Best Of

Michael Gove on the Spectator Q&A podcast has some thoughts on why Labour's big majority makes it susceptible to rebellions, as discussed in previous threads (and since Francis Pym ended his political career by cautioning Mrs Thatcher against landslides four decades back).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GeJ0dX34nug

Can't watch the clip right now, but I do think Starmer's huge majority is a curse. For all I disagreed with it at the time, and opposed it for political reasons, in terms of Party management, Boris was right to withdraw the whip from Rory Stewart, Ken Clarke etc for rebelling on Brexit even though it, briefly, cost him his majority. Starmer should maybe have done the same on WFA.

I also wonder if such a large majority on a pretty low vote share means that MPs feel more entitled to pull their own way rather than follow the party line (and indeed, feel less obliged to be loyal to the party leader in general).

Some good news this morning, Russia has got rid of 71% of its gold reserves since 2022.

https://x.com/kshevchenkoreal/status/2016907186749002198

It appears that, as with their oil, China is the buyer at a significant discount to market price.

Russia is slowly being hollowed-out as a country, they’re trying to fight a ground war and have run out of tanks. The entire Soviet stockpile of more than ten thousand tanks, all gone to give the Ukranians some scrap metal for recycling.

Oligarchs have been buying gold for rubles from the Russian state. The billions of rubles they have stashed are otherwise essentially worthless.

In my day job my conversations with OFSI have increased exponentially in the last six months as more and more Russians are desperately trying to sell stuff.

They’ve been turning up in the sandpit with old-fashioned and new-fashioned money - gold and bitcoin - and are realising how difficult it is to liquidate large quantities of either at anywhere close to the published market prices.

Turns out the Gaza Health Ministry was right.

Israel and Hamas finally agree on Gaza death toll

Israeli Defence Forces reports on number of Palestinians killed for first time

Israel has signalled is ready to acknowledge that 70,000 people have been killed in its war on Gaza.

Officials from the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) reported the estimated death toll for the first time to multiple Israeli news outlets.

The figure is almost identical to the 71,667 reported by the Gaza health ministry, which is run by Hamas.

Throughout the war, the Israeli military and government has accused the health ministry of publishing “exaggerated” figures, cautioning the media and NGOs not to trust the data.

Until now, Israel has refused to offer alternative figures.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2026/01/29/israel-and-hamas-finally-agree-on-gaza-death-toll/

7th October - the dumbest terrorist attack in history?

Hamas are following the classic tactics of anti-colonial insurgency movements, in carrying out atrocities, in order to provoke an even harsher reaction from the colonial power. That leads to the colonial power being discredited among its own citizens.

Where Hamas failed is that the Israelis don't see this as a colonial war. They see it as an existential war. People will willingly inflict all manner of cruelties on the enemy, if they believe that they are fighting for their existence.

What tends to get overlooked, because of the romanticisation of guerilla movements, is that irregular warfare is very much the second best option, to regular warfare. Most insurgencies fail, and where they do succeed, it is only with the backing of foreign governments, and/or where they are fighting in conjunction with regular forces.

The argument is interesting - thanks.

I'm actually not familiar with Jenrick & co having been involved in this; I need to read some 2010 to 2023 history, perhaps.

IMO the stuff about "hiking Council tax" (which I lost count of how many times Rabbit mentioned it) is very strange and highly political, because according to my numbers Band D Council tax (the basic number from which others are defined) has risen between 2005 and 2025 by 95%, whilst CPI inflation has risen by 91%, which is as near as dammit identical.

To take the numbers on a UK wide average per household (rather than Band D) the increase is still marginal. England is flat over 20 years, Wales is up, Scotland is down. Source ONS via Dan Neidle.

Councils have not "hiked" Council Tax; that is an urban myth.

We need to compare that to changes in centralised support and service responsibilities to get a proper handle on that. I suggest that poor services is related to level of responsibilities being increased or reduced left that resources from the centre have been cut. That is a function of Central Government not giving a damn.

A very useful article where I sourced the above graph:
https://taxpolicy.org.uk/2025/11/24/council-tax-has-it-gone-up/#:~:text=Showing first 20 rows of,council tax is largely unchanged.

I'm not sure where the graph went:

I think you've misread the graph. That's a graph of real Council Tax rates (at 2024 price) using CPI. It even says so in both the header and in the small print (CPI).

So you can't then compare against CPI, as CPI has already been taken into account.

So your graph does not show that Council Taxes are flat against CPI, they have basically doubled in real terms even having taken into account CPI.

I make 2 comparisons.

My first comparator is Band D vs CPI from 2005 to 2025, which is flat in real terms (91% vs 95% increase in cash terms).

My cross check is average household expenditure on Council Tax vs CPI, which is the graph, which is also flat in 2024 money (ie real) terms.

ie It has not been hiked in real terms.

Ah, you're right, my apologies, I spotted the CPI issue and took your numbers as coming from the graph, but didn't read the x-axis. The sharp increase is the decade from 1997-2007.

Thanks. Apologies for any lack of clarity.

I'd go for more significant local autonomy, and given relative success of regional mayors in some places that seems to be the best chance we will get.

The argument is interesting - thanks.

I'm actually not familiar with Jenrick & co having been involved in this; I need to read some 2010 to 2023 history, perhaps.

IMO the stuff about "hiking Council tax" (which I lost count of how many times Rabbit mentioned it) is very strange and highly political, because according to my numbers Band D Council tax (the basic number from which others are defined) has risen between 2005 and 2025 by 95%, whilst CPI inflation has risen by 91%, which is as near as dammit identical.

