Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Climate change: The huge opinion gap in the US – politicalbetting.com

1356710

Comments

  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,355

    Farooq said:

    kjh said:



    Ok. That's a reasonable pragmatic view. I got the impression from your previous posts you could not be a republican and a conservative. Are there really no openly republican Tories?

    That's neither reasonable nor pragmatic! He's literally talking about cancelling views he doesn't agree with and purging people who hold them. HYUFD is a Stalinist nightmare of a politician and almost everyone, Conservatives included, would fail his ridiculous purity tests.
    I'm not entirely convinced that HYUFD is genuine. Would a party office-holder really go out of his way to drive sympathisers away from the party and urge them to vote Labour, or talk of "cancelling" people (surely the kind of language that right-wingers accuse lefties of using)? He's often interesting and well-informed on polling, and always polite, but politically he doesn't seem quite credible - but no offence if that's how he really feels.
    We used to have Stewart Jackson, erstwhile MP of Peterborough, post on the board. Given that experience it is easy to believe that HYUFD is genuinely who he says he is.

    There's a self-selection bias at play. All the more circumspect party office-holders will be holding their tongues, or being more polite, but it's not hard to believe that there's one prepared to talk out in the way HYUFD does.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,067

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Something similar looks to be happening with electric vehicles and battery manufacturing.
    We have largely missed the bus.
  • Farooq said:

    kjh said:



    Ok. That's a reasonable pragmatic view. I got the impression from your previous posts you could not be a republican and a conservative. Are there really no openly republican Tories?

    That's neither reasonable nor pragmatic! He's literally talking about cancelling views he doesn't agree with and purging people who hold them. HYUFD is a Stalinist nightmare of a politician and almost everyone, Conservatives included, would fail his ridiculous purity tests.
    I'm not entirely convinced that HYUFD is genuine. Would a party office-holder really go out of his way to drive sympathisers away from the party and urge them to vote Labour, or talk of "cancelling" people (surely the kind of language that right-wingers accuse lefties of using)? He's often interesting and well-informed on polling, and always polite, but politically he doesn't seem quite credible - but no offence if that's how he really feels.
    Was talking to a lurker the other day who was saying much the same. Can't be real. Also seems, for a youngish person, to have a lot of time to comment here.
    He is an elected official of the party
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,420

    To be fair to HYUFD, I suspect that there are divisions in his mind between Conservative Party members, Conservative party voters and Tories.

    Which ones are the scum? I lose track.
    I would describe very few people as 'scum'. Tommy Robinson perhaps is verging upon the category.
  • HYUFD said:

    It has finally happened, Laurence Fox has come out with a good idea.

    'No more Charles!' Laurence Fox makes brutal dig as he claims Queen should be last monarch

    https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1514370/Laurence-Fox-twitter-prince-charles-queen-G20-summit-rome-speech-cop26-news

    Only because he thinks Prince Charles is pushing climate change too hard (as he thinks are William and Harry). Hence Fox can never be a Tory or British conservative because he does not support our constitutional monarchy, all he can ever be is an extreme libertarian anti wokeist.

    However given Khan won the London Mayoralty as the Labour candidate pushing action on climate change hard and Shaun Bailey as the Conservative candidate, also pro action on climate change, got 893,051 votes to just 47,634 for Fox as the Reclaim candidate it is pretty clear which route is more successful.

    Surely a true monarchist would take the rough with the smooth? - sometimes the monarch will have views or actions that one doesn't like, but that comes with the territory of delegating the choice of head of state to random genetics. It seems an utterly bizarre idea, mitigated only by the fact that the last couple of incumbents have happened to be good at the job. Will the monarchy survive a really unpopular monarch when one comes along?
    Hasn't that always been the case, we did chop the head off one when they got too big for their boots.

    The monarchy only exists by the will of the people, as a democracy should function. If that changes, then that changes.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,723

    Farooq said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    It has finally happened, Laurence Fox has come out with a good idea.

    'No more Charles!' Laurence Fox makes brutal dig as he claims Queen should be last monarch

    https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1514370/Laurence-Fox-twitter-prince-charles-queen-G20-summit-rome-speech-cop26-news

    Only because he thinks Prince Charles is pushing climate change too hard (as he thinks are William and Harry). Hence Fox can never be a Tory or British conservative because he does not support our constitutional monarchy, all he can ever be is an extreme libertarian anti wokeist.

    However given Khan won the London Mayoralty as the Labour candidate pushing action on climate change hard and Shaun Bailey as the Conservative candidate, also pro action on climate change, got 893,051 votes to just 47,634 for Fox as the Reclaim candidate it is pretty clear which route is more successful.

    Should Truss be kicked out of the conservative party then?
    Truss has never on a Conservative platform called for a republic, the only time she did so was in her youth at a Liberal Democrat conference when she was still a LD.

    If she started calling for a republic on a Tory platform then yes I would have serious reservations about her staying a Minister or even being allowed to remain a Tory MP. Her private views are her own, if she is still a republican 'a don't ask, don't tell' policy for her in terms of her views on the monarchy are fine by me as long as she does not start to push republicanism in public
    Ok. That's a reasonable pragmatic view. I got the impression from your previous posts you could not be a republican and a conservative. Are there really no openly republican Tories?
    That's neither reasonable nor pragmatic! He's literally talking about cancelling views he doesn't agree with and purging people who hold them. HYUFD is a Stalinist nightmare of a politician and almost everyone, Conservatives included, would fail his ridiculous purity tests.
    He is in a party of one

    His own, and from someone who has supported and voted conservative since 1962 (apart from Blair twice) he embarrasses himself and shows himself as an intolerant and prejudiced individual
    He is a birk. Ignore him. Noone cares what he says. Hes great as Lewis's sidekick however.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,372

    More wokeist virtue signalling, is she a member of Insulate Britain?

    SHOPPERS should be prepared to boycott firms who fail to go green, a minister has said.

    In an unusual swipe at small businesses still reeling from the shock of the pandemic, Anne Marie Trevelyan urged Brits to vote with their wallets if firms are big polluters.


    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/16593812/boycott-companies-not-green/?utm_source=native_share&utm_medium=sharebar_native&utm_campaign=sharebaramp

    I see even The Sun is jumping on the green bandwagon.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,420

    Farooq said:

    kjh said:



    Ok. That's a reasonable pragmatic view. I got the impression from your previous posts you could not be a republican and a conservative. Are there really no openly republican Tories?

    That's neither reasonable nor pragmatic! He's literally talking about cancelling views he doesn't agree with and purging people who hold them. HYUFD is a Stalinist nightmare of a politician and almost everyone, Conservatives included, would fail his ridiculous purity tests.
    I'm not entirely convinced that HYUFD is genuine. Would a party office-holder really go out of his way to drive sympathisers away from the party and urge them to vote Labour, or talk of "cancelling" people (surely the kind of language that right-wingers accuse lefties of using)? He's often interesting and well-informed on polling, and always polite, but politically he doesn't seem quite credible - but no offence if that's how he really feels.
    Was talking to a lurker the other day who was saying much the same. Can't be real. Also seems, for a youngish person, to have a lot of time to comment here.
    He is an elected official of the party
    So are his duties that light that he can spend the time here he does?

    I'm retired, and find plenty of other things to do, especially when there's cricket or Rugby League to watch!
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,723

    To be fair to HYUFD, I suspect that there are divisions in his mind between Conservative Party members, Conservative party voters and Tories.

    Which ones are the scum? I lose track.
    I would describe very few people as 'scum'. Tommy Robinson perhaps is verging upon the category.
    Ask Angela Rayner,she knows all about calling people scum.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,897
    edited November 2021
    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    It has finally happened, Laurence Fox has come out with a good idea.

    'No more Charles!' Laurence Fox makes brutal dig as he claims Queen should be last monarch

    https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1514370/Laurence-Fox-twitter-prince-charles-queen-G20-summit-rome-speech-cop26-news

    Only because he thinks Prince Charles is pushing climate change too hard (as he thinks are William and Harry). Hence Fox can never be a Tory or British conservative because he does not support our constitutional monarchy, all he can ever be is an extreme libertarian anti wokeist.

    However given Khan won the London Mayoralty as the Labour candidate pushing action on climate change hard and Shaun Bailey as the Conservative candidate, also pro action on climate change, got 893,051 votes to just 47,634 for Fox as the Reclaim candidate it is pretty clear which route is more successful.

    Should Truss be kicked out of the conservative party then?
    According to @HYUFD he has excommunicated me and most every moderate conservative who does not subscribe to his narrow 1950s style Little Englander attitudes

    He is no advert for the conservative party
    The counter-argument is that quite possibly, he is?

    Parties change, and often older members don't keep up with the times and think they are supporting some image of how the party was, once upon a time, rather than how it is now.
    No he isn't. He operates on an unchanged prejudice of what the Tories from the past were rather than keeping up with what they really are.
    You are not a Tory now either, indeed you even did a thread header a few weeks ago saying why you had left the party (as well of course as the fact you voted for Blair like BigG in 2001 when genuine Tories like me were still voting Tory).

    You are a centre right liberal, you are not a Tory
    No Tory doesn't believe in Brexit.
    86% of 2019 Conservative voters back retaining the monarchy, only 9% are republicans.
    https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/zzfjr9fmfc/Attitudes to monarchy 2021.pdf

    By contrast only 74% of 2019 Conservative voters voted Leave and 19% voted Remain.
    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/wl0r2q1sm4/Results_HowBritainVoted_2019_w.pdf

    So even now the Conservative party is still more monarchist than it is pro Brexit (ie believed in and voted for it rather than just accepted the result)
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,454

    Farooq said:

    kjh said:



    Ok. That's a reasonable pragmatic view. I got the impression from your previous posts you could not be a republican and a conservative. Are there really no openly republican Tories?

    That's neither reasonable nor pragmatic! He's literally talking about cancelling views he doesn't agree with and purging people who hold them. HYUFD is a Stalinist nightmare of a politician and almost everyone, Conservatives included, would fail his ridiculous purity tests.
    I'm not entirely convinced that HYUFD is genuine. Would a party office-holder really go out of his way to drive sympathisers away from the party and urge them to vote Labour, or talk of "cancelling" people (surely the kind of language that right-wingers accuse lefties of using)? He's often interesting and well-informed on polling, and always polite, but politically he doesn't seem quite credible - but no offence if that's how he really feels.
    Was talking to a lurker the other day who was saying much the same. Can't be real. Also seems, for a youngish person, to have a lot of time to comment here.
    He is an elected official of the party
    So are his duties that light that he can spend the time here he does?

    I'm retired, and find plenty of other things to do, especially when there's cricket or Rugby League to watch!
    Town Councils are serious business I have you know
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,454

    To be fair to HYUFD, I suspect that there are divisions in his mind between Conservative Party members, Conservative party voters and Tories.

    Which ones are the scum? I lose track.
    I would describe very few people as 'scum'. Tommy Robinson perhaps is verging upon the category.
    Ask Angela Rayner,she knows all about calling people scum.
    Yes, that was the joke. Well done.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,420
    edited November 2021
    Taz said:

    More wokeist virtue signalling, is she a member of Insulate Britain?

    SHOPPERS should be prepared to boycott firms who fail to go green, a minister has said.

    In an unusual swipe at small businesses still reeling from the shock of the pandemic, Anne Marie Trevelyan urged Brits to vote with their wallets if firms are big polluters.


    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/16593812/boycott-companies-not-green/?utm_source=native_share&utm_medium=sharebar_native&utm_campaign=sharebaramp

    I see even The Sun is jumping on the green bandwagon.
    How 'green' is the Murdoch press? Just asking!
  • To be fair to HYUFD, I suspect that there are divisions in his mind between Conservative Party members, Conservative party voters and Tories.

    Which ones are the scum? I lose track.
    The scum are where they are in all parties: the ones floating on the top.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,952
    edited November 2021
    HYUFD said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    It has finally happened, Laurence Fox has come out with a good idea.

    'No more Charles!' Laurence Fox makes brutal dig as he claims Queen should be last monarch

    https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1514370/Laurence-Fox-twitter-prince-charles-queen-G20-summit-rome-speech-cop26-news

    Only because he thinks Prince Charles is pushing climate change too hard (as he thinks are William and Harry). Hence Fox can never be a Tory or British conservative because he does not support our constitutional monarchy, all he can ever be is an extreme libertarian anti wokeist.

    However given Khan won the London Mayoralty as the Labour candidate pushing action on climate change hard and Shaun Bailey as the Conservative candidate, also pro action on climate change, got 893,051 votes to just 47,634 for Fox as the Reclaim candidate it is pretty clear which route is more successful.

    Should Truss be kicked out of the conservative party then?
    According to @HYUFD he has excommunicated me and most every moderate conservative who does not subscribe to his narrow 1950s style Little Englander attitudes

    He is no advert for the conservative party
    The counter-argument is that quite possibly, he is?

    Parties change, and often older members don't keep up with the times and think they are supporting some image of how the party was, once upon a time, rather than how it is now.
    No he isn't. He operates on an unchanged prejudice of what the Tories from the past were rather than keeping up with what they really are.
    You are not a Tory now either, indeed you even did a thread header a few weeks ago saying why you had left the party (as well of course as the fact you voted for Blair like BigG in 2001 when genuine Tories like me were still voting Tory).

