

www.bbc.co.uk

This is a case where it's worth watching the video linked to in the BBC story before you pass judgement based on a couple of lines of a BBC report. If you watch the video, it's pretty clear that the story is making a mountain out of nothing by apparently trying to make out that Chris Philip Jeremy Hunt doesn't know the DR Congo is a country. In fact, if you watch the video, it's very clear that Chris Philip is simply asking a rhetorical question as he clarifies what was actually a pretty complicated question one of the audience was asking. Indeed the final paragraph acknowledges this by stating

An ally of Mr Philp suggested the minister had been posing a rhetorical question, rather than a real one, as he tried to clarify what he had been asked.

(I would say it's misleading for the BBC to make out that is questionable: It's very clear from the video that is to a large extent what is going on).

There's also something else important: The guy asking the question refers simply to 'Congo'. In fact there is no country merely called 'Congo' but there are two different countries with 'Congo' in their name - the Republic of the Congo and the Democratic Republic of the Congo - so the question is already ambiguous and potentially confusing. Hardly surprising that the person answering it on the spot might want to think about it for a second and clarify it. The BBC have misleadingly hidden this by showing subtitles that say 'DR Congo' but of course that information wouldn't have been available to the Question Time panel.

All in all, whatever you think about the Rwanda legislation, the problem here is the BBC putting up a very misleading story. Incredibly poor journalism here.

 

[najaB]

This is a case where it's worth watching the video linked to in the BBC story before you pass judgement based on a couple of lines of a BBC report. If you watch the video, it's pretty clear that the story is making a mountain out of nothing by apparently trying to make out that Jeremy Hunt doesn't know the DR Congo is a country. In fact, if you watch the video, it's very clear that Jeremy Hunt is simply asking a rhetorical question as he clarifies what was actually a pretty complicated question one of the audience was asking.

I have watched the video and, unsurprisingly, I disagree with your characterisation of it. The fact that his initial answer was "There's an exclusion on people from Rwanda being sent to Rwanda" makes it clear that he had no idea what the questioner meant by "Congo". You can tell by the reaction of the audience that they weren't in any doubt that he was clueless, and both the host and the questioner had to repeat that DR Congo is a different country than Rwanda.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

You can tell by the reaction of the audience that they weren't in any doubt that he was clueless, and both the host and the questioner had to repeat that DR Congo is a different country than Rwanda.

How did they manage to do that when no-one had actually explicitly referred to the DR Congo? The DR bit is entirely in the BBC report and the subtitles - as far as I can see, it's nowhere in the actual recording. The questioner merely said, Congo, which by itself is completely ambiguous.

 

[SteveM70]

If you watch the video, it's pretty clear that the story is making a mountain out of nothing by apparently trying to make out that Jeremy Hunt doesn't know the DR Congo is a country. In fact, if you watch the video, it's very clear that Jeremy Hunt is simply asking a rhetorical question as he clarifies what was actually a pretty complicated question one of the audience was asking

Chris Philp, not Jeremy Hunt

 

[AM9]

This is a case where it's worth watching the video linked to in the BBC story before you pass judgement based on a couple of lines of a BBC report. If you watch the video, it's pretty clear that the story is making a mountain out of nothing by apparently trying to make out that Jeremy Hunt doesn't know the DR Congo is a country. In fact, if you watch the video, it's very clear that Jeremy Hunt is simply asking a rhetorical question as he clarifies what was actually a pretty complicated question one of the audience was asking. Indeed the final paragraph acknowledges this by stating



(I would say it's misleading for the BBC to make out that is questionable: It's very clear from the video that is to a large extent what is going on).

There's also something else important: The guy asking the question refers simply to 'Congo'. In fact there is no country merely called 'Congo' but there are two different countries with 'Congo' in their name - the Republic of the Congo and the Democratic Republic of the Congo - so the question is already ambiguous and potentially confusing. Hardly surprising that the person answering it on the spot might want to think about it for a second and clarify it. The BBC have misleadingly hidden this by showing subtitles that say 'DR Congo' but of course that information wouldn't have been available to the Question Time panel.

