[Politics] UK Suspends Parliament

Baffle

Elite Member
Apr 6, 2020
2,049
993
118
CM156 said:
I still haven't forgiven him for his comments about the Falkland Islands.
And I'm not even British.
Most people here are only vaguely aware the Falkland Islands exist until someone reminds them that Corbyn is a bad man. Come on, most people in England couldn't give a shit about Northern Ireland and are annoyed that it's made Brexit really awkward, and that's just over yonder - why would they care about Penguin Poo Island?
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
15,525
1,202
118
Baffle2 said:
CM156 said:
I still haven't forgiven him for his comments about the Falkland Islands.
And I'm not even British.
Most people here are only vaguely aware the Falkland Islands exist until someone reminds them that Corbyn is a bad man. Come on, most people in England couldn't give a shit about Northern Ireland and are annoyed that it's made Brexit really awkward, and that's just over yonder - why would they care about Penguin Poo Island?
It reminds them of a time that the BBC would stick to its guns about impartiality and say stuff like "British Forces" instead of "our boys". We'll not see the like of those days again.
 

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
8,090
5,467
118
Baffle2 said:
(Lib Dems don't stand a chance and are shit anyway -- they'll be in bed with the Tories the second they get a chance)
Not likely, for two reasons. Firstly, the experience of the 2010-2015 government. More importantly, Brexit is an anathema to the LDs and whilst they might feasibly bend on a very soft Brexit for pragmatism, the Tories aren't offering anything close to what the LDs could swallow.

CM156 said:
I still haven't forgiven him for his comments about the Falkland Islands.
And I'm not even British.
This is exactly the sort of problem Corbyn poses. A whole heap of voters look at a party leader and think "Is he/she my kind of person?" Labour is still a socially liberal middle class operation that fails to quite grasp that appealing to qualities like nationalism and even mild authoritarianism win votes. He plays right up to the worst caricatures of a dreamy, ineffectual, unpatriotic socialist in the right-wing press, which makes their job so much easier.

He does appear to be an effective campaigner on the ground so I expect in a campaign he'll pick his personal and party ratings up, but Johnson is also far more effective than May so I strongly doubt the sort of comeback that was achieved in 2017 will be replicated.
 

Baffle

Elite Member
Apr 6, 2020
2,049
993
118
Agema said:
Not likely, for two reasons. Firstly, the experience of the 2010-2015 government. More importantly, Brexit is an anathema to the LDs and whilst they might feasibly bend on a very soft Brexit for pragmatism, the Tories aren't offering anything close to what the LDs could swallow.
It didn't bother them last time to go into a party with policies that were directly opposed to their own (see tuition fees). And Swinson's voting record on benefits is sufficiently damning that she's pretty much a Tory in my eyes. (Disclosure: I voted Lib Dem once without really knowing enough about them. Won't happen again.)

Also, Farron in the last election. Make up your mind man! Do you hate gays or not!?
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 26, 2020
7,294
2,898
118
Country
United Kingdom
Agema said:
He plays right up to the worst caricatures of a dreamy, ineffectual, unpatriotic socialist in the right-wing press, which makes their job so much easier.
I'm often inclined to believe this, but then I see that the press are simultaneously calling him authoritarian, threatening, cruel etc. Its not even a consistent theme; its anything.

From time to time I start to think its sheer volume. Endless slander and character-assassination has gone on for so long, at such a pitch, that the image has stuck. And it's not even a specific image, it's just "bad".

Whenever criticism of Corbyn comes up, it doesn't usually start with policy. The platform is not discussed, but the term "extreme" is trotted out mindlessly anyway. Much the same happened with "Red Ed" Miliband, a milquetoast centrist. So to a degree, I don't think it matters who it is or what the platform is. The press have their horse and they'll spend inordinate amounts of money to make sure its opponent is hobbled.
 

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
8,090
5,467
118
Baffle2 said:
It didn't bother them last time to go into a party with policies that were directly opposed to their own (see tuition fees).
Virtually any political alliance requires parties supporting others with directly opposing policies. That's what being a different party is about. An alliance is agreeing that some concessions need to be made where policies clash.

