back to article Wannabe Prime Minister Andrea Leadsom thinks all websites should be rated – just like movies

The UK's possible future prime minister thinks all websites should be classified with minimum age ratings, just like films. Andrea Leadsom is one of two candidates left in the race for the leadership of the Conservative Party; the winner of which will become the country's Prime Minister. Although many are concerned with the …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Andrea Leadsom...

    Rated for what? Political Bias?

    So when it comes to censorship, probably slightly less draconian than Theresa May then.

    1. Titus Technophobe

      Re: Andrea Leadsom...

      To me they both look like worthy successors to one of the greatest female leaders this country has ever had.

      That said you are right this is a difficult choice, on the one hand Theresa May has the experience on the other Andrea Leadsom has clearly indicated she is in tune with the will of the people.

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

        1. phuzz Silver badge
          Facepalm

          Re: Andrea Leadsom...

          @ Symon I'm pretty sure* that Titus is being a mite sarcastic and is comparing Theresa May to Maggie Thatcher.

          Which is ridiculous because Maggie at least understood basic science.

          * Well, I hope so

          1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

            Re: Andrea Leadsom...

            Which is ridiculous because Maggie at least understood basic science.

            * Well, I hope so

            Given that she had a biochemistry degree, yes...

            1. Titus Technophobe

              Re: Andrea Leadsom...

              Which is ridiculous .... she had a biochemistry degree, yes...

              Which she put to good use in helping to invent "Mr Whippy".

              1. hplasm Silver badge
                Happy

                Re: Andrea Leadsom...

                "Which she put to good use in helping to invent "Mr Whippy"."

                Douglas Hurd?

              2. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Andrea Leadsom...

                > Which she put to good use in helping to invent "Mr Whippy".

                I thought there were other conservative MPs involved in that sort of activity...

              3. Leslie Graham

                Re: Andrea Leadsom...

                And spent the rest of the time engineering an unmitigated cultural and economic disaster from which the UK has never recovered. Not to mention she lost The Falklands through sheer incompetence which lead to the loss of hundreds of lives in order to get it back.

                Worst PM in UK history.

                1. Titus Technophobe

                  Re: Andrea Leadsom... @Leslie

                  You say that but one thing she did not do was hold a referendum on EEC membership.

            2. Hollerithevo Silver badge

              Re: Andrea Leadsom...

              She always said "I am proud to be Britain's first Prime Minister who is a ...chemist."

              1. hplasm Silver badge
                Devil

                Re: Andrea Leadsom...

                She always said "I am proud to be Britain's first Prime Minister who is a ...chemist."

                (Jack) Boots?

            3. Starting

              Re: Andrea Leadsom...

              Chemistry degree, not Biochemistry. (Just so we keep things accurate.)

            4. Starting
              Alert

              Re: Andrea Leadsom...

              Chemistry degree, not Biochemistry. (Just so we keep things accurate.)

          2. inmypjs Silver badge

            Re: Andrea Leadsom...

            "@ Symon I'm pretty sure* that Titus is being a mite sarcastic and is comparing Theresa May to Maggie Thatcher."

            Really? I thought he meant Cameron - behaved like an effing girl to the very end.

            1. This post has been deleted by its author

              1. MiguelC Silver badge

                Re: About 26 MPs have a STEM degree

                Do you mean roughly between 25.8 and 26.3 MPs?

              2. Mark 85 Silver badge
                Happy

                Re: Andrea Leadsom...

                Maybe we could replace the "House of Lords" with a "House of Labs",

                For a moment there I had a vision of Parliament filled with Retrievers and wanting to play "fetch". It put a smile on this old face of mine.

                1. Crazy Operations Guy

                  Re: Andrea Leadsom...

                  > Maybe we could replace the "House of Lords" with a "House of Labs"

                  I hope some kind of Astrophysics Lab where scientist can study how its possible for the lords' heads to be so dense, but not exhibit any gravitational effects or collapse in upon itself and become a neutron star.

                  It does seem like a mistake to hand so much power to people whose only qualification is "My daddy was a lord that didn't pull out"

                  1. Anonymous Coward
                    Anonymous Coward

                    Re: Andrea Leadsom...

                    "It does seem like a mistake to hand so much power to people whose only qualification is "My daddy was a lord that didn't pull out""

                    It is many years since the House of Lords was purged of many of the inherited positions. The vast majority are Life Peers (683). While some were political rewards - others could be considered experts in their non-political field. Even political appointees have often chosen to become cross-benchers - so as to follow their consciences rather than their previous party's line.

                    There are now very few hereditary peers (89). The vacancies in their ranks are filled by voting by the House of Lords. That ensures that those with some real-world competence can be selected.

                    The remaining positions are the mandatory Anglican bishops (26).

                    http://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/lords/composition-of-the-lords/

      2. Naughtyhorse

        Re: greatest female leaders this country has ever had.

        Boudica??

        If you mean TBW... you need to take more water with it

        1. Titus Technophobe

          Re: greatest female leaders this country has ever had. @Symon

          Ah yes the Ken Clarke live mike interview. Don't you think he may just be deluding himself that either one of these candidates would go against the "Will of the people"?

          1. MJI Silver badge

            Re: greatest female leaders this country has ever had. @Symon

            Don't knock the chap.

            Ken Clarke is one of the most respected politiicians of his era.

            He knew what he was doing.

            As to general Conservative membership, don't do a Corbyn, do vote for least worse option, my MP is doing that, so general members do the same please.

            And just remember that we do not like nutjobs like Leadsom. The UK could handle a May but not the nutjob.

        2. Suricou Raven

          Re: greatest female leaders this country has ever had.

          She who lead her people into a war that they had no realistic prospect of ever winning, and thus lost?

      3. Mike Richards Silver badge

        Re: Andrea Leadsom...

        'To me they both look like worthy successors to one of the greatest female leaders this country has ever had.'

        Which one? Mary I?

    2. inmypjs Silver badge

      Re: Andrea Leadsom...

      "Rated for what?"

      I will judge her not for coming up with a dumb idea (4 years ago) but by how she reacts when someone explains to her why it is dumb.

    3. Adam Jarvis

      Re: The IT Crowd

      Where is that black box they called the 'Internet' currently kept?, we need to locate from its secured location and give it to Andrea Leadsom for safe keeping ASAP, she needs to understand the true responsibility of safely storing this, for future generations. Just don't let Theresa near it.

      Signed,

      TheRegister

      1. Crazy Operations Guy

        Re: The IT Crowd

        I'd imagine that they put it back up on the top of Big Ben* once they finished fixing it.

        *(yeah I know is technically Elizabeth Tower and that 'Big Ben' is just the bell inside it and yes, I am an American, don't faint)

    4. streaky Silver badge

      Re: Andrea Leadsom...

      It's obviously physically and budgetarily impossible to do this so it's not a real issue. Stuff May thinks is a thing on the other hand..

  2. Oliver Mayes

    So every website worldwide will be required to submit themselves to an independent British organisation, likely charging extortionate fees al la the film board for each rating. Those people will be required to review all content on the website before reaching a conclusion.

    How will they handle dynamic content? Will all news organisations be required to submit their articles to the board for approval before being allowed to publish? There's obviously no risk of censorship there.

    What about forums, where anyone is allowed to comment, will this board be reviewing individual comments before they're allowed to be displayed?

    Sounds like yet another politician trying to regulate something they have zero understanding of. Perhaps they should just encourage the parents to actually do some parenting instead of requiring the government to act as an online nanny service for their spawn.

    1. Rich 11 Silver badge

      And how long would it be before t'British t'Internet was entirely coincidentally swamped with new sites generating pages which are the equivalent of watching paint dry?

      1. Mycho Silver badge

        Wait, so...

        ... so someone can guarantee that this internet ratings firm will run their zero-day-infused flash video?

      2. g e

        Or better...

        A site that generates infinite pages of AI-assembled text

        1. Trigonoceps occipitalis

          Re: Or better...

          One day at the British Board of Site Checkers:

          "We need a translator to check that this page is not pornographic, it appears to be in Latin - Lorem Ipsum ... "

        2. Robert Moore
          Joke

          Re: Or better...

          > A site that generates infinite pages of AI-assembled text

          Just hire amanfrommars1. No need for AI.

          Maybe this is what the Reg forums are for already?

      3. Alan J. Wylie Silver badge

        Better than watching paint dry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spider_trap.

        And would the spider respect robots.txt?

    2. This post has been deleted by its author

    3. Adam 1 Silver badge

      ah, now it makes sense

      Why sometimes my comments end up awaiting moderator approval.

      You were waiting for the BBFC!

      1. m0rt Silver badge

        Re: ah, now it makes sense

        Wouldn't it make more sense to ban under 16s from unsupervised use of the internet? Makes more sense, and easier to implement.

        Sorry under 16 year olds, but I feel that you shouldn't be used as an excuse to enforce rules on the rest of the population.

      2. Michael Habel Silver badge
        Trollface

        Re: ah, now it makes sense

        Only you old hags would agree with this... Quit screwing 'round with your kids futures!

    4. Novex

      Leadballoon's idea to block unrated sites is absurd, and the issue of dynamic content is always going to be a problem. However, if all unrated sites are treated as '18', and any site that wants to be rated less had to go through a monitoring scheme then maybe something could be made of it. However, monitoring costs money, a lot of money, and I don't see the Government paying for it. Many sites, especially hobby forums that have under 18 viewers and contributors, are run on practically no money (needing donations to keep going as advertising is often not enough to cover bandwidth) so they simply aren't going to be able to afford to pay for monitoring. Also, should the ISPs police this, really, or should it be some form of age rating built into browsers? To be brutally honest, trying to classify websites is like whack-a-mole and ultimately doomed to failure, even if the reasons for doing so come from honestly good intentions.

      1. Bluenose

        ahh but you forget.....

        Now we have voted to leave the EU we will soon have £350 million a week to spend on this activity. See there was a plan, which is more than I can say about Theresa May and the Home Office IT projects she has ultimate responsibility for.

    5. Flocke Kroes Silver badge
      Joke

      Clearly you lot lack positive thinking

      If the BBFC needs a few million people to review British web pages then that is an instant end to unemployment! So what if we need to print £50M per day to pay for it and the exchange rate plummets to zero. Everyone will just have to stop going abroad and Buy British. As for foreign websites, just cut the cables. We are leaving the EU. We might as well leave the rest of the planet at the same time.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Clearly you lot lack positive thinking

        ..." So what if we need to print £50M per day to pay for it and the exchange rate plummets to zero."

        hmm, £50m per day x 7 = £350m per week.No wwhere have I heard that figure before?