All in all, whatever you think about the Rwanda legislation, the problem here is the BBC putting up a very misleading story. Incredibly poor journalism here.

There was no 'very misleading story' put up be the BBC, I saw it live and it was quite obvious what was being asked. Cabinet collective responsibility requires that each minister supports each government decision. Philip, as Minister for Policing in UK may not be familiar with every aspect of the Rwanda policy, but rather than trying to immediately parry the question as 'fixed and not a problem' by rattling off a line from the recent legislation's headlines, should at least have ascertianed his understanding of the question by asking. Maybe his response was so dismissive because the questioner was just another person from an African nation about which he neither knew nor cared much.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Chris Philp, not Jeremy Hunt

Oops, yep, my mistake, thanks - fixed.

(Rewatching the video, Chris Philip and Jeremy Hunt do look very alike - at least to my eyes)

 

[gg1]

How did they manage to do that when no-one had actually explicitly referred to the DR Congo? The DR bit is entirely in the BBC report and the subtitles - as far as I can see, it's nowhere in the actual recording. The questioner merely said, Congo, which by itself is completely ambiguous.

As you mentioned yourself a few posts earlier, the only ambiguity is around which of the two similarly named nations the questioner was referring to. This is completely irrelevant to Philp's gaff of seemingly not being aware that Rwanda and Congo (either of them) are seperate nations.

 

[D6130]

As you mentioned yourself a few posts earlier, the only ambiguity is around which of the two similarly named nations the questioner was referring to. This is completely irrelevant to Philp's gaff of seemingly not being aware that Rwanda and Congo (either of them) are seperate nations.

Ah well....that's another - very public - nail in the Tories' coffin come the general election. It can't come soon enough!

 

[najaB]

The questioner merely said, Congo, which by itself is completely ambiguous.

Neither the Republic of the Congo nor the Democratic Republic of the Congo are, in fact, Rwanda.

Edit: The questioner also said that his family were in Goma, which would eliminate any ambiguity.

 

[SteveM70]

Oops, yep, my mistake, thanks - fixed.

(Rewatching the video, Chris Philip and Jeremy Hunt do look very alike - at least to my eyes)

Yes, he does, I'll give you that

 

[jfollows]

Yes, he does, I'll give you that

The difference is that Jeremy Hunt has more functioning brain cells, Chris Philp is an enormous self-publicist who misses no opportunity to say something but isn’t backed up with a functioning mind.

 

[Ediswan]

As you mentioned yourself a few posts earlier, the only ambiguity is around which of the two similarly named nations the questioner was referring to.

I was watching 'live' on iPlayer. The context was activity on the border between Rwanda and 'Congo'. Of the two, only DR Congo borders Rwanda.

 

[brad465]

This is a case where it's worth watching the video linked to in the BBC story before you pass judgement based on a couple of lines of a BBC report. If you watch the video, it's pretty clear that the story is making a mountain out of nothing by apparently trying to make out that Chris Philip Jeremy Hunt doesn't know the DR Congo is a country. In fact, if you watch the video, it's very clear that Chris Philip is simply asking a rhetorical question as he clarifies what was actually a pretty complicated question one of the audience was asking. Indeed the final paragraph acknowledges this by stating



(I would say it's misleading for the BBC to make out that is questionable: It's very clear from the video that is to a large extent what is going on).

There's also something else important: The guy asking the question refers simply to 'Congo'. In fact there is no country merely called 'Congo' but there are two different countries with 'Congo' in their name - the Republic of the Congo and the Democratic Republic of the Congo - so the question is already ambiguous and potentially confusing. Hardly surprising that the person answering it on the spot might want to think about it for a second and clarify it. The BBC have misleadingly hidden this by showing subtitles that say 'DR Congo' but of course that information wouldn't have been available to the Question Time panel.

All in all, whatever you think about the Rwanda legislation, the problem here is the BBC putting up a very misleading story. Incredibly poor journalism here.

Politics is a cruel opportunistic game, anyone who goes into it has to learn this and know how to play it. Philp should have not taken that risk; the natural reactions of the audience and the panel are testament to that (had they not reacted like that, the BBC probably wouldn't have done this standout video/article). Perception matters a lot in politics, even if what is perceived is not true, and now many will look at Philp and know him for this gaffe, even if he did genuinely know about the different countries.