I wouldn't deny the importance of tuition fees to many individuals, particularly those of studenty age around 2010. But in the greater scheme of the whole country - economy, health service, social services or even primary and secondary education - it's quite a small issue. Nor do I really get how it is the Tories and Labour routinely break promises when in office, yet the Lib Dems do it once and are never to be forgiven.

And Swinson's voting record on benefits is sufficiently damning that she's pretty much a Tory in my eyes. (Disclosure: I voted Lib Dem once without really knowing enough about them. Won't happen again.)
Let's also bear in mind most of those welfare votes are 2010-2015 when the Lib Dems were part of the government and thus to all intents and purposes honour-bound to support the policies of the government, so I think her voting record is not entirely a fair representation of where she would stand if she had control over welfare policy. I think it's more that it's useful for Labour and the left to ignore that context and characterise her that way.

That said, the Lib Dems approach welfare differently from Labour. They approach welfare more in terms of improving opportunities (supporting education, skills, etc.) and incentivising than increasing basic safety net supports.

Anyway, current LD welfare policy stuff:
https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/libdems/pages/46346/attachments/original/1564404756/136_-_A_fairer_share_for_all.pdf?1564404756

Silvanus said:
I'm often inclined to believe this, but then I see that the press are simultaneously calling him authoritarian, threatening, cruel etc. Its not even a consistent theme; its anything.
It's not necessarily inconsistent, it may depend on the sphere being referred to.

From time to time I start to think its sheer volume. Endless slander and character-assassination has gone on for so long, at such a pitch, that the image has stuck. And it's not even a specific image, it's just "bad".

Whenever criticism of Corbyn comes up, it doesn't usually start with policy. The platform is not discussed, but the term "extreme" is trotted out mindlessly anyway. Much the same happened with "Red Ed" Miliband, a milquetoast centrist. So to a degree, I don't think it matters who it is or what the platform is. The press have their horse and they'll spend inordinate amounts of money to make sure its opponent is hobbled.
The press doesn't have unlimited ability to trash people. Miliband was able to vastly improve his approval rating with the right attention paid to how he came across.

Corbyn's reputation in the last election improved enormously when the public got to see him properly and unfiltered, he was around evens. But then how the hell has he managed to go from that in 2017 to about -50-60 now? How has that been left to slip? It's not just the press, it's more than that and a failing that goes right to the top.
 

Baffle

Elite Member
Apr 6, 2020
2,049
993
118
Agema said:
Virtually any political alliance requires parties supporting others with directly opposing policies. That's what being a different party is about. An alliance is agreeing that some concessions need to be made where policies clash.

I wouldn't deny the importance of tuition fees to many individuals, particularly those of studenty age around 2010. But in the greater scheme of the whole country - economy, health service, social services or even primary and secondary education - it's quite a small issue. Nor do I really get how it is the Tories and Labour routinely break promises when in office, yet the Lib Dems do it once and are never to be forgiven.
Well, no, they didn't only support the Tories in the tuition policies, it's just they they supported them in something completely against a major point they campaigned on. They supported them in austerity too.

But on tuition, it is a big difference. I left uni with ~12K of debt; my sister is going to leave with ~50K of debt. You can't just hand-wave that away - those are amounts that can change lives.

Let's also bear in mind most of those welfare votes are 2010-2015 when the Lib Dems were part of the government and thus to all intents and purposes honour-bound to support the policies of the government, so I think her voting record is not entirely a fair representation of where she would stand if she had control over welfare policy.
Disagree. MPs are honour-bound to vote in the best interests of their constituents and the people who voted them into power. And that means going against the party line sometimes (see Corbyn). Do you think the people who voted Lib Dem in 2010 felt that's what happened? It's not that the Lib Dems compromised, it's that they completely sold out.

That said, the Lib Dems approach welfare differently from Labour. They approach welfare more in terms of improving opportunities (supporting education, skills, etc.) and incentivising than increasing basic safety net supports.
That's not what they did. They voted for the bedroom tax (at the time that came in I was living on a council estate, and it really did hurt people). It doesn't improve people's opportunities to hurt them financially; that's the stick, not the carrot. It's the Tory way: if it's more profitably to live on benefits than work, cut benefits! No you dolt! Raise wages!