        By Jingo, I think I've just realised a way we could pay for it!

    6. Kubla Cant Silver badge

      yet another politician trying to regulate something they have zero understanding of

      How can you say such a thing. Just look at her CV. Andrea Leadsom will have learned everything there is to know about IT during the time she was a Director in charge of thousands of employees and billions of pounds.

    7. Lyndon Hills 1

      Unemployment?

      problem solved.

    8. Danny 14 Silver badge

      Lol. And this woman wants control of our nuclear arsenal? Sweet jesus.

    9. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Well, they expect overseas porn websites to comply with their age verification demands, so...

      1. Mark 85 Silver badge

        Well, they expect overseas porn websites to comply with their age verification demands, so...

        I'm sure if they offered the positions for that, they could charge the raters.

        I'm thinking along lines of Woody Allen:

        Michael: Did you get a job?

        Victor: Yes, I got something at the strip-tease. I help the girls dress and undress.

        Michael: Nice job.

        Victor: Twenty francs a week.

        Michael: Not very much.

        Victor: It's all I could afford.

    10. Someone Else Silver badge
      Devil

      @ Oliver Mayes

      What about forums, where anyone is allowed to comment, will this board be reviewing individual comments before they're allowed to be displayed?

      Well, Just in case this should come to pass, I'll need to get this in fast:

      Fuck

      Shit

      Piss

      Cunt

      Cocksucker

      Motherfucker

      and

      Tits!

      ...and Tits doesn't even belong on the list!

    11. bombastic bob Silver badge

      Sounds like yet another politician trying to regulate something they have zero understanding of

      @Oliver Mayes

      deserves its own topic

      oh, 'well said' by the way.

      and remember THIS?

      http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/01/27/paint_drying_classification/

      (that was a crowning moment of awesome!)

    12. Vic
      Joke

      will this board be reviewing individual comments before they're allowed to be displayed?

      Are you implying that Andrew Orlowski is in thrall to Andrea Leadsom?

      Vic.

    13. TheOtherHobbes

      >So every website worldwide will be required to submit themselves to an independent British organisation, likely charging extortionate fees al la the film board for each rating.

      Possibly, but probably not.

      Leadsom is an idiot who makes Dunning and Kruger look like unrealistic optimists. She has already gained a reputation in Whitehall for being a self-regarding simpleton of the first water.

      IMO there is no chance at all that this insane scheme will ever become reality. Sir Humphrey will surely distract her with detail, and before you know it she'll have moved on to forcing all women to give birth in the nearest Work House while embroidering Union Jacks onto their skivvy caps, or something.

    14. Terry 6 Silver badge

      I think we know that. Unless the Scots do leave. In which case we could have a Hadrian's Firewall for England and Wales.

      1. Tom 64
        Coffee/keyboard

        "Hadrian's Firewall for England and Wales."

        To match the Great British Channel Checkpoint, or the Great Firewall of China?

        Seriously it sounds like she wants and excuse to censor anything and everything for some whimsical excuse. Great, another power-mad sociopathic conservative.

  3. Rich 11 Silver badge

    Regression to the really mean

    Seems to me that her political roots lie in Texas and her policies are from La-La Land.

    1. alain williams Silver badge

      Re: Regression to the really mean

      Suddenly the Labour party is starting to seem electable.

      Her and May - not much to choose from is there ?

      1. Alien8n Silver badge

        Re: Regression to the really mean

        Don't be so sure, if they succeed in pushing out Corbyn they're left with another Blairite in charge of Labour and Blair was actually more right wing than the previous conservative government. Politics in the UK is getting more and more like America with 2 parties dominating that you really can't tell the difference between unless they have a leader at one or other extreme end. The Lib Dems had an excellent chance of proving themselves to be a moderating force in politics until Nick Clegg showed everyone that actually all three parties were just slightly different shades of blue

        1. Fonant

          Re: Regression to the really mean

          Don't vote Blue or Red or Yellow, vote Green!

          1. Alien8n Silver badge

            Re: Regression to the really mean

            @Fonant once you take out the militant green policies they actually have some excellent ideas, it would be interesting to see another party actually look at some of their policies and actually try and implement some of them. Would never happen though as all the main parties are only interested in maintaining the status quo.

            Time for a complete change in Westminster, remove everyone and start again, have Labour MPs with truly socialist ideals, Tories that are true capitalists and Lib Dems that are truly moderate. I think this may be one of the reasons why the Tories are swinging so far to the right now, the fact that pretty much every MP now seems to be trying to claim the centre ground. The only way to show themselves to be different is to try and out-Thatcher Thatcher.

            1. Inventor of the Marmite Laser Silver badge

              Re: Regression to the really mean

              the socialists would be OK only until they run out of other people's money

              1. Rich 11 Silver badge

                Re: Regression to the really mean

                until they run out of other people's money

                You can tell you're in the presence of a truly original thinker when this phrase is trotted out.

                All governments use other people's money. Most of the time they run out of it too, regardless of their economic ideology. Just look at that dangerously Socialist project, the NHS, and how it's been run down every time in the last 30 years that the Tories have been in charge -- look how much strain it's under right now. And if we scrapped it completely and were handed back the proportion of our taxes that goes to pay for it, almost none of us would have enough with which to buy the equivalent level of health insurance.

        2. Naughtyhorse

          Re: Regression to the really mean

          Pretty big if there.

          No sign of JC going anywhere soon.

          the bliarites... not so much,

          JC might be willing to bury the hatchet, I wonder how many CLP's will be as magnanimous at re-selection time.

          not doing to badly for such a poor leader,

          funny that the press hasn't picked up on this

          1. itzman
            Angel

            Re: Regression to the really mean

            JC? You mean the messiah?

            1. Ian Bush
              Coat

              Re: Regression to the really mean

              > JC? You mean the messiah?

              No, he's a very naughty boy

          2. MJI Silver badge

            Re: Regression to the really mean

            And I can guess where any hatchets would be buried

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Regression to the really mean

        Her and May - not much to choose from is there ?

        Actually there is a lot of difference.

        On the one hand we have Fuhrer wannabe May and her police state and on the other there is Leadsom that appears to think about the country and its people.

        May would be a disaster greater than Cameron and Osborne combined and anything has to be better than that.

        1. wikkity

          Re: appears to think about the country and its people

          I doubt that very much, she was one of those who used the referendum to further her career. Watching her campaign and debate I saw no supporting evidence she give a toss about anyone in this country other than herself.

          1. wikkity

            Re: appears to think about the country and its people

            probably no one reading this now. But given what happed today I'm a bit unsure that my original opinion was correct. She has certianly helped the country today by standing down. Wether this was as she obvious was not going to win and wants to keep her options open for later I don't know/ But today she did do what was best.

            BTW, I'm a left winger. While I like a lot of what Jeremy Corbyn has to offer he should now do the same, you can't do anything if no one you have to work with supports you.

        2. Ian Bush
          Flame

          Re: Regression to the really mean

          Yes there is a difference. But either will be a disaster. May wants to cement the surveillance state. Leadsom has no interest in the "common man", she merely wants to legalise the (in my opinion) tax scams she has run throughout her career - see Private Eye passim.

          1. Fred Dibnah

            Re: Regression to the really mean

            From now on I'm using Private Eye's name for her: Andrea Loathsome.

            But really it's no laughing matter, as she sounds to me like a dangerous nutjob. May, with her surveillance plans, is also dangerous, and I don't get to choose the next PM (surprise surprise, democracy in action) but if I did I'd pick May over Loathsome any day.

            1. moiety

              Re: Regression to the really mean

              It's the US formula - Total nazi versus (hopefully) unelectable clown. Either -as in the US- would be disastrous.

              We've got enough of the useless twatbags sucking at the public teat...can't we dig one up that has some semblance of sanity? Just one?

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Regression to the really mean

                'We've got enough of the useless twatbags sucking at the public teat...can't we dig one up that has some semblance of sanity? Just one?'

                Yes. But you'd need an igor to get her walking again.

                1. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: Regression to the really mean

                  Careful, she'll steal your milk.

            2. Captain Badmouth
              Thumb Up

              Re: Regression to the really mean

              "From now on I'm using Private Eye's name for her: Andrea Loathsome"

              Liedsome might be quite good, too.

        3. Naughtyhorse

          Re: appears to think about the country and its people....

          The woman lied about being an investment banker on her CV.

          a wannabe of the people who broke the world?

          She's a fucking nutjob.

          1. CanadianMacFan

            Re: appears to think about the country and its people....

            For some reason I think that having lied about being an investment banker is not as bad as actually as having been an investment banker.

        4. td0s

          Re: Regression to the really mean

          Apart from the gay ones obviously

    2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      Re: Regression to the really mean

      "her policies are from La-La Land."

      The only safe internet is one with a single website. http://www.tellytubbies.co.uk/

      1. Charles 9 Silver badge

        Re: Regression to the really mean

        "The only safe internet is one with a single website. http://www.tellytubbies.co.uk/"

        Even THAT one would be dangerous. Wasn't there a controversy as to why Tinky-Winky (a male) carried a purse?

      2. Swarthy Silver badge
        Thumb Up

        Re: Regression to the really mean

        The only safe internet is one with a single website. http://www.tellytubbies.co.uk/ http://wherestheporn.co.uk

        FTFY

  4. TimR

    Be afraid, be very afraid

    This is a "Morton's fork" situation....

    1. Warm Braw Silver badge

      Re: Be afraid, be very afraid

      It's not, though, a new situation.

      Chilcot has reminded us again this week that, when it comes to organising large-scale projects, politicians of all hues are either clueless as to the magnitude of the task they are undertaking and the necessary planning and preparation - or are so imbued with hubris that they simply have to issue their instruction to "make it so".

      Leadsom is another Blair - she's manages to combine the comfort of her personal wealth and her prominently-worn religion into a dangerous self-righteousness. No wonder she's popular with the Tory faithful.

    2. Michael Habel Silver badge
      Coat

      Re: Be afraid, be very afraid

      This is a "Morton's fork" situation....

      A bit kinda like Trump, and the sCUNThorpe.... Not a real win win their either.

  5. Voland's right hand Silver badge

    What a choice

    Choice of:

    A) Swallowed Stalin without even burping

    B) "Interesting CV", half of the positions occupied are in brother in-law companies, positively clueless and with a fundamentalist religious slant.