    You are a centre right liberal, you are not a Tory
    No Tory doesn't believe in Brexit.
    86% of 2019 Conservative voters back retaining the monarchy, only 9% are republicans.
    https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/zzfjr9fmfc/Attitudes to monarchy 2021.pdf

    By contrast only 74% of 2019 Conservative voters voted Leave and 19% voted Remain.
    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/wl0r2q1sm4/Results_HowBritainVoted_2019_w.pdf

    So even now the Conservative party is still more monarchist than it is pro Brexit (ie believed in and voted for it rather than just accepted the result)
    Absolutely. I am just observing that to be a true Tory you need to believe in Brexit. That is what the Tory party is these days.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,420

    To be fair to HYUFD, I suspect that there are divisions in his mind between Conservative Party members, Conservative party voters and Tories.

    Which ones are the scum? I lose track.
    I would describe very few people as 'scum'. Tommy Robinson perhaps is verging upon the category.
    Ask Angela Rayner,she knows all about calling people scum.
    Seem to recall her apologising.
  • Farooq said:

    kjh said:



    Ok. That's a reasonable pragmatic view. I got the impression from your previous posts you could not be a republican and a conservative. Are there really no openly republican Tories?

    That's neither reasonable nor pragmatic! He's literally talking about cancelling views he doesn't agree with and purging people who hold them. HYUFD is a Stalinist nightmare of a politician and almost everyone, Conservatives included, would fail his ridiculous purity tests.
    I'm not entirely convinced that HYUFD is genuine. Would a party office-holder really go out of his way to drive sympathisers away from the party and urge them to vote Labour, or talk of "cancelling" people (surely the kind of language that right-wingers accuse lefties of using)? He's often interesting and well-informed on polling, and always polite, but politically he doesn't seem quite credible - but no offence if that's how he really feels.
    Was talking to a lurker the other day who was saying much the same. Can't be real. Also seems, for a youngish person, to have a lot of time to comment here.
    He is an elected official of the party
    So are his duties that light that he can spend the time here he does?

    I'm retired, and find plenty of other things to do, especially when there's cricket or Rugby League to watch!
    He is consumed by politics and to be fair has an amazing knowledge of polls

    When I worked I would not have had time to post over 89,000 times, and at the same time hold down an office on behalf of the conservative party
  • Taz said:

    More wokeist virtue signalling, is she a member of Insulate Britain?

    SHOPPERS should be prepared to boycott firms who fail to go green, a minister has said.

    In an unusual swipe at small businesses still reeling from the shock of the pandemic, Anne Marie Trevelyan urged Brits to vote with their wallets if firms are big polluters.


    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/16593812/boycott-companies-not-green/?utm_source=native_share&utm_medium=sharebar_native&utm_campaign=sharebaramp

    I see even The Sun is jumping on the green bandwagon.
    How 'green' is the Murdoch press? Just asking!
    I would imagine having gone from dead trees to pixels they probably are actually.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,664
    edited November 2021
    Foxy said:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    World is screwed. Will continue to be screwed. We have,no right to survive.

    World is not screwed. World will be fine, at least until the sun gets too hot.

    500 million years ago, the world was almost entirely covered in ice. If it hadn't been for a few volcanoes emitting CO2, it would have been stuck as an ice world pretty much forever.

    50 million years ago, there was a period when it was about 10 degrees warmer than the present day. The _increase_ in biological activity this caused eventually brought the temperature down by dumping carbon in the deep oceans.

    There's no runaway happening here - either way - otherwise such a thing would already have happened.


    The big issue for _us_ is what happens when a large proportion of the world's cities are flooded and lots of people have to move.

    Perhaps the empty spaces of Siberia will become easier to live in...

    Maybe I was catatrophising. Find the continuing excuses for doing close to bugger all very frustrating.
    I've never really believed that it would be possible to solve this politically. I recall saying such in 1989 in the only bit of actual English I had to write for my degree.

    Technologically, yes, it probably is, but only by making _better_ things than we already have. People are very reluctant to give anything up.

    We'll end up having to adapt. Things might change a bit, but life will go on.
    Yes, just change your username to @coastal_shelf and job done.
    Lol. I'm at 20m. North of me the Flatlands stretch away into the distance. A beachside house sounds good...

    I think that what would happen is that a large part of 'Humberland' would turn back into salt marsh. In the middle ages, people used to flood the land deliberately at high tides ('warping') to allow the silt to build up on their fields, eventually raising the land and the fertility. This process could be repeated as the sea comes in, so I doubt the Vale of York will ever turn into an arm of the open sea even if the sea ends up 10m higher.

    I'm not so sure about the flatlands of the Wash, as the coastal dynamics will be different, but there's a lot of sediment out there so I don't see why the same couldn't happen.

    What happens now is that the land is actively drained by pumping, and as the soil dries out, it shrinks. Some parts are now below sea level. This is not sustainable whether we have sea level rise or not.

    The big problem is of course that you can't warp the built environment...

  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,355
    Nigelb said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Something similar looks to be happening with electric vehicles and battery manufacturing.
    We have largely missed the bus.
    It could happen with tidal too. Though we are giving mini nukes a go.

    Any news from reaction engines?

    I suppose one thing we're particularly bad at here is providing support for dozens of good ideas in the sure knowledge that most will come to nothing, but comfortable that there's no way of knowing in advance what will work so the only way to find out is to try them all - and then you benefit from what does work.

    We learnt the wrong lesson from "government can't pick winners".
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,132

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Apparently personal number plates are a good thing:

    Kirsty Blackman, the MP for Aberdeen North and the Scottish National party’s Westminster spokesperson on the economy, says there are more cars with personalised number plates on the city’s streets than anywhere else in the UK bar central London.

    Very good article.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859

    Farooq said:

    kjh said:



    Ok. That's a reasonable pragmatic view. I got the impression from your previous posts you could not be a republican and a conservative. Are there really no openly republican Tories?

    That's neither reasonable nor pragmatic! He's literally talking about cancelling views he doesn't agree with and purging people who hold them. HYUFD is a Stalinist nightmare of a politician and almost everyone, Conservatives included, would fail his ridiculous purity tests.
    I'm not entirely convinced that HYUFD is genuine. Would a party office-holder really go out of his way to drive sympathisers away from the party and urge them to vote Labour, or talk of "cancelling" people (surely the kind of language that right-wingers accuse lefties of using)? He's often interesting and well-informed on polling, and always polite, but politically he doesn't seem quite credible - but no offence if that's how he really feels.
    Was talking to a lurker the other day who was saying much the same. Can't be real. Also seems, for a youngish person, to have a lot of time to comment here.
    He is an elected official of the party
    So are his duties that light that he can spend the time here he does?

    I'm retired, and find plenty of other things to do, especially when there's cricket or Rugby League to watch!
    He is consumed by politics and to be fair has an amazing knowledge of polls

    When I worked I would not have had time to post over 89,000 times, and at the same time hold down an office on behalf of the conservative party
    The trouble is that it leaves so little time for him to be out canvassing. I'd rather he was out night and day, knocking on doors.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,723
    edited November 2021
    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    It has finally happened, Laurence Fox has come out with a good idea.

    'No more Charles!' Laurence Fox makes brutal dig as he claims Queen should be last monarch

    https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1514370/Laurence-Fox-twitter-prince-charles-queen-G20-summit-rome-speech-cop26-news

    Only because he thinks Prince Charles is pushing climate change too hard (as he thinks are William and Harry). Hence Fox can never be a Tory or British conservative because he does not support our constitutional monarchy, all he can ever be is an extreme libertarian anti wokeist.

    However given Khan won the London Mayoralty as the Labour candidate pushing action on climate change hard and Shaun Bailey as the Conservative candidate, also pro action on climate change, got 893,051 votes to just 47,634 for Fox as the Reclaim candidate it is pretty clear which route is more successful.

    Should Truss be kicked out of the conservative party then?
    According to @HYUFD he has excommunicated me and most every moderate conservative who does not subscribe to his narrow 1950s style Little Englander attitudes

    He is no advert for the conservative party
    The counter-argument is that quite possibly, he is?

    Parties change, and often older members don't keep up with the times and think they are supporting some image of how the party was, once upon a time, rather than how it is now.
    No he isn't. He operates on an unchanged prejudice of what the Tories from the past were rather than keeping up with what they really are.
    You are not a Tory now either, indeed you even did a thread header a few weeks ago saying why you had left the party (as well of course as the fact you voted for Blair like BigG in 2001 when genuine Tories like me were still voting Tory).

    You are a centre right liberal, you are not a Tory
    No Tory doesn't believe in Brexit.
    86% of 2019 Conservative voters back retaining the monarchy, only 9% are republicans.
    https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/zzfjr9fmfc/Attitudes to monarchy 2021.pdf

    By contrast only 74% of 2019 Conservative voters voted Leave and 19% voted Remain.
    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/wl0r2q1sm4/Results_HowBritainVoted_2019_w.pdf

    So even now the Conservative party is still more monarchist than it is pro Brexit (ie believed in and voted for it rather than just accepted the result)
    Absolutely. I am just observing that to be a true Tory you need to believe in Brexit. That is what the Tory party is these days.
    No. You have to believe that now we are out, we are out, for better or for worse we are out. We are seeing the perfidiousness of the EU, currently the French , but there will be others. The EU empire will fail just as Rome did.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,782

    Farooq said:

    kjh said:



    Ok. That's a reasonable pragmatic view. I got the impression from your previous posts you could not be a republican and a conservative. Are there really no openly republican Tories?

    That's neither reasonable nor pragmatic! He's literally talking about cancelling views he doesn't agree with and purging people who hold them. HYUFD is a Stalinist nightmare of a politician and almost everyone, Conservatives included, would fail his ridiculous purity tests.
    I'm not entirely convinced that HYUFD is genuine. Would a party office-holder really go out of his way to drive sympathisers away from the party and urge them to vote Labour, or talk of "cancelling" people (surely the kind of language that right-wingers accuse lefties of using)? He's often interesting and well-informed on polling, and always polite, but politically he doesn't seem quite credible - but no offence if that's how he really feels.
    You and I must have different definitions of polite.

    I'm not sure how telling people like Big_G and I (and many others) to fuck off and join the Lib Dems is polite.
    I think polite in that he did all of that but didn't use the words 'fuck off'.
  • IanB2 said:

    Farooq said:

    kjh said:



    Ok. That's a reasonable pragmatic view. I got the impression from your previous posts you could not be a republican and a conservative. Are there really no openly republican Tories?

    That's neither reasonable nor pragmatic! He's literally talking about cancelling views he doesn't agree with and purging people who hold them. HYUFD is a Stalinist nightmare of a politician and almost everyone, Conservatives included, would fail his ridiculous purity tests.
    I'm not entirely convinced that HYUFD is genuine. Would a party office-holder really go out of his way to drive sympathisers away from the party and urge them to vote Labour, or talk of "cancelling" people (surely the kind of language that right-wingers accuse lefties of using)? He's often interesting and well-informed on polling, and always polite, but politically he doesn't seem quite credible - but no offence if that's how he really feels.
    Was talking to a lurker the other day who was saying much the same. Can't be real. Also seems, for a youngish person, to have a lot of time to comment here.
    He is an elected official of the party
    So are his duties that light that he can spend the time here he does?

    I'm retired, and find plenty of other things to do, especially when there's cricket or Rugby League to watch!
    He is consumed by politics and to be fair has an amazing knowledge of polls

    When I worked I would not have had time to post over 89,000 times, and at the same time hold down an office on behalf of the conservative party
    The trouble is that it leaves so little time for him to be out canvassing. I'd rather he was out night and day, knocking on doors.
    Now that is a good line and made me chuckle
  • kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    It has finally happened, Laurence Fox has come out with a good idea.

    'No more Charles!' Laurence Fox makes brutal dig as he claims Queen should be last monarch

    https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1514370/Laurence-Fox-twitter-prince-charles-queen-G20-summit-rome-speech-cop26-news

    Only because he thinks Prince Charles is pushing climate change too hard (as he thinks are William and Harry). Hence Fox can never be a Tory or British conservative because he does not support our constitutional monarchy, all he can ever be is an extreme libertarian anti wokeist.

    However given Khan won the London Mayoralty as the Labour candidate pushing action on climate change hard and Shaun Bailey as the Conservative candidate, also pro action on climate change, got 893,051 votes to just 47,634 for Fox as the Reclaim candidate it is pretty clear which route is more successful.

    Should Truss be kicked out of the conservative party then?
    Truss has never on a Conservative platform called for a republic, the only time she did so was in her youth at a Liberal Democrat conference when she was still a LD.

    If she started calling for a republic on a Tory platform then yes I would have serious reservations about her staying a Minister or even being allowed to remain a Tory MP. Her private views are her own, if she is still a republican 'a don't ask, don't tell' policy for her in terms of her views on the monarchy are fine by me as long as she does not start to push republicanism in public
    Ok. That's a reasonable pragmatic view. I got the impression from your previous posts you could not be a republican and a conservative. Are there really no openly republican Tories?
    Adam Tompkins is openly Republican, albeit he was an MSP until this May.
    I thought he’d renounced his republicanism in the whole Damascene adoption of Conservatism, Unionism and supporting Rangers thing?
    Pass.
    Fudged it. The Sons of Struth can put away their pitchforks.

    'As the Holyrood chamber beckons, one questions lingers. Is he still a constitutional republican?

    “In the sense of believing that Parliaments must have the powers to hold their governments to account, yes. In the sense of the identity of the head of state, I’m really not bothered.”'
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,723

    To be fair to HYUFD, I suspect that there are divisions in his mind between Conservative Party members, Conservative party voters and Tories.