To take the numbers on a UK wide average per household (rather than Band D) the increase is still marginal. England is flat over 20 years, Wales is up, Scotland is down. Source ONS via Dan Neidle.

Councils have not "hiked" Council Tax; that is an urban myth.

We need to compare that to changes in centralised support and service responsibilities to get a proper handle on that. I suggest that poor services is related to level of responsibilities being increased or reduced left that resources from the centre have been cut. That is a function of Central Government not giving a damn.

A very useful article where I sourced the above graph:
https://taxpolicy.org.uk/2025/11/24/council-tax-has-it-gone-up/#:~:text=Showing first 20 rows of,council tax is largely unchanged.

I'm not sure where the graph went:

I think you've misread the graph. That's a graph of real Council Tax rates (at 2024 price) using CPI. It even says so in both the header and in the small print (CPI).

So you can't then compare against CPI, as CPI has already been taken into account.

So your graph does not show that Council Taxes are flat against CPI, they have basically doubled in real terms even having taken into account CPI.

I make 2 comparisons.

My first comparator is Band D vs CPI from 2005 to 2025, which is flat in real terms (91% vs 95% increase in cash terms).

My cross check is average household expenditure on Council Tax vs CPI, which is the graph, which is also flat in 2024 money (ie real) terms.

ie It has not been hiked in real terms.

Ah, you're right, my apologies, I spotted the CPI issue and took your numbers as coming from the graph, but didn't read the x-axis. The sharp increase is the decade from 1997-2007.

On topic: Jenrick and Gove have never fucked anything up?
Gove, the education system and free schools for starters, Jenrick would be hard pushed to point to anything he hasn't fucked up.

Putting that to one side. What is the problem the reorganization is trying to solve?

If it is the current financial crisis then limited council budgets only buy so much tarmac, refuse services and people regardless of the size of the council purchasing it.
Reorganization might create efficiencies in future but immediately it will only take money out of a budget that is already too small to deliver basic services. The councils that are in the worst debt are those that tried risky money making schemes so they could afford to provide basic services, made possible by removal of the oversight of the audit commission (brilliant Conservative cost-saving measure).

I'm not against reorganization, but at this point any penny Councils have needs to be spent on services, re-organization can wait until councils are on a surer financial footing. If it's a choice between filling potholes or rebranding council leaflets the priority of residents is clear.

It seems to me that the local government election/funding problem illustrates a fairly diagnosable democracy problem along with a concept problem as well.

Firstly in any notionally democratic hierarchy a general rule applies, arising out of human nature: the higher level of the democratic hierarchy will always want to maximise its power and minimise its responsibility.

The conceptual problem in local democracy is that it is rational to want two incompatible things: local decision and accountability but also an absence of 'postcode lottery' about any local service we happen to want at any particular moment.

In respect of Westminster v local government this is fairly obvious. But because total state managed expenditure is a vast proportion of all activity from building nuclear submarines to park benches and playground swings it goes right down to the level of the village primary school and beyond.

Result: blame transference is one of the great creative industries of the democratic world. It is a social blight. Result: good well intentioned school governors (volunteers) and management etc spend long winter evenings exercising responsibility without power, while a thousand miles away well paid politicians exercise power without responsibility.

Underneath is the problem that local government has no constitutional basis and hence no security.

In most other democracies, the fundamentals of its local governance are set out in its constitution. For sure, constitutions can change - but that's normally an extended process with a series of hurdles to jump, and not something governments do lightly.

The absence of any formalised constitution in the UK means that local government exists and operates entirely at the whim of national government - it can be re-organised, abolished, have its election dates changed, have its funding cut or capped, all according to the political decisions of a majority party at Westminster, elected on 35-40% of the vote, and has next to no reliable funding sources of its own (other than, perhaps, parking charges - which in itself explains a lot).

There's perhaps a very gradual movement in the opposite direction with the introduction of regional mayors ?

And it ought to be acknowledged that the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, which is causing the controversy discussed in the header, does significantly increase powers devolved to the higher tier of local government.

Turns out the Gaza Health Ministry was right.

Israel and Hamas finally agree on Gaza death toll

Israeli Defence Forces reports on number of Palestinians killed for first time

Israel has signalled is ready to acknowledge that 70,000 people have been killed in its war on Gaza.

Officials from the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) reported the estimated death toll for the first time to multiple Israeli news outlets.

The figure is almost identical to the 71,667 reported by the Gaza health ministry, which is run by Hamas.

Throughout the war, the Israeli military and government has accused the health ministry of publishing “exaggerated” figures, cautioning the media and NGOs not to trust the data.

Until now, Israel has refused to offer alternative figures.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2026/01/29/israel-and-hamas-finally-agree-on-gaza-death-toll/

7th October - the dumbest terrorist attack in history?

Turns out the Gaza Health Ministry was right.

Israel and Hamas finally agree on Gaza death toll

Israeli Defence Forces reports on number of Palestinians killed for first time

Israel has signalled is ready to acknowledge that 70,000 people have been killed in its war on Gaza.

Officials from the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) reported the estimated death toll for the first time to multiple Israeli news outlets.

The figure is almost identical to the 71,667 reported by the Gaza health ministry, which is run by Hamas.

Throughout the war, the Israeli military and government has accused the health ministry of publishing “exaggerated” figures, cautioning the media and NGOs not to trust the data.

Until now, Israel has refused to offer alternative figures.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2026/01/29/israel-and-hamas-finally-agree-on-gaza-death-toll/