Best Of

37 years ago today since the Piper Alpha disaster. My Dad was working off shore in the North Sea at the time but he was away on a short holiday with my Mum and my sister and I were both at home house/cat and dog sitting for them. We had neither the radio or the TV on that day, but I always remember the phone started ringing as old friends of my Dad who didn't realise which rig he worked on or that he was on shore started phoning to check in with him and their relief when they discovered he was away on holiday. I think it was about the third random phonecall from an old friend of his when I said right what is going on and why is everyone suddenly phoning to check in on my Dad today.

I had moved from Aberdeen the year before to take up a nursing job in Edinburgh, but one of my best friends was on duty at Aberdeen Royal Infirmary when the news came in and the hospital went into emergency mode in preparation for a large amount of incoming casualties and she still talks about the utter shock and sadness that overwhelmed the staff on duty there that day when those casualties didn't materialise as the enormity of the tragedy unfolded.

Labour 's pre- election absurdity of essentially saying "no new taxes on working people" has come back to bite them.

Last week's word cloud on here where the only words visible were "Winter Fuel Allowance" demonstrate they can't go for the oldsters, and the utter catastrophe of a Labour Government appearing to take money off the most vulnerable in society looked disgusting. Selling a carefully crafted and focused package to stem the burgeoning welfare bill could have worked by politicians less inept than Starmer, Kendall and Reeves. We can't afford to put everyone on PIP if they occasionally feel sad.

You're not wrong of course.

The problem was coming into office (and there would have been discussions with senior civil servants in advance), it was clear everything that needed to be done couldn't be done on day one. Most would need complex legislation and take time to have an impact.

Labour thought they needed to hit the ground running and instead they just hit the ground. In truth, the theory of taking winter fuel allowance away from wealthy pensioners wasn't a bad one but the way the policy was presented was about as bad as it could have been. Had Reeves said, for example, we'll take WFA away from higher rate taxpayers, yes, there'd have been grumbling particularly from those at the cliff edge of the thresholds but overall that would have been muted and probably forgotten.

The big problem remains "the small boats" for which Starmer, like Badenoch and Farage, has no coherent, practical or affordable solution.

Two excellent posts today from Mr S.
Surely the Labour top brass (and the backroom policy wonks) must have felt that victory was at least possible by Christmas 2023 ..... and certainly by Easter 2024. We rather got the impression that the mindset was 'OMG we've won; what do we do now!"

Rather like Reform in the County Councils now.

If the LibDems had been in that position one could have understood it.

I do not think that is correct. For a start, some Labour ministers did hit the ground running. Many might disagree with what Ed Miliband and Bridget Phillipson have done but the point is, they've done it. Likewise Angela Rayner. ETA and Wes Streeting.

Where there has been a gaping hole is in economic policy, partly because of waiting for the OBR as posted earlier, but also because Reeves and Starmer are technocrats, apparently under the impression that Treasury civil servants already had a map pointing our way to the sunlit uplands but had been blocked by evil Tories for ideological reasons.

There is also, and the Conservatives are the same here, no guiding principle. Just as Kemi cannot say what is the point of the Conservative Party, so Starmer is silent on what Labour is for.

Labour has a gaping hole in economic policy because it (esp backbenchers) has no understanding of or interest in economics.

It is the 'give away be nice cus that makes me feel good party'.

Last thread was a hoot, cannot wait to hear more from "THE FALCON" when he awakens from his stupour.

And verily, See that His Sublime Grace LEONDAMUS, Lord Paramount of Camden, Warden of the Primrose Hill Borders, Commander of the Mighty Herd, He Who Rides The Unbridled Thunder, Surveyor of the PB Wastes and Whisperer to Kings, the Master known as Al-Saqr to the Desert Arabs, as Shahin to the Dusky Persians, and as THE FALCON to us all…

is awake. And maybe having a coffee

If you need a sidekick, I'm always happy to play The Tit

You do yourself down. Try calling yourself "The Merlin". Our smallest hawk. But damn it, good enough to power the Spitfire...

Also the Bolton Paul Defiant; armament pointing backwards, disastrous in the daytime once the enemy knew what was up and reduced to lurking in the night hoping to bag a prize.
And a load of useless to mediocre Faireys.

Merlin engines also powered America's best fighter, the Mustang, which gave the allies aerial superiority then supremacy over Europe. The Mustang's original engines had been no good but the Merlin fixed that. One of the key features of the war was allied cooperation and cross-fertilisation in arms development and manufacture. The axis powers never had that.