Anyway, current LD welfare policy stuff:
https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/libdems/pages/46346/attachments/original/1564404756/136_-_A_fairer_share_for_all.pdf?1564404756
I appreciate the effort (really), but there's no way I'll vote Lib Dem (rather die in a ditch!). I feel personally betrayed by the coalition years, and I see the pro-Brexit stance as nothing more than product differentiation. For me the forthcoming GE is more important than Brexit as a single issue; it's a chance to start to unravel years of misery. (For clarity, I live in a fairly well-off part of the northeast, but some of the places round here, fuck me it's bleak. Doesn't have to be that way.)

Edit: by pro-Brexit, I obviously meant anti-Brexit.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 26, 2020
7,294
2,898
118
Country
United Kingdom
Agema said:
Corbyn's reputation in the last election improved enormously when the public got to see him properly and unfiltered, he was around evens. But then how the hell has he managed to go from that in 2017 to about -50-60 now? How has that been left to slip? It's not just the press, it's more than that and a failing that goes right to the top.
It's not just the press, sure. He responds poorly to questioning, as if it's an imposition.

But its notable that whenever discussion revolves around his qualities as a party leader, it always becomes so vague. I've heard a hundred times that hes a useless leader; I've heard very few times any specific points about what his leaderly failings actually are.
 

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
8,090
5,467
118
Baffle2 said:
Well, no, they didn't only support the Tories in the tuition policies, it's just they they supported them in something completely against a major point they campaigned on. They supported them in austerity too.

But on tuition, it is a big difference. I left uni with ~12K of debt; my sister is going to leave with ~50K of debt. You can't just hand-wave that away - those are amounts that can change lives.
Firstly, let me say I personally think tuition fees are way too high currently.

On the other hand, a degree is worth (on average) over ?200,000 across a lifespan compared to those without a degree. The more degrees are paid for by tax, the more they are de facto in part paid by people who don't have degrees - low earners funding those who will go on to be richer. Let's also bear in mind that thanks to the LDs loan repayments were graded according to earnings so those who earn more after graduation will repay more than those who earn less.

Disagree. MPs are honour-bound to vote in the best interests of their constituents and the people who voted them into power.
It's a lot more complex than that, though. Government involves an entire program of many policies and this requires compromise and concessions - giving up some battles to win wars. The best interests overall of constituents may translate to giving them a disadvantage to win a bigger advantage elsewhere. If the government is repeatedly defeated by its own MPs, the end result is the collapse of the government, which means the MP loses the opportunity to advance anything at all.

That's not what they did. They voted for the bedroom tax (at the time that came in I was living on a council estate, and it really did hurt people). It doesn't improve people's opportunities to hurt them financially; that's the stick, not the carrot. It's the Tory way: if it's more profitably to live on benefits than work, cut benefits! No you dolt! Raise wages!
It was Tory policy, and the Lib Dems had to support elements of Tory policy in return for advancing some of their own. Chiefly the Lib Dems wanted a shot at changing FPTP to proportional representation, and they got their referendum even if it was defeated. The Lib Dems also had two other objectives - firstly to show that a coalition government could function (particularly with relation to the possibility of introducing PR) and to provide stability in governance with the country facing crisis post-recession.

History is fairly clear that a lot of 2010 Lib Dem voters did not appreciate it all, and that's totally fair enough. But I think the Lib Dems need to be evaluated by their policies here and now, not by largely Tory governance in 2010-2015.

I appreciate the effort (really), but there's no way I'll vote Lib Dem (rather die in a ditch!). I feel personally betrayed by the coalition years, and I see the pro-Brexit stance as nothing more than product differentiation. For me the forthcoming GE is more important than Brexit as a single issue; it's a chance to start to unravel years of misery. (For clarity, I live in a fairly well-off part of the northeast, but some of the places round here, fuck me it's bleak. Doesn't have to be that way.)
You're right that the GE is crucial: but Brexit is inseparable from the wider future of the UK, and if the Tories are free to organise Brexit then they'll also lead a bonfire of regulations and social services that'll make Thatcher look drippily half-hearted.

Honestly, at this point I think every non-Tory and Remainer needs to check whether Lab or the LDs are the main opposition in their constituency and back it no matter how much they hate it. The one and only objective is ensuring the Tories do not have a majority whether Brexit or the general running of the economy, because it's clear the Tories intend a bonfire of regulations and social services. A vote for anyone else (except UKIP and the Brexit party) is a vote to not go that way.
 

Baffle

Elite Member
Apr 6, 2020
2,049
993
118
Agema said:
Honestly, at this point I think every non-Tory and Remainer needs to check whether Lab or the LDs are the main opposition in their constituency and back it no matter how much they hate it. The one and only objective is ensuring the Tories do not have a majority whether Brexit or the general running of the economy, because it's clear the Tories intend a bonfire of regulations and social services. A vote for anyone else (except UKIP and the Brexit party) is a vote to not go that way.
Fundamentally my issue with the Lib Dems is that I see their actions as a betrayal specifically of the poor. They threw the poor under the bus to get what they wanted, and didn't even get that in the end. It's not their policies as such -- those aren't even that relevant because the only way they get in is via coalition, and then their policies don't count for anything. It's that I just don't trust them. A bit more than the Tories, but not much.

I'll (obviously) be voting Labour in any case; we're in the Labour heartlands here and it's unlikely anyone else will get a look in. But I wouldn't want to risk it -- people not making the effort hasn't really gone to plan lately...
 

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
8,090
5,467
118
Silvanus said:
It's not just the press, sure. He responds poorly to questioning, as if it's an imposition.
Yes. There is something about Corbyn that makes him seem suspicious and perhaps resentful of others. It's not a good image.

But its notable that whenever discussion revolves around his qualities as a party leader, it always becomes so vague. I've heard a hundred times that hes a useless leader; I've heard very few times any specific points about what his leaderly failings actually are.
I think my main problem is that he's not there enough. It seems to me John McDonnell and Tom Watson are out there more than Corbyn.

One can certainly take the approach that he has a more collegiate approach to governance, so it's a "group effort" by the cabinet, or that the party NEC has a lot more say. But whilst this may attractive and effective to party insiders, voters are used to someone who leads more conventionally by going out there, being visible and apparently doing stuff. So perhaps he didn't effectively stamp on antisemitisim because he views it as the remit of the NEC. Okay... but how did that end up, especially when he's in the firing line personally? Or Brexit - we have the shadow Brexit secretary fighting the Tories tooth and nail with a plainly anti-leave leaning whilst Corbyn occasionally pops up to announce something contrary, and often also vague and dithery.

Corbyn doesn't seem to want to play the normal media game, and I can see some sort of rationale there. But if you need to win the votes of millions of people who don't give a shit about internal party politics - they want a more conventional model who does what they understand and can relate to - there is a high chance it will cost.

What I would also suggest is that Corbyn has been a hugely divisive leader for the Labour party - I could weep at how many talented MPs are locked on the backbenches because they're deemed insufficiently loyal to the program (Corbyn / Momentum), the deselection threats to hard working MPs, the air of menace to ideological difference. But a lot of these moderates have reach to the middle ground that Labour also needs to win over. This is where "authoritarian" and "threatening" comes in.
 

Seanchaidh

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
4,447
2,430
118
Country
United States of America
And then there's this:

[tweet t="https://twitter.com/tm_mnn/status/1189973785388163072"]

Just utterly shameful.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 26, 2020
7,294
2,898
118
Country
United Kingdom
Agema said:
What I would also suggest is that Corbyn has been a hugely divisive leader for the Labour party - I could weep at how many talented MPs are locked on the backbenches because they're deemed insufficiently loyal to the program (Corbyn / Momentum), the deselection threats to hard working MPs, the air of menace to ideological difference. But a lot of these moderates have reach to the middle ground that Labour also needs to win over. This is where "authoritarian" and "threatening" comes in.
Everything else I can definitely see and agree with, but not really this. This is how deselections and reshuffles are always done, with one eye on loyalty to the party leader's vision.

Divisiveness merely became unacceptable because of who was out and who was in. The New Labour/ Third Way was out, and that was alienating... but nobody gave a shit when the New Labour leadership was alienating the social Democrats.

Then, we have Johnson removing the whip from 20+ MPs. An actual ideological purge, and the silence from the press is deafening.
 

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
8,090
5,467
118
Silvanus said:
Everything else I can definitely see and agree with, but not really this. This is how deselections and reshuffles are always done, with one eye on loyalty to the party leader's vision.

Divisiveness merely became unacceptable because of who was out and who was in. The New Labour/ Third Way was out, and that was alienating... but nobody gave a shit when the New Labour leadership was alienating the social Democrats.
A lot of shadow cabinet ministers have got the chop, in many cases justified because they openly expressed distrust in Corbyn's leadership. On the other hand, that's partly because Corbyn looked for all the world like he was sinking the party - and had May run a halfway competent campaign in 2017 Labour probably would have been sunk.

But the deselection threats (also under recent rule changes to make deselections easier) are beyond what occurred under Blair (althought maybe less severe than the 80s purge of militant). Labour's had a chunk of MPs resign from the party for a reason, and I don't think their comments about the hostility and intolerance they've been experiencing are non-negligible. I'd like to think more Labour activists accept it might be a little problematic, but mostly I hear them say things like good riddance to red Tories. My concern is that those more centreist types can often represent sections of the populace Labour should be fighting for.

Then, we have Johnson removing the whip from 20+ MPs. An actual ideological purge, and the silence from the press is deafening.
From the Johnson fan club part of the press, sure. He can say no wrong. Although I don't doubt some of their fervour relates to Brexit and the concern about how far left Corbyn is perceived to be, too.
 

CM156_v1legacy

Revelation 9:6
Mar 23, 2011
3,997
0
0
Baffle2 said:
CM156 said:
I still haven't forgiven him for his comments about the Falkland Islands.
And I'm not even British.
Most people here are only vaguely aware the Falkland Islands exist until someone reminds them that Corbyn is a bad man. Come on, most people in England couldn't give a shit about Northern Ireland and are annoyed that it's made Brexit really awkward, and that's just over yonder - why would they care about Penguin Poo Island?
I don't think they would. I only care because I have a few friends from the islands, and one who is currently working there as a military contractor.

But Corbyn's statements about the islands are inexcusable.

Thaluikhain said:
Baffle2 said:
CM156 said:
I still haven't forgiven him for his comments about the Falkland Islands.
And I'm not even British.
Most people here are only vaguely aware the Falkland Islands exist until someone reminds them that Corbyn is a bad man. Come on, most people in England couldn't give a shit about Northern Ireland and are annoyed that it's made Brexit really awkward, and that's just over yonder - why would they care about Penguin Poo Island?
It reminds them of a time that the BBC would stick to its guns about impartiality and say stuff like "British Forces" instead of "our boys". We'll not see the like of those days again.
Should have been "Our Lads" vs "the Argie bastards"

But the BBC wouldn't take my suggestion

Agema said:
Baffle2 said:
(Lib Dems don't stand a chance and are shit anyway -- they'll be in bed with the Tories the second they get a chance)
Not likely, for two reasons. Firstly, the experience of the 2010-2015 government. More importantly, Brexit is an anathema to the LDs and whilst they might feasibly bend on a very soft Brexit for pragmatism, the Tories aren't offering anything close to what the LDs could swallow.

CM156 said:
I still haven't forgiven him for his comments about the Falkland Islands.
And I'm not even British.
This is exactly the sort of problem Corbyn poses. A whole heap of voters look at a party leader and think "Is he/she my kind of person?" Labour is still a socially liberal middle class operation that fails to quite grasp that appealing to qualities like nationalism and even mild authoritarianism win votes. He plays right up to the worst caricatures of a dreamy, ineffectual, unpatriotic socialist in the right-wing press, which makes their job so much easier.

He does appear to be an effective campaigner on the ground so I expect in a campaign he'll pick his personal and party ratings up, but Johnson is also far more effective than May so I strongly doubt the sort of comeback that was achieved in 2017 will be replicated.
Hasn't he appeared on Iranian TV? I'm trying to remember if that's a true accusation against him or a smear


EDIT: I just realized: It's Poppy season now in the UK, isn't it?
 