    When the candidates were announced I could not believe it, but I was rooting for Josephina Vissarionovich. Sure, we all know that the next PM (and probably the one after) is a dead man walking as (s)he will be burned by the radioactive fallout of the Eu negotiations, but none the less...

    1. Don Dumb
      Flame

      Re: What a choice

      @Voland's right hand - "What a choice"

      And one that hardly anyone gets to make - it is only the Prime Minister after all.

      There are faults with the US approach to democracy but one aspect that I like is that everyone knows who the person to take over from the President would be (the Veep) at the time of voting. So voters get to vote on the leader and their understudy.

      No one in Britain voted for a government led by Theresa or Andrea (neither were Deputy PM). And yet one of them will apparently have the "mandate" to tear the UK out of the EU that a minority of the country voted for.

      As much as I hate Boris, he was the person that lead the vote to leave, he should be the person to lead that exit, as it was his 'plan' that people officially voted on. (The - he shat in his bath he should wash in it principle.)

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: What a choice

        And yet one of them will apparently have the "mandate" to tear the UK out of the EU that a minority of the country voted for.

        WTF 52% voted Out 48% voted in, An unknown number couldn't be arsed either way.

        1. Don Dumb

          Re: What a choice

          @AC - Not a majority of the population but of the general electorate. My point was that many were prevented from voting and less than half of those who actually could vote demanded change against the government advice and policy.

          I know the Leave Vote won under the rules of the referendum, but it hardly delivered a clear mandate. And this party election for PM isn't giving that mandate either.

        2. fruitoftheloon
          WTF?

          @AC: Re: What a choice

          Ac,

          Diddums...

          Grow up, the vote didn't go your way, that's it!

          I was pleasantly surprised by the vote, but would have acted like a grown-up if it went the other way...

          Cheers,

          Jay

          1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

            Re: @AC: What a choice

            "I was pleasantly surprised by the vote"

            And one of the more immediate non-economic consequences is that we get either May or Leadsom as PM. Are you pleasantly surprised with that?

            1. fruitoftheloon
              Happy

              @doctor syntax: Re: @AC: What a choice

              Ds,

              Well, one is unreconstructed bible basher who has a problem with pr/writing resumes...

              The other is an authoritan nut job...

              So same old same old re qualifications for the top job?

              It's not ideal my friend, but earth will continue rotating!

              What's your take on it then??

              Cheers,

              Jay

        3. John H Woods Silver badge

          Re: What a choice

          "An unknown number couldn't be arsed either way"

          Is it unknown? The number of eligible voters who didn't is approx 12.5m, which is approx 10x the size of the majority.

          1. captain veg

            Couldn't be arsed

            I know a couple of people who were unable to vote for unforeseen reasons, they being respectively a severe health crisis and an unexpected work call-out to another country. Not every failure to vote was due to apathy.

            The point was often made that older people were both more likely to turn out and more likely to be for Leave. I might add that pensioners also have more time on their hands to actually go to the polling station on a work day. Why doesn't Britain do like other countries and field votes on a Sunday?

            -A.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Couldn't be arsed

              "Why doesn't Britain do like other countries and field votes on a Sunday?"

              Voting is considered a DUTY which is considered WORK. And in Christianity, Sunday is the Lord's Day, as in "Thou shalt remember to keep holy the Lord's Day," meaning one is not supposed to work on the Lord's Day (Sunday). Strongly-Christian countries usually don't allow voting on Sundays because it's considered a profane act. Saturday is normally out because that encompasses most of the Jewish Sabbath, and Friday is holy for Muslims, meaning the entire weekend is out on religious grounds.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: What a choice

        It's all politics. Every announcement by a person going for a position has to be viewed through that prism.

        And by what the effect is. Was May's comment the other day about the ECHR actually a statement of view, or a test to see how people reacted to the idea.

        Does Leadsom really think screening websites is the right solution, or is it a play to get those who believe "something should be done" (but who would actually not go for website screening when push comes to shove) onside?

      3. codejunky Silver badge

        Re: What a choice

        @ Don Dumb

        "And yet one of them will apparently have the "mandate" to tear the UK out of the EU that a majority of the country voted for."

        FIFY

        1. Don Dumb
          FAIL

          Re: What a choice

          @codejunky - UK adult population ~61 million. Number of people who voted out ~17 million, number of people who didn't vote out ~44 million. Which number is the minority?

          I didn't say general electorate, deliberately.

          1. alain williams Silver badge

            Re: What a choice

            UK adult population ~61 million. Number of people who voted out ~17 million, number of people who didn't vote out ~44 million. Which number is the minority?

            Using that logic, we count that ~16 million (35%) voted to remain. Or number who did not vote to remain: ~45 million.

            So stop pissing about and abusing the numbers.

            (Me writing as someone who voted remain)

            1. Don Dumb

              Re: What a choice

              @alain williams - "So stop pissing about and abusing the numbers."

              I'll concede you have a point as I suspect my pissing around with the referendum semantics has obscured the point I was making. Please allow me to clarify:-

              The referendum, rightly or wrongly, is considered as a 'mandate' by many politicians and commentators as many did vote. But no one voted for, and very few will be able to vote for, Theresa or Andrea to carry out that mandate, let alone run the whole bloody country.

              I wasn't really objecting to the result of the advisory referendum being considered a mandate, I was objecting that the party election for PM is considered an acceptable way to award the job of head of government and chief exit negotiator. We should now have a general election as neither the leader we voted for nor the leader of the leave campaign voted for are doing the job of leading the country or the leave negotiations.

              NB (offtopic) - Yes, I am would suggest that the number that didn't vote to change should have been considered as remain (it is government policy) but I acknowledge we can't do that after the result.

              1. captain veg

                Mandate

                There is no mandate. It was an advisory referendum, not a manifesto pleadge by the party with a majority in the Commons.

                -A.

          2. codejunky Silver badge

            Re: What a choice

            @ Don Dumb

            "Which number is the minority?"

            I dont disagree with your maths, I just think your suggestion is wrong. For example we are offered a boolean choice. There are 3 possible outcomes- true, false, null. Null being anyone who didnt want to have an input which leaves the tally of the true and the false.

            You were technically correct until you claimed a lack of mandate. For those who cared enough to vote the answer is a clear majority with a large portion of the electorate not caring about the question. So a clear mandate has been given based on the agreed rules.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: What a choice

              "There are 3 possible outcomes- true, false, null."

              Nope: There were 4.

              True, False, NULL and Non of the above.

              People could spoil their ballot papers, which would count as a vote but not as a 'Yes' or 'No'. It's a very underused method of protesting the options. NULL voting (not bothering to vote) isn't included in the count so they do not affect the outcome.

          3. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Delegating responsibility...

            ...there are those who votea and those who don't, by not voting you are delegating your responsibility to those who do. By not voting you are saying 'I don't care', or 'you decide'.*

            Arguing otherwise is playing into the Cameron(remember him) Trade Union voting legislation which requires a majority of all eligible voters, not just those that actually voted, this should not be how our system works, as always, be careful what you wish for.....

            *obviously there may be some logistical reason that prevented someone from voting, but that is a different issue

            1. This post has been deleted by its author

          4. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: What a choice

            £350 million a week saved. 65 million population.

            why not divide one weeks worth of £350 million between the 65 million people? £5.3 million each?

            1. Fred Dibnah

              Re: What a choice

              Eh? On my abacus £350m divided by £65m is about £5.50 each per week.Don't spend it all at once.

              1. graeme leggett

                Re: What a choice

                And it's not 350million. Never was, not since Mrs T got the rebate.

                The Bus is a lie.

          5. J.G.Harston Silver badge

            Re: What a choice

            UK adult population ~61 million. Number of people who voted stay ~16 million, number of people who didn't vote stay ~45 million. Which number is the minority?

          6. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: What a choice

            @Don Thumb. Equally; number of people who didn't vote in ~44 million

        2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: What a choice

          '"And yet one of them will apparently have the "mandate" to tear the UK out of the EU that a majority of the country voted for."'

          No, the original statement was correct. They may have been a majority (albeit too small to justify so large and permanent a change) of those who voted. They were still a minority of the country.

          1. codejunky Silver badge

            Re: What a choice

            @ Doctor Syntax

            "They may have been a majority (albeit too small to justify so large and permanent a change)"

            Based on the rules of the referendum it is a clear majority. But I actually agree with that statement greatly. This is the first actual vote for the EU which has been promised for over a decade. Over all that time we have been in the EU and they have shown us all they have to offer. Yet not only did they not have a large majority of support but didnt even have a majority at all. So based on that logic there is no mandate for this country to have been given to the EU nor to continue in it.

            If the population can be walked over to join then the populations voice by the agreed rules is enough to justify our exit. By majority of those who cared enough to vote.

          2. ChrisB 2

            Re: What a choice

            "No, the original statement was correct. They may have been a majority (albeit too small to justify so large and permanent a change) of those who voted. They were still a minority of the country."

            Decisions are taken by those who show up. I didn't like the decision, but I now think it has to be carried through.

        3. Teiwaz Silver badge

          Re: What a choice

          @ codejunky

          "And yet one of them will apparently have the "mandate" to tear the UK out of the EU that a very slim majority of the country voted for."

          Correction for accuracy...

        4. David Roberts Silver badge
          Mushroom

          Re: What a choice - get a grip FFS!

          "And yet one of them will apparently have the "mandate" to tear the UK out of the EU that a majority of the country voted for."

          Bloody hell! You are worse than the fucking politicians.

          Or the advertisers who push some shampoo as "voted number one in the UK" followed by the weasel words " by 81 out of 120 women who expressed a preference".

          This is supposed to be a tech site where we all take the piss out of people who are so mathematically challenged that they can't understand simple numbers.

          I was going to rip the piss out of commentards who were insisting it was "the majority of the UK" when it wasn't even the majority of registered voters.

          However I note that that is already being comprehensively taken care of.

          A summary:

          Just over 37% of those registered to vote chose "Leave".

          Just under 34.5% of those registered to vote chose "Remain".

          Approximately 28.2% of those registered to vote chose not to vote.

          [Can't find figures at the moment for those who are eligible to vote but didn't register.]

          So a democratic majority by our usual method of voting opted for the "Leave campaign".

          However this is only 37% of the registered voters.

          It is nowhere near 37% of the population.

          On a more positive note, this is more than usually turn out to vote in a bunch of politicians who then run things to suit themselves. Which shows that this issue was more important than a general election.

          However, for fucks sake get a grip!

