"The Belarusian government has discovered that migration from the Middle East and elsewhere can be used as a weapon against the EU. Migrants are being flown to Belarus, bused to the Polish border and then pushed across the frontier. The Polish authorities are pushing back, trapping thousands of people in the no-man’s-land between the two states. As temperatures drop, we’re coming closer to a full-blown humanitarian crisis — and perhaps to armed conflict. A regime capable of using people as weapons is also capable of giving weapons to people."
The issue with forecasts like that is that they tend to miss the fact that - irrespective of government diktat - people will lockdown themselves if they are scared. So, "no lockdown" is a scenario that never really happens.
"The Belarusian government has discovered that migration from the Middle East and elsewhere can be used as a weapon against the EU. Migrants are being flown to Belarus, bused to the Polish border and then pushed across the frontier. The Polish authorities are pushing back, trapping thousands of people in the no-man’s-land between the two states. As temperatures drop, we’re coming closer to a full-blown humanitarian crisis — and perhaps to armed conflict. A regime capable of using people as weapons is also capable of giving weapons to people."
It is - effectively - an act of war by the government of Belarus.
(That being said - I'm not sure the article is completely accurate. The Belarussian government is certainly not paying to fly migrants into the country.)
"The Belarusian government has discovered that migration from the Middle East and elsewhere can be used as a weapon against the EU. Migrants are being flown to Belarus, bused to the Polish border and then pushed across the frontier. The Polish authorities are pushing back, trapping thousands of people in the no-man’s-land between the two states. As temperatures drop, we’re coming closer to a full-blown humanitarian crisis — and perhaps to armed conflict. A regime capable of using people as weapons is also capable of giving weapons to people."
"The Belarusian government has discovered that migration from the Middle East and elsewhere can be used as a weapon against the EU. Migrants are being flown to Belarus, bused to the Polish border and then pushed across the frontier. The Polish authorities are pushing back, trapping thousands of people in the no-man’s-land between the two states. As temperatures drop, we’re coming closer to a full-blown humanitarian crisis — and perhaps to armed conflict. A regime capable of using people as weapons is also capable of giving weapons to people."
It is - effectively - an act of war by the government of Belarus.
(That being said - I'm not sure the article is completely accurate. The Belarussian government is certainly not paying to fly migrants into the country.)
Regrettable if the information in the article isn't entirely accurate. Usually UnHerd is reliable.
I think the 3 Tory byelections will be all held though there may be a sweat on if LDs cut through in Shropshire... quite what happens if one of the three is lost may lead to whispers against BJ etc turning into something more...
Rayner's asking the right questions here: Did this MP declare an interest when these matters were discussed and reported on by the taskforce? Why is the prime minister failing to act over these glaring conflicts of interest?
Looking forward to hearing about why we don't need to be worried by this. Prima facie this is troubling.
I agree, although she has asked the question, convicted and demanded punishment in 2 sentences
"The Belarusian government has discovered that migration from the Middle East and elsewhere can be used as a weapon against the EU. Migrants are being flown to Belarus, bused to the Polish border and then pushed across the frontier. The Polish authorities are pushing back, trapping thousands of people in the no-man’s-land between the two states. As temperatures drop, we’re coming closer to a full-blown humanitarian crisis — and perhaps to armed conflict. A regime capable of using people as weapons is also capable of giving weapons to people."
It is - effectively - an act of war by the government of Belarus.
(That being said - I'm not sure the article is completely accurate. The Belarussian government is certainly not paying to fly migrants into the country.)
I understood they are flying people into Belarus to ship them to the Polish border
"The Belarusian government has discovered that migration from the Middle East and elsewhere can be used as a weapon against the EU. Migrants are being flown to Belarus, bused to the Polish border and then pushed across the frontier. The Polish authorities are pushing back, trapping thousands of people in the no-man’s-land between the two states. As temperatures drop, we’re coming closer to a full-blown humanitarian crisis — and perhaps to armed conflict. A regime capable of using people as weapons is also capable of giving weapons to people."
It is - effectively - an act of war by the government of Belarus.
(That being said - I'm not sure the article is completely accurate. The Belarussian government is certainly not paying to fly migrants into the country.)
I understood they are flying people into Belarus to ship them to the Polish border
Surely it’s easier to just ask the military to ‘land’ any overflying planes and arrest those on board?
Amusingly I see there was even 1 by-election in the Feb-Oct 1974 Parliament, otherwise the best chance to get away with none.
There used to be so many of them - 1959-64 there were 62! 27 were due to death in office, and a number of others were due to deaths of someone else pushing the incumbent into the Lords.
1271 seats contested in 1974 then? That's got to be a record, right?
Not sure how many by-elections there were but there were 1340 seats in the two elections of 1910. Some of them were uncontested though.
"The Belarusian government has discovered that migration from the Middle East and elsewhere can be used as a weapon against the EU. Migrants are being flown to Belarus, bused to the Polish border and then pushed across the frontier. The Polish authorities are pushing back, trapping thousands of people in the no-man’s-land between the two states. As temperatures drop, we’re coming closer to a full-blown humanitarian crisis — and perhaps to armed conflict. A regime capable of using people as weapons is also capable of giving weapons to people."
It is - effectively - an act of war by the government of Belarus.
(That being said - I'm not sure the article is completely accurate. The Belarussian government is certainly not paying to fly migrants into the country.)
I understood they are flying people into Belarus to ship them to the Polish border
Surely it’s easier to just ask the military to ‘land’ any overflying planes and arrest those on board?
So you land a bunch of MENA refugees and they all claim asylum?
Are any other countries banning internal combustion engines in cars as early as 2030 ? We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Good morning everyone. Bit warmer this morning, but can't see whether it's cloudy or not yet!
Our PM's problems aren't coming singly, are they. Although, since one of my main sources of news is the Guardian, that could be an over-optimistic impression!
Are any other countries banning internal combustion engines in cars as early as 2030 ? We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Don't worry; the legislators all earn enough to afford electric cars, and have nice driveways and garages in which to charge them. That means everyone can afford them, and can charge them. Oh, and it's nice for current owners of EVs to get bug government handouts to buy them - handouts that will disappear as the prices reduce. (/sarcasm)
It's a big gamble: will the price of EVs decrease enough to make this target realisable, and will the supporting infrastructure be in place by then?
Are any other countries banning internal combustion engines in cars as early as 2030 ? We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Don't worry; the legislators all earn enough to afford electric cars, and have nice driveways and garages in which to charge them. That means everyone can afford them, and can charge them. Oh, and it's nice for current owners of EVs to get bug government handouts to buy them - handouts that will disappear as the prices reduce. (/sarcasm)
It's a big gamble: will the price of EVs decrease enough to make this target realisable, and will the supporting infrastructure be in place by then?
Agree with your scepticism; think there might be quite a lot of charging places in some areas...... SE England etc....... but many fewer in others. And what is going to happen to the large number of small garages that make a living from repairing and maintaining IC-engined cars? Tyres etc will still be needed, but there are going to have to be some retraining facilities for quite a few people.
The IDS thing really isn't great. How on earth did he (or the PM) think it was ok to chair a task force dealing with that sector when he had such a clear and obvious vested interest? A bit like Owen Paterson, it is the mindset of entitlement that is the most troubling. They genuinely seem to believe because they know that they are good chaps that is all that is required. It really isn't.
I suspect that his conclusion on the hand wash was both inevitable and helpful. Clearly the company were going to have a spectacular pay day out of Covid regardless. But the failure to understand the most basic elements of conflict of interest rules and the importance of appearances is just weird. Everyone else moved on to this decades ago.
Are any other countries banning internal combustion engines in cars as early as 2030 ? We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Norway is banning them by 2025. Currently 77% of cars sold there are electric. Substantially more remote areas than us.
Are any other countries banning internal combustion engines in cars as early as 2030 ? We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Norway is banning them by 2025. Currently 77% of cars sold there are electric. Substantially more remote areas than us.