    Which ones are the scum? I lose track.
    I would describe very few people as 'scum'. Tommy Robinson perhaps is verging upon the category.
    Ask Angela Rayner,she knows all about calling people scum.
    Seem to recall her apologising.
    If you think that apology was genuine you are seriously mistaken. She apologised under pressure. Her apology is not worth a pfennig.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,782
    Farooq said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    It has finally happened, Laurence Fox has come out with a good idea.

    'No more Charles!' Laurence Fox makes brutal dig as he claims Queen should be last monarch

    https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1514370/Laurence-Fox-twitter-prince-charles-queen-G20-summit-rome-speech-cop26-news

    Only because he thinks Prince Charles is pushing climate change too hard (as he thinks are William and Harry). Hence Fox can never be a Tory or British conservative because he does not support our constitutional monarchy, all he can ever be is an extreme libertarian anti wokeist.

    However given Khan won the London Mayoralty as the Labour candidate pushing action on climate change hard and Shaun Bailey as the Conservative candidate, also pro action on climate change, got 893,051 votes to just 47,634 for Fox as the Reclaim candidate it is pretty clear which route is more successful.

    Should Truss be kicked out of the conservative party then?
    Truss has never on a Conservative platform called for a republic, the only time she did so was in her youth at a Liberal Democrat conference when she was still a LD.

    If she started calling for a republic on a Tory platform then yes I would have serious reservations about her staying a Minister or even being allowed to remain a Tory MP. Her private views are her own, if she is still a republican 'a don't ask, don't tell' policy for her in terms of her views on the monarchy are fine by me as long as she does not start to push republicanism in public
    Ok. That's a reasonable pragmatic view. I got the impression from your previous posts you could not be a republican and a conservative. Are there really no openly republican Tories?
    That's neither reasonable nor pragmatic! He's literally talking about cancelling views he doesn't agree with and purging people who hold them. HYUFD is a Stalinist nightmare of a politician and almost everyone, Conservatives included, would fail his ridiculous purity tests.
    Oh I have really started something here haven't I.

    I was trying to be pleasant. At least he has conceded that provided you restrain your republican views and keep them private you can remain in the party, bonkers though that may be.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,782

    To be fair to HYUFD, I suspect that there are divisions in his mind between Conservative Party members, Conservative party voters and Tories.

    Which ones are the scum? I lose track.
    I would describe very few people as 'scum'. Tommy Robinson perhaps is verging upon the category.
    Ask Angela Rayner,she knows all about calling people scum.
    Seem to recall her apologising.
    If you think that apology was genuine you are seriously mistaken. She apologised under pressure. Her apology is not worth a pfennig.
    Whether you believe it or not is another matter, but it was a gracious apology and more than she needed to do. I mean what more do you want her to do?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,241

    Nigelb said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Something similar looks to be happening with electric vehicles and battery manufacturing.
    We have largely missed the bus.
    It could happen with tidal too. Though we are giving mini nukes a go.

    Any news from reaction engines?

    I suppose one thing we're particularly bad at here is providing support for dozens of good ideas in the sure knowledge that most will come to nothing, but comfortable that there's no way of knowing in advance what will work so the only way to find out is to try them all - and then you benefit from what does work.

    We learnt the wrong lesson from "government can't pick winners".
    You mean Reaction Engines? They have largely stopped trying to push Skylon and are getting research funding from the US Military for hypersonic applications for their engine.

    In many ways, a very British idea - pushing an elaborate, elegant, complex solution. Which then got overtaken by the relatively simple....
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,664

    Cyclefree said:

    It's a pity rain can't be turned into power in some way. (Or maybe it can.)

    There is plenty of it here in Cumbria at the moment.

    Hydroelectricity. Any deep valleys in Cumbria you wouldn’t mind seeing permanently flooded to a depth of tens of meters?
    Borrowdale? Fed by the highest rainfall in England. Imagine the furore.

    No, you do these things in remote parts of Scotland where nobody is looking. (Loch Lochy Munros, I understand).
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    It has finally happened, Laurence Fox has come out with a good idea.

    'No more Charles!' Laurence Fox makes brutal dig as he claims Queen should be last monarch

    https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1514370/Laurence-Fox-twitter-prince-charles-queen-G20-summit-rome-speech-cop26-news

    Only because he thinks Prince Charles is pushing climate change too hard (as he thinks are William and Harry). Hence Fox can never be a Tory or British conservative because he does not support our constitutional monarchy, all he can ever be is an extreme libertarian anti wokeist.

    However given Khan won the London Mayoralty as the Labour candidate pushing action on climate change hard and Shaun Bailey as the Conservative candidate, also pro action on climate change, got 893,051 votes to just 47,634 for Fox as the Reclaim candidate it is pretty clear which route is more successful.

    Should Truss be kicked out of the conservative party then?
    According to @HYUFD he has excommunicated me and most every moderate conservative who does not subscribe to his narrow 1950s style Little Englander attitudes

    He is no advert for the conservative party
    The counter-argument is that quite possibly, he is?

    Parties change, and often older members don't keep up with the times and think they are supporting some image of how the party was, once upon a time, rather than how it is now.
    This is what I saw in the labour party in 2016. I could see that the old party was dead, and the new party was not something I wanted to be involved in, so rather than fight it out I just walked away from it. I've never felt particularly bothered about it.

    The conservative party is as it has always been, a power winning machine. It has switched from being a flawed small state neoliberal party to a flawed big state, social democratic party in a decade, all whilst being in power. Personally, I can vote for the latter; but definitely not for the former. HYUFDs comments have little effect on me; but they are indicative of a search for a meaning from political action that will never ultimately be achieved.

    The best reason to vote conservative is as it always has been, to stop the alternative.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    HYUFD said:

    It has finally happened, Laurence Fox has come out with a good idea.

    'No more Charles!' Laurence Fox makes brutal dig as he claims Queen should be last monarch

    https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1514370/Laurence-Fox-twitter-prince-charles-queen-G20-summit-rome-speech-cop26-news

    Only because he thinks Prince Charles is pushing climate change too hard (as he thinks are William and Harry). Hence Fox can never be a Tory or British conservative because he does not support our constitutional monarchy, all he can ever be is an extreme libertarian anti wokeist.

    However given Khan won the London Mayoralty as the Labour candidate pushing action on climate change hard and Shaun Bailey as the Conservative candidate, also pro action on climate change, got 893,051 votes to just 47,634 for Fox as the Reclaim candidate it is pretty clear which route is more successful.

    Surely a true monarchist would take the rough with the smooth? - sometimes the monarch will have views or actions that one doesn't like, but that comes with the territory of delegating the choice of head of state to random genetics. It seems an utterly bizarre idea, mitigated only by the fact that the last couple of incumbents have happened to be good at the job. Will the monarchy survive a really unpopular monarch when one comes along?
    A monarchy can only survive with the consent of the people

    However, even with an unpopular monarch, you would need (a) alignment on what replaces it and (b) a PM willing to spend much of their PM time and political capital fighting a fight that doesn’t seem very exciting unless you are a true believer.

    So I guess inertia will mean it survives. Until it doesn’t.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,241
    MattW said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Apparently personal number plates are a good thing:

    Kirsty Blackman, the MP for Aberdeen North and the Scottish National party’s Westminster spokesperson on the economy, says there are more cars with personalised number plates on the city’s streets than anywhere else in the UK bar central London.

    Very good article.
    As M. Thatcher pointed out, when they introduced buying and selling of personalised plates, the initial sale is a tax on the rich and vain.

    Plus personalised plates are easier to remember/identify - which makes it harder for the owners of such to get away with breaking various laws....
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677

    Nigelb said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Something similar looks to be happening with electric vehicles and battery manufacturing.
    We have largely missed the bus.
    It could happen with tidal too. Though we are giving mini nukes a go.

    Any news from reaction engines?

    I suppose one thing we're particularly bad at here is providing support for dozens of good ideas in the sure knowledge that most will come to nothing, but comfortable that there's no way of knowing in advance what will work so the only way to find out is to try them all - and then you benefit from what does work.

    We learnt the wrong lesson from "government can't pick winners".
    You mean Reaction Engines? They have largely stopped trying to push Skylon and are getting research funding from the US Military for hypersonic applications for their engine.

    In many ways, a very British idea - pushing an elaborate, elegant, complex solution. Which then got overtaken by the relatively simple....
    It's quite amazing that RE started 13 years before SpaceX and have produced exactly nothing except a demonstrated talent for bilking the government for money.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,782
    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    It has finally happened, Laurence Fox has come out with a good idea.

    'No more Charles!' Laurence Fox makes brutal dig as he claims Queen should be last monarch

    https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1514370/Laurence-Fox-twitter-prince-charles-queen-G20-summit-rome-speech-cop26-news

    Only because he thinks Prince Charles is pushing climate change too hard (as he thinks are William and Harry). Hence Fox can never be a Tory or British conservative because he does not support our constitutional monarchy, all he can ever be is an extreme libertarian anti wokeist.

    However given Khan won the London Mayoralty as the Labour candidate pushing action on climate change hard and Shaun Bailey as the Conservative candidate, also pro action on climate change, got 893,051 votes to just 47,634 for Fox as the Reclaim candidate it is pretty clear which route is more successful.

    Should Truss be kicked out of the conservative party then?
    Truss has never on a Conservative platform called for a republic, the only time she did so was in her youth at a Liberal Democrat conference when she was still a LD.

    If she started calling for a republic on a Tory platform then yes I would have serious reservations about her staying a Minister or even being allowed to remain a Tory MP. Her private views are her own, if she is still a republican 'a don't ask, don't tell' policy for her in terms of her views on the monarchy are fine by me as long as she does not start to push republicanism in public
    Ok. That's a reasonable pragmatic view. I got the impression from your previous posts you could not be a republican and a conservative. Are there really no openly republican Tories?
    Being a republican is incompatible with being a Tory. Support for constitutional monarchy has always been a defining feature of British Toryism.

    Belief in the free market and small state for example is shared with Orange Book LDs and indeed Tories have often been protectionist and big government like Boris. Belief in Brexit was shared with UKIP and the Brexit Party, however the Tories have often been pro EU like Heath and still some Remainers who accept Brexit are in the Tories today. However support for constitutional monarchy and inherited wealth is what has defined Toryism and the Conservative Party and what almost all Tories have always agreed on
    How many Tories do you think there are who define themselves as the party of the Monarchy, Church of England, landed gentry and inherited wealth?

    I have this horrible feeling that there might actually be a lot more than I think there are.

    And I am struggling to think of why any of those subjects should be top of anyone's list of priorities, in particular 'landed gentry'. I mean why landed gentry? I would have thought (depending upon your outlook) it would have been things like free markets, organised labour, poverty, constitution, NHS, the environment, capitalism, nationalisation, nationalism, etc, etc, etc)
  • MattW said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Apparently personal number plates are a good thing:

    Kirsty Blackman, the MP for Aberdeen North and the Scottish National party’s Westminster spokesperson on the economy, says there are more cars with personalised number plates on the city’s streets than anywhere else in the UK bar central London.

    Very good article.
    As M. Thatcher pointed out, when they introduced buying and selling of personalised plates, the initial sale is a tax on the rich and vain.

    Plus personalised plates are easier to remember/identify - which makes it harder for the owners of such to get away with breaking various laws....
    Handy wanker identifier also.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,723
    kjh said:

    To be fair to HYUFD, I suspect that there are divisions in his mind between Conservative Party members, Conservative party voters and Tories.

    Which ones are the scum? I lose track.
    I would describe very few people as 'scum'. Tommy Robinson perhaps is verging upon the category.
    Ask Angela Rayner,she knows all about calling people scum.
    Seem to recall her apologising.
    If you think that apology was genuine you are seriously mistaken. She apologised under pressure. Her apology is not worth a pfennig.
    Whether you believe it or not is another matter, but it was a gracious apology and more than she needed to do. I mean what more do you want her to do?
    When something is spoken with such vitriol
    as Rayner did, you know that's what she really wanted to convey. What she said was calculated and deliberate. No apology can alter that, however gracious the manner in which it might seem to have been given.


  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,582

    To be fair to HYUFD, I suspect that there are divisions in his mind between Conservative Party members, Conservative party voters and Tories.

    Which ones are the scum? I lose track.
    I would describe very few people as 'scum'. Tommy Robinson perhaps is verging upon the category.
    Ask Angela Rayner,she knows all about calling people scum.
    At least the PLP have progressed from calling each other scum, to calling their opponents scum.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,355
    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    It has finally happened, Laurence Fox has come out with a good idea.

    'No more Charles!' Laurence Fox makes brutal dig as he claims Queen should be last monarch

    https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1514370/Laurence-Fox-twitter-prince-charles-queen-G20-summit-rome-speech-cop26-news

    Only because he thinks Prince Charles is pushing climate change too hard (as he thinks are William and Harry). Hence Fox can never be a Tory or British conservative because he does not support our constitutional monarchy, all he can ever be is an extreme libertarian anti wokeist.

    However given Khan won the London Mayoralty as the Labour candidate pushing action on climate change hard and Shaun Bailey as the Conservative candidate, also pro action on climate change, got 893,051 votes to just 47,634 for Fox as the Reclaim candidate it is pretty clear which route is more successful.