They did sort of, not that it did them much good. Quite surprisingly Italy and Japan never developed a high performance inline engine, so German DB601/5s powered the Kawasaki Hien and various Italian fighters.

FPT. Morris_Dancer said:

betting Post:

F1: backed Hulkenberg for points at 7.5 (boosted), with a hedge at 1.8.

https://morrisf1.blogspot.com/2025/07/british-grand-prix-2025-pre-race.html

Given he starts 19th this might sound daft, and it might be. But he's scored from 16th, 13th, and 20th in recent races.

Hi Morris Dancer, Son No1 and his girlfriend are having an amazing long weekend at Silverstone, they also ended up really enjoying the Fat Boy Slim concert last night before the big race today. I had never watched an F1 GP race before I met Fitaloon, but I quickly became a fan of the sport afterwards through him. We watched the Damon Hill documentary last night and I highly recommend it, the 1993/94 F1 seasons were the first time I managed to get to watch them all live along with Fitaloon which made this documentary all the more poignant because at the time I was busy having Sons No1 and 2. Previously my weekend shift work as a nurse meant I rarely got to watch most of the races live during the Ayrton Senna/Nigel Mansell era.

I saw Mansell twice at Silverstone.
First time in '83 when he came fourth to Prost in the Lotus. And later in his dominant championship year when the Williams drove into the distance.

'83 was absolutely sweltering, the traffic was indescribable, and the atmosphere amazing.

I went to Silverstone once. Must have been early/mid 90s

I don't remember the year. I don't remember who won.

My abiding memory is how much better it was on TV than live...

The same is true of the Calcutta Cup match at Murrayfield. In the pub with a pint beats the stadium, every time.

Any sport is better watched at home where you see far more of the game, especially with modern multi-camera set-ups. What you get at the ground is atmosphere and the feeling that you too are part of unfolding events, a small footnote in history. I was there!

Football, rugby, athletics are definitely better at the venue. Golf, cycling and F1 better on TV. Tennis not much difference. Cricket depends on preference for giant beer garden vs following the minutiae.

Labour 's pre- election absurdity of essentially saying "no new taxes on working people" has come back to bite them.

Last week's word cloud on here where the only words visible were "Winter Fuel Allowance" demonstrate they can't go for the oldsters, and the utter catastrophe of a Labour Government appearing to take money off the most vulnerable in society looked disgusting. Selling a carefully crafted and focused package to stem the burgeoning welfare bill could have worked by politicians less inept than Starmer, Kendall and Reeves. We can't afford to put everyone on PIP if they occasionally feel sad.

You're not wrong of course.

The problem was coming into office (and there would have been discussions with senior civil servants in advance), it was clear everything that needed to be done couldn't be done on day one. Most would need complex legislation and take time to have an impact.

Labour thought they needed to hit the ground running and instead they just hit the ground. In truth, the theory of taking winter fuel allowance away from wealthy pensioners wasn't a bad one but the way the policy was presented was about as bad as it could have been. Had Reeves said, for example, we'll take WFA away from higher rate taxpayers, yes, there'd have been grumbling particularly from those at the cliff edge of the thresholds but overall that would have been muted and probably forgotten.

The big problem remains "the small boats" for which Starmer, like Badenoch and Farage, has no coherent, practical or affordable solution.

Two excellent posts today from Mr S.
Surely the Labour top brass (and the backroom policy wonks) must have felt that victory was at least possible by Christmas 2023 ..... and certainly by Easter 2024. We rather got the impression that the mindset was 'OMG we've won; what do we do now!"

Rather like Reform in the County Councils now.

If the LibDems had been in that position one could have understood it.

I do not think that is correct. For a start, some Labour ministers did hit the ground running. Many might disagree with what Ed Miliband and Bridget Phillipson have done but the point is, they've done it. Likewise Angela Rayner. ETA and Wes Streeting.

Where there has been a gaping hole is in economic policy, partly because of waiting for the OBR as posted earlier, but also because Reeves and Starmer are technocrats, apparently under the impression that Treasury civil servants already had a map pointing our way to the sunlit uplands but had been blocked by evil Tories for ideological reasons.

There is also, and the Conservatives are the same here, no guiding principle. Just as Kemi cannot say what is the point of the Conservative Party, so Starmer is silent on what Labour is for.

Labour 's pre- election absurdity of essentially saying "no new taxes on working people" has come back to bite them.