Are any other countries banning internal combustion engines in cars as early as 2030 ? We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Norway is banning them by 2025. Currently 77% of cars sold there are electric. Substantially more remote areas than us.
The IDS thing really isn't great. How on earth did he (or the PM) think it was ok to chair a task force dealing with that sector when he had such a clear and obvious vested interest? A bit like Owen Paterson, it is the mindset of entitlement that is the most troubling. They genuinely seem to believe because they know that they are good chaps that is all that is required. It really isn't.
I suspect that his conclusion on the hand wash was both inevitable and helpful. Clearly the company were going to have a spectacular pay day out of Covid regardless. But the failure to understand the most basic elements of conflict of interest rules and the importance of appearances is just weird. Everyone else moved on to this decades ago.
It's why the story won't die. It wasn't just Paterson and it won't end with IDS and Cox.
It is time to ban outside jobs, and for all MPs investments to be managed by blind trusts. The kleptocracy has to end.
The IDS thing really isn't great. How on earth did he (or the PM) think it was ok to chair a task force dealing with that sector when he had such a clear and obvious vested interest? A bit like Owen Paterson, it is the mindset of entitlement that is the most troubling. They genuinely seem to believe because they know that they are good chaps that is all that is required. It really isn't.
I suspect that his conclusion on the hand wash was both inevitable and helpful. Clearly the company were going to have a spectacular pay day out of Covid regardless. But the failure to understand the most basic elements of conflict of interest rules and the importance of appearances is just weird. Everyone else moved on to this decades ago.
It's why the story won't die. It wasn't just Paterson and it won't end with IDS and Cox.
It is time to ban outside jobs, and for all MPs investments to be managed by blind trusts. The kleptocracy has to end.
'Outside jobs'; does that include doctors doing a weekly shift somewhere? IIRC Howard Stoate used to do a regular stint in a (?his) GP practice while MP for Dartford.
Are any other countries banning internal combustion engines in cars as early as 2030 ? We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Norway is banning them by 2025. Currently 77% of cars sold there are electric. Substantially more remote areas than us.
To be fair Dr F, I'm not so concerned with the remoteness of an area, but whether thought has been given to the infrastructure everywhere.
I agree. Our household has an EV (kia e-niro, a great car) and my 13 year old Fiat 500, which looks good for a couple of years more. We charge at home, but for everyone to go electric there needs to be better charging infrastructure, and a simpler common app, rather than a dozen or so. That is where government support should go now.
Having had our EV for 18 months now, I am a major convert. Nicer to drive, no real maintenance needed, range accurate at 280 miles is plenty, and after having a couple of months very little range anxiety.
The IDS thing really isn't great. How on earth did he (or the PM) think it was ok to chair a task force dealing with that sector when he had such a clear and obvious vested interest? A bit like Owen Paterson, it is the mindset of entitlement that is the most troubling. They genuinely seem to believe because they know that they are good chaps that is all that is required. It really isn't.
I suspect that his conclusion on the hand wash was both inevitable and helpful. Clearly the company were going to have a spectacular pay day out of Covid regardless. But the failure to understand the most basic elements of conflict of interest rules and the importance of appearances is just weird. Everyone else moved on to this decades ago.
It's why the story won't die. It wasn't just Paterson and it won't end with IDS and Cox.
It is time to ban outside jobs, and for all MPs investments to be managed by blind trusts. The kleptocracy has to end.
The problem with that Foxy is that it makes the job of MP even less attractive than it is already. If you take the example of Geoffrey Cox QC, this is a top level silk who earns over £1m a year easily. Do we simply accept that people like him can no longer be MPs unless they are going to make absurd financial sacrifices? He was extremely qualified for the role of AG and did well in that role in very difficult circumstances. If the likes of him are excluded from the Commons where do we get our next AG from? Do we just have to accept people who are not nearly as well qualified?
I want the most able people who are willing to give up their time to be MPs. I think we have to accept if we are going to get that additional earnings are a part of the package. But I also expect that people are much more alert to both actual and perceived conflicts of interest and accept that there are somethings that they just cannot do.
The IDS thing really isn't great. How on earth did he (or the PM) think it was ok to chair a task force dealing with that sector when he had such a clear and obvious vested interest? A bit like Owen Paterson, it is the mindset of entitlement that is the most troubling. They genuinely seem to believe because they know that they are good chaps that is all that is required. It really isn't.
I suspect that his conclusion on the hand wash was both inevitable and helpful. Clearly the company were going to have a spectacular pay day out of Covid regardless. But the failure to understand the most basic elements of conflict of interest rules and the importance of appearances is just weird. Everyone else moved on to this decades ago.
I'm not a fan of just out and out banning other jobs, or even of the various issues where parliament has essentially divested itself of personal responsibility (in theory) on the basis people don't believe they can be trusted on certain things relating to themselves.
But standards and probity are not difficult, the principles around interests and biases, apparent or actual, are well established and known. Yet as you point out in bold there is a culture that thinks these things are unimportant if as individuals they 'know' they are ok.
So, unfortunately, there may not really be any other options. MPs, as a collective, really cannot be trusted to maintain proper registers, make proper declarations, or not involve themselves in things in which they have an interest. Most manage it just fine, but enough of them won't and it is very damaging when that happens, so the collective body may need punishing because of the arrogant few.
But this government, even with all else going on, hasn't even responded to a report from the Committee on Standards in Public Life on local government standards in more than 2 years. A furore over Paterson and others won't make them act, because ultimately it is not in the interests of MPs to hold themselves to high standards.
Banning other jobs would be a sledgehammer to crack a nut, and cause damage to the floor around the nut, but does anyone really believe a more nuanced or targeted series of efforts to improve matters has any chance of happening, or succeeding if it does?
Are any other countries banning internal combustion engines in cars as early as 2030 ? We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Norway is banning them by 2025. Currently 77% of cars sold there are electric. Substantially more remote areas than us.
Are any other countries banning internal combustion engines in cars as early as 2030 ? We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Norway is banning them by 2025. Currently 77% of cars sold there are electric. Substantially more remote areas than us.
To be fair Dr F, I'm not so concerned with the remoteness of an area, but whether thought has been given to the infrastructure everywhere.
I agree. Our household has an EV (kia e-niro, a great car) and my 13 year old Fiat 500, which looks good for a couple of years more. We charge at home, but for everyone to go electric there needs to be better charging infrastructure, and a simpler common app, rather than a dozen or so. That is where government support should go now.
Having had our EV for 18 months now, I am a major convert. Nicer to drive, no real maintenance needed, range accurate at 280 miles is plenty, and after having a couple of months very little range anxiety.
One of the reasons that I didn't go electric when we changed our car recently was charging. We would have no problem; detached bungalow, garage, driveway etc. However, every so often we visit in-laws; no prospect of being able to charge there.
The IDS thing really isn't great. How on earth did he (or the PM) think it was ok to chair a task force dealing with that sector when he had such a clear and obvious vested interest? A bit like Owen Paterson, it is the mindset of entitlement that is the most troubling. They genuinely seem to believe because they know that they are good chaps that is all that is required. It really isn't.
I suspect that his conclusion on the hand wash was both inevitable and helpful. Clearly the company were going to have a spectacular pay day out of Covid regardless. But the failure to understand the most basic elements of conflict of interest rules and the importance of appearances is just weird. Everyone else moved on to this decades ago.
It's why the story won't die. It wasn't just Paterson and it won't end with IDS and Cox.
It is time to ban outside jobs, and for all MPs investments to be managed by blind trusts. The kleptocracy has to end.
'Outside jobs'; does that include doctors doing a weekly shift somewhere? IIRC Howard Stoate used to do a regular stint in a (?his) GP practice while MP for Dartford.
Yes, I think it should.
Alternatively, no outside job should pay more than 20% of an MPs salary, or have an hourly rate that is higher.
And yes, if millionaires need to take a pay cut to become MPs then so be it. They usually have enough savings to draw on. I would like to see more people from everyday occupations represented in Parliament. If MPs need expert legal advice on drafting it in then they should pay for that advice like anyone else.