    Surely a true monarchist would take the rough with the smooth? - sometimes the monarch will have views or actions that one doesn't like, but that comes with the territory of delegating the choice of head of state to random genetics. It seems an utterly bizarre idea, mitigated only by the fact that the last couple of incumbents have happened to be good at the job. Will the monarchy survive a really unpopular monarch when one comes along?
    A monarchy can only survive with the consent of the people

    However, even with an unpopular monarch, you would need (a) alignment on what replaces it and (b) a PM willing to spend much of their PM time and political capital fighting a fight that doesn’t seem very exciting unless you are a true believer.

    So I guess inertia will mean it survives. Until it doesn’t.
    Which is why we still have some hereditary peers in the House of Lords.
  • Nuno sacked by Spurs.
  • MattW said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Apparently personal number plates are a good thing:

    Kirsty Blackman, the MP for Aberdeen North and the Scottish National party’s Westminster spokesperson on the economy, says there are more cars with personalised number plates on the city’s streets than anywhere else in the UK bar central London.

    Very good article.
    As M. Thatcher pointed out, when they introduced buying and selling of personalised plates, the initial sale is a tax on the rich and vain.

    Plus personalised plates are easier to remember/identify - which makes it harder for the owners of such to get away with breaking various laws....
    What annoys me about personalised number plates is when you can tell by the spacing that there is a name or message but I can't quite decipher it.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,582
    edited November 2021

    MattW said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Apparently personal number plates are a good thing:

    Kirsty Blackman, the MP for Aberdeen North and the Scottish National party’s Westminster spokesperson on the economy, says there are more cars with personalised number plates on the city’s streets than anywhere else in the UK bar central London.

    Very good article.
    As M. Thatcher pointed out, when they introduced buying and selling of personalised plates, the initial sale is a tax on the rich and vain.

    Plus personalised plates are easier to remember/identify - which makes it harder for the owners of such to get away with breaking various laws....
    And more opportunity for police to pull them over, take a look around and maybe give them a ticket for having dodgy spacing on a custom-made number plate. That’s if they don’t find the drugs or the drink.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,952

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    It has finally happened, Laurence Fox has come out with a good idea.

    'No more Charles!' Laurence Fox makes brutal dig as he claims Queen should be last monarch

    https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1514370/Laurence-Fox-twitter-prince-charles-queen-G20-summit-rome-speech-cop26-news

    Only because he thinks Prince Charles is pushing climate change too hard (as he thinks are William and Harry). Hence Fox can never be a Tory or British conservative because he does not support our constitutional monarchy, all he can ever be is an extreme libertarian anti wokeist.

    However given Khan won the London Mayoralty as the Labour candidate pushing action on climate change hard and Shaun Bailey as the Conservative candidate, also pro action on climate change, got 893,051 votes to just 47,634 for Fox as the Reclaim candidate it is pretty clear which route is more successful.

    Should Truss be kicked out of the conservative party then?
    According to @HYUFD he has excommunicated me and most every moderate conservative who does not subscribe to his narrow 1950s style Little Englander attitudes

    He is no advert for the conservative party
    The counter-argument is that quite possibly, he is?

    Parties change, and often older members don't keep up with the times and think they are supporting some image of how the party was, once upon a time, rather than how it is now.
    No he isn't. He operates on an unchanged prejudice of what the Tories from the past were rather than keeping up with what they really are.
    You are not a Tory now either, indeed you even did a thread header a few weeks ago saying why you had left the party (as well of course as the fact you voted for Blair like BigG in 2001 when genuine Tories like me were still voting Tory).

    You are a centre right liberal, you are not a Tory
    No Tory doesn't believe in Brexit.
    86% of 2019 Conservative voters back retaining the monarchy, only 9% are republicans.
    https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/zzfjr9fmfc/Attitudes to monarchy 2021.pdf

    By contrast only 74% of 2019 Conservative voters voted Leave and 19% voted Remain.
    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/wl0r2q1sm4/Results_HowBritainVoted_2019_w.pdf

    So even now the Conservative party is still more monarchist than it is pro Brexit (ie believed in and voted for it rather than just accepted the result)
    Absolutely. I am just observing that to be a true Tory you need to believe in Brexit. That is what the Tory party is these days.
    No. You have to believe that now we are out, we are out, for better or for worse we are out. We are seeing the perfidiousness of the EU, currently the French , but there will be others. The EU empire will fail just as Rome did.
    Bit early to be on the sauce, isn't it? Waiting for your Union Jack underpants to come out of the dryer?

    But as to the point at hand, no. To be a true Tory you need to believe in Brexit because that is what Tories do. They believe in Brexit. It is part of Toryness. If you don't believe in Brexit you are not a Tory.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,132

    Foxy said:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    World is screwed. Will continue to be screwed. We have,no right to survive.

    World is not screwed. World will be fine, at least until the sun gets too hot.

    500 million years ago, the world was almost entirely covered in ice. If it hadn't been for a few volcanoes emitting CO2, it would have been stuck as an ice world pretty much forever.

    50 million years ago, there was a period when it was about 10 degrees warmer than the present day. The _increase_ in biological activity this caused eventually brought the temperature down by dumping carbon in the deep oceans.

    There's no runaway happening here - either way - otherwise such a thing would already have happened.


    The big issue for _us_ is what happens when a large proportion of the world's cities are flooded and lots of people have to move.

    Perhaps the empty spaces of Siberia will become easier to live in...

    Maybe I was catatrophising. Find the continuing excuses for doing close to bugger all very frustrating.
    I've never really believed that it would be possible to solve this politically. I recall saying such in 1989 in the only bit of actual English I had to write for my degree.

    Technologically, yes, it probably is, but only by making _better_ things than we already have. People are very reluctant to give anything up.

    We'll end up having to adapt. Things might change a bit, but life will go on.
    Yes, just change your username to @coastal_shelf and job done.
    Lol. I'm at 20m. North of me the Flatlands stretch away into the distance. A beachside house sounds good...

    I think that what would happen is that a large part of 'Humberland' would turn back into salt marsh. In the middle ages, people used to flood the land deliberately at high tides ('warping') to allow the silt to build up on their fields, eventually raising the land and the fertility. This process could be repeated as the sea comes in, so I doubt the Vale of York will ever turn into an arm of the open sea even if the sea ends up 10m higher.

    I'm not so sure about the flatlands of the Wash, as the coastal dynamics will be different, but there's a lot of sediment out there so I don't see why the same couldn't happen.

    What happens now is that the land is actively drained by pumping, and as the soil dries out, it shrinks. Some parts are now below sea level. This is not sustainable whether we have sea level rise or not.

    The big problem is of course that you can't warp the built environment...

    If you're willing to play the odds, there will soon be some less expensive housing on the coast of EEA, judging by the advice being offered now.
  • MattW said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Apparently personal number plates are a good thing:

    Kirsty Blackman, the MP for Aberdeen North and the Scottish National party’s Westminster spokesperson on the economy, says there are more cars with personalised number plates on the city’s streets than anywhere else in the UK bar central London.

    Very good article.
    As M. Thatcher pointed out, when they introduced buying and selling of personalised plates, the initial sale is a tax on the rich and vain.

    Plus personalised plates are easier to remember/identify - which makes it harder for the owners of such to get away with breaking various laws....
    Handy wanker identifier also.
    Oi, I have a personalised plate.

    Was a gift from my parents when I passed my test.

    Alongside a brand new Volvo 440.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,897
    edited November 2021
    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    It has finally happened, Laurence Fox has come out with a good idea.

    'No more Charles!' Laurence Fox makes brutal dig as he claims Queen should be last monarch

    https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1514370/Laurence-Fox-twitter-prince-charles-queen-G20-summit-rome-speech-cop26-news

    Only because he thinks Prince Charles is pushing climate change too hard (as he thinks are William and Harry). Hence Fox can never be a Tory or British conservative because he does not support our constitutional monarchy, all he can ever be is an extreme libertarian anti wokeist.

    However given Khan won the London Mayoralty as the Labour candidate pushing action on climate change hard and Shaun Bailey as the Conservative candidate, also pro action on climate change, got 893,051 votes to just 47,634 for Fox as the Reclaim candidate it is pretty clear which route is more successful.

    Should Truss be kicked out of the conservative party then?
    Truss has never on a Conservative platform called for a republic, the only time she did so was in her youth at a Liberal Democrat conference when she was still a LD.

    If she started calling for a republic on a Tory platform then yes I would have serious reservations about her staying a Minister or even being allowed to remain a Tory MP. Her private views are her own, if she is still a republican 'a don't ask, don't tell' policy for her in terms of her views on the monarchy are fine by me as long as she does not start to push republicanism in public
    Ok. That's a reasonable pragmatic view. I got the impression from your previous posts you could not be a republican and a conservative. Are there really no openly republican Tories?
    Being a republican is incompatible with being a Tory. Support for constitutional monarchy has always been a defining feature of British Toryism.

    Belief in the free market and small state for example is shared with Orange Book LDs and indeed Tories have often been protectionist and big government like Boris. Belief in Brexit was shared with UKIP and the Brexit Party, however the Tories have often been pro EU like Heath and still some Remainers who accept Brexit are in the Tories today. However support for constitutional monarchy and inherited wealth is what has defined Toryism and the Conservative Party and what almost all Tories have always agreed on
    How many Tories do you think there are who define themselves as the party of the Monarchy, Church of England, landed gentry and inherited wealth?

    I have this horrible feeling that there might actually be a lot more than I think there are.

    And I am struggling to think of why any of those subjects should be top of anyone's list of priorities, in particular 'landed gentry'. I mean why landed gentry? I would have thought (depending upon your outlook) it would have been things like free markets, organised labour, poverty, constitution, NHS, the environment, capitalism, nationalisation, nationalism, etc, etc, etc)
    More Tories today agree with each other on retaining the monarchy and keeping inheritance tax low than agree with each other on virtually any other topic, from the right rate of government spending and rates of income taxes, to nationalising the railways and utilities, to abortion and trans issues, to military intervention abroad, to climate change and even on Brexit.

    The founding principles of support for the monarchy (still head of the C of E too of course) and inherited wealth of the Tory Party and then the Conservative Party still define the Conservative Party and Tories to this day
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,241
    Dura_Ace said:

    Nigelb said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Something similar looks to be happening with electric vehicles and battery manufacturing.
    We have largely missed the bus.
    It could happen with tidal too. Though we are giving mini nukes a go.

    Any news from reaction engines?

    I suppose one thing we're particularly bad at here is providing support for dozens of good ideas in the sure knowledge that most will come to nothing, but comfortable that there's no way of knowing in advance what will work so the only way to find out is to try them all - and then you benefit from what does work.

    We learnt the wrong lesson from "government can't pick winners".
    You mean Reaction Engines? They have largely stopped trying to push Skylon and are getting research funding from the US Military for hypersonic applications for their engine.

    In many ways, a very British idea - pushing an elaborate, elegant, complex solution. Which then got overtaken by the relatively simple....
    It's quite amazing that RE started 13 years before SpaceX and have produced exactly nothing except a demonstrated talent for bilking the government for money.
    They demonstrated a rather awesome heat exchanger. And a fair chunk of their engine cycle.... Which got them to their present state of being funded for hypersonic engine design.

    The issue was getting money for their project. Which needed billions, up front, since they were going down the classic aerospace route.

    The bit when various people in their company were going round claiming that the design was complete for Skylon was embarrassing, though.

    The biggest problem was that it created a situation where they were actively fighting to stop conventional rocket engine projects. An FFSC with TAN would have been interesting.....
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,953
    edited November 2021

    kjh said:

    To be fair to HYUFD, I suspect that there are divisions in his mind between Conservative Party members, Conservative party voters and Tories.

    Which ones are the scum? I lose track.
    I would describe very few people as 'scum'. Tommy Robinson perhaps is verging upon the category.
    Ask Angela Rayner,she knows all about calling people scum.
    Seem to recall her apologising.
    If you think that apology was genuine you are seriously mistaken. She apologised under pressure. Her apology is not worth a pfennig.
    Whether you believe it or not is another matter, but it was a gracious apology and more than she needed to do. I mean what more do you want her to do?
    When something is spoken with such vitriol
    as Rayner did, you know that's what she really wanted to convey. What she said was calculated and deliberate. No apology can alter that, however gracious the manner in which it might seem to have been given.


    Your insight into the innermost thoughts of women politicians is a thing of wonder.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,795

    Nuno sacked by Spurs.

    Fuck yes!
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,782

    Farooq said:

    kjh said:



    Ok. That's a reasonable pragmatic view. I got the impression from your previous posts you could not be a republican and a conservative. Are there really no openly republican Tories?

    That's neither reasonable nor pragmatic! He's literally talking about cancelling views he doesn't agree with and purging people who hold them. HYUFD is a Stalinist nightmare of a politician and almost everyone, Conservatives included, would fail his ridiculous purity tests.
    I'm not entirely convinced that HYUFD is genuine. Would a party office-holder really go out of his way to drive sympathisers away from the party and urge them to vote Labour, or talk of "cancelling" people (surely the kind of language that right-wingers accuse lefties of using)? He's often interesting and well-informed on polling, and always polite, but politically he doesn't seem quite credible - but no offence if that's how he really feels.
    HYUFD has told us who he is and having a similar view to you I looked him up, he being a town councillor, so yes he is real.

    And as an aside, I must say it is really scary what you can find on the internet. Not that there was anything special to find out, just how easy it was to find out so much with the click of a button.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,132
    On the header, interesting that this is perhaps part of the culture wars in the US.