          Lying about or misrepresenting simple numbers is where politicians, pharmaceutical companies and Microsoft earn a living.

        5. Toltec

          Re: What a choice

          @ codejunky

          I though Don Dumb was referring to the heads of state that signed the Maastricht treaty as the minority in "the EU that a minoroty of the country voted for".

      4. Voland's right hand Silver badge

        Re: What a choice

        UK out of the EU that a minority

        Like it or not, according to the rules of the referendum, they are a majority.

        1. Titus Technophobe
          Thumb Up

          Re: What a choice

          Independence Day indeed and at last the country gets a good strong leader worthy of the opportunity.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: What a choice

          Majority opinion is that the UK should leave EU

        3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: What a choice

          According to the rules of the advisory referendum, they are a majority.

          FTFY

        4. MrXavia

          Re: What a choice

          "Like it or not, according to the rules of the referendum, they are a majority."

          Writing something down doesn't make it true....

          Less than 50% of the British people voted for Brexit.

          Not every British person who wanted to vote was given a chance to vote, many didn't care enough to vote or knew so little they left it to others...

          1. J.G.Harston Silver badge

            Re: What a choice

            Less than 50% of the British people voted to stay.

        5. tiggity Silver badge

          Re: What a choice

          And technically the referendum was advisory... which everyone seems to ignore.

      5. Michael Habel Silver badge

        Re: What a choice

        Minoroty.... You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means

        51.8 For BREXIT

        48.2 AGAINST<- FYI this IS the Minoroty you were looking for!

        1. Charlie Clark Silver badge
          Trollface

          Re: What a choice

          Minoroty.... You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means

          You know what? You're absolutely right I have absolutely no idea what a minoroty is. I don't think it's what you think it means either.

          1. Lyndon Hills 1

            Minoroty.

            It's a moronity with a typo.

      6. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: What a choice

        "And yet one of them will apparently have the "mandate" to tear the UK out of the EU that a minority of the country voted for."

        And by that logic, an even smaller minority of the country voted to stay*.

        Unless it was stated at the start of the referendum (or any vote for that matter), those who do not vote have to accept the decision of those who did.

        In truth, the whole thing was badly run and the person responsible has bailed out and left the mess for someone else to clean up.

        * Sorry, but I believe in democracy, and regardless of my view of the outcome, this is how a democracy works.

      7. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: What a choice

        "So voters get to vote on the leader and their understudy."

        I remember Tricky Dicky having Agnew as his VP, presumably to discourage attempts at impeachment.

        1. Antron Argaiv Silver badge

          Re: What a choice

          Re: Agnew being insurance for Nixon against impeachment. Didn't work, did it? :-)

      8. Roj Blake Silver badge

        Re: What a choice

        "There are faults with the US approach to democracy but one aspect that I like is that everyone knows who the person to take over from the President would be (the Veep) at the time of voting. So voters get to vote on the leader and their understudy."

        And yet you still ended up with Gerald Ford, who had been elected as neither PotUS nor VP

    2. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Re: What a choice

      Sure, we all know that the next PM (and probably the one after) is a dead man walking

      I'm currently torn between this kind of analysis (Bojo will be back when the waters are safe again though there might not be much of a country left by then) and putting it all down to being run by a clique of public school boys and oxbridge knobs.

      Mrs Leadsom wants to bring back fox-hunting. Is she IDS' estranged sister? In any case the blue rinse brigade are going to love this.

      Jolly hockey sticks!

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: What a choice

        Her real agenda is to bring back hunting -- but of gays, not foxes.

  6. gv

    Ratings

    Perhaps they can adopt a similar approach to dead tree newspapers/magazines/books as well: they are usually full of sex, violence, drugs, and rock & roll.

    1. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken Silver badge

      Re: Ratings

      And music! Lots and lots of recordings out there, full of sax and violins. Disgusting.

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I think all aspiring political leaders should be rated for their belief in non-existent sky fairies.

    1. captain veg

      So it's not just me then. What is it about bluddy "committed christians" that makes them want to be politicians, and how come so many of them get to lead their parties?

      -A.

      1. Mike Richards Silver badge

        I guess if you can work through the Bible without blinking at its insane contradictions, and, despite all the evidence in the Old Testament, still think him upstairs is a kind and benevolent god, you're just about credulous enough to believe in UK party politics.

  8. Nya

    It's like during the whole Brexit debates, and now in her speeches to become PM. She's blinkin' bonkers and lives utterly in an imaginary world. It's like her cure for the countries financial problems is that we all need to think really positively and it'll all magically happen, and if not it's someone at the back here not thinking positive enough.

    May isn't ideal either but she's the least worst of the candidates we have. Although I guess neither fall into the getting blow jobs off bacon like the current one we have.

    1. captain veg

      fantasy politics

      Leadsom becomes PM, quickly loses confidence vote. In subsequent general election Lib Dems are surprise beneficiaries of chaos in Conservative and Labour parties and a Farage-less UKIP.

      You read it here first.

      -A.

  9. Huns n Hoses

    Oh lordy

    Not only does she look like a May clone but shares the same strident opinions on a subject she completely misunderstands.

    And while you're busy fixing the internet, toss in a cure for spam will you?

    Who the hell advises these people.

    1. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

      Re: Oh lordy

      > toss in a cure for spam will you?

      Sadly, I suspect the manufacturer might sue if their psuedo-meat product gets banned..

  10. Julian Bond
    Big Brother

    Maybe

    God told her to do it. InSain sbury's.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Maybe

      Dammit. I knew that subliminal advertising crap they play over the audio does weird things to some people.

      Now it's all making sense.

  11. AndrueC Silver badge
    Unhappy

    You know I used to sigh and smile over not having any choice over who my MP was. Shouldn't one feel slightly proud when facing the possibility of having your MP become PM?

    I don't.

    But then who can be possibly be happy right now. Theresa May or Andrea Leadsom. Brexit. Gawd help us all.

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Trading standards need to get involved...

    If the Conservative Party is producing Political Sausages this inept for their leadership ballot, with the raw ingredients of offal and vast quantties of rusk of such poor quality, thereby proving unfit for human consumption - surely Trading standards should get involved?

    1. Dan 55 Silver badge

      Re: Trading standards need to get involved...

      Nasty ingredients for the nasty party.

    2. Paul Shirley

      Re: Trading standards need to get involved...

      Why worry about the quality of the meat slurry, the country voted no to EU food standards, back to British slops for us all...

  13. Tony Paulazzo

    We are so fucked!

    1. Dan 55 Silver badge

      It's never been more obvious that those at the top have even less of a clue than we do, but they're happy to play political games while the country is rudderless.

      If this goes completely to shit then there will be a strong case for a technocracy to try and get the country back on track (wherever that is now) which is not known to be particularly democratic.

      1. Titus Technophobe

        You have to look for the positives from brexit. With a weak pound, less employment, UK business can be a lot more competitive. Never mind a new PM the existing government are already negotiating trade deals with India.

        1. hammarbtyp Silver badge

          less employment - A nice Freudian slip there

          Anyone who thinks weak pound will be good for the British economy is in la la land

          1. Titus Technophobe

            The effect of brexist may just force the UK into exactly the re-balancing of the economy that the government discussed when they won the general election. Bear in mind when ever somebody loses money, it doesn't disappear, just ends up somewhere else.

            Remember "remainers" if there are any on this web site this worked in 1992 following the effects of Black Wednesday.

            1. Tom 38 Silver badge

              Bear in mind when ever somebody loses money, it doesn't disappear, just ends up somewhere else.

              Good news, our money turned up, its now in Germany. It's also staying there.

            2. DavCrav Silver badge

              "Bear in mind when ever somebody loses money, it doesn't disappear, just ends up somewhere else."

              Sorry, this is drivel. If you really believe this, start thinking carefully. If money cannot be lost, then it cannot be gained either, because doing the opposite of the thing that gains money would mean you lose it. Thus our living standards are the same as in the 13th century, or any century you choose.

        2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          "the existing government are already negotiating trade deals with India."

          Are you familiar with the term "off-shoring"?

          1. fruitoftheloon
            Happy

            @Doctor syntax

            DS,

            there is a difference between 'offshoring' and trade deals, one is sending UK/creating jobs overseas, the other is [potentially] creating jobs here, as a result of selling more of the stuff overseas due to lower/no import duties.

            It's really not that complicated...

            Ironically my nascent business will be better off when HMG [eventually] signs a few trade deals, as we will be exporting the bulk of our stuff from England to the far/middle east & USA...

            Cheers,

            Jay

  14. Don Dumb
    Paris Hilton

    Why only the internet?

    What annoyed me during the investigations into the media and the Leveson inquiry is that, for some reason some areas of the media are treated as sacrosanct and others are fair game for massive censorship.

    The print media is a gradually dying form (old news) but for some reason any regulation of the print media would be 'tantamount to living in Pyongyang'. Preventing regulation of newspapers would be fine, if not for the fact that the very same print media are always happy to see television, radio, the internet, films and every other form of media be heavily regulated and often pre-emptively (such as film with the BBFC). Why should Television news be subject to far more government oversight than newspaper article?

    I get annoyed at the double standard applied, it's as if everyone decided the phrase 'freedom of the press' should only ever be applied literally, so everything else gets regulation, pushed hard by the print media and the print media themselves get no regulation. That seems unfair being as many sources of information have taken over from newspapers, yet newspapers still sit on this strange pedestal.

    If Andrea Leadsom wants to age rate the whole of the internet why doesn't she start with press articles? - sitting there in every newsagent poisoning human decency. Oh, because *that* would be wrong, so why should heavy regulation of the internet be any more acceptable?

    Paris - because pictures of her and her ilk are often at child height on the cover of papers in a newsagent, that's all perfectly fine with Andrea of course.

    1. Paul Shirley

      Re: Why only the internet?

      I believe tv appearance fees are considerably lower than the bung on offer for propaganda passed of as opinion in the printed sheets. A politician cutting off a nice earner and bullshit opportunity? Never going to happen.

    2. Fred Dibnah

      Re: Why only the internet?

      Because Murdoch doesn't own the internet. Yet.

  15. Stanislaw
    Alert

    Looking for a bunker

    You know things are bad when you find yourself really hoping that Theresa May will be the next PM. Sheesh.

  16. Pascal Monett Silver badge
    Facepalm

    Rating websites - think of the children !

    Because that is what Great Britain really needs to do in this economic crises : focus on controlling access to websites that might be showing a bit of skin.