The IDS thing really isn't great. How on earth did he (or the PM) think it was ok to chair a task force dealing with that sector when he had such a clear and obvious vested interest? A bit like Owen Paterson, it is the mindset of entitlement that is the most troubling. They genuinely seem to believe because they know that they are good chaps that is all that is required. It really isn't.
I suspect that his conclusion on the hand wash was both inevitable and helpful. Clearly the company were going to have a spectacular pay day out of Covid regardless. But the failure to understand the most basic elements of conflict of interest rules and the importance of appearances is just weird. Everyone else moved on to this decades ago.
I'm not a fan of just out and out banning other jobs, or even of the various issues where parliament has essentially divested itself of personal responsibility (in theory) on the basis people don't believe they can be trusted on certain things relating to themselves.
But standards and probity are not difficult, the principles around interests and biases, apparent or actual, are well established and known. Yet as you point out in bold there is a culture that thinks these things are unimportant if as individuals they 'know' they are ok.
So, unfortunately, there may not really be any other options. MPs, as a collective, really cannot be trusted to maintain proper registers, make proper declarations, or not involve themselves in things in which they have an interest. Most manage it just fine, but enough of them won't and it is very damaging when that happens, so the collective body may need punishing because of the arrogant few.
But this government, even with all else going on, hasn't even responded to a report from the Committee on Standards in Public Life on local government standards in more than 2 years. A furore over Paterson and others won't make them act, because ultimately it is not in the interests of MPs to hold themselves to high standards.
Banning other jobs would be a sledgehammer to crack a nut, and cause damage to the floor around the nut, but does anyone really believe a more nuanced or targeted series of efforts to improve matters has any chance of happening, or succeeding if it does?
For the reasons I have set out I do not think a ban is the answer. But they need to be held to the same standards as every other profession has managed for decades. It needs to be independent and rigorous and clear. This is not rocket science. Many of these people, like Geoffrey Cox QC, already comply with such standards on a daily basis in their other jobs.
"The Belarusian government has discovered that migration from the Middle East and elsewhere can be used as a weapon against the EU. Migrants are being flown to Belarus, bused to the Polish border and then pushed across the frontier. The Polish authorities are pushing back, trapping thousands of people in the no-man’s-land between the two states. As temperatures drop, we’re coming closer to a full-blown humanitarian crisis — and perhaps to armed conflict. A regime capable of using people as weapons is also capable of giving weapons to people."
It is - effectively - an act of war by the government of Belarus.
(That being said - I'm not sure the article is completely accurate. The Belarussian government is certainly not paying to fly migrants into the country.)
Regrettable if the information in the article isn't entirely accurate. Usually UnHerd is reliable.
I had heard that Putin and Assad were conspiring to fly the migrants to Minsk. Lukashenka takes over from there.
The IDS thing really isn't great. How on earth did he (or the PM) think it was ok to chair a task force dealing with that sector when he had such a clear and obvious vested interest? A bit like Owen Paterson, it is the mindset of entitlement that is the most troubling. They genuinely seem to believe because they know that they are good chaps that is all that is required. It really isn't.
I suspect that his conclusion on the hand wash was both inevitable and helpful. Clearly the company were going to have a spectacular pay day out of Covid regardless. But the failure to understand the most basic elements of conflict of interest rules and the importance of appearances is just weird. Everyone else moved on to this decades ago.
It's why the story won't die. It wasn't just Paterson and it won't end with IDS and Cox.
It is time to ban outside jobs, and for all MPs investments to be managed by blind trusts. The kleptocracy has to end.
The problem with that Foxy is that it makes the job of MP even less attractive than it is already. If you take the example of Geoffrey Cox QC, this is a top level silk who earns over £1m a year easily. Do we simply accept that people like him can no longer be MPs unless they are going to make absurd financial sacrifices? He was extremely qualified for the role of AG and did well in that role in very difficult circumstances. If the likes of him are excluded from the Commons where do we get our next AG from? Do we just have to accept people who are not nearly as well qualified?
I want the most able people who are willing to give up their time to be MPs. I think we have to accept if we are going to get that additional earnings are a part of the package. But I also expect that people are much more alert to both actual and perceived conflicts of interest and accept that there are somethings that they just cannot do.
It's not an unreasonable expectation. But some of them just will never be alert, intentionally or otherwise, and they will prevent any action to make themselves truly accountable if they are caught. They'll make excuses, use complex processes to obfuscate, they'll say other matters are far more important, and if all else fail they'll resign in a cloud of self righteousness having already done the damage and then things will move on after some milquetoast review, for fear of doing too much from one side, and no desire to be accountable on the other.
The bad apples will continue to poison the barrel unless stopped. Lowering overall quality by making the role less appealing may be one of the few options that will have some effect at least. The bad apples won't accept anything, so removing their opportunities may be the only thing that works.
Are any other countries banning internal combustion engines in cars as early as 2030 ? We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Don't worry; the legislators all earn enough to afford electric cars, and have nice driveways and garages in which to charge them. That means everyone can afford them, and can charge them. Oh, and it's nice for current owners of EVs to get bug government handouts to buy them - handouts that will disappear as the prices reduce. (/sarcasm)
It's a big gamble: will the price of EVs decrease enough to make this target realisable, and will the supporting infrastructure be in place by then?
“Benchmark says prices for battery grade lithium carbonate in China have climbed more than 300pc since October 2020, hitting $28,765 in October. Prices for nickel and cobalt, also key battery ingredients, have also climbed, with Benchmark’s cathode price index up by 62.4pc over the year.
“It believes the lithium supply shortages are set to deepen next year and continue through the mid-2020s. ”
The IDS thing really isn't great. How on earth did he (or the PM) think it was ok to chair a task force dealing with that sector when he had such a clear and obvious vested interest? A bit like Owen Paterson, it is the mindset of entitlement that is the most troubling. They genuinely seem to believe because they know that they are good chaps that is all that is required. It really isn't.
I suspect that his conclusion on the hand wash was both inevitable and helpful. Clearly the company were going to have a spectacular pay day out of Covid regardless. But the failure to understand the most basic elements of conflict of interest rules and the importance of appearances is just weird. Everyone else moved on to this decades ago.
The IDS thing really isn't great. How on earth did he (or the PM) think it was ok to chair a task force dealing with that sector when he had such a clear and obvious vested interest? A bit like Owen Paterson, it is the mindset of entitlement that is the most troubling. They genuinely seem to believe because they know that they are good chaps that is all that is required. It really isn't.
I suspect that his conclusion on the hand wash was both inevitable and helpful. Clearly the company were going to have a spectacular pay day out of Covid regardless. But the failure to understand the most basic elements of conflict of interest rules and the importance of appearances is just weird. Everyone else moved on to this decades ago.
I'm not a fan of just out and out banning other jobs, or even of the various issues where parliament has essentially divested itself of personal responsibility (in theory) on the basis people don't believe they can be trusted on certain things relating to themselves.
But standards and probity are not difficult, the principles around interests and biases, apparent or actual, are well established and known. Yet as you point out in bold there is a culture that thinks these things are unimportant if as individuals they 'know' they are ok.
So, unfortunately, there may not really be any other options. MPs, as a collective, really cannot be trusted to maintain proper registers, make proper declarations, or not involve themselves in things in which they have an interest. Most manage it just fine, but enough of them won't and it is very damaging when that happens, so the collective body may need punishing because of the arrogant few.
But this government, even with all else going on, hasn't even responded to a report from the Committee on Standards in Public Life on local government standards in more than 2 years. A furore over Paterson and others won't make them act, because ultimately it is not in the interests of MPs to hold themselves to high standards.
Banning other jobs would be a sledgehammer to crack a nut, and cause damage to the floor around the nut, but does anyone really believe a more nuanced or targeted series of efforts to improve matters has any chance of happening, or succeeding if it does?
For the reasons I have set out I do not think a ban is the answer. But they need to be held to the same standards as every other profession has managed for decades. It needs to be independent and rigorous and clear. This is not rocket science. Many of these people, like Geoffrey Cox QC, already comply with such standards on a daily basis in their other jobs.