To take another example that this reminds me of: back in the Global Financial Crisis, there was a PMQs where Brown was defending the bank bailouts. He infamously said "We not only saved the world...uh saved the banks", and instantly the entire opposition benches erupted in laughter. Once the hapless speaker finally gained order, Brown resumed and said "We not only worked with other countries to save the world's banking system..." and continued as planned. The actual answer made sense, but one slip-up and his opponents seized the moment, and that's all anyone remembers.

In short, Philp only has himself to blame for not thinking twice about his approach here. You want to be a politician, in particular a minister, you have to learn the rules of the game, be able to handle the pressure of the role and be on top of your brief before going out in public.

 

[Gigabit]

How did they manage to do that when no-one had actually explicitly referred to the DR Congo? The DR bit is entirely in the BBC report and the subtitles - as far as I can see, it's nowhere in the actual recording. The questioner merely said, Congo, which by itself is completely ambiguous.

But isn't the point that the Tory MP believed Congo and Rwanda were the same country? It doesn't matter what country he was referring to, neither Congo is or ever has been? He also said Congo was fighting with Rwanda so it was quite heavily implied which he meant.

 

[najaB]

But isn't the point that the Tory MP believed Congo and Rwanda were the same country?

Whether he actually believed that or not only he can answer, but that is definitely the impression that anyone watching the clip with an unbiased eye would come to.

 

[nw1]

Chris Philp... heard the name before somewhere. He's the MP for Croydon North isn't he? Or is it Croydon Central? Well they're the same, who cares.

 

[The Ham]

Thanks for these. Are they the ONS numbers from the 2021 census please?

Can you provide a link that shows the full data series also including years 0-64 please?

Not sure if the original source, but data is from here:

UK population by age 2022 | Statista

The three-most common single years of age in the UK were among people in their 30s, with the UK also having a high number of people in their 50s.

www.statista.com

However, the numbers look broadly right, for example circa 12 million over 65 (2022) vs the ONS census data stating that it was over 11 million (2021).

 

[Yew]

In short, Philp only has himself to blame for not thinking twice about his approach here. You want to be a politician, in particular a minister, you have to learn the rules of the game, be able to handle the pressure of the role and be on top of your brief before going out in public.

So we need politicians who are obsessed with making soundbites for the media circus, rather than have substance and conviction?

 

[baz962]

Watched it live and knew it was a rhetorical question straight away.

 

[Magdalia]

Not sure if the original source, but data is from here:

UK population by age 2022 | Statista

The three-most common single years of age in the UK were among people in their 30s, with the UK also having a high number of people in their 50s.

www.statista.com

However, the numbers look broadly right, for example circa 12 million over 65 (2022) vs the ONS census data stating that it was over 11 million (2021).

Thanks. I was looking at the ONS website and could only find data for England and Wales (Scotland postponed its census because of the pandemic). It isn't clear what Statista (or ONS) have done to get to UK estimates.

The interesting line on the chart is 800k per single year of age. The years of age above that line are 46-62, 22-43 and 9-14. I feel relieved that I'm even older than all of those. If I was in the 22-43 block I'd be worried how few people there are younger than that.

 

[YorkRailFan]

A Tory MP and former health minister has staged a dramatic defection to Labour, saying the Conservatives have become a “nationalist party of the right” that has abandoned compassion and no longer prioritises the NHS.

Dr Dan Poulter, the MP for Central Suffolk and North Ipswich, who works part-time as a mental health doctor in an NHS hospital, announced he was resigning as a Tory MP and would be taking the Labour whip until the next election in an exclusive interview with the Observer.He said he would not seek re-election to the House of Commons at the next general election. But, writing in the Observer, he says he envisages a role advising the Labour party on its policies on mental health while focusing more on his NHS work.

Poulter said his experiences on more than 20 night shifts over the last year in a severely overstretched accident and emergency department had been “truly life-changing” and persuaded him to defect to the only party he believed was now really committed to investing in improving the NHS.