    Congratulations on having solved all your other problems : poverty, homelessness, illegal immigration, unemployment, failing education standards, all that is now over !

    Now you can officially take care of the real problem : ensuring that no parent has to actually lift a finger in the upbringing of their offspring, it will all be handled by the Government and the rating system.

    Because there is obviously no way a child can possibly use his daddy's computer to surf the web and see things that are rated above his age, no sir. Won't ever happen.

    1. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

      Re: Rating websites - think of the children !

      Practice Positive Thinking!

      Plenty of devices have web cams these days. Just snap a photo every time someone clicks on a link. A quick £200M government IT project later and we can convert photographs to ages! Solved! I am sure the budget would only get to £4.5B, and if we scrap it when it is only a decade overdue nearly half of that money will be saved!

      I was a bit disappointed last election because there was no Monster Raving Loony candidate in my constituency. Now I feel confident that the next PM will be a real monster raving loony.

  17. Ye Gads

    The obvious problem with this

    Is that when a movie is released its content is then largely static. Nobody can suddenly insert a sex scene into Star Wars: The Phantom Menace dvd that my nephew owns. Web-sites change. Frequently. Do you have to submit the site for frequent re-classification?

    And what do you do about user-content-driven sites? Twitter, Facebook, YouTube et al have all sorts of dubious content/views on them Do you rank them as 18 and over?

    And do they really expect kids to self-certify? And do they really expect the majority of clueless parents to know how to block this stuff (and stop their kids from secretly unblocking it?)?

    1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Re: The obvious problem with this

      Don't get sucked into a discussion of the details.

      The only real thing that the UK can do is exert control over websites with .uk domains. As soon as this becomes onerous all content will move elsewhere and even this illusion of control would be lost.

      But hang on: Britain could decide to leave the internet, couldn't it? That would keep all that nasty stuff out.

      In reality, this is all just an excuse to allow mass surveillance to be setup.

      1. Alister Silver badge

        Re: The obvious problem with this

        But hang on: Britain could decide to leave the internet, couldn't it? That would keep all that nasty stuff out.

        Oh I would so love to see the outcome of a referendum on Britain leaving the Internet, I wonder how many dumb fucks would vote for it.

        1. Don Dumb
          Megaphone

          Re: The obvious problem with this

          @Alister - Not sure why the downvotes, it's proven to be too easy to sell stupid to Dumb Britain -

          Every day millions of webpages are desperately trying to get into the UK, flooding into *our* servers, clogging up *our* infrastructure, taking away browser space from decent, hardworking UK webpages. Some of them are even written in Arabic.

      2. Don Dumb
        Terminator

        I can see it now....

        @Charlie Clark "But hang on: Britain could decide to leave the internet, couldn't it? That would keep all that nasty stuff out."

        "Take back control of our internet" along with "Let's decide how to spend the £millions of fees we give to the W3C each year ourselves and free us from their burdensome 'standards' red tape."

      3. sandman

        Re: The obvious problem with this

        Ah, I have some .eu domain names, will I have to leave them (or just offer to host "adult" content for deprived Brits)? ;-)

        1. moiety

          Re: The obvious problem with this

          I wanted to buy fuck.eu because it would be an awesome email address for things I disapproved of. Alas, it was gone by the time I thought of it.

  18. albaleo

    God has spoken to her directly

    That was probably Boris whispering in her ear. I hear he has that effect on some people.

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    leave the woman be, Kieran

    AT LEAST she's not called Boris Johnson, Christian Gove or Theresa May...

    1. Paul Shirley

      Re: leave the woman be, Kieran

      How do we know she hasn't called Boris?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: leave the woman be, Kieran

        because she definitely did not call me!

  20. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    So the choice is Mrs Hitler or the Stasi?

  21. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Another moron

    Suggests she uses Google to lookup definitions of "Internet" so she can determine what level of idiocy her thoughts are on this, as long as she doesn't need those reference sites classified before she reads them, sigh.

    Never thought I would say this but I hope Teresa May stays in the lead if this idiocy is how Leadsom thinks...actually with her way of thinking Leadsom would make a good running mate for Trump!

    1. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

      Re: Another moron

      I have been wondering if the entire reason for the threat of Leadsom as PM was to make May look good by comparison. There is some danger that May's handlers can steer her into legalising the stasi state. Leadsom comes across as so bat-shit crazy that she would never support legislation that could actually get through the commons let alone the lords.

  22. vulture234

    This is just badly thought through nonsense on so many levels. Will they be checking every single internet page in the world or just those that are hosted in England? And if it's just English ones, will they block everyone in England from accessing pages from outside the UK that haven't been rated by their censorship board? What about companies and consumers that do business over the web? What's to stop English people hosting in other countries?

    This will never work in reality and the fact that these politicians have such a flimsy grasp of the modern world is scary enough but the fact that this person may end up Prime Minister just goes to show how messed up this Brexit vote has made the UK. With so much chaos someone is going to do something stupid and the things will turn nasty....

  23. Ole Juul Silver badge

    404

    We checked with Leadsom's office . . . So far, it has failed to respond.

    1. gv

      Re: 404

      Surely it was a Socket Timeout rather than a 404?

      1. moiety

        Re: 404

        More like a 418 I'm a teapot error.

        1. Anonymous C0ward

          Re: 404

          420 Enhance Your Calm error. Because they're clearly on a different planet.

  24. wolfetone Silver badge

    How can 150,000 people chose who represents the 60,000,000 inhabitants of the UK?

    If a Prime Minister steps down, then it's a General Election. If a normal MP steps down from their role a by-election is triggered.

    1. Titus Technophobe

      17 million people chose this it was fairly obvious that "Call me Dave" did not have the stomach for what needs to be done.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      You still have your MP. The PM is 'leader' of the Conservative party and only leader of government and while the other Conservative party MPs put up with it.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        "The PM is 'leader' of the Conservative party and only leader of government and while the other Conservative party MPs put up with it."

        Jim Hacker on comparing voters with MPs: "The voters can only vote against me in 2 years' time, they can vote against me at 10 o'clock tonight.".

    3. Brian Morrison

      It doesn't work like that, the Prime Minister is merely "first among equals" so replacing one with another is purely an internal government matter and only requires the agreement of the Crown (which cannot normally be withheld).

      The election among Conservative party members is for party leader, only convention dictates that party leader must be PM.

      1. wolfetone Silver badge

        "The election among Conservative party members is for party leader, only convention dictates that party leader must be PM."

        I understand the convention. However, that PM decides who does what job while that party is in Government, which then impacts on the lives of the people in the country.

        The fact of the matter is when you go to vote, a lot of people vote by party or by PM. Those with no great interest in politics will vote for the man or woman they see on the TV who wants to lead their country, and vote accordingly. Whether this is right or wrong is beside the point. The fact remains that 36% of the 66% of the country who voted, voted for a Tory Government ran by David Cameron. They didn't vote for a Tory Government with any old clown in charge.

        It should be the fact that any representative, at any level, should be voted for if the incumbent in office leaves their post.

        1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

          Not calling general elections when the leader changes is established tradition and contributes to stability. Even if most leaders thus elected often lose the next election.

          The real problem for the next PM is going to be getting a majority in parliament to do anything. In theory the government has a slender but working majority but this hasn't been borne out by the first twelve months of this parliament and doesn't look likely to get better. A new election, whether they want it (Leadsom might fancy a Tory / UKIP coalition) or not, is very likely.

          1. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

            Paddypower currently gives 6/4 for an election this year, and an even chance for 2020. I think the most successful candidate will be the one who changes his name to "None of the above".

    4. Steve Mw

      We don't elect Prime Ministers in the UK, we elect a Government. The Government is formed from the party (or coalition) that gets more votes than any of the others. The Prime Minister by convention is the leader of that party.

      This is in no way the first time this has happened, it has happened 7 times since 1945 (Churchill/Eden/Macmillan/Douglas Home, Wilson/Callaghan, Thatcher/Major, Blair/Brown)

      1. captain veg

        We don't elect a government in the UK, we elect MPs. The Queen appoints the Prime Minister. She could chose who she likes, but by convention she selects whoever can command a majority in the Commons, possibly in coalition. This is usually the leader of the party with the greatest number of seats, but it doesn't have to be,

        Democracy? We've heard of it.

        -A.

        1. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken Silver badge

          That reminds me:

          " ... I can think of plenty of reasons for people to want out of the EU, not least being the realisation that the EU is as likely to be persuaded to bring about internal reform and weed out corruption as FIFA is.

          But all I was hearing was the line: “We don’t like unelected officials telling us what to do”. What unelected officials are these? “The European Commission,” they’d tell me.

          Members of the European Commission are indeed nominated by something called the European Council but, I tried to explain, this Council comprises the European heads of state (elected by us), and even so, their choice is still subject to approval by a vote in the European Parliament (also elected by us). In fact, the head of the European Commission is directly elected by the European Parliament (who are elected by…? Oh yes, that’s right: us).

          Electing the European Commission may not be a plebiscite but it is just the same as voting for a MP whose political party has decided that an off-shore money-laundering, tax-dodging toff should be Prime Minister whether you like it or not, only to ditch him barely a year later in favour some other imbecilic, dough-faced cunt."

          Yep, that's from last week's A trip to the Twilight Zone with a support guy called Iron Maiden by our dear Dabbsy. Enlightening and almost prophetic.

      2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        "it has happened 7 times since 1945"

        Add Chamberlain > Churchill early in the war.

  25. Crisp Silver badge

    How about we start with age appropriate adverts.

    I don't actually think this would be a good thing. But if we can keep the government tied up with policing the least desirable part of the internet then the rest of us can actually get on with some real work.

    1. kmac499

      Re: How about we start with age appropriate adverts.

      I've got a better idea. Before we start classifying what the public can see, why don't we make all party political\election braodcasts and literature subject to the Advertising Standards Authority. .

      At the very least Boris & Co would have had to repaint the "we send £350million" on the side of the bus, and Gorgeous George would have had to quote an error range on his "you'll be £4300 worse off" figure.

      1. Dan 55 Silver badge

        Re: How about we start with age appropriate adverts.

        The referendum must not be repeated again in its current form?

      2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: How about we start with age appropriate adverts.

        'Gorgeous George would have had to quote an error range on his "you'll be £4300 worse off" figure.'

        Quite, the falling pound must be playing havoc with estimates like that.

  26. Chris G Silver badge

    Lead time

    With over a billion sites out there, many of which have constantly changing content, how long does she think this will take to do and how will she do it?