I don't want it to be the answer at all. But what you propose is never going to happen. As we've just seen, a somewhat independent if flawed system around standards was just attempted to be junked the first time someone with some pull got into trouble.
No, it didn't work out on this occasion, but it demonstrates the desire among a large enough portion of the House to take such action as soon as they can get away with it. If the desire is there, which there demonstrably was, then designing something else is pointless, as workarounds will happen eventually.
As you say standards like these have been known and managed for decades. Parish councillors, by and large, even know not to involve themselves in areas where there is even the potential for conflict of interest. So MPs acting like it is a revelation or blowing their minds, or if outraged that they've only just noticed it, does not provide any confidence it will lead to anything.
They all know this stuff already. They're already supposed to act in proper ways. A new way of them being told they should not do so won't achieve anything compared to not giving them the chance in the first place.
That's unfair on the vast majority, but the minority are too ingrained to change.
"If you had to choose, would you rather have… A smaller government providing fewer services A bigger government providing more services"
It would have been nice to have had more than 2 possible answers.
Especially as the options in the US seem to mostly be:
A bigger government prioritising people like you or A bigger government prioritising people not like you
There is nothing on efficiency or using sane management practises.
I recently spoke to a doctor in A&E. His description of the management practises, including the way that his working time was observed by (literal) clip board wielding "time ad motion" inspectors, was out of the 1950s. He even noted* that his personal response to the management by these methods was straight out of Taylorist theory..... "soldiering".
The methods of the 1950s lead to the results of the 1950s.
*He turned out to have a post grad degree in Operations Research.
Are any other countries banning internal combustion engines in cars as early as 2030 ? We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Don't worry; the legislators all earn enough to afford electric cars, and have nice driveways and garages in which to charge them. That means everyone can afford them, and can charge them. Oh, and it's nice for current owners of EVs to get bug government handouts to buy them - handouts that will disappear as the prices reduce. (/sarcasm)
It's a big gamble: will the price of EVs decrease enough to make this target realisable, and will the supporting infrastructure be in place by then?
“Benchmark says prices for battery grade lithium carbonate in China have climbed more than 300pc since October 2020, hitting $28,765 in October. Prices for nickel and cobalt, also key battery ingredients, have also climbed, with Benchmark’s cathode price index up by 62.4pc over the year.
“It believes the lithium supply shortages are set to deepen next year and continue through the mid-2020s. ”
Yes, but there is loads of lithium in the world, it is a fairly common element. Cobalt less so, and the mining of it in the Congo a bit of an environmental mess. Less so than many countries despoiled by fossil fuel extraction perhaps.
The IDS thing really isn't great. How on earth did he (or the PM) think it was ok to chair a task force dealing with that sector when he had such a clear and obvious vested interest? A bit like Owen Paterson, it is the mindset of entitlement that is the most troubling. They genuinely seem to believe because they know that they are good chaps that is all that is required. It really isn't.
I suspect that his conclusion on the hand wash was both inevitable and helpful. Clearly the company were going to have a spectacular pay day out of Covid regardless. But the failure to understand the most basic elements of conflict of interest rules and the importance of appearances is just weird. Everyone else moved on to this decades ago.
It's why the story won't die. It wasn't just Paterson and it won't end with IDS and Cox.
It is time to ban outside jobs, and for all MPs investments to be managed by blind trusts. The kleptocracy has to end.
'Outside jobs'; does that include doctors doing a weekly shift somewhere? IIRC Howard Stoate used to do a regular stint in a (?his) GP practice while MP for Dartford.
There needs to be some allowance for MPs to remain ‘current’ and licenced in their previous profession, but the difficulty is in knowing where to draw the line.
The IDS thing really isn't great. How on earth did he (or the PM) think it was ok to chair a task force dealing with that sector when he had such a clear and obvious vested interest? A bit like Owen Paterson, it is the mindset of entitlement that is the most troubling. They genuinely seem to believe because they know that they are good chaps that is all that is required. It really isn't.
I suspect that his conclusion on the hand wash was both inevitable and helpful. Clearly the company were going to have a spectacular pay day out of Covid regardless. But the failure to understand the most basic elements of conflict of interest rules and the importance of appearances is just weird. Everyone else moved on to this decades ago.
They *think* they are good chaps. They're not.
I would have hoped that the regular scandals about these conflicts of interests would stop it, but it doesn't. Too many MPs are entitled and greedy and arrogant enough to not see that bunging contracts to mates is a real problem.
Are any other countries banning internal combustion engines in cars as early as 2030 ? We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Don't worry; the legislators all earn enough to afford electric cars, and have nice driveways and garages in which to charge them. That means everyone can afford them, and can charge them. Oh, and it's nice for current owners of EVs to get bug government handouts to buy them - handouts that will disappear as the prices reduce. (/sarcasm)
It's a big gamble: will the price of EVs decrease enough to make this target realisable, and will the supporting infrastructure be in place by then?
“Benchmark says prices for battery grade lithium carbonate in China have climbed more than 300pc since October 2020, hitting $28,765 in October. Prices for nickel and cobalt, also key battery ingredients, have also climbed, with Benchmark’s cathode price index up by 62.4pc over the year.
“It believes the lithium supply shortages are set to deepen next year and continue through the mid-2020s. ”
The best bet might be to tty and get a piss weak Labour administration in next election so the Tories can sort themselves out with a return for PM Sunak in 2028 or so. I think he likely has a more realistic approach to climate unlike Boris who likes to please whoever he was in the room with last.
The IDS thing really isn't great. How on earth did he (or the PM) think it was ok to chair a task force dealing with that sector when he had such a clear and obvious vested interest? A bit like Owen Paterson, it is the mindset of entitlement that is the most troubling. They genuinely seem to believe because they know that they are good chaps that is all that is required. It really isn't.
I suspect that his conclusion on the hand wash was both inevitable and helpful. Clearly the company were going to have a spectacular pay day out of Covid regardless. But the failure to understand the most basic elements of conflict of interest rules and the importance of appearances is just weird. Everyone else moved on to this decades ago.
They *think* they are good chaps. They're not.
Frankly, and ultimately, it really doesn't matter whether they are or not. Once you accept that the perception of a conflict is as important as the reality behaviour has to change.
Are any other countries banning internal combustion engines in cars as early as 2030 ? We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Don't worry; the legislators all earn enough to afford electric cars, and have nice driveways and garages in which to charge them. That means everyone can afford them, and can charge them. Oh, and it's nice for current owners of EVs to get bug government handouts to buy them - handouts that will disappear as the prices reduce. (/sarcasm)
It's a big gamble: will the price of EVs decrease enough to make this target realisable, and will the supporting infrastructure be in place by then?
“Benchmark says prices for battery grade lithium carbonate in China have climbed more than 300pc since October 2020, hitting $28,765 in October. Prices for nickel and cobalt, also key battery ingredients, have also climbed, with Benchmark’s cathode price index up by 62.4pc over the year.
“It believes the lithium supply shortages are set to deepen next year and continue through the mid-2020s. ”
Yes, but there is loads of lithium in the world, it is a fairly common element. Cobalt less so, and the mining of it in the Congo a bit of an environmental mess. Less so than many countries despoiled by fossil fuel extraction perhaps.
The important thing to remember when discussing Rare Earths
1) They aren't rare 2) They aren't earths 3) Lithium isn't a Rare Earth
The next generation of batteries pretty much eliminate Cobalt from their chemistry.
Are any other countries banning internal combustion engines in cars as early as 2030 ? We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Battery electric vehicles were 15.2% of new car registrations in October 2021, up from 6.6% in October 2020. I don't think there will be any difficulty with banning the sale of new internal combustion engines in 2030. At the speed things are changing it may come to seem like a conservative target.
Our current internal combustion engine car is still running fine at 18.5 years old, so there will still be lots of internal combustion engine cars on the road in the 2030s, so I think there will be time for the infrastructure to be put in place to support the transition from ICE cars to electric ones.