    Not so much, here.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677

    MattW said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Apparently personal number plates are a good thing:

    Kirsty Blackman, the MP for Aberdeen North and the Scottish National party’s Westminster spokesperson on the economy, says there are more cars with personalised number plates on the city’s streets than anywhere else in the UK bar central London.

    Very good article.
    As M. Thatcher pointed out, when they introduced buying and selling of personalised plates, the initial sale is a tax on the rich and vain.

    Plus personalised plates are easier to remember/identify - which makes it harder for the owners of such to get away with breaking various laws....
    The government are missing a trick by not letting people order (at vast expense) any valid combination of seven characters.


  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,953
    edited November 2021

    MattW said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Apparently personal number plates are a good thing:

    Kirsty Blackman, the MP for Aberdeen North and the Scottish National party’s Westminster spokesperson on the economy, says there are more cars with personalised number plates on the city’s streets than anywhere else in the UK bar central London.

    Very good article.
    As M. Thatcher pointed out, when they introduced buying and selling of personalised plates, the initial sale is a tax on the rich and vain.

    Plus personalised plates are easier to remember/identify - which makes it harder for the owners of such to get away with breaking various laws....
    Handy wanker identifier also.
    Oi, I have a personalised plate.

    Was a gift from my parents when I passed my test.

    Alongside a brand new Volvo 440.
    Like taking a knighthood to please one's old mum, that's just about a valid excuse. Just about..
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    It has finally happened, Laurence Fox has come out with a good idea.

    'No more Charles!' Laurence Fox makes brutal dig as he claims Queen should be last monarch

    https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1514370/Laurence-Fox-twitter-prince-charles-queen-G20-summit-rome-speech-cop26-news

    Only because he thinks Prince Charles is pushing climate change too hard (as he thinks are William and Harry). Hence Fox can never be a Tory or British conservative because he does not support our constitutional monarchy, all he can ever be is an extreme libertarian anti wokeist.

    However given Khan won the London Mayoralty as the Labour candidate pushing action on climate change hard and Shaun Bailey as the Conservative candidate, also pro action on climate change, got 893,051 votes to just 47,634 for Fox as the Reclaim candidate it is pretty clear which route is more successful.

    Should Truss be kicked out of the conservative party then?
    According to @HYUFD he has excommunicated me and most every moderate conservative who does not subscribe to his narrow 1950s style Little Englander attitudes

    He is no advert for the conservative party
    The counter-argument is that quite possibly, he is?

    Parties change, and often older members don't keep up with the times and think they are supporting some image of how the party was, once upon a time, rather than how it is now.
    No he isn't. He operates on an unchanged prejudice of what the Tories from the past were rather than keeping up with what they really are.
    You are not a Tory now either, indeed you even did a thread header a few weeks ago saying why you had left the party (as well of course as the fact you voted for Blair like BigG in 2001 when genuine Tories like me were still voting Tory).

    You are a centre right liberal, you are not a Tory
    You have a strange need to define yourself by excluding others.

    The fundamental nature of Conservatism is bringing the One Nation together in a compassionate and inclusive way.

    Therefore you are not a Tory. You are probably a Ditcher, or may be an Ultramontane but definitely not a conservative
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,782
    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    It has finally happened, Laurence Fox has come out with a good idea.

    'No more Charles!' Laurence Fox makes brutal dig as he claims Queen should be last monarch

    https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1514370/Laurence-Fox-twitter-prince-charles-queen-G20-summit-rome-speech-cop26-news

    Only because he thinks Prince Charles is pushing climate change too hard (as he thinks are William and Harry). Hence Fox can never be a Tory or British conservative because he does not support our constitutional monarchy, all he can ever be is an extreme libertarian anti wokeist.

    However given Khan won the London Mayoralty as the Labour candidate pushing action on climate change hard and Shaun Bailey as the Conservative candidate, also pro action on climate change, got 893,051 votes to just 47,634 for Fox as the Reclaim candidate it is pretty clear which route is more successful.

    Should Truss be kicked out of the conservative party then?
    Truss has never on a Conservative platform called for a republic, the only time she did so was in her youth at a Liberal Democrat conference when she was still a LD.

    If she started calling for a republic on a Tory platform then yes I would have serious reservations about her staying a Minister or even being allowed to remain a Tory MP. Her private views are her own, if she is still a republican 'a don't ask, don't tell' policy for her in terms of her views on the monarchy are fine by me as long as she does not start to push republicanism in public
    Ok. That's a reasonable pragmatic view. I got the impression from your previous posts you could not be a republican and a conservative. Are there really no openly republican Tories?
    Being a republican is incompatible with being a Tory. Support for constitutional monarchy has always been a defining feature of British Toryism.

    Belief in the free market and small state for example is shared with Orange Book LDs and indeed Tories have often been protectionist and big government like Boris. Belief in Brexit was shared with UKIP and the Brexit Party, however the Tories have often been pro EU like Heath and still some Remainers who accept Brexit are in the Tories today. However support for constitutional monarchy and inherited wealth is what has defined Toryism and the Conservative Party and what almost all Tories have always agreed on
    How many Tories do you think there are who define themselves as the party of the Monarchy, Church of England, landed gentry and inherited wealth?

    I have this horrible feeling that there might actually be a lot more than I think there are.

    And I am struggling to think of why any of those subjects should be top of anyone's list of priorities, in particular 'landed gentry'. I mean why landed gentry? I would have thought (depending upon your outlook) it would have been things like free markets, organised labour, poverty, constitution, NHS, the environment, capitalism, nationalisation, nationalism, etc, etc, etc)
    More Tories today agree with each other on retaining the monarchy and keeping inheritance tax low than agree with each other on virtually any other topic, from the right rate of government spending and rates of income taxes, to nationalising the railways and utilities, to abortion and trans issues, to military intervention abroad, to climate change and even on Brexit.

    The founding principles of support for the monarchy (still head of the C of E too of course) and inherited wealth of the Tory Party and then the Conservative Party still define the Conservative Party and Tories to this day
    OK I can accept that but what about Church of England and landed gentry? I'm really struggling with the latter in particular as it doesn't seem to make any sense so I suspect I am missing something.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,664

    MattW said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Apparently personal number plates are a good thing:

    Kirsty Blackman, the MP for Aberdeen North and the Scottish National party’s Westminster spokesperson on the economy, says there are more cars with personalised number plates on the city’s streets than anywhere else in the UK bar central London.

    Very good article.
    As M. Thatcher pointed out, when they introduced buying and selling of personalised plates, the initial sale is a tax on the rich and vain.

    Plus personalised plates are easier to remember/identify - which makes it harder for the owners of such to get away with breaking various laws....
    Handy wanker identifier also.
    Oi, I have a personalised plate.

    Was a gift from my parents when I passed my test.

    Alongside a brand new Volvo 440.
    My brother-in-law collects old Volvos. His favourite is the elastobandomatic 340, which goes faster in reverse than forwards. I've no idea what the imposters you see these days with Volvo badges are - they just don't look right.

    Personalised plates are environmentally friendly because you don't have to buy a new car just to look flash.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,174
    MaxPB said:

    Nuno sacked by Spurs.

    Fuck yes!
    I'm struggling to think of anyone who would actually want that job.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Farooq said:

    kjh said:



    Ok. That's a reasonable pragmatic view. I got the impression from your previous posts you could not be a republican and a conservative. Are there really no openly republican Tories?

    That's neither reasonable nor pragmatic! He's literally talking about cancelling views he doesn't agree with and purging people who hold them. HYUFD is a Stalinist nightmare of a politician and almost everyone, Conservatives included, would fail his ridiculous purity tests.
    I'm not entirely convinced that HYUFD is genuine. Would a party office-holder really go out of his way to drive sympathisers away from the party and urge them to vote Labour, or talk of "cancelling" people (surely the kind of language that right-wingers accuse lefties of using)? He's often interesting and well-informed on polling, and always polite, but politically he doesn't seem quite credible - but no offence if that's how he really feels.
    Was talking to a lurker the other day who was saying much the same. Can't be real. Also seems, for a youngish person, to have a lot of time to comment here.
    He is an elected official of the party
    Does he have a role in the party? I thought he was just an elected councillor who ran under the Conservative brand
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,241

    MattW said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Apparently personal number plates are a good thing:

    Kirsty Blackman, the MP for Aberdeen North and the Scottish National party’s Westminster spokesperson on the economy, says there are more cars with personalised number plates on the city’s streets than anywhere else in the UK bar central London.

    Very good article.
    As M. Thatcher pointed out, when they introduced buying and selling of personalised plates, the initial sale is a tax on the rich and vain.

    Plus personalised plates are easier to remember/identify - which makes it harder for the owners of such to get away with breaking various laws....
    Handy wanker identifier also.
    Oi, I have a personalised plate.

    Was a gift from my parents when I passed my test.

    Alongside a brand new Volvo 440.
    Like taking a knighthood to please one's old mum, that's just about a viable excuse. Just about..
    I was rather saddened by Blair screwing up the sale of honours. In my bachelor days, I realised that if I gave x to political party for y number of years, I could expect a peerage.

    This would have been nice for my dad.

    And the attendance allowance etc would have paid for the investment, since the pension contributions required to get that kind of money would have been vastly higher.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,782

    MattW said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Apparently personal number plates are a good thing:

    Kirsty Blackman, the MP for Aberdeen North and the Scottish National party’s Westminster spokesperson on the economy, says there are more cars with personalised number plates on the city’s streets than anywhere else in the UK bar central London.

    Very good article.
    As M. Thatcher pointed out, when they introduced buying and selling of personalised plates, the initial sale is a tax on the rich and vain.

    Plus personalised plates are easier to remember/identify - which makes it harder for the owners of such to get away with breaking various laws....
    Handy wanker identifier also.
    Oi, I have a personalised plate.

    Was a gift from my parents when I passed my test.

    Alongside a brand new Volvo 440.
    TSE you have dropped in my estimations dramatically.
  • Charles said:

    Farooq said:

    kjh said:



    Ok. That's a reasonable pragmatic view. I got the impression from your previous posts you could not be a republican and a conservative. Are there really no openly republican Tories?

    That's neither reasonable nor pragmatic! He's literally talking about cancelling views he doesn't agree with and purging people who hold them. HYUFD is a Stalinist nightmare of a politician and almost everyone, Conservatives included, would fail his ridiculous purity tests.
    I'm not entirely convinced that HYUFD is genuine. Would a party office-holder really go out of his way to drive sympathisers away from the party and urge them to vote Labour, or talk of "cancelling" people (surely the kind of language that right-wingers accuse lefties of using)? He's often interesting and well-informed on polling, and always polite, but politically he doesn't seem quite credible - but no offence if that's how he really feels.
    Was talking to a lurker the other day who was saying much the same. Can't be real. Also seems, for a youngish person, to have a lot of time to comment here.
    He is an elected official of the party
    Does he have a role in the party? I thought he was just an elected councillor who ran under the Conservative brand
    As far as I am aware yes
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,897
    edited November 2021
    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    It has finally happened, Laurence Fox has come out with a good idea.

    'No more Charles!' Laurence Fox makes brutal dig as he claims Queen should be last monarch

    https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1514370/Laurence-Fox-twitter-prince-charles-queen-G20-summit-rome-speech-cop26-news

    Only because he thinks Prince Charles is pushing climate change too hard (as he thinks are William and Harry). Hence Fox can never be a Tory or British conservative because he does not support our constitutional monarchy, all he can ever be is an extreme libertarian anti wokeist.

    However given Khan won the London Mayoralty as the Labour candidate pushing action on climate change hard and Shaun Bailey as the Conservative candidate, also pro action on climate change, got 893,051 votes to just 47,634 for Fox as the Reclaim candidate it is pretty clear which route is more successful.

    Should Truss be kicked out of the conservative party then?
    According to @HYUFD he has excommunicated me and most every moderate conservative who does not subscribe to his narrow 1950s style Little Englander attitudes

    He is no advert for the conservative party
    The counter-argument is that quite possibly, he is?

    Parties change, and often older members don't keep up with the times and think they are supporting some image of how the party was, once upon a time, rather than how it is now.
    No he isn't. He operates on an unchanged prejudice of what the Tories from the past were rather than keeping up with what they really are.
    You are not a Tory now either, indeed you even did a thread header a few weeks ago saying why you had left the party (as well of course as the fact you voted for Blair like BigG in 2001 when genuine Tories like me were still voting Tory).

    You are a centre right liberal, you are not a Tory
    You have a strange need to define yourself by excluding others.

    The fundamental nature of Conservatism is bringing the One Nation together in a compassionate and inclusive way.

    Therefore you are not a Tory. You are probably a Ditcher, or may be an Ultramontane but definitely not a conservative
    No, that may have been what has historically been most likely to win the Tories general elections, it does not define Toryism.

    Boris, Cameron, May, IDS, Baldwin, Macmillan, the Chamberlains, Hague, Disraeli, Balfour, Enoch Powell, Heath, Thatcher, Michael Howard, Michael Heseltine, Lord Salisbury, Major, Churchill etc were all Tories as all believed in constitutional monarchy and inherited wealth.

    Not all of them won elections however, some of them lost quite badly, nor even did they agree on everything but they were all Tories because of belief in those 2 principles
  • eekeek Posts: 28,366
    Charles said:

    Farooq said:

    kjh said:



    Ok. That's a reasonable pragmatic view. I got the impression from your previous posts you could not be a republican and a conservative. Are there really no openly republican Tories?

    That's neither reasonable nor pragmatic! He's literally talking about cancelling views he doesn't agree with and purging people who hold them. HYUFD is a Stalinist nightmare of a politician and almost everyone, Conservatives included, would fail his ridiculous purity tests.
    I'm not entirely convinced that HYUFD is genuine. Would a party office-holder really go out of his way to drive sympathisers away from the party and urge them to vote Labour, or talk of "cancelling" people (surely the kind of language that right-wingers accuse lefties of using)? He's often interesting and well-informed on polling, and always polite, but politically he doesn't seem quite credible - but no offence if that's how he really feels.
    Was talking to a lurker the other day who was saying much the same. Can't be real. Also seems, for a youngish person, to have a lot of time to comment here.
    He is an elected official of the party
    Does he have a role in the party? I thought he was just an elected councillor who ran under the Conservative brand
    I think he is chair of the constituency party which may well be whoever is foolish enough to do it but even that carries responsibility.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,241

    kjh said:

    To be fair to HYUFD, I suspect that there are divisions in his mind between Conservative Party members, Conservative party voters and Tories.

    Which ones are the scum? I lose track.
    I would describe very few people as 'scum'. Tommy Robinson perhaps is verging upon the category.
    Ask Angela Rayner,she knows all about calling people scum.
    Seem to recall her apologising.
    If you think that apology was genuine you are seriously mistaken. She apologised under pressure. Her apology is not worth a pfennig.
    Whether you believe it or not is another matter, but it was a gracious apology and more than she needed to do. I mean what more do you want her to do?
    When something is spoken with such vitriol
    as Rayner did, you know that's what she really wanted to convey. What she said was calculated and deliberate. No apology can alter that, however gracious the manner in which it might seem to have been given.


    Your insight into the innermost thoughts of women politicians is a thing of wonder.
    On the Rayner thing -

    - We have no idea if she actually meant what she said.
    - We have no idea if she actually meant what she said in the apology.

    On that basis - No debit, no credit.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Totally O/T, I see Glyn Razzell has had his parole request turned down under Helen's Law as he would not identify where he buried his wife's body as he continues to plead his innocence and states he does not know where she is.

    This is truly one of the oddest cases in legal history as there is no evidence that his wife is in fact dead. The only thing that convicted him was that police found her blood in a car he was using, but only found it on their third look. They had it for four days on the 2nd time they looked and returned the car to the owner, who then had it valetted due to the state the police left it in with fingerprint powder everywhere. When they took it in for the third time they found a few bloodspots that was visible to the naked eye in the boot. There is no explanation as to how the police missed these in their first 2 looks. No other DNA from his wife was found.

    No one saw him abduct her from a busy Swindon street, none of the 25 CCTV cameras videoed his vehicle on his drive to the abduction site, and none videoed him on his drive to whereever he buried her. His neighbour confirmed that the vehicle was on Razell's driveway just 45 minutes after the alleged abduction.

    Razzell also provided a decent alibi to the police. He claimed to have walked by a police station at the time of the abduction which had numerous CCTV cameras that would have videoed him. All were out of order (which Razzell would not have known).

    If he gave up the place he buried his wife he would probably be realeased by now as he has been a model prisoner.

    Just imagine if he has not killed her, he will not know where her body is and therefore will probably never be released.

    http://www.mojuk.org.uk/Portia/archive 12/razzell.html

    Juries have their own dynamic but I suspect there was more to the story than you have just laid out otherwise I don’t think there would have been a conviction
  • eekeek Posts: 28,366

    Totally O/T, I see Glyn Razzell has had his parole request turned down under Helen's Law as he would not identify where he buried his wife's body as he continues to plead his innocence and states he does not know where she is.

    This is truly one of the oddest cases in legal history as there is no evidence that his wife is in fact dead. The only thing that convicted him was that police found her blood in a car he was using, but only found it on their third look. They had it for four days on the 2nd time they looked and returned the car to the owner, who then had it valetted due to the state the police left it in with fingerprint powder everywhere. When they took it in for the third time they found a few bloodspots that was visible to the naked eye in the boot. There is no explanation as to how the police missed these in their first 2 looks. No other DNA from his wife was found.

    No one saw him abduct her from a busy Swindon street, none of the 25 CCTV cameras videoed his vehicle on his drive to the abduction site, and none videoed him on his drive to whereever he buried her. His neighbour confirmed that the vehicle was on Razell's driveway just 45 minutes after the alleged abduction.

    Razzell also provided a decent alibi to the police. He claimed to have walked by a police station at the time of the abduction which had numerous CCTV cameras that would have videoed him. All were out of order (which Razzell would not have known).

    If he gave up the place he buried his wife he would probably be realeased by now as he has been a model prisoner.

    Just imagine if he has not killed her, he will not know where her body is and therefore will probably never be released.

    http://www.mojuk.org.uk/Portia/archive 12/razzell.html

    It's quite possible his wife has committed the perfect crime...
  • Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    It has finally happened, Laurence Fox has come out with a good idea.

    'No more Charles!' Laurence Fox makes brutal dig as he claims Queen should be last monarch

    https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1514370/Laurence-Fox-twitter-prince-charles-queen-G20-summit-rome-speech-cop26-news

    Only because he thinks Prince Charles is pushing climate change too hard (as he thinks are William and Harry). Hence Fox can never be a Tory or British conservative because he does not support our constitutional monarchy, all he can ever be is an extreme libertarian anti wokeist.

    However given Khan won the London Mayoralty as the Labour candidate pushing action on climate change hard and Shaun Bailey as the Conservative candidate, also pro action on climate change, got 893,051 votes to just 47,634 for Fox as the Reclaim candidate it is pretty clear which route is more successful.

    Should Truss be kicked out of the conservative party then?
    According to @HYUFD he has excommunicated me and most every moderate conservative who does not subscribe to his narrow 1950s style Little Englander attitudes

    He is no advert for the conservative party
    The counter-argument is that quite possibly, he is?

    Parties change, and often older members don't keep up with the times and think they are supporting some image of how the party was, once upon a time, rather than how it is now.
    No he isn't. He operates on an unchanged prejudice of what the Tories from the past were rather than keeping up with what they really are.
    You are not a Tory now either, indeed you even did a thread header a few weeks ago saying why you had left the party (as well of course as the fact you voted for Blair like BigG in 2001 when genuine Tories like me were still voting Tory).

    You are a centre right liberal, you are not a Tory
    You have a strange need to define yourself by excluding others.

    The fundamental nature of Conservatism is bringing the One Nation together in a compassionate and inclusive way.

    Therefore you are not a Tory. You are probably a Ditcher, or may be an Ultramontane but definitely not a conservative
    Well put Charles
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,420
    edited November 2021

    MattW said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Apparently personal number plates are a good thing:

    Kirsty Blackman, the MP for Aberdeen North and the Scottish National party’s Westminster spokesperson on the economy, says there are more cars with personalised number plates on the city’s streets than anywhere else in the UK bar central London.

    Very good article.
    As M. Thatcher pointed out, when they introduced buying and selling of personalised plates, the initial sale is a tax on the rich and vain.

    Plus personalised plates are easier to remember/identify - which makes it harder for the owners of such to get away with breaking various laws....
    Handy wanker identifier also.
    Oi, I have a personalised plate.

    Was a gift from my parents when I passed my test.

    Alongside a brand new Volvo 440.
    My brother-in-law collects old Volvos. His favourite is the elastobandomatic 340, which goes faster in reverse than forwards. I've no idea what the imposters you see these days with Volvo badges are - they just don't look right.

    Personalised plates are environmentally friendly because you don't have to buy a new car just to look flash.
    I've had a couple of Volvo's. Enjoyed them both. Most enjoyable car I ever had though was a VW Cabriolet GT , when the children were grown up and had their own cars. Mrs C and I could drive about in the open top we'd never been able to afford in our youth!
    And yes, we personalised the number plate. A bit!
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677

    MattW said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Apparently personal number plates are a good thing:

    Kirsty Blackman, the MP for Aberdeen North and the Scottish National party’s Westminster spokesperson on the economy, says there are more cars with personalised number plates on the city’s streets than anywhere else in the UK bar central London.

    Very good article.
    As M. Thatcher pointed out, when they introduced buying and selling of personalised plates, the initial sale is a tax on the rich and vain.

    Plus personalised plates are easier to remember/identify - which makes it harder for the owners of such to get away with breaking various laws....
    Handy wanker identifier also.
    Oi, I have a personalised plate.

    Was a gift from my parents when I passed my test.

    Alongside a brand new Volvo 440.
    My brother-in-law collects old Volvos. His favourite is the elastobandomatic 340, which goes faster in reverse than forwards. I've no idea what the imposters you see these days with Volvo badges are - they just don't look right.
    =
    The 340 had worse aero when going backwards so the reverse top speed was slightly lower (not higher) than the forward top speed. It's still impressive though and spawned its own backwards racing series in the Netherlands.

    I was once involved in a reverse Toyota Yaris hire care race (Fleet Air Arm vs RAF Vickers Funbus crew) in Bahrain. Not only did I not win but the event ended with the car upside down and me locked up.
  • tlg86 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Nuno sacked by Spurs.

    Fuck yes!
    I'm struggling to think of anyone who would actually want that job.
    The Athletic think it will be Conte.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,628
    edited November 2021
    kjh said:

    MattW said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Apparently personal number plates are a good thing:

    Kirsty Blackman, the MP for Aberdeen North and the Scottish National party’s Westminster spokesperson on the economy, says there are more cars with personalised number plates on the city’s streets than anywhere else in the UK bar central London.

    Very good article.
    As M. Thatcher pointed out, when they introduced buying and selling of personalised plates, the initial sale is a tax on the rich and vain.

    Plus personalised plates are easier to remember/identify - which makes it harder for the owners of such to get away with breaking various laws....
    Handy wanker identifier also.
    Oi, I have a personalised plate.

    Was a gift from my parents when I passed my test.

    Alongside a brand new Volvo 440.
    TSE you have dropped in my estimations dramatically.
    The neither the plates and the car were my idea.

    I felt incredibly guilty because that car was the first time my father had bought a brand new car and it wasn’t for him.

    He chose the car as it was the safest vehicle on the road.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,420
    Charles said:

    Totally O/T, I see Glyn Razzell has had his parole request turned down under Helen's Law as he would not identify where he buried his wife's body as he continues to plead his innocence and states he does not know where she is.

    This is truly one of the oddest cases in legal history as there is no evidence that his wife is in fact dead. The only thing that convicted him was that police found her blood in a car he was using, but only found it on their third look. They had it for four days on the 2nd time they looked and returned the car to the owner, who then had it valetted due to the state the police left it in with fingerprint powder everywhere. When they took it in for the third time they found a few bloodspots that was visible to the naked eye in the boot. There is no explanation as to how the police missed these in their first 2 looks. No other DNA from his wife was found.

    No one saw him abduct her from a busy Swindon street, none of the 25 CCTV cameras videoed his vehicle on his drive to the abduction site, and none videoed him on his drive to whereever he buried her. His neighbour confirmed that the vehicle was on Razell's driveway just 45 minutes after the alleged abduction.

    Razzell also provided a decent alibi to the police. He claimed to have walked by a police station at the time of the abduction which had numerous CCTV cameras that would have videoed him. All were out of order (which Razzell would not have known).

    If he gave up the place he buried his wife he would probably be realeased by now as he has been a model prisoner.

    Just imagine if he has not killed her, he will not know where her body is and therefore will probably never be released.

    http://www.mojuk.org.uk/Portia/archive 12/razzell.html

    Juries have their own dynamic but I suspect there was more to the story than you have just laid out otherwise I don’t think there would have been a conviction
    Quite. That there was 'bad blood' between husband and wife isn't really mentioned, although reading between the lines there must have been.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,952

    tlg86 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Nuno sacked by Spurs.

    Fuck yes!
    I'm struggling to think of anyone who would actually want that job.
    The Athletic think it will be Conte.
    In Arsene we trust.

    Would be extremely amusing.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    It has finally happened, Laurence Fox has come out with a good idea.

    'No more Charles!' Laurence Fox makes brutal dig as he claims Queen should be last monarch

    https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1514370/Laurence-Fox-twitter-prince-charles-queen-G20-summit-rome-speech-cop26-news

    Only because he thinks Prince Charles is pushing climate change too hard (as he thinks are William and Harry). Hence Fox can never be a Tory or British conservative because he does not support our constitutional monarchy, all he can ever be is an extreme libertarian anti wokeist.

    However given Khan won the London Mayoralty as the Labour candidate pushing action on climate change hard and Shaun Bailey as the Conservative candidate, also pro action on climate change, got 893,051 votes to just 47,634 for Fox as the Reclaim candidate it is pretty clear which route is more successful.

    Surely a true monarchist would take the rough with the smooth? - sometimes the monarch will have views or actions that one doesn't like, but that comes with the territory of delegating the choice of head of state to random genetics. It seems an utterly bizarre idea, mitigated only by the fact that the last couple of incumbents have happened to be good at the job. Will the monarchy survive a really unpopular monarch when one comes along?
    A monarchy can only survive with the consent of the people

    However, even with an unpopular monarch, you would need (a) alignment on what replaces it and (b) a PM willing to spend much of their PM time and political capital fighting a fight that doesn’t seem very exciting unless you are a true believer.

    So I guess inertia will mean it survives. Until it doesn’t.
    Which is why we still have some hereditary peers in the House of Lords.
    Yes - they were supposed to be the grit that provoked proper reform…
  • Brillo has widened his portfolio of competence to include being un expert en pêche. Nice try Andra, but everyone's still splitting their sides over your GB News debacle.


  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    MattW said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Apparently personal number plates are a good thing:

    Kirsty Blackman, the MP for Aberdeen North and the Scottish National party’s Westminster spokesperson on the economy, says there are more cars with personalised number plates on the city’s streets than anywhere else in the UK bar central London.

    Very good article.
    As M. Thatcher pointed out, when they introduced buying and selling of personalised plates, the initial sale is a tax on the rich and vain.

    Plus personalised plates are easier to remember/identify - which makes it harder for the owners of such to get away with breaking various laws....
    Handy wanker identifier also.
    Oi, I have a personalised plate.

    Was a gift from my parents when I passed my test.

    Alongside a brand new Volvo 440.
    I got a second hand VW polo…
  • MattW said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Apparently personal number plates are a good thing:

    Kirsty Blackman, the MP for Aberdeen North and the Scottish National party’s Westminster spokesperson on the economy, says there are more cars with personalised number plates on the city’s streets than anywhere else in the UK bar central London.

    Very good article.
    As M. Thatcher pointed out, when they introduced buying and selling of personalised plates, the initial sale is a tax on the rich and vain.

    Plus personalised plates are easier to remember/identify - which makes it harder for the owners of such to get away with breaking various laws....
    Handy wanker identifier also.
    Oi, I have a personalised plate.

    Was a gift from my parents when I passed my test.

    Alongside a brand new Volvo 440.
    My brother-in-law collects old Volvos. His favourite is the elastobandomatic 340, which goes faster in reverse than forwards. I've no idea what the imposters you see these days with Volvo badges are - they just don't look right.

    Personalised plates are environmentally friendly because you don't have to buy a new car just to look flash.
    The 440 was like driving round in a tank.

    The one downside with that beast was the lights automatically came on the moment you switched on the engine.

    Pretty much every other driver on the road used to flash their lights at me to tell me my lights were on.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,132
    edited November 2021

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    It has finally happened, Laurence Fox has come out with a good idea.

    'No more Charles!' Laurence Fox makes brutal dig as he claims Queen should be last monarch

    https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1514370/Laurence-Fox-twitter-prince-charles-queen-G20-summit-rome-speech-cop26-news

    Only because he thinks Prince Charles is pushing climate change too hard (as he thinks are William and Harry). Hence Fox can never be a Tory or British conservative because he does not support our constitutional monarchy, all he can ever be is an extreme libertarian anti wokeist.

    However given Khan won the London Mayoralty as the Labour candidate pushing action on climate change hard and Shaun Bailey as the Conservative candidate, also pro action on climate change, got 893,051 votes to just 47,634 for Fox as the Reclaim candidate it is pretty clear which route is more successful.

    Should Truss be kicked out of the conservative party then?
    According to @HYUFD he has excommunicated me and most every moderate conservative who does not subscribe to his narrow 1950s style Little Englander attitudes

    He is no advert for the conservative party
    The counter-argument is that quite possibly, he is?

    Parties change, and often older members don't keep up with the times and think they are supporting some image of how the party was, once upon a time, rather than how it is now.
    No he isn't. He operates on an unchanged prejudice of what the Tories from the past were rather than keeping up with what they really are.
    You are not a Tory now either, indeed you even did a thread header a few weeks ago saying why you had left the party (as well of course as the fact you voted for Blair like BigG in 2001 when genuine Tories like me were still voting Tory).

    You are a centre right liberal, you are not a Tory
    You have a strange need to define yourself by excluding others.

    The fundamental nature of Conservatism is bringing the One Nation together in a compassionate and inclusive way.

    Therefore you are not a Tory. You are probably a Ditcher, or may be an Ultramontane but definitely not a conservative
    Well put Charles
    Aren't Anglican Ultramontanes rather unusual? Perhaps ultramontanism is an easier viewpoint to maintain at a distance :smile: .
  • pingping Posts: 3,805
    edited November 2021
    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    It has finally happened, Laurence Fox has come out with a good idea.

    'No more Charles!' Laurence Fox makes brutal dig as he claims Queen should be last monarch

    https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1514370/Laurence-Fox-twitter-prince-charles-queen-G20-summit-rome-speech-cop26-news

    Only because he thinks Prince Charles is pushing climate change too hard (as he thinks are William and Harry). Hence Fox can never be a Tory or British conservative because he does not support our constitutional monarchy, all he can ever be is an extreme libertarian anti wokeist.

    However given Khan won the London Mayoralty as the Labour candidate pushing action on climate change hard and Shaun Bailey as the Conservative candidate, also pro action on climate change, got 893,051 votes to just 47,634 for Fox as the Reclaim candidate it is pretty clear which route is more successful.

    Should Truss be kicked out of the conservative party then?
    According to @HYUFD he has excommunicated me and most every moderate conservative who does not subscribe to his narrow 1950s style Little Englander attitudes

    He is no advert for the conservative party
    The counter-argument is that quite possibly, he is?

    Parties change, and often older members don't keep up with the times and think they are supporting some image of how the party was, once upon a time, rather than how it is now.
    No he isn't. He operates on an unchanged prejudice of what the Tories from the past were rather than keeping up with what they really are.
    You are not a Tory now either, indeed you even did a thread header a few weeks ago saying why you had left the party (as well of course as the fact you voted for Blair like BigG in 2001 when genuine Tories like me were still voting Tory).

    You are a centre right liberal, you are not a Tory
    You have a strange need to define yourself by excluding others.

    The fundamental nature of Conservatism is bringing the One Nation together in a compassionate and inclusive way.

    Therefore you are not a Tory. You are probably a Ditcher, or may be an Ultramontane but definitely not a conservative
    I think you’re quite wrong, Charles.

    Hyufd IS a tory. He follows the logic of the tory party to its obvious conclusion. He states the unsayable truth in his characteristically blunt way. He’s honest, unlike most of the tory hangers-on - He doesn’t seek to change the tory party, or reengineer it for his own purposes. Neither does he project onto it his own desires.

    It’s a cynical, callous institution at heart. A coalition of self interest. All else is fluff.

    With respect, Charles, it is you who and others who feel the need to define yourself against hyufd.

    I could vote for your kind of Tory party. And bigG’s. But not hyufd’s.

    But it is his conservatism that is on offer, hence why I’m not a conservative.
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,291
    edited November 2021
    eek said:

    Charles said:

    Farooq said:

    kjh said:



    Ok. That's a reasonable pragmatic view. I got the impression from your previous posts you could not be a republican and a conservative. Are there really no openly republican Tories?

    That's neither reasonable nor pragmatic! He's literally talking about cancelling views he doesn't agree with and purging people who hold them. HYUFD is a Stalinist nightmare of a politician and almost everyone, Conservatives included, would fail his ridiculous purity tests.
    I'm not entirely convinced that HYUFD is genuine. Would a party office-holder really go out of his way to drive sympathisers away from the party and urge them to vote Labour, or talk of "cancelling" people (surely the kind of language that right-wingers accuse lefties of using)? He's often interesting and well-informed on polling, and always polite, but politically he doesn't seem quite credible - but no offence if that's how he really feels.
    Was talking to a lurker the other day who was saying much the same. Can't be real. Also seems, for a youngish person, to have a lot of time to comment here.
    He is an elected official of the party
    Does he have a role in the party? I thought he was just an elected councillor who ran under the Conservative brand
    I think he is chair of the constituency party which may well be whoever is foolish enough to do it but even that carries responsibility.
    I believe HYFUD chairs his local branch not the Constituency Association. I'm sure he's an assiduous Parish Councillor on behalf of his residents.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    It has finally happened, Laurence Fox has come out with a good idea.

    'No more Charles!' Laurence Fox makes brutal dig as he claims Queen should be last monarch

    https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1514370/Laurence-Fox-twitter-prince-charles-queen-G20-summit-rome-speech-cop26-news

    Only because he thinks Prince Charles is pushing climate change too hard (as he thinks are William and Harry). Hence Fox can never be a Tory or British conservative because he does not support our constitutional monarchy, all he can ever be is an extreme libertarian anti wokeist.

    However given Khan won the London Mayoralty as the Labour candidate pushing action on climate change hard and Shaun Bailey as the Conservative candidate, also pro action on climate change, got 893,051 votes to just 47,634 for Fox as the Reclaim candidate it is pretty clear which route is more successful.

    Should Truss be kicked out of the conservative party then?
    Truss has never on a Conservative platform called for a republic, the only time she did so was in her youth at a Liberal Democrat conference when she was still a LD.

    If she started calling for a republic on a Tory platform then yes I would have serious reservations about her staying a Minister or even being allowed to remain a Tory MP. Her private views are her own, if she is still a republican 'a don't ask, don't tell' policy for her in terms of her views on the monarchy are fine by me as long as she does not start to push republicanism in public
    Ok. That's a reasonable pragmatic view. I got the impression from your previous posts you could not be a republican and a conservative. Are there really no openly republican Tories?
    Being a republican is incompatible with being a Tory. Support for constitutional monarchy has always been a defining feature of British Toryism.

    Belief in the free market and small state for example is shared with Orange Book LDs and indeed Tories have often been protectionist and big government like Boris. Belief in Brexit was shared with UKIP and the Brexit Party, however the Tories have often been pro EU like Heath and still some Remainers who accept Brexit are in the Tories today. However support for constitutional monarchy and inherited wealth is what has defined Toryism and the Conservative Party and what almost all Tories have always agreed on
    How many Tories do you think there are who define themselves as the party of the Monarchy, Church of England, landed gentry and inherited wealth?

    I have this horrible feeling that there might actually be a lot more than I think there are.

    And I am struggling to think of why any of those subjects should be top of anyone's list of priorities, in particular 'landed gentry'. I mean why landed gentry? I would have thought (depending upon your outlook) it would have been things like free markets, organised labour, poverty, constitution, NHS, the environment, capitalism, nationalisation, nationalism, etc, etc, etc)
    More Tories today agree with each other on retaining the monarchy and keeping inheritance tax low than agree with each other on virtually any other topic, from the right rate of government spending and rates of income taxes, to nationalising the railways and utilities, to abortion and trans issues, to military intervention abroad, to climate change and even on Brexit.

    The founding principles of support for the monarchy (still head of the C of E too of course) and inherited wealth of the Tory Party and then the Conservative Party still define the Conservative Party and Tories to this day
    OK I can accept that but what about Church of England and landed gentry? I'm really struggling with the latter in particular as it doesn't seem to make any sense so I suspect I am missing something.
    That’s what it was at the time it split from the Peelites over the corn laws
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,067
    edited November 2021

    MattW said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Apparently personal number plates are a good thing:

    Kirsty Blackman, the MP for Aberdeen North and the Scottish National party’s Westminster spokesperson on the economy, says there are more cars with personalised number plates on the city’s streets than anywhere else in the UK bar central London.

    Very good article.
    As M. Thatcher pointed out, when they introduced buying and selling of personalised plates, the initial sale is a tax on the rich and vain.

    Plus personalised plates are easier to remember/identify - which makes it harder for the owners of such to get away with breaking various laws....
    Handy wanker identifier also.
    Oi, I have a personalised plate.

    Was a gift from my parents when I passed my test.

    Alongside a brand new Volvo 440.
    My brother-in-law collects old Volvos. His favourite is the elastobandomatic 340, which goes faster in reverse than forwards. I've no idea what the imposters you see these days with Volvo badges are - they just don't look right.

    Personalised plates are environmentally friendly because you don't have to buy a new car just to look flash.
    Wasn't the 340 itself something of an imposter, being designed by DAF ?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    MattW said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Apparently personal number plates are a good thing:

    Kirsty Blackman, the MP for Aberdeen North and the Scottish National party’s Westminster spokesperson on the economy, says there are more cars with personalised number plates on the city’s streets than anywhere else in the UK bar central London.

    Very good article.
    As M. Thatcher pointed out, when they introduced buying and selling of personalised plates, the initial sale is a tax on the rich and vain.

    Plus personalised plates are easier to remember/identify - which makes it harder for the owners of such to get away with breaking various laws....
    Handy wanker identifier also.
    Oi, I have a personalised plate.

    Was a gift from my parents when I passed my test.

    Alongside a brand new Volvo 440.
    Like taking a knighthood to please one's old mum, that's just about a viable excuse. Just about..
    I was rather saddened by Blair screwing up the sale of honours. In my bachelor days, I realised that if I gave x to political party for y number of years, I could expect a peerage.

    This would have been nice for my dad.

    And the attendance allowance etc would have paid for the investment, since the pension contributions required to get that kind of money would have been vastly higher.
    It used to be a 4% tax free yield IIRC 😂
  • TOPPING said:

    tlg86 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Nuno sacked by Spurs.

    Fuck yes!
    I'm struggling to think of anyone who would actually want that job.
    The Athletic think it will be Conte.
    In Arsene we trust.

    Would be extremely amusing.
    Not as amusing as Sol Campbell.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,782

    MattW said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Apparently personal number plates are a good thing:

    Kirsty Blackman, the MP for Aberdeen North and the Scottish National party’s Westminster spokesperson on the economy, says there are more cars with personalised number plates on the city’s streets than anywhere else in the UK bar central London.