    Like most of the lackwits that think they should lead us, she has only a vague idea of how anything works but as Prime Minister she will have 'experts' to enable it all.

    Or god of course!

  27. Yugguy

    Well, this kind of already happens

    My parental controls on my home wireless block sites that someone has deemed inappopriated for children. I can add or remove URLs on these lists.

    Work web filters perform a similar task.

    So it's basically unnecessary - those of us who care already use some form of filtering, Those who don't won't care about ratings anyway.

    1. Flywheel Silver badge

      Re: Well, this kind of already happens

      It'll endear her to MumsNet - the great driving force/nagging horde behind many a politician,

    2. fruitoftheloon
      Joke

      @Yugguy: Re: Well, this kind of already happens

      Yugguy,

      indeed, but you are not a feckless parent who is incapable of actually using their brain and taking responsibility for their actions, hence you (and I, presumably quite a few commentards too) are the exception

      So the rest of the plebs obviously need the Government to ensure they never see anything naughty (for a given definition of naughty) as clearly they aren't capable of making their own decisions...

      This is apparently the 'Christian' thing to do [cue laughter]...

      /sarcasm

  28. thondwe

    From the Great Douglas Adams

    "The major problem—one of the major problems, for there are several—one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them.

    To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.

    To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.”

    Which leads to the why don't we use the "Bank of England" model and let teachers run schools, medics run hospitals and I.T. guys run I.T?????

    1. Hollerithevo Silver badge

      Re: From the Great Douglas Adams

      What are you, some kind of pinko terrorist nutcase?!? IT run IT? Doctors run the NHS? Are you mad? Teachers run schools? Don't you know that only politicians and civil servants can handle that god-like power???

    2. fruitoftheloon
      Stop

      @Thondwe Re: From the Great Douglas Adams

      Thondwe,

      I hate to bust your bubble matey, but many medics/scientists DO run hospitals...

      Which makes me wonder (anecdotal curiousity) why so many NHS trusts are cattle-trucked and are not very good at 'innovating' - granted I have painted with a broad brush but I suspect you get the gist!

      From my experience (wifey is a senior physicist), 98% of the 'medics that manage' should have stuck to medicine, there are so many perfect examples of The Peter Principle in action it is genuinely scary...

      Cheers,

      Jay

      1. Terry 6 Silver badge

        Re: @Thondwe From the Great Douglas Adams

        My experience in education tends to make me think that it's more than Peter Principle. There are also some people who enter a profession with an intent to get promoted out of it.

        So they tend to be good at doing and saying the things that get promotion - rather than being good at the job or the management they aspire to.

  29. codejunky Silver badge

    Hmm

    I cant see any good choice of leader in the Tory party. Partly because I dont pay too much attention to most of the party and because the main faces are not exactly promising.

    However on a positive note the Tories will have fielded 2 female PM's while nobody else has fielded 1. Considering some of the guardian like articles I thought this would have been praised even if nothing else about them is.

    1. MJI Silver badge

      Re: Hmm

      Their current best choice announced his standing down.

      Also why has the party which has boasted so much about equal rights for women only had a woman leader as a stand in until they could find a man to take over, then who did they choose?

      Sorry two women PMs trump women only short lists.

      I also think there will be a new PM post EU exit (if it happens) as the next few years will be toxic to the MPs involved, whoever that is I do not know, but both main parties have some interesting.

      And it is depressing when May is best choice.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: Hmm

        "Sorry two women PMs trump women only short lists."

        Unfortunate choice of word in the circumstances.

        1. MJI Silver badge

          Re: Hmm

          Good spot, have an upvote!

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Hmm

      The definition of 'Female' here is rather loose, all be told - we're talking Politicians, not Nurses.

      Empathy, compassion which I'd class as two strong female qualities, over men, seem completely lacking here. Actually, these candidates lack any of the qualities, I see everyday, in the female collegues around me. I'm in no way saying Micheal Gove was better either.

    3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: Hmm

      "I cant see any good choice of leader in the Tory party."

      David Davis would have been a good choice but the party turned him down in favour of the Blairalike Dave.

      1. codejunky Silver badge

        Re: Hmm

        @Doctor Syntax

        I know we generally disagree (on the EU at least) so as well as a thumbs up I wanted to say "Blairalike Dave" is spot on. I think dave would be far happier in the Labour Party.

        1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: Hmm

          "I know we generally disagree (on the EU at least)"

          Not necessarily. As I've written here a number of times the EU has a severe democratic deficit. Maybe we don't disagree about that. Maastricht and Lisbon should both have been validated by referenda in all countries - and not Irish style referenda of vote till you get the right answer. What might have passed such referenda would almost certainly have been very different to what happened; in fact we might still have just had the EEC as a trading arrangement.

          However just walking out is economically daft and some of the areas which will catch the worst effects are those where foreign companies have set up so business so as to be in the EU and are major employers. Those seem to have voted leave - turkeys voting for Christmas. I also think that a referendum should require a large majority - another commentard mentioned the term "supermajority" - to effect a change in the status quo in such a major, permanent way. I'd also apply that to the unfortunately hypothetical referenda that should have validated the earlier treaties. Maybe we differ on those.

          As to Blairalike that's been my term for him since he came to prominence. The Tories were so hypnotised by Blair that they went for the nearest thing in their own ranks. They could have done much better.

    4. staringatclouds

      Re: Hmm

      The current choice is between Satan & the Antichrist, regardless of who wins they'll be using the same pitchfork on us

  30. Anonymous Coward
    FAIL

    Good

    There are over 1 billion websites on the world wide web today.

    So if you allow 1 hour for every site to be correctly vetted that equals approx 114,155 man years of work.

    Of course that's provided no new sites go online....

    Oopps there's 5 more

    and again

    and again

    and again...

    1. Flywheel Silver badge

      Re: Good

      "So if you allow 1 hour for every site to be correctly vetted that equals approx 114,155 man years of work"

      Exactly! Think of all those bods previously deemed unemployable that we can now put to work censoring web sites! Ker-ching!

  31. MJI Silver badge

    She scares me

    Firstly I will say that the current PM is much more preferable to the 5 shortlisted replacements. Not the greatest PM but not a disaster. And worked well in the coalition.

    The 5 in the short list

    Gove, er no

    Welsh chap - bit too religious

    Fox - bit right wing

    Leadsom - so not trust at al

    May - least worse

    Leadsom is a dangerous fool

    Finally, Ken Clarke comments, how honest and refreshing, why didn't he ever get selected for leader?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: She scares me

      Ken? Too nice?

      Good as 'elder statesman' type - in fact many politicians seem much better after they've done their bit in the actual fray and then retired to the sidelines to cheer on or criticize the team.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: She scares me

        "Good as 'elder statesman' type - in fact many politicians seem much better after they've done their bit in the actual fray"

        Maybe you're too young to remember his turn at the Treasury - back when things were going well for the economy.

        1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

          Re: She scares me

          Maybe you're too young to remember his turn at the Treasury - back when things were going well for the economy.

          I think he did a reasonable job after the mess that that the clowns Lawson and Lamont had left behind. He was incredibly quiet for the first six months, gave the BoE independence and was cautiously in favour of the single currency. The latter, whether you agree with it or not, was after considerable time in the job and not a crowd-pleaser.

        2. MJI Silver badge

          Re: Ken & Treasury

          AFAIR he was quite a good chancellor.

      2. Charlie Clark Silver badge

        Re: She scares me

        Ken? Too nice?

        Surely, you jest. Of Ken Clarke it was once said that he'd cross a street to join in a fight. Maggie reportedly enjoyed fights with him over agreement from the more supine members of her cabinet.

        He ran twice and lost twice because the Conservative Party members are infamously out of touch with the electorate: average age is well over 60, income is well over average, etc. It's not a coincidence that the people he lost to subsequently went on to lose elections heavily.

        Had he been elected leader he would no doubt have done the same kind of purging that John Smith did of the Labour Party and presumably what their next leader will have to do with Corbyn's Militant 2015 coterie.

        1. MJI Silver badge

          Re: She scares me

          That party forgets that the majority of voters like centre politics.

          To a lot of people they saw Ken Clarke standing against some right wing knob. And what happens? Right wing knob gets selected and loses. As a voter I would like to have seen Ken Clarke up against Tony Blair as leader of opposition. A lot of people would have voted for a Ken over a IDS. But what do we know, we are only voters, not party members.

          Then they select a reasonably central person - he becomes PM.

          Please note parties, since the mid 1990s the government has been more or less central, keep it that way please, no lurching to the right, I prefer the more centre ground Conservatives to the hard line right.

          1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

            Re: She scares me

            As a voter I would like to have seen Ken Clarke up against Tony Blair as leader of opposition.

            Indeed, he was one of the few Tories in Parliament to oppose the Iraq war, especially highlighting how Parliament had effectively been circumvented: "this House is being asked to vote on something, which has been decided elsewhere". Ted Heath did the same thing when Maggie was doing the same thing: Tory landowners still only see Parliament as at best a useful tool.

            Funny how you don't see alleged guardians of parliamentary democracy like Rees-Mogg decrying the recent referendum as a farce.

    2. Brian Morrison

      Re: She scares me

      Ken Clarke for leader? Easy, he is too pro-EU and so could never have been acceptable to the party or a sufficient percentage of Conservative MPs.

  32. Mr Dogshit

    Yay!

    It's Internet Content Rating Association (ICRA) all over again! Which no longer exists because no one gave a damn.

  33. Boris the Cockroach Silver badge
    Devil

    I'm waiting on

    how long it is before she rates and bans the bible

    Its full of sex and violence and a major part of it is devoted to the torture and death of someone who spoke out against the system..

    Then again, She may just censor the rest and leave those bits in as an example for us if we get out of line.........

    "Nail 'em up I say, nail some sense into them"

    1. Teiwaz Silver badge

      Re: I'm waiting on

      "how long it is before she rates and bans the bible"

      To types like her, it's merely a symbol of majority, conformity etc. We're well past the time when a Peter Watkins Privilege type scenario might work.

  34. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    More fines...

    Lets face it...if implemented (and badly)

    This will end up a lazy fixed penalty fine system every time you mistakenly type in a URL that shouldn't be accessed (with the technical details of its operation/URLs kept hidden) if the (grey - not yellow) stealth Hadecs 3 Safety Camera* model of Policing, currently active on the M4/M25 is followed.