The IDS thing really isn't great. How on earth did he (or the PM) think it was ok to chair a task force dealing with that sector when he had such a clear and obvious vested interest? A bit like Owen Paterson, it is the mindset of entitlement that is the most troubling. They genuinely seem to believe because they know that they are good chaps that is all that is required. It really isn't.
I suspect that his conclusion on the hand wash was both inevitable and helpful. Clearly the company were going to have a spectacular pay day out of Covid regardless. But the failure to understand the most basic elements of conflict of interest rules and the importance of appearances is just weird. Everyone else moved on to this decades ago.
They *think* they are good chaps. They're not.
Such people do not accept a distinction between what they think and what they know. How can someone say they are guilty of something when they don't feel guilty? QED
The IDS thing really isn't great. How on earth did he (or the PM) think it was ok to chair a task force dealing with that sector when he had such a clear and obvious vested interest? A bit like Owen Paterson, it is the mindset of entitlement that is the most troubling. They genuinely seem to believe because they know that they are good chaps that is all that is required. It really isn't.
I suspect that his conclusion on the hand wash was both inevitable and helpful. Clearly the company were going to have a spectacular pay day out of Covid regardless. But the failure to understand the most basic elements of conflict of interest rules and the importance of appearances is just weird. Everyone else moved on to this decades ago.
It's why the story won't die. It wasn't just Paterson and it won't end with IDS and Cox.
It is time to ban outside jobs, and for all MPs investments to be managed by blind trusts. The kleptocracy has to end.
'Outside jobs'; does that include doctors doing a weekly shift somewhere? IIRC Howard Stoate used to do a regular stint in a (?his) GP practice while MP for Dartford.
Yes, I think it should.
Alternatively, no outside job should pay more than 20% of an MPs salary, or have an hourly rate that is higher.
And yes, if millionaires need to take a pay cut to become MPs then so be it. They usually have enough savings to draw on. I would like to see more people from everyday occupations represented in Parliament. If MPs need expert legal advice on drafting it in then they should pay for that advice like anyone else.
A point was raised (but ignored) during the MP-expense-scandal - that the changes would give a huge advantage to those with family money.
Consider - no unpleasant trying-to-make-money, climbing-the-social-ladder etc. Either the family trust is opaque enough to render questions moot, or the family just owns the nicer half of Shropshire.
The IDS thing really isn't great. How on earth did he (or the PM) think it was ok to chair a task force dealing with that sector when he had such a clear and obvious vested interest? A bit like Owen Paterson, it is the mindset of entitlement that is the most troubling. They genuinely seem to believe because they know that they are good chaps that is all that is required. It really isn't.
I suspect that his conclusion on the hand wash was both inevitable and helpful. Clearly the company were going to have a spectacular pay day out of Covid regardless. But the failure to understand the most basic elements of conflict of interest rules and the importance of appearances is just weird. Everyone else moved on to this decades ago.
They *think* they are good chaps. They're not.
Frankly, and ultimately, it really doesn't matter whether they are or not. Once you accept that the perception of a conflict is as important as the reality behaviour has to change.
Problem is, that has been accepted by everyone with sense for a long time. If people active in politics for decades still don't get that, even when they are told these things repeatedly, how does one achieve change? Tell them again? We've already seen punishing them for it doesn't change their minds, so even if you beef that up you only catch the egregious offenders not actually get them to realise it is wrong and to stop.
The IDS thing really isn't great. How on earth did he (or the PM) think it was ok to chair a task force dealing with that sector when he had such a clear and obvious vested interest? A bit like Owen Paterson, it is the mindset of entitlement that is the most troubling. They genuinely seem to believe because they know that they are good chaps that is all that is required. It really isn't.
I suspect that his conclusion on the hand wash was both inevitable and helpful. Clearly the company were going to have a spectacular pay day out of Covid regardless. But the failure to understand the most basic elements of conflict of interest rules and the importance of appearances is just weird. Everyone else moved on to this decades ago.
I'm not a fan of just out and out banning other jobs, or even of the various issues where parliament has essentially divested itself of personal responsibility (in theory) on the basis people don't believe they can be trusted on certain things relating to themselves.
But standards and probity are not difficult, the principles around interests and biases, apparent or actual, are well established and known. Yet as you point out in bold there is a culture that thinks these things are unimportant if as individuals they 'know' they are ok.
So, unfortunately, there may not really be any other options. MPs, as a collective, really cannot be trusted to maintain proper registers, make proper declarations, or not involve themselves in things in which they have an interest. Most manage it just fine, but enough of them won't and it is very damaging when that happens, so the collective body may need punishing because of the arrogant few.
But this government, even with all else going on, hasn't even responded to a report from the Committee on Standards in Public Life on local government standards in more than 2 years. A furore over Paterson and others won't make them act, because ultimately it is not in the interests of MPs to hold themselves to high standards.
Banning other jobs would be a sledgehammer to crack a nut, and cause damage to the floor around the nut, but does anyone really believe a more nuanced or targeted series of efforts to improve matters has any chance of happening, or succeeding if it does?
For the reasons I have set out I do not think a ban is the answer. But they need to be held to the same standards as every other profession has managed for decades. It needs to be independent and rigorous and clear. This is not rocket science. Many of these people, like Geoffrey Cox QC, already comply with such standards on a daily basis in their other jobs.
I don't want it to be the answer at all. But what you propose is never going to happen. As we've just seen, a somewhat independent if flawed system around standards was just attempted to be junked the first time someone with some pull got into trouble.
No, it didn't work out on this occasion, but it demonstrates the desire among a large enough portion of the House to take such action as soon as they can get away with it. If the desire is there, which there demonstrably was, then designing something else is pointless, as workarounds will happen eventually.
As you say standards like these have been known and managed for decades. Parish councillors, by and large, even know not to involve themselves in areas where there is even the potential for conflict of interest. So MPs acting like it is a revelation or blowing their minds, or if outraged that they've only just noticed it, does not provide any confidence it will lead to anything.
They all know this stuff already. They're already supposed to act in proper ways. A new way of them being told they should not do so won't achieve anything compared to not giving them the chance in the first place.
That's unfair on the vast majority, but the minority are too ingrained to change.
Indeed. Listening to the complaints about the new expenses system when that came in were hilarious - for anyone who'd had to deal with the legal/tax requirements of a modern expenses system in the "Real World".
Which said MPs had voted to impose on us, of course.
"The Belarusian government has discovered that migration from the Middle East and elsewhere can be used as a weapon against the EU. Migrants are being flown to Belarus, bused to the Polish border and then pushed across the frontier. The Polish authorities are pushing back, trapping thousands of people in the no-man’s-land between the two states. As temperatures drop, we’re coming closer to a full-blown humanitarian crisis — and perhaps to armed conflict. A regime capable of using people as weapons is also capable of giving weapons to people."
It is - effectively - an act of war by the government of Belarus.
(That being said - I'm not sure the article is completely accurate. The Belarussian government is certainly not paying to fly migrants into the country.)
Regrettable if the information in the article isn't entirely accurate. Usually UnHerd is reliable.
I had heard that Putin and Assad were conspiring to fly the migrants to Minsk. Lukashenka takes over from there.
The migrants pay thousands, apparently. But it’s certainly by design of the Belarusian government, since they require visas, which would otherwise be difficult to obtain - and of course Belarus is rather strict about the control of its airspace. The price of a flight from Damascus to Minsk is in the hundreds, not thousands.
The tactics certainly have the smell of Putin about them. And serve to increase the divide between the Polish right and left. The semi fascist Polish government is responding with predictable brutality, and a lot of refugees may die this winter.
The IDS thing really isn't great. How on earth did he (or the PM) think it was ok to chair a task force dealing with that sector when he had such a clear and obvious vested interest? A bit like Owen Paterson, it is the mindset of entitlement that is the most troubling. They genuinely seem to believe because they know that they are good chaps that is all that is required. It really isn't.