He said: “I could not go on as part of that. I have to be able to look my NHS colleagues in the eye, my patients in the eye and my constituents in the eye. And I know that the Conservative government has been failing on the thing I care about most, which is the NHS and its patients.”

The Observer understands that discussions between Poulter and senior Labour figures have been going on for many months at the highest levels about the timing and organisation of his likely defection, as well as advisory roles he could play in future in developing the party’s health policies, with the benefit of his firsthand inside knowledge.The defection has, however, been kept the tightest of secrets, with only half a dozen people in the party knowing it was coming before the Observer broke the news.

A one nation Tory on the left of the party, Poulter has regularly made his disquiet clear about the direction of government policy since David Cameron’s premiership, and it is understood that he has been frustrated by subsequent Tory prime ministers’ lack of interest in his views on NHS reform.The shock defection – the first by a Tory MP to Labour since Christian Wakeford crossed the floor in 2022 – is another severe blow to Rishi Sunak before Thursday’s council and mayoral elections, in which the Tory party is expected to lose up to a half of its remaining local authority seats.

Heavy losses and failure to hold on to key mayoralties such as the West Midlands and Tees Valley are likely to reopen speculation about a possible pre-election leadership challenge to the prime minister.

In the run-up to the next general election, the future of the NHS will be a vital battleground, and Labour is known to be keen to use Poulter’s inside knowledge to maximum effect.

Poulter was first elected to parliament in 2010 and served as a health minister under Cameron from 2012 to 2015.

Since then, he says, he has seen a progressive “rightward drift” in the party’s policy and thinking that has left him feeling increasingly uncomfortable.He described Liz Truss’s brief and disastrous premiership as a “shattering moment” for moderates in the party like him, and for middle-ground voters. “It is very difficult to forget that,” he said, adding that his constituents had become poorer directly as a result of Truss’s mistakes on the economy.

“The Conservative party’s values have changed over the past eight years,” he said. “The values of the Conservative party under David Cameron were different values and the priorities were very different. David Cameron undoubtedly had a very strong commitment to the NHS.

“Since he ceased to be prime minister eight years ago, the health service has ceased to be an area of priority for the Conservative party, and that is now showing in the strain on the frontline and the deterioration of care for patients.”

He added: “It feels to me that the Tory party has gone from being a pragmatic, centrist, centre-right party which focused on and understood the importance of public service and the state to deliver certain things …and had a compassionate outlook on key issues. It has gone from that and feels like it has become a nationalist party of the right, much more of what we see in Europe.“It is not to say all [Tory] MPs are like that. There are good MPs, but it feels that the party is ever moving rightwards, ever presenting a more nationalist position rather than a position that actually focuses on what a lot of people want to see, which is a level of compassion from government but also well-run public services.”Poulter said he wished Sunak well in what was a very difficult job and that the prime minister had always been very civil towards him.

But he lavished praise on Keir Starmer for reforming the Labour party since 2019 and for his clear commitment to the ideals of public service. In the case of the NHS, he said, the party’s focus on preventative care, child health and the social causes of poor health were key.
“One of the things I really like about Labour party policy on the NHS is the focus on the social determinants of poor health and actually recognising that tackling poverty, poor housing, all those issues, particularly giving children from poorer backgrounds better chances and focusing on child health,” he said. “That is something Labour understands that the Conservatives really don’t – and that, for me, is something that makes the Labour party the party that can be trusted with delivering the reforms that are needed to get the NHS back on its feet.

Top Tory MP defects to Labour in fury at NHS crisis

Ex-health minister Dan Poulter who also works as a hospital doctor, says Conservatives have become ‘nationalist party of the right’

www.theguardian.com

Yet another defection, the Tories are slowly losing their majority one by one. The center-right to Labour and the right to Reform, Sunak is being squeezed from all sides.