    *Hadec 3 'Safety' Cameras now operating a strict enforcement of National Speed limits active 24/7 on the M4 in the UK (Avon and Somerset Police) , even when overhead Smart Motorway Gantries aren't lit. So much the unwritten rules, of a steady 80mph being acceptable (as put forward by Popular press), during off-peak hours / 'unrestricted' sections of Motorway - NOT ANY MORE.

    The new world of autonomous Police harassment, via technology.

    Odd, they spend millions on technology to implement this, but fail to erect a £50 sign to say 'Strict enforcement -Safety Cameras operating 27/4', just saying.

    1. Andy 97

      Re: More fines...

      Remember.... it's for YOUR SAFETY.

  35. Andy 97

    This is the future they've all been waiting to impose on us.

  36. Cuddles Silver badge

    Easy solution

    Pretty much all video games, regardless of rating, have a notice saying "Online interactions not rated". Presumably websites can simply use the same disclaimer.

  37. Mr Dogshit

    Funny how the Tories are always opposed to "The Nanny State"

    and yet always come up with these ideas.

  38. magickmark
    Childcatcher

    VPN

    I assume she's never heard of Virtual Private Networks?

    Just sayin'

  39. Flywheel Silver badge
    WTF?

    In that case I'll have mine rated "FU" or maybe "STFU"

    Bl**dy cheek!

  40. msknight Silver badge

    That woman...

    ...appears to be 999 screws short of a 1,000 piece mechano set.

    1. Boris the Cockroach Silver badge
      Devil

      Re: That woman...

      And the remaining piece is of lego

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: That woman...

        Wait a minute, this isn't real lego.

        Mega Bloks!!!

  41. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    She is one of the new Internet of dumb things.

    [id]IOT

  42. Winkypop Silver badge
    Joke

    Late running candidate...

    The ghost of Mary Whitehouse.

  43. Fonant
    FAIL

    Poor rhetoric, impossible task

    Andrea, perhaps you could remind me: how many internet sites are there in the world, at the moment?

    And how many new sites come online every day?

    And how long does it take to rate a web site?

  44. David Roberts Silver badge

    Board of Censors?

    As already pointed out by Douglas Adams, "where due to a terrible miscalculation of scale.....".

    As far as I know the film censors don't censor each film produced by amateur film makers in the UK.

    They don't even censor home movies shown at film clubs.

    They only censor commercially produced films for showing at a local cinema or for sale on DVD/BluRay or via Netflix and the like.

    So the comparison doesn't scale - unless my home movies are due for a quick visit sometime soon to see if they are suitable for me to watch.

    Given that they seem to have cut back on Trading Standards officers so much that the CAB is now standing in, I don't expect them to be doing anything realistic any time soon.

    So the whole thing is a "Think about the children" sound bite no doubt followed by a cunning scheme to get somebody else to do the work so the Government doesn't have to spend any money (that shows up in the accounts).

    As others have said, it is a sad time when we look at Cameron as a wise and effective elder statesman.

    Again tracking other comments, how is it O.K. to have Corbyn as leader of the Labour Party without a general election, but not Theresa (for example) as leader of the Conservative Party without a general election? The current structure has the leader of the parliamentary party as PM and no rules about an election if the leader quits or is deposed.

    Generally a sad time for us all.

    1. Fr. Ted Crilly

      Re: Board of Censors?

      Corbyn?

      erm suppose to say was a G.E next week and 'tweedy' Corbyn was still Shadow PM then he would have been elected as the prospective PM wouldn't he...

      Are you really suggesting the lumpen mass of the voting general public should express a preference as to whom they prefer as Shadow PM in between G.E's

  45. Alfred
    Headmaster

    Massive misunderstanding of how companies operate

    "While it sounds like a massive leap, the majority of new websites already go through testing when they are hosted to make sure that a site is intact and that files and content are free of viruses."

    Like fuck they do.

  46. fLaMePrOoF

    Why not just ask China to build us a Great Firewall...?

  47. FuzzyWuzzys Silver badge
    Facepalm

    There are you dopey moo!

    You buy into a service like NetNanny, BlueCoat or Z-Scaler and you're done. Of course this al relies of the bleedin' obvious fact that websites can spring up any bloody where and that it's obvious you have no clue how this "techie stuff" works!

  48. John70

    18PG Certificate

    Just give the Internet an 18 certificate with Parental Guidance thrown in.

  49. staringatclouds

    So

    1 - Every small business with a website will no longer have a website because of the cost

    2 - As she could only enforce this on UK based websites she'll have to prevent people accessing non UK websites

    The whole idea of putting no hopers like Gove and people further to the right than Ghengiz Khan, like Crabb & Leadsom, into the Tory leadership election is so that if May gets in it'll be see as a mercy and not the absolute clusterfuck of a disaster that it really is.

    We'll be grateful if May, the far right securocrat with an emergency that allows her to push any legislation she likes through, wins because the other choices are far worse.

    1. MJI Silver badge

      At least May stopped McKinnon extradition

  50. scrubber
    Big Brother

    The Great British Firewall

    So a prospective Conservative leader wants to regulate what adults can see? Who'd've thunk it?

    Whatever happened to small government?

  51. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken Silver badge

    Seriously, I'm beginning to fear that in a few years time, visiting my relatives in the UK will be quite like visiting my relatives in the GDR way back when.

    Get it together, guys!

  52. JLV Silver badge
    Happy

    why stop there?

    Movies have ratings.

    Videogames too.

    Internet should have ratings.

    Age-rate all books, newspapers and mags as well. God-fearing ones get an automatic G (all ages). Unrateds? Burn them.

    Children are thought of and civilization is saved!

    I'd have thought AO should be penning articles putting forward the excellent views of such a prominent Leaver.

  53. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Massive leap

    More like "Great leap forward".

    Let a thousand (age restricted) websites bloom.

    1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Re: Massive leap

      And in order to have enough people to work the fields: how about a "Cultural Revolution"? That'll the smirks off those layabout intellectuals in Cambridge.

      Mine's the one with the Little Red Book in the pocket, ta.

  54. Stevie Silver badge

    Bah!

    Where do I apply for a "ban this filth" rating for my incoherent and grammatically questionable blog? I could use the traffic.

  55. ThomH Silver badge

    But doesn't she also want zero regulation for startup businesses?

    ... so if I'm an Internet startup, can I publish my site or not?

  56. steward
    Facepalm

    Sounds like an extension of Brexit

    Britain exits the rest of the world.

  57. Paul Smith

    Three options

    "There are two sound ways to ensure that children are not exposed to dangerous or disturbing content,"

    Three! The third option is for parents to take responsibility for their children.

    1. fruitoftheloon
      Pint

      @Paul Smith: Re: Three options

      Paul,

      WHAT ARE YOU ON MAN???

      If that were to happen, bible bashing hypocritical nut jobs would lose one of their 'levers' to get their views across 'for the sake of the children'...

      Have one on me pls!!

      Cheers,

      Jay.

  58. J.G.Harston Silver badge

    The WHOLE website? So does the BBC get a 'U' category, or an 'A' category 'cos there's pages with boobies on.

    I look forward to the humungous piles of job vacancies to do all this classification.

    Argh!! Boobies!

  59. Jeffrey Nonken Silver badge

    Uhhhhhhh... No.

    Apparently she's only connected to reality at a few widely scattered points.

    Also I don't think it's any damn business of hers who I have sex with.

    Lucky for me I'm on the other side of the pond, so this is nothing to do with me. Best luck with this, England.

  60. W. Anderson

    Stupid thinking similar to Donald Drump

    This idea from MP Adrea Leadsom can be rightly categorized s completely daft.

    First of all, how are tens of millions of Websites on thousands of topics/genres, new, changed and/or updated daily going to be monitored and rated.

    Furthermore the British Film Board, nor any other entity in the UK (or elsewhere) has the know-how or expertise to rate Websites for example - on climate change, Astronomy (NASA), technology in it's myriad categories, Sports related Websites, healthcare websites, and so on.

    It looks like the Uk is getting politicians just as balmy as US Donald Trump.

    1. BlokeInTejas

      Re: Stupid thinking similar to Donald Drump

      "barmy", not "balmy"

      Unless you're referencing the Mighty Steve

    2. Leslie Graham

      Re: Stupid thinking similar to Donald Drump

      There are now well over a billion websites and another couple of thousand have been added in the time it took you to read this sentence.

      Spending just ten minutes checking each one would take one man over 19,000 years to work his way through them all.

      And that's just the practicalities. Who gave her the right to decide what I can and can not view on the internet? Maybe she would be better employed working for the North Koreans.

  61. Someone Else Silver badge
    Big Brother

    Listen, you guys on the right side of the pond...

    After the choices you have "nominated" for PM, I don't evah want to hear one phoneme of bitching/whining/tut-tutting/etc about our choices for President. You have explicitly disqualified yourselves from any high ground (moral or otherwise) in that respect.

  62. HarryBl

    Why are they so stupid?

    1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      "Why are they so stupid?"

      Part of the job description?

  63. Chris G Silver badge

    Disqualified

    Having had a chance to read her Wicki page and a few other articles, this woman is disqualified from leading the country by virtue of her lying about her positions and experience in finance, particularly with Braclay's Bonk who are agents of the devil.

    Then she admits to not only being a committed (should be) christian but also to taking part in Parliamentary bible studies groups, having a link to religion of any type as a beneficial character trait should automatically disqualify any would be leader. Hitler had his astrologer, Bush had his fundamentalist preacher, who knows who she will have as an 'Advisor'.

    So no idea about how the real world works other than missing the good ol' days of being able to get out into the world on horseback with a couple of dozen of her chums to chase a small mammal that largely (in the countyside) keeps down rodent numbers and looks cute.

    Usually while out on a hunt the morons will chase the fox wherever it goes including across a farmers crops, well, if he ain't a member of the hunt y'know!

    And then there's May.....

    Where I live we are looking at the possibiltyof a third GE this year, the voting public in Spain don't like any of the choices they are presented with, seems to be a thing this year.

    1. Alister Silver badge

      Re: Disqualified

      So no idea about how the real world works

      ...to chase a small mammal that largely (in the countyside) keeps down rodent numbers and looks cute.

      I'm sorry, but you also have no idea how the real world works if you come out with shit like that.

      Foxes are a pest that kill enormous numbers of chickens and geese every year, they aren't just a cute little animal.

      1. anonymous boring coward Silver badge

        Re: Disqualified

        Yeah, the foxes shouldn't have any right to eat. Why not exterminate all wild animals from this island while we are at it? In other countries they have bears, lions, tigers etc, but in this one we can't accept some foxes. Pathetic.

        Besides, if they are too many, just shoot some humanely and professionaly. Don't effing torture them for toff-"sport".

        1. Alister Silver badge

          Re: Disqualified

          @anonymous boring coward

          Yeah, the foxes shouldn't have any right to eat. Why not exterminate all wild animals from this island while we are at it? In other countries they have bears, lions, tigers etc, but in this one we can't accept some foxes. Pathetic.

          Wow, Strawman much?

          No, the foxes shouldn't have the right to eat farmed poultry, there's plenty of other things they could eat. I did not, and do not suggest exterminating them all, I've no idea where you got that from. And I don't support hunting, either.

      2. fruitoftheloon
        WTF?

        @Alister: Re: Disqualified

        Alister,

        if I may chip-in, if Fox hunting is a sport, how many of the dogs/horses/riders have to get ripped to bits for the fox to have 'won'?

        Sport it isn't, imho it is a moderately good reason to get dressed up and ride around the countryside, [potentially] killing a fox in the process.

        Also I do live in the countryside, have neighbours who have lost chickens due to foxes, and have relatives who did hunt...

        Regards,

        Jay

        1. Alister Silver badge

          Re: @Alister: Disqualified

          @Jay,

          I don't think I said anywhere that I support hunting, did I?

          I was simply correcting ChrisG who said "a small mammal that largely (in the countyside) keeps down rodent numbers and looks cute"

          This may be the townies view, but anyone who farms knows what a struggle it is to deal with foxes.

  64. if(i == alive) { live_free = true; government = NULL; }
    WTF?

    What is she going to do if somebody writes "fuck" in the comments?

    I think I prefer Leadsome to May simply because she will invoke article 50 quicker, but this is a really goddam silly idea.

  65. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Hanging for downloading mp3's can't be far off at this rate.

  66. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

    "We checked with Leadsom's office"

    Good. It's much better than reaching out.

    Hmm. Am I going to have to add Leadsom to my spill chucker word list?

  67. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

    Thinking about it, if it were feasible, it would be useful. There are plenty of infantile sites to be avoided.

  68. Slx

    Bye bye UK tech industry

    Do the Tories actually want an economy???

    So far they've basically put the City of London at risk and now they seem to be planning to become about as friendly to the tech sector as Iran and China.

    This is really looking bleak!

  69. Tristan Young

    ... and I think all politicians should be rated by the citizens and thrown in prison if they are determined to be crooks, thugs, liars, cheats, deceivers, enter into really bad deals and contracts, waste our money, etc.

    Awe, screw the rating. They all deserve life-long prison sentences. Maybe a little Minority Report style look-ahead so we can catch these scumbags before they manage to reach office.

  70. xyz

    Oh God, Oh God, Oh God...

    ....how have politicians managed to "miss" the internet to such an extent that they still think it's some trendy new TV channel. Non nerds have been using it en mass since about 2000 and the average road sweeper appears to know more about how it works than people who are supposed to be running the country. Surely in the past 16 years this person must have used the bloody thing or manybe she has a "man who does" that sorts out all that tiresome data entry stuff.

    1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: Oh God, Oh God, Oh God...

      'politicians managed to "miss" the internet'

      Of course they haven't missed it. They just want control of it.

      1. anonymous boring coward Silver badge

        Re: Oh God, Oh God, Oh God...

        "Of course they haven't missed it. They just want control of it."

        In Sweden, som 20+ years ago, they politicians really looked at how to control what content was available to the web surfers. Not to protect children, but to protect the Swedish population from incorrect views.

        The Social Democrats had traditionally had the press in their hands by having some really strange publication laws, as well as massive state contributions to newspapers that were deemed worthy. You can imagine how that put the lid on the papers being too critical of politicians.

        Unlike China, Sweden didn't have the resources to build a Great Firewall.

  71. This post has been deleted by its author

  72. William 3 Bronze badge

    Double Standards??

    Would you run an article strap line that said "Maybe Allah Told him to do it" about Sadiq Khan?

    If not, why run one that says "Maybe God Told her to do it".

    I'm athiest, but find the double standards in left wing authors fucking disgraceful.

    The person who wrote this would be off screaming "Islamaphobia" if anyone said the same thing about Islam with regards to a Muslim politician.

  73. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Re: "...need of a monitor for obscene and adult websites."

    When she loses her bid for prime minister shortly, may be she should put her money where her mouth is and apply for that particular job vacancy, rather than just letting some peon destroy their own view of humanity, and probably their marriage and family relationships.

  74. anonymous boring coward Silver badge

    She really is dangerously stupid, even for a politician.

    Apparently she also claims to know what God wants. Although it does seem unlikely that God would have a strong view on EU.

    What could possibly go wrong?

    1. MJI Silver badge

      If I was God I would not want to talk to her.

  75. Rewire

    EU red-tape: the Quantum Leap from Burdensome to Leadsom?

    Need we say more?

  76. Captain Badmouth
    FAIL

    Liedsome's website

    http://www.andrealeadsom.com/working-for-you/andrea's-blog/a-tory-mums-recipe-for-a-perfect-british-society/27

    Perhaps she should start with her own blog page, pass the sickbag......

    p.s Upvote for anyone who can get a comment published, good luck with that!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Liedsome's website

      "p.s Upvote for anyone who can get a comment published, good luck with that!"

      Not unlike theGuardian.com of late, then...

      1. Captain Badmouth
        Big Brother

        Re: Liedsome's website

        "Not unlike theGuardian.com of late, then..."

        Downvoted for anon. posting. Hardly contentious when blogs screen comments, is it?

        What are you afraid of? (vernacular)

        or

        Of what are you afraid? (correct grammar version?)

  77. Dodgy Geezer Silver badge

    Right wing views...?

    ...no subsidies for renewable energy...

    That sounds just like common sense...

  78. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Demoncracy

    Andrea Leadsom / Theresa May = Demoncracy, not Democracy.

  79. a_yank_lurker Silver badge

    Open Auditions

    She auditioning for the position of Idiot aka Congress Critter? I doubt she has a clue how the vast the Internet is and dynamic it is.

  80. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Feasible?

    How would you even enforce that?

    And how may people would be needed to rate sites?

    And how would you find them (the sites)?

  81. RDW

    Leave Campaign website - age rating 40+

  82. harmjschoonhoven

    Yes, we can

    LOL. Just Youtube adds simultaneously an estimated 18000 videos to be censored rated.

  83. DerekCurrie
    Angel

    Install Net Nanny Dear!

    Or how about the government hands out Net Nanny with every ISP account?

    It's always amusing when 'conservatives', who want less regulation and less government, come up with excuses to impose exactly the opposite upon the citizenry. Cognitive dissonance.

  84. The Vociferous Time Waster

    Urgh

    So we have Nigel Farage in a Thatcher costume or Thatcher in a Thatcher costume. Brilliant and well done 52%

  85. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken Silver badge

    Book* tip: Alan Bennett - The Uncommon Reader. (If only, if only, if only... well, a man can dream.)

    * Yes, I know, it's a bloody "novella".

  86. d3rrial

    EU regulations

    Well aren't you really glad you left the EU and all their regulations now? Cookie law? Ha, screw the EU now the UK doesn't have to deal with that bullshit no more!

    Congratulations on winning your freedom!

  87. Asterix the Gaul

    During the referendum debate, I thought that Leadsom held the 'high-ground, by actually responding to questions in a dignified, non-dogmatic & unemotional way.

    Shortly after she began coming out with talk about her 'religious' beliefs, along with other comments that made me change my opinion of her.

    I'm sorry to say that, what was once a positive opinion of her, has now become a complete switch-off.

    It's a sad thing to acknowledge, but the U.K is well & truly NOT served by any politician\party currently in existence.

    I think perhaps that it's well past time that ALL politicians have a 'rating' given by the public, who can call time on them.

    1. d3rrial
      Happy

      Don't worry, Germany is here for you. :)

      You can be our crimea!

  88. CheesyTheClown Silver badge

    Nice idea and good spirit but impossible to implement

    There are web site rating systems already in place from companies like Checkpoint and Cisco as part of their firewall services. In a modern web, with the advent of HTTP v2.0 and also with primarily randomized URLs, it would require application later inspection and filtering to implement such a system.

    Even with data center scale computing, deploying clusters of tens of thousands for firewall instances, it would be computationally impossible to filter all we traffic effectively to make such a thing matter.

    Add "dark web" resources (which I think means Tor) which simply requires the download of a free and public web browser to use and inline filtering would be absolutely impossible.

    This sort of solution would depend instead on DNS filtering which doesn't work since most users don't actually use British DNS servers.

    In the end, while she has a good heart and spirit and is trying to recommend something she believes could have a healthy and positive impact on her country, it would be simply wasted breath and resources to try and push such legislation into effect.

  89. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Slack-cunted mongoloid hausfrau

  90. Leslie Graham

    One has to wonder at the sanity of a person who would even suggest such a thing. Not even taking into account the morality of the enterprise and who would decide and what would be censored but purely from a practical point of view the logistics are simply impossible.

    I have just worked out that it would take one man 19,000 years to check out every website even just spending a few minutes on each one.

    I think she would be better employed doing the ironing and not worrying her pretty little head about running the country.

  91. GoogleBrexitCoin

    Another out-of-touch politician

    Whilst in theory, it may be a good idea... think of the children... but in reality it's ridiculous. There's just too many websites in existence (on the surface web) for this to work. if a 1,000 people working a 35 hour week (no breaks or anything) would take them until 2067 to rate all websites; assuming they take 5 minutes. that's not including all the numerous websites that would be added in that time.

    This politician, just like all of them just demonstrates how out of touch they are with technology and the people they're supposed to represent

  92. Richard Cranium

    There was a web page rating system many years ago when the web was still in short trousers (1990s) called PICS (Platform for Internet Content Selection). As far as I recall a significant flaw was the need for third party validation of the rating applied by the web developer and which came with a price tag.

    Since then there have been numerous other rating and filtering systems but none that "tick all the boxes". Inevitably at some point a human is involved in making the filtering decision leading to sites being blocked for using the words for humans' organs of regeneration (so blocking legitimate medical sites) through to extremes like religious nuts blocking sites that suggest the world is older than 6000 years.

    1. Charles 9 Silver badge

      And this says nothing of the modern procedural web where content can be generated for any user on the fly, unique to each user. This makes rating pretty much impossible because no two viewers get the same thing.

      PS. Looks like she ended up biting off more than she could chew. She's officially out which means a winner by default.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019