I suspect that his conclusion on the hand wash was both inevitable and helpful. Clearly the company were going to have a spectacular pay day out of Covid regardless. But the failure to understand the most basic elements of conflict of interest rules and the importance of appearances is just weird. Everyone else moved on to this decades ago.
They *think* they are good chaps. They're not.
I would have hoped that the regular scandals about these conflicts of interests would stop it, but it doesn't. Too many MPs are entitled and greedy and arrogant enough to not see that bunging contracts to mates is a real problem.
Let's face it, as @ydoethur would no doubt remind us if he was here, this kind of thing has gone on with politicians of all stripes since the beginning of time. It just seems increasingly anachronistic in the modern world.
If you take the example of Geoffrey Cox QC, this is a top level silk who earns over £1m a year easily. Do we simply accept that people like him can no longer be MPs unless they are going to make absurd financial sacrifices? He was extremely qualified for the role of AG and did well in that role in very difficult circumstances. If the likes of him are excluded from the Commons where do we get our next AG from? Do we just have to accept people who are not nearly as well qualified?
Your point is completely undermined by the current AG
Are any other countries banning internal combustion engines in cars as early as 2030 ? We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Battery electric vehicles were 15.2% of new car registrations in October 2021, up from 6.6% in October 2020. I don't think there will be any difficulty with banning the sale of new internal combustion engines in 2030. At the speed things are changing it may come to seem like a conservative target.
Our current internal combustion engine car is still running fine at 18.5 years old, so there will still be lots of internal combustion engine cars on the road in the 2030s, so I think there will be time for the infrastructure to be put in place to support the transition from ICE cars to electric ones.
In any case, we got through the Blitz, and we got through Brexit, so how hard can it be to manage to transition to EVs? The people in this country just need to find a backbone and a stiff upper lip.
Are any other countries banning internal combustion engines in cars as early as 2030 ? We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Don't worry; the legislators all earn enough to afford electric cars, and have nice driveways and garages in which to charge them. That means everyone can afford them, and can charge them. Oh, and it's nice for current owners of EVs to get bug government handouts to buy them - handouts that will disappear as the prices reduce. (/sarcasm)
It's a big gamble: will the price of EVs decrease enough to make this target realisable, and will the supporting infrastructure be in place by then?
“Benchmark says prices for battery grade lithium carbonate in China have climbed more than 300pc since October 2020, hitting $28,765 in October. Prices for nickel and cobalt, also key battery ingredients, have also climbed, with Benchmark’s cathode price index up by 62.4pc over the year.
“It believes the lithium supply shortages are set to deepen next year and continue through the mid-2020s. ”
Yes, but there is loads of lithium in the world, it is a fairly common element. Cobalt less so, and the mining of it in the Congo a bit of an environmental mess. Less so than many countries despoiled by fossil fuel extraction perhaps.
The important thing to remember when discussing Rare Earths
1) They aren't rare 2) They aren't earths 3) Lithium isn't a Rare Earth
The next generation of batteries pretty much eliminate Cobalt from their chemistry.
Also Lithium makes up only a couple of percent of Lithium Ion batteries. So it’s really not a big deal.
The rare earth element comes in the form of neodymium, often used in permanent magnets in the drivetrain. But Tesla has shown it is perfectly possible to make mass market EV drive trains without it.
Battery grade Nickel is the thing that’s scarce when it comes to batteries. Plenty of it in Russia, says Mr Putin as he strokes the white cat on his knee. Hence the growing shifting to iron phosphate batteries.
As for cobalt, yup that’s being substituted out. If people really want to fall off their moral high horse they should ponder the likely source of the tin in the smartphone they're holding.
“It’s hard to avoid the suspicion that the prime minister sees a day trip to the COP as a useful way of distracting from the sleaze surrounding the Tory party rather than a chance to get a grip and engage in the substance like a statesman.” https://twitter.com/tamcohen/status/1458340703826743300
Rayner's asking the right questions here: Did this MP declare an interest when these matters were discussed and reported on by the taskforce? Why is the prime minister failing to act over these glaring conflicts of interest?
Looking forward to hearing about why we don't need to be worried by this. Prima facie this is troubling.
I agree, although she has asked the question, convicted and demanded punishment in 2 sentences
He is a Tory , no chance he is not guilty and the evidence will be in his big fat wallet
Are any other countries banning internal combustion engines in cars as early as 2030 ? We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Battery electric vehicles were 15.2% of new car registrations in October 2021, up from 6.6% in October 2020. I don't think there will be any difficulty with banning the sale of new internal combustion engines in 2030. At the speed things are changing it may come to seem like a conservative target.
Our current internal combustion engine car is still running fine at 18.5 years old, so there will still be lots of internal combustion engine cars on the road in the 2030s, so I think there will be time for the infrastructure to be put in place to support the transition from ICE cars to electric ones.
In any case, we got through the Blitz, and we got through Brexit, so how hard can it be to manage to transition to EVs? The people in this country just need to find a backbone and a stiff upper lip.
When do the spitfires and Lancasters do a fly over to stiffen their backs
Are any other countries banning internal combustion engines in cars as early as 2030 ? We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Don't worry; the legislators all earn enough to afford electric cars, and have nice driveways and garages in which to charge them. That means everyone can afford them, and can charge them. Oh, and it's nice for current owners of EVs to get bug government handouts to buy them - handouts that will disappear as the prices reduce. (/sarcasm)
It's a big gamble: will the price of EVs decrease enough to make this target realisable, and will the supporting infrastructure be in place by then?
“Benchmark says prices for battery grade lithium carbonate in China have climbed more than 300pc since October 2020, hitting $28,765 in October. Prices for nickel and cobalt, also key battery ingredients, have also climbed, with Benchmark’s cathode price index up by 62.4pc over the year.
“It believes the lithium supply shortages are set to deepen next year and continue through the mid-2020s. ”
Yes, but there is loads of lithium in the world, it is a fairly common element. Cobalt less so, and the mining of it in the Congo a bit of an environmental mess. Less so than many countries despoiled by fossil fuel extraction perhaps.
The important thing to remember when discussing Rare Earths
1) They aren't rare 2) They aren't earths 3) Lithium isn't a Rare Earth
The next generation of batteries pretty much eliminate Cobalt from their chemistry.
Also Lithium makes up only a couple of percent of Lithium Ion batteries. So it’s really not a big deal.
The rare earth element comes in the form of neodymium, often used in permanent magnets in the drivetrain. But Tesla has shown it is perfectly possible to make mass market EV drive trains without it.
Battery grade Nickel is the thing that’s scarce when it comes to batteries. Plenty of it in Russia, says Mr Putin as he strokes the white cat on his knee. Hence the growing shifting to iron phosphate batteries.
As for cobalt, yup that’s being substituted out. If people really want to fall off their moral high horse they should ponder the likely source of the tin in the smartphone they're holding.
There's plenty of nickel around the world - new mines opening all the time, now.
Adam Boulton leaving Sky News at the end of the year.
Why? “Well,” he says awkwardly, “it’s a kind of mutual decision. Basically, just looking ahead, having been at two start-ups, first with TV-am and then Sky, I think it looks like the direction which Sky News wants to go over the next few years is not one that’s a particularly good fit for me.”
He refers me to an article his boss, Sky News’s head John Ryley, recently wrote in Press Gazette, a last rites for the age of the “all-powerful anchor”. Reporters were now experts, he wrote; the votive anchor’s role had shrunk.
“And also,” Boulton says, “he’s made it quite clear he believes the future of news is digital, is on the platform for phones and is very strongly based around data journalism. At that point you do start thinking . . .”
He acknowledges a genuine problem. For decades Sky News broke the news. Now Twitter, unobligated to check its sources, does.
The IDS thing really isn't great. How on earth did he (or the PM) think it was ok to chair a task force dealing with that sector when he had such a clear and obvious vested interest? A bit like Owen Paterson, it is the mindset of entitlement that is the most troubling. They genuinely seem to believe because they know that they are good chaps that is all that is required. It really isn't.