 

[brad465]

The second Tory to Labour defection of the parliament. Daniel Poulter defecting, however he'll also stand down at the next election, which avoids a contentious candidate selection/standing in the area:

Conservative MP and ex-minister Daniel Poulter defects to Labour

The doctor told the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg he could no longer look NHS colleagues and patients in the eye and stay as a Conservative.

www.bbc.co.uk

Former minister and Conservative MP Dan Poulter has defected to Labour.
In an exclusive TV interview with the BBC, the MP for Central Suffolk and North Ipswich told Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg that he could no longer look his NHS colleagues and patients in the eye and stay on as a Conservative.
Dr Poulter, who works part time as a doctor, said that Conservatives were no longer focused on public services.
Downing Street has just been told of his decision and is yet to respond.
Dr Poulter said he would sit as a Labour MP until the general election and then stand down.
He said: "I found it increasingly difficult to look my NHS colleagues in the eye, my patients in the eye, and my constituents in the eye with good conscience."
He suggested the party had stopped valuing public services, saying: "The difficulty for the Conservative Party is that the party I was elected into valued public services... it had a compassionate view about supporting the more disadvantaged in society.
"I think the Conservative Party today is in a very different place."
Dr Poulter, who was first elected in 2010, served as a health minister for several years under the coalition.
He said he had "no animus" towards Prime Minister Rishi Sunak but that the country needed a general election as soon as possible, adding that Labour and Sir Keir Starmer could be trusted to run the NHS and the country.
Asked if his constituents who elected him as a Conservative would be angry with his decision he said: "I could have carried on to the election and then stood down, or I could have decided to call a by-election… and I thought on balance, because there's going to be an election very soon, it's better to work for my constituents through to the end of this Parliament."
It is only the third Conservative defection since 2019.
Lee Anderson who sat briefly as an independent joined Reform last month. Christian Wakeford left the Conservatives for the Labour Party in 2022.

 

[Enthusiast]

Dr Poulter, who works part time as a doctor, said that Conservatives were no longer focused on public services.

Nor is he, it seems.

 

[317 forever]

At first I thought he was the singer of Bad Day from 2005. However, that was Daniel Powter.

 

[Meole]

No loss as Humza Yousaf would say.

 

[nw1]

Nor does he, it seems.

Explain?

No loss as Humza Yousaf would say.

Disagree. He's not well known, but it's bad publicity for Sunak.

 

[sor]

I'm one of his constituents. All I can say about him is that he has stayed out of the controversy that has engulfed both of his neighbours and of course MH over in the west of the county. Totally invisible in fact - only hear from him when its election time (or when he regurgitates the tory party line back at me in an email)

Extremely hard not to see this as a cynical move - the tories are in such danger of losing even safe seats like his and his local council already had a huge upset last year as the Tories lost control. The guy's spent 14 years voting for Tory policies that have contributed to the problems he now claims he's suddenly been aware of. Pull the other one.

If I was the local Lab candidate I'd be wanting to get confirmation of my candidacy in writing I think. (though I don't think they'd try to put him in here, this is not a very Labour area)

 

[nw1]

I'm one of his constituents. All I can say about him is that he has stayed out of the controversy that has engulfed both of his neighbours

Is Truss one of them? Not sure who else, besides Truss and Hancock, are MPs for this part of the world. And who is the other?

and of course MH over in the west of the county. Totally invisible in fact - only hear from him when its election time (or when he regurgitates the tory party line back at me in an email)

Extremely hard not to see this as a cynical move - the tories are in such danger of losing even safe seats like his and his local council already had a huge upset last year as the Tories lost control. The guy's spent 14 years voting for Tory policies that have contributed to the problems he now claims he's suddenly been aware of. Pull the other one.

If I was the local Lab candidate I'd be wanting to get confirmation of my candidacy in writing I think. (though I don't think they'd try to put him in here, this is not a very Labour area)

Mind you he's not planning to stand in the election. If he was planning to stand as a Labour candidate I'd be more cynical, but in this case he is perhaps genuine.

A slightly puzzling move though if he's not planning to stay in politics: one might think he'd just resign the Tory whip and represent the constituency as an Independent.

While I don't know it, I'd guess this seat is very rural so it presumably won't go Labour (or indeed anyone else besides the Tories) in a million years. So he'd have probably had more chance of retaining the seat if he remained a Tory.