Gordon_4_v1legacy

New member
Aug 22, 2010
2,577
0
0
CM156 said:
Baffle2 said:
CM156 said:
I still haven't forgiven him for his comments about the Falkland Islands.
And I'm not even British.
Most people here are only vaguely aware the Falkland Islands exist until someone reminds them that Corbyn is a bad man. Come on, most people in England couldn't give a shit about Northern Ireland and are annoyed that it's made Brexit really awkward, and that's just over yonder - why would they care about Penguin Poo Island?
I don't think they would. I only care because I have a few friends from the islands, and one who is currently working there as a military contractor.

But Corbyn's statements about the islands are inexcusable.

Thaluikhain said:
Baffle2 said:
CM156 said:
I still haven't forgiven him for his comments about the Falkland Islands.
And I'm not even British.
Most people here are only vaguely aware the Falkland Islands exist until someone reminds them that Corbyn is a bad man. Come on, most people in England couldn't give a shit about Northern Ireland and are annoyed that it's made Brexit really awkward, and that's just over yonder - why would they care about Penguin Poo Island?
It reminds them of a time that the BBC would stick to its guns about impartiality and say stuff like "British Forces" instead of "our boys". We'll not see the like of those days again.
Should have been "Our Lads" vs "the Argie bastards"

But the BBC wouldn't take my suggestion

Agema said:
Baffle2 said:
(Lib Dems don't stand a chance and are shit anyway -- they'll be in bed with the Tories the second they get a chance)
Not likely, for two reasons. Firstly, the experience of the 2010-2015 government. More importantly, Brexit is an anathema to the LDs and whilst they might feasibly bend on a very soft Brexit for pragmatism, the Tories aren't offering anything close to what the LDs could swallow.

CM156 said:
I still haven't forgiven him for his comments about the Falkland Islands.
And I'm not even British.
This is exactly the sort of problem Corbyn poses. A whole heap of voters look at a party leader and think "Is he/she my kind of person?" Labour is still a socially liberal middle class operation that fails to quite grasp that appealing to qualities like nationalism and even mild authoritarianism win votes. He plays right up to the worst caricatures of a dreamy, ineffectual, unpatriotic socialist in the right-wing press, which makes their job so much easier.

He does appear to be an effective campaigner on the ground so I expect in a campaign he'll pick his personal and party ratings up, but Johnson is also far more effective than May so I strongly doubt the sort of comeback that was achieved in 2017 will be replicated.
Hasn't he appeared on Iranian TV? I'm trying to remember if that's a true accusation against him or a smear


EDIT: I just realized: It's Poppy season now in the UK, isn't it?
Remembrance Day is in nine days, yes. So the poppies will be out in force among the Commonwealth nations.
 

CM156_v1legacy

Revelation 9:6
Mar 23, 2011
3,997
0
0
Gordon_4 said:
Remembrance Day is in nine days, yes. So the poppies will be out in force among the Commonwealth nations.
And that also means the constant political controversy over poppies too, doesn't it?
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
7,265
2,046
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
CM156 said:
Gordon_4 said:
Remembrance Day is in nine days, yes. So the poppies will be out in force among the Commonwealth nations.
And that also means the constant political controversy over poppies too, doesn't it?
Controvery over poppies? Is this a UK thing?
 

CM156_v1legacy

Revelation 9:6
Mar 23, 2011
3,997
0
0
trunkage said:
CM156 said:
Gordon_4 said:
Remembrance Day is in nine days, yes. So the poppies will be out in force among the Commonwealth nations.
And that also means the constant political controversy over poppies too, doesn't it?
Controvery over poppies? Is this a UK thing?
From what I have heard, yes.

Here's a link to the wikipedia page [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remembrance_poppy#Protests_and_controversy].
 

Baffle

Elite Member
Apr 6, 2020
2,049
993
118
trunkage said:
Controvery over poppies? Is this a UK thing?
Yeah, Corbyn's is never big enough if he's still able to move under its weight. Everyone else is allowed to wear normal-sized ones, apart from football players, who are simultaneously obliged to wear one and banned from doing so.