I suspect that his conclusion on the hand wash was both inevitable and helpful. Clearly the company were going to have a spectacular pay day out of Covid regardless. But the failure to understand the most basic elements of conflict of interest rules and the importance of appearances is just weird. Everyone else moved on to this decades ago.
They *think* they are good chaps. They're not.
They are just greedy grasping over privileged crooks.
La Rayner seems to think that civilisation will come to an end because somebody made a videoconference from his Parliamentary Office.
Angela Rayner Jumps the shark?
If it's against the rules it's against the rules and he should not have done it, but I think more headway being made will require focus on more obvious impropriety.
Sadly it seems I won't be able to use the headline 'Cox out!'
Cox, who is the MP for Torridge & West Devon, is understood to be determined to fight his corner and has told friends that there is “nothing new” in the reports. He is said to have privately dismissed calls for him to resign.
La Rayner seems to think that civilisation will come to an end because somebody made a videoconference from his Parliamentary Office.
Angela Rayner Jumps the shark?
However it perfectly illustrates the arrogance, hypocrisy and greed of these Tories perfectly. They will milk every penny at the trough and even use it to gorge themselves at other troughs. These scum are lower than rattlesnakes bellies in a rut, one would not piss on them if they were on fire. Nasty despicable creatures.
Are any other countries banning internal combustion engines in cars as early as 2030 ? We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Don't worry; the legislators all earn enough to afford electric cars, and have nice driveways and garages in which to charge them. That means everyone can afford them, and can charge them. Oh, and it's nice for current owners of EVs to get bug government handouts to buy them - handouts that will disappear as the prices reduce. (/sarcasm)
It's a big gamble: will the price of EVs decrease enough to make this target realisable, and will the supporting infrastructure be in place by then?
“Benchmark says prices for battery grade lithium carbonate in China have climbed more than 300pc since October 2020, hitting $28,765 in October. Prices for nickel and cobalt, also key battery ingredients, have also climbed, with Benchmark’s cathode price index up by 62.4pc over the year.
“It believes the lithium supply shortages are set to deepen next year and continue through the mid-2020s. ”
Yes, but there is loads of lithium in the world, it is a fairly common element. Cobalt less so, and the mining of it in the Congo a bit of an environmental mess. Less so than many countries despoiled by fossil fuel extraction perhaps.
The important thing to remember when discussing Rare Earths
1) They aren't rare 2) They aren't earths 3) Lithium isn't a Rare Earth
The next generation of batteries pretty much eliminate Cobalt from their chemistry.
Also Lithium makes up only a couple of percent of Lithium Ion batteries. So it’s really not a big deal.
The rare earth element comes in the form of neodymium, often used in permanent magnets in the drivetrain. But Tesla has shown it is perfectly possible to make mass market EV drive trains without it.
Battery grade Nickel is the thing that’s scarce when it comes to batteries. Plenty of it in Russia, says Mr Putin as he strokes the white cat on his knee. Hence the growing shifting to iron phosphate batteries.
As for cobalt, yup that’s being substituted out. If people really want to fall off their moral high horse they should ponder the likely source of the tin in the smartphone they're holding.
Another possible battery chemistry involves iron and sulphur. Neither exactly scarce.
The IDS thing really isn't great. How on earth did he (or the PM) think it was ok to chair a task force dealing with that sector when he had such a clear and obvious vested interest? A bit like Owen Paterson, it is the mindset of entitlement that is the most troubling. They genuinely seem to believe because they know that they are good chaps that is all that is required. It really isn't.
I suspect that his conclusion on the hand wash was both inevitable and helpful. Clearly the company were going to have a spectacular pay day out of Covid regardless. But the failure to understand the most basic elements of conflict of interest rules and the importance of appearances is just weird. Everyone else moved on to this decades ago.
I'm not a fan of just out and out banning other jobs, or even of the various issues where parliament has essentially divested itself of personal responsibility (in theory) on the basis people don't believe they can be trusted on certain things relating to themselves.
But standards and probity are not difficult, the principles around interests and biases, apparent or actual, are well established and known. Yet as you point out in bold there is a culture that thinks these things are unimportant if as individuals they 'know' they are ok.
So, unfortunately, there may not really be any other options. MPs, as a collective, really cannot be trusted to maintain proper registers, make proper declarations, or not involve themselves in things in which they have an interest. Most manage it just fine, but enough of them won't and it is very damaging when that happens, so the collective body may need punishing because of the arrogant few.
But this government, even with all else going on, hasn't even responded to a report from the Committee on Standards in Public Life on local government standards in more than 2 years. A furore over Paterson and others won't make them act, because ultimately it is not in the interests of MPs to hold themselves to high standards.
Banning other jobs would be a sledgehammer to crack a nut, and cause damage to the floor around the nut, but does anyone really believe a more nuanced or targeted series of efforts to improve matters has any chance of happening, or succeeding if it does?
TBF I think in most cases - like Cox and IDS - the disclosures have been fine. The issue is that nothing was done with the information in the case of IDS.
The case of Cox seems much more political mischief making - “he wasn’t in his constituency so he wasn’t doing his job” rather than anything specifically wrong?
Are any other countries banning internal combustion engines in cars as early as 2030 ? We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Battery electric vehicles were 15.2% of new car registrations in October 2021, up from 6.6% in October 2020. I don't think there will be any difficulty with banning the sale of new internal combustion engines in 2030. At the speed things are changing it may come to seem like a conservative target.
Our current internal combustion engine car is still running fine at 18.5 years old, so there will still be lots of internal combustion engine cars on the road in the 2030s, so I think there will be time for the infrastructure to be put in place to support the transition from ICE cars to electric ones.
In any case, we got through the Blitz, and we got through Brexit, so how hard can it be to manage to transition to EVs? The people in this country just need to find a backbone and a stiff upper lip.
I think there's a better example: the move from town gas to natural (North Sea) gas in the 1960s. Over ten million homes changed fuel in a decade, with AIUI every burner needing to be altered, and supply chains/pipes/systems radically altered.
La Rayner seems to think that civilisation will come to an end because somebody made a videoconference from his Parliamentary Office.
Angela Rayner Jumps the shark?
No, it's the rules, you can only use your parliamentary offices for parliamentary or non partisan constituency work.
You have to love the "so what" here. He is sat in his taxpayer-provided office helping the corrupt BVI government sue our own government. Being paid a stonking amount of cash on top of what most people already consider a stonking salary as an MP. So what that he has spoken once in the commons since getting sacked at AG?
My mind boggles. The only explanation for how the party can keep making self-inflicted screwup after another, unforced errors that kick the scandal along and make the press pack chasing it more determined is sneering arrogance.
And then we have the people who make no cash from this - indeed it is their cash these shysters are stealing - who pop up willing to excuse literally anything because its their team stealing their money.
The IDS thing really isn't great. How on earth did he (or the PM) think it was ok to chair a task force dealing with that sector when he had such a clear and obvious vested interest? A bit like Owen Paterson, it is the mindset of entitlement that is the most troubling. They genuinely seem to believe because they know that they are good chaps that is all that is required. It really isn't.
I suspect that his conclusion on the hand wash was both inevitable and helpful. Clearly the company were going to have a spectacular pay day out of Covid regardless. But the failure to understand the most basic elements of conflict of interest rules and the importance of appearances is just weird. Everyone else moved on to this decades ago.
It's why the story won't die. It wasn't just Paterson and it won't end with IDS and Cox.
It is time to ban outside jobs, and for all MPs investments to be managed by blind trusts. The kleptocracy has to end.
'Outside jobs'; does that include doctors doing a weekly shift somewhere? IIRC Howard Stoate used to do a regular stint in a (?his) GP practice while MP for Dartford.
Yes, I think it should.
Alternatively, no outside job should pay more than 20% of an MPs salary, or have an hourly rate that is higher.
And yes, if millionaires need to take a pay cut to become MPs then so be it. They usually have enough savings to draw on. I would like to see more people from everyday occupations represented in Parliament. If MPs need expert legal advice on drafting it in then they should pay for that advice like anyone else.