Last week's word cloud on here where the only words visible were "Winter Fuel Allowance" demonstrate they can't go for the oldsters, and the utter catastrophe of a Labour Government appearing to take money off the most vulnerable in society looked disgusting. Selling a carefully crafted and focused package to stem the burgeoning welfare bill could have worked by politicians less inept than Starmer, Kendall and Reeves. We can't afford to put everyone on PIP if they occasionally feel sad.

You're not wrong of course.

The problem was coming into office (and there would have been discussions with senior civil servants in advance), it was clear everything that needed to be done couldn't be done on day one. Most would need complex legislation and take time to have an impact.

Labour thought they needed to hit the ground running and instead they just hit the ground. In truth, the theory of taking winter fuel allowance away from wealthy pensioners wasn't a bad one but the way the policy was presented was about as bad as it could have been. Had Reeves said, for example, we'll take WFA away from higher rate taxpayers, yes, there'd have been grumbling particularly from those at the cliff edge of the thresholds but overall that would have been muted and probably forgotten.

The big problem remains "the small boats" for which Starmer, like Badenoch and Farage, has no coherent, practical or affordable solution.

Two excellent posts today from Mr S.
Surely the Labour top brass (and the backroom policy wonks) must have felt that victory was at least possible by Christmas 2023 ..... and certainly by Easter 2024. We rather got the impression that the mindset was 'OMG we've won; what do we do now!"

Rather like Reform in the County Councils now.

If the LibDems had been in that position one could have understood it.

Its very odd. I mean there was absolutely no tightening in the polling whatsoever before the election was called. Obviously don't have access to their internal polling but between Dec 23 and May 24 the smallest lead was a single 11 with Deltapoll, Labour never dipped below 40 and the Tories never got to 30. It was as certain as its possible to be

The term 'vibes-driven' is frequently used, usually in reference to more charismatic politicians like Johnson and Farage, but I think it applies to Starmer as well.

Prior to the election he and Reeves succeeded in presenting the image of competent administrators who can actually get things done. A year into government it seems that there doesn't seem to have been a plan. It is almost as though they genuinely believed that they would succeed simply by virtue of not being the Conservatives. Perhaps Sue Gray had a plan, but her career-long habit seems to have been not to write anything down, lest it be subject to FOI, so we shall probably never know.

There are two notable exceptions, where the government seems to know what it it is doing: Wes Streeting has a plan for the NHS (I think this will pay off by the next election; it may already be moving in the right direction) and Ed Miliband seems to be getting done exactly what he wants in energy (I am less sure this will pay off, but he seems so messianically sure of himself that I feel there must be something to it). Both of these are plans that I think were broadly outlined before the election unlike the recent attempt at welfare reform.

On central economic policy, it really was just 'vibes'. Sorry, I don't have it with me, Liz Truss ate my homework. But if they aren't going to raise any of the taxes that actually bring in revenue, they will have to cut spending. Saying 'growth' three times while clicking your heels together doesn't work.

Labour 's pre- election absurdity of essentially saying "no new taxes on working people" has come back to bite them.

Last week's word cloud on here where the only words visible were "Winter Fuel Allowance" demonstrate they can't go for the oldsters, and the utter catastrophe of a Labour Government appearing to take money off the most vulnerable in society looked disgusting. Selling a carefully crafted and focused package to stem the burgeoning welfare bill could have worked by politicians less inept than Starmer, Kendall and Reeves. We can't afford to put everyone on PIP if they occasionally feel sad.

You're not wrong of course.

The problem was coming into office (and there would have been discussions with senior civil servants in advance), it was clear everything that needed to be done couldn't be done on day one. Most would need complex legislation and take time to have an impact.

Labour thought they needed to hit the ground running and instead they just hit the ground. In truth, the theory of taking winter fuel allowance away from wealthy pensioners wasn't a bad one but the way the policy was presented was about as bad as it could have been. Had Reeves said, for example, we'll take WFA away from higher rate taxpayers, yes, there'd have been grumbling particularly from those at the cliff edge of the thresholds but overall that would have been muted and probably forgotten.

The big problem remains "the small boats" for which Starmer, like Badenoch and Farage, has no coherent, practical or affordable solution.

Labour did not even hit the ground. After Liz Truss, it was deemed essential to the markets that any budget measures had to be signed off by the BoE, HMT and OBR. This meant Labour spinning its wheels over the summer while George Osborne's crack bean-counters produced their invariably wrong estimates.

Good point - we had the period between July and the Budget when little happened because of the OBR. At the time, I thought it odd but was prepared to accept taking the time to get it right was the best way.