    Very good article.
    As M. Thatcher pointed out, when they introduced buying and selling of personalised plates, the initial sale is a tax on the rich and vain.

    Plus personalised plates are easier to remember/identify - which makes it harder for the owners of such to get away with breaking various laws....
    Handy wanker identifier also.
    Oi, I have a personalised plate.

    Was a gift from my parents when I passed my test.

    Alongside a brand new Volvo 440.
    It has just dawned on me what you got for passing your test. I got the right to fill up my Dad's secondhand Vauxhall Viva with petrol.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,664
    edited November 2021
    Dura_Ace said:

    MattW said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Apparently personal number plates are a good thing:

    Kirsty Blackman, the MP for Aberdeen North and the Scottish National party’s Westminster spokesperson on the economy, says there are more cars with personalised number plates on the city’s streets than anywhere else in the UK bar central London.

    Very good article.
    As M. Thatcher pointed out, when they introduced buying and selling of personalised plates, the initial sale is a tax on the rich and vain.

    Plus personalised plates are easier to remember/identify - which makes it harder for the owners of such to get away with breaking various laws....
    Handy wanker identifier also.
    Oi, I have a personalised plate.

    Was a gift from my parents when I passed my test.

    Alongside a brand new Volvo 440.
    My brother-in-law collects old Volvos. His favourite is the elastobandomatic 340, which goes faster in reverse than forwards. I've no idea what the imposters you see these days with Volvo badges are - they just don't look right.
    =
    The 340 had worse aero when going backwards so the reverse top speed was slightly lower (not higher) than the forward top speed. It's still impressive though and spawned its own backwards racing series in the Netherlands.

    I was once involved in a reverse Toyota Yaris hire care race (Fleet Air Arm vs RAF Vickers Funbus crew) in Bahrain. Not only did I not win but the event ended with the car upside down and me locked up.
    Ah, shame, I thought the profile looked like it would be slightly better in reverse. I can't say I've ever tried it as in person as, er, I wouldn't fancy ending upside down, and it would probably take a 3 mile run to get up to speed.

    Surely you did a favour to aesthetics there, though. A Yaris would look far better on its roof.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,897
    Charles said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    It has finally happened, Laurence Fox has come out with a good idea.

    'No more Charles!' Laurence Fox makes brutal dig as he claims Queen should be last monarch

    https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1514370/Laurence-Fox-twitter-prince-charles-queen-G20-summit-rome-speech-cop26-news

    Only because he thinks Prince Charles is pushing climate change too hard (as he thinks are William and Harry). Hence Fox can never be a Tory or British conservative because he does not support our constitutional monarchy, all he can ever be is an extreme libertarian anti wokeist.

    However given Khan won the London Mayoralty as the Labour candidate pushing action on climate change hard and Shaun Bailey as the Conservative candidate, also pro action on climate change, got 893,051 votes to just 47,634 for Fox as the Reclaim candidate it is pretty clear which route is more successful.

    Should Truss be kicked out of the conservative party then?
    Truss has never on a Conservative platform called for a republic, the only time she did so was in her youth at a Liberal Democrat conference when she was still a LD.

    If she started calling for a republic on a Tory platform then yes I would have serious reservations about her staying a Minister or even being allowed to remain a Tory MP. Her private views are her own, if she is still a republican 'a don't ask, don't tell' policy for her in terms of her views on the monarchy are fine by me as long as she does not start to push republicanism in public
    Ok. That's a reasonable pragmatic view. I got the impression from your previous posts you could not be a republican and a conservative. Are there really no openly republican Tories?
    Being a republican is incompatible with being a Tory. Support for constitutional monarchy has always been a defining feature of British Toryism.

    Belief in the free market and small state for example is shared with Orange Book LDs and indeed Tories have often been protectionist and big government like Boris. Belief in Brexit was shared with UKIP and the Brexit Party, however the Tories have often been pro EU like Heath and still some Remainers who accept Brexit are in the Tories today. However support for constitutional monarchy and inherited wealth is what has defined Toryism and the Conservative Party and what almost all Tories have always agreed on
    How many Tories do you think there are who define themselves as the party of the Monarchy, Church of England, landed gentry and inherited wealth?

    I have this horrible feeling that there might actually be a lot more than I think there are.

    And I am struggling to think of why any of those subjects should be top of anyone's list of priorities, in particular 'landed gentry'. I mean why landed gentry? I would have thought (depending upon your outlook) it would have been things like free markets, organised labour, poverty, constitution, NHS, the environment, capitalism, nationalisation, nationalism, etc, etc, etc)
    More Tories today agree with each other on retaining the monarchy and keeping inheritance tax low than agree with each other on virtually any other topic, from the right rate of government spending and rates of income taxes, to nationalising the railways and utilities, to abortion and trans issues, to military intervention abroad, to climate change and even on Brexit.

    The founding principles of support for the monarchy (still head of the C of E too of course) and inherited wealth of the Tory Party and then the Conservative Party still define the Conservative Party and Tories to this day
    OK I can accept that but what about Church of England and landed gentry? I'm really struggling with the latter in particular as it doesn't seem to make any sense so I suspect I am missing something.
    That’s what it was at the time it split from the Peelites over the corn laws
    The Peelites joined with the Whigs and Radicals to form the Liberal party ie the main opponents of the Conservative Party and Tories until the rise of Labour in the early 20th century
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,355
    tlg86 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Nuno sacked by Spurs.

    Fuck yes!
    I'm struggling to think of anyone who would actually want that job.
    They'd want to negotiate a strong early termination clause in their contract.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    It has finally happened, Laurence Fox has come out with a good idea.

    'No more Charles!' Laurence Fox makes brutal dig as he claims Queen should be last monarch

    https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1514370/Laurence-Fox-twitter-prince-charles-queen-G20-summit-rome-speech-cop26-news

    Only because he thinks Prince Charles is pushing climate change too hard (as he thinks are William and Harry). Hence Fox can never be a Tory or British conservative because he does not support our constitutional monarchy, all he can ever be is an extreme libertarian anti wokeist.

    However given Khan won the London Mayoralty as the Labour candidate pushing action on climate change hard and Shaun Bailey as the Conservative candidate, also pro action on climate change, got 893,051 votes to just 47,634 for Fox as the Reclaim candidate it is pretty clear which route is more successful.

    Should Truss be kicked out of the conservative party then?
    According to @HYUFD he has excommunicated me and most every moderate conservative who does not subscribe to his narrow 1950s style Little Englander attitudes

    He is no advert for the conservative party
    The counter-argument is that quite possibly, he is?

    Parties change, and often older members don't keep up with the times and think they are supporting some image of how the party was, once upon a time, rather than how it is now.
    No he isn't. He operates on an unchanged prejudice of what the Tories from the past were rather than keeping up with what they really are.
    You are not a Tory now either, indeed you even did a thread header a few weeks ago saying why you had left the party (as well of course as the fact you voted for Blair like BigG in 2001 when genuine Tories like me were still voting Tory).

    You are a centre right liberal, you are not a Tory
    You have a strange need to define yourself by excluding others.

    The fundamental nature of Conservatism is bringing the One Nation together in a compassionate and inclusive way.

    Therefore you are not a Tory. You are probably a Ditcher, or may be an Ultramontane but definitely not a conservative
    No, that may have been what has historically been most likely to win the Tories general elections, it does not define Toryism.

    Boris, Cameron, May, IDS, Baldwin, Macmillan, the Chamberlains, Hague, Disraeli, Balfour, Enoch Powell, Heath, Thatcher, Michael Howard, Michael Heseltine, Lord Salisbury, Major, Churchill etc were all Tories as all believed in constitutional monarchy and inherited wealth.

    Not all of them won elections however, some of them lost quite badly, nor even did they agree on everything but they were all Tories because of belief in those 2 principles
    Nah. The Tories don’t have principles.

    Fundamentally they believe that change should be gradual and measured. Reform to preserve.

    That’s why they support existing constitutional arrangements and oppose penal taxation. They are just too radical to support.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,174
    That Razzell case sounds very odd:

    https://insidetime.org/the-case-of-glyn-razzell/

    Either the switching of cars was part of a very cunning plan, or the police stitched him up good and proper.
  • kjh said:

    MattW said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Apparently personal number plates are a good thing:

    Kirsty Blackman, the MP for Aberdeen North and the Scottish National party’s Westminster spokesperson on the economy, says there are more cars with personalised number plates on the city’s streets than anywhere else in the UK bar central London.

    Very good article.
    As M. Thatcher pointed out, when they introduced buying and selling of personalised plates, the initial sale is a tax on the rich and vain.

    Plus personalised plates are easier to remember/identify - which makes it harder for the owners of such to get away with breaking various laws....
    Handy wanker identifier also.
    Oi, I have a personalised plate.

    Was a gift from my parents when I passed my test.

    Alongside a brand new Volvo 440.
    It has just dawned on me what you got for passing your test. I got the right to fill up my Dad's secondhand Vauxhall Viva with petrol.
    It wasn’t an entirely altruistic act by my father.

    My mother couldn’t drive, neither set of grandparents couldn’t drive, so it was his way of sharing the taxi duties.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,782

    kjh said:

    MattW said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Apparently personal number plates are a good thing:

    Kirsty Blackman, the MP for Aberdeen North and the Scottish National party’s Westminster spokesperson on the economy, says there are more cars with personalised number plates on the city’s streets than anywhere else in the UK bar central London.

    Very good article.
    As M. Thatcher pointed out, when they introduced buying and selling of personalised plates, the initial sale is a tax on the rich and vain.

    Plus personalised plates are easier to remember/identify - which makes it harder for the owners of such to get away with breaking various laws....
    Handy wanker identifier also.
    Oi, I have a personalised plate.

    Was a gift from my parents when I passed my test.

    Alongside a brand new Volvo 440.
    TSE you have dropped in my estimations dramatically.
    The neither the plates and the car were my idea.

    I felt incredibly guilty because that car was the first time my father had bought a brand new car and it wasn’t for him.

    He chose the car as it was the safest vehicle on the road.
    OK you are back up there again (not that you probably care whatsoever). I have to say that you sound like you have very nice parents.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,664
    Nigelb said:

    MattW said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Apparently personal number plates are a good thing:

    Kirsty Blackman, the MP for Aberdeen North and the Scottish National party’s Westminster spokesperson on the economy, says there are more cars with personalised number plates on the city’s streets than anywhere else in the UK bar central London.

    Very good article.
    As M. Thatcher pointed out, when they introduced buying and selling of personalised plates, the initial sale is a tax on the rich and vain.

    Plus personalised plates are easier to remember/identify - which makes it harder for the owners of such to get away with breaking various laws....
    Handy wanker identifier also.
    Oi, I have a personalised plate.

    Was a gift from my parents when I passed my test.

    Alongside a brand new Volvo 440.
    My brother-in-law collects old Volvos. His favourite is the elastobandomatic 340, which goes faster in reverse than forwards. I've no idea what the imposters you see these days with Volvo badges are - they just don't look right.

    Personalised plates are environmentally friendly because you don't have to buy a new car just to look flash.
    Wasn't the 340 itself something of an imposter, being designed by DAF ?
    The transmission was definitely DAF. Sadly it couldn't quite carry enough power to make it really useful. It is very clever but not particularly efficient.

    The weirdest thing is accelerating at constant revs. The car speeds up but the engine note remains the same.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variomatic
  • Overcast, rainy, windy. We need to burn more coal to get that Mediterranean climate.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677



    Surely you did a favour to aesthetics there, though. A Yaris would look far better on its roof.

    I had four fat Sea King mates on board (who all legged it and left me to the mercy of the Bahraini criminal justice system) as passengers. Their beer fuelled corpulence raised the centre of mass in the roll axis to a dangerously unstable level so the Yaris just fell over.
  • Charles said:

    Charles said:

    My local city is planning its transition away from oil: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil

    The shift to renewables is already on, and Aberdeen is already a hydrogen hub. Note the last paragraph: “It is, I expect, a huge political regret that we missed out on a manufacturing windfall from wind. We have massively invested in wind but we don’t make a lot of the kit here,”

    How is it we missed out on this? Half our energy generated by wind yesterday and all the turbines are imported. Subsidy is/was needed to get that industry going, we're supposedly hosing money at all kinds of fripperies so how about cash to get the Renewable UK sector competitive? Then we can be an exporter of our own technology instead of increasingly reliant on imports.

    Isn’t that what the Freeport in your old stomping ground is focused on? Not sure when Demark started focusing on wind, but I suspect that around when we missed a trick
    I am sure that there will be some wind there. Problem is:
    1. We missed the boat so to speak, our competitors did this years ago
    2. You don't need a Freeport to do so
    3. Even their own report shows that Freeports move jobs rather than creating jobs
    So because we missed a trick in the past we should butch and whine about attempts to do something now?

    What a strange philosophy
    I'm whining? I'm openly advocating that we hurl money at it to catch-up.

    My observation was that the Freeport you mentioned wasn't relevant or beneficial to the UK. They're hardly a new idea are they? If they were so beneficial we would have kept them.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,420
    edited November 2021
    tlg86 said:

    That Razzell case sounds very odd:

    https://insidetime.org/the-case-of-glyn-razzell/

    Either the switching of cars was part of a very cunning plan, or the police stitched him up good and proper.

    Interested enough to have a look on t'internet; there are lots of references to the case. Apparently the BBC did a re-enactment and Razzell refused to do a lie-detector test. The wife's new boy-friend thinks he did it.
This discussion has been closed.