A point was raised (but ignored) during the MP-expense-scandal - that the changes would give a huge advantage to those with family money.
Consider - no unpleasant trying-to-make-money, climbing-the-social-ladder etc. Either the family trust is opaque enough to render questions moot, or the family just owns the nicer half of Shropshire.
Plus no complaints about MPs pay.
What's not to like?
For the vast majority of people in this country, an MPs salary would be a massive pay rise, even before expenses are added in.
The IDS thing really isn't great. How on earth did he (or the PM) think it was ok to chair a task force dealing with that sector when he had such a clear and obvious vested interest? A bit like Owen Paterson, it is the mindset of entitlement that is the most troubling. They genuinely seem to believe because they know that they are good chaps that is all that is required. It really isn't.
I suspect that his conclusion on the hand wash was both inevitable and helpful. Clearly the company were going to have a spectacular pay day out of Covid regardless. But the failure to understand the most basic elements of conflict of interest rules and the importance of appearances is just weird. Everyone else moved on to this decades ago.
I'm not a fan of just out and out banning other jobs, or even of the various issues where parliament has essentially divested itself of personal responsibility (in theory) on the basis people don't believe they can be trusted on certain things relating to themselves.
But standards and probity are not difficult, the principles around interests and biases, apparent or actual, are well established and known. Yet as you point out in bold there is a culture that thinks these things are unimportant if as individuals they 'know' they are ok.
So, unfortunately, there may not really be any other options. MPs, as a collective, really cannot be trusted to maintain proper registers, make proper declarations, or not involve themselves in things in which they have an interest. Most manage it just fine, but enough of them won't and it is very damaging when that happens, so the collective body may need punishing because of the arrogant few.
But this government, even with all else going on, hasn't even responded to a report from the Committee on Standards in Public Life on local government standards in more than 2 years. A furore over Paterson and others won't make them act, because ultimately it is not in the interests of MPs to hold themselves to high standards.
Banning other jobs would be a sledgehammer to crack a nut, and cause damage to the floor around the nut, but does anyone really believe a more nuanced or targeted series of efforts to improve matters has any chance of happening, or succeeding if it does?
For the reasons I have set out I do not think a ban is the answer. But they need to be held to the same standards as every other profession has managed for decades. It needs to be independent and rigorous and clear. This is not rocket science. Many of these people, like Geoffrey Cox QC, already comply with such standards on a daily basis in their other jobs.
It’s relatively simple as well.
When I was at LSHTM for example, I disclosed my interests as the first item on the agenda of every meeting (as did everyone else)
Are any other countries banning internal combustion engines in cars as early as 2030 ? We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Battery electric vehicles were 15.2% of new car registrations in October 2021, up from 6.6% in October 2020. I don't think there will be any difficulty with banning the sale of new internal combustion engines in 2030. At the speed things are changing it may come to seem like a conservative target.
Our current internal combustion engine car is still running fine at 18.5 years old, so there will still be lots of internal combustion engine cars on the road in the 2030s, so I think there will be time for the infrastructure to be put in place to support the transition from ICE cars to electric ones.
Morning all.
This morning I've enjoyed the industry lobby story about "there will be a shortage of 35k BEV mechanics by 2030". Quick - government must solve the problem.
Hook, line and sinker by the BBC, may their socks forever stink.
Meanwhile, the motor industry has 200k+ mechanics, and there is this thing known as "training."
"The Belarusian government has discovered that migration from the Middle East and elsewhere can be used as a weapon against the EU. Migrants are being flown to Belarus, bused to the Polish border and then pushed across the frontier. The Polish authorities are pushing back, trapping thousands of people in the no-man’s-land between the two states. As temperatures drop, we’re coming closer to a full-blown humanitarian crisis — and perhaps to armed conflict. A regime capable of using people as weapons is also capable of giving weapons to people."
It is - effectively - an act of war by the government of Belarus.
(That being said - I'm not sure the article is completely accurate. The Belarussian government is certainly not paying to fly migrants into the country.)
Regrettable if the information in the article isn't entirely accurate. Usually UnHerd is reliable.
I had heard that Putin and Assad were conspiring to fly the migrants to Minsk. Lukashenka takes over from there.
I'd summarise that as Belarus and Russia go into people-trafficking.
Are any other countries banning internal combustion engines in cars as early as 2030 ? We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Battery electric vehicles were 15.2% of new car registrations in October 2021, up from 6.6% in October 2020. I don't think there will be any difficulty with banning the sale of new internal combustion engines in 2030. At the speed things are changing it may come to seem like a conservative target.
Our current internal combustion engine car is still running fine at 18.5 years old, so there will still be lots of internal combustion engine cars on the road in the 2030s, so I think there will be time for the infrastructure to be put in place to support the transition from ICE cars to electric ones.
Morning all.
This morning I've enjoyed the industry lobby story about "there will be a shortage of 35k BEV mechanics by 2030". Quick - government must solve the problem.
Hook, line and sinker by the BBC, may their socks forever stink.
Meanwhile, the motor industry has 200k+ mechanics, and there is this thing known as "training."
What is going to start happening now, as the numbers of battery vehicles in use increases, is that garages will start to get enquiries from the owners of said vehicles asking if they can fix them. Garages will know that if they aren't able to they will lose out on an increasing amount of business.
Are any other countries banning internal combustion engines in cars as early as 2030 ? We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Battery electric vehicles were 15.2% of new car registrations in October 2021, up from 6.6% in October 2020. I don't think there will be any difficulty with banning the sale of new internal combustion engines in 2030. At the speed things are changing it may come to seem like a conservative target.
Our current internal combustion engine car is still running fine at 18.5 years old, so there will still be lots of internal combustion engine cars on the road in the 2030s, so I think there will be time for the infrastructure to be put in place to support the transition from ICE cars to electric ones.
In any case, we got through the Blitz, and we got through Brexit, so how hard can it be to manage to transition to EVs? The people in this country just need to find a backbone and a stiff upper lip.
Because we, drivers, don’t want EVs, and see them being forced upon us by governments against our will.
I’m slowly going to start buying up V8s, because they’ll be going up in value once you can’t buy them new any more.
Are any other countries banning internal combustion engines in cars as early as 2030 ? We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Norway is banning them by 2025. Currently 77% of cars sold there are electric. Substantially more remote areas than us.
Rayner's asking the right questions here: Did this MP declare an interest when these matters were discussed and reported on by the taskforce? Why is the prime minister failing to act over these glaring conflicts of interest?
Looking forward to hearing about why we don't need to be worried by this. Prima facie this is troubling.
I agree, although she has asked the question, convicted and demanded punishment in 2 sentences
He is a Tory , no chance he is not guilty and the evidence will be in his big fat wallet
La Rayner seems to think that civilisation will come to an end because somebody made a videoconference from his Parliamentary Office.
Angela Rayner Jumps the shark?
The rules were written for physical use and never updated. I’m not convinced that hosting a meeting in parliament influences people, but certainly a VC doesn’t!
Rayner's asking the right questions here: Did this MP declare an interest when these matters were discussed and reported on by the taskforce? Why is the prime minister failing to act over these glaring conflicts of interest?
Looking forward to hearing about why we don't need to be worried by this. Prima facie this is troubling.
I agree, although she has asked the question, convicted and demanded punishment in 2 sentences
He is a Tory , no chance he is not guilty and the evidence will be in his big fat wallet
I can't see how the Tories lose Old Bexley and North Shropshire in any circumstances now TBH. The former might have been vulnerable to a UKIP/Brexit/Reform outfit around the time of the Clacton and Rochester and Strood by elections but not now. Even if the Lib Dems make a big effort in the latter, Labour are still likely to poll at least 20% in both.
A Windsor by election on the other hand would be pretty dangerous for the Tories and I'd make the Lib Dems narrow favourites there like just about any other seat in the Southeast of England where the LDs start in 2nd place.
Comments
https://unherd.com/2021/11/europe-cant-defend-itself/
https://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/corona-virologe-christian-drosten-warnt-vor-100-000-weiteren-corona-toten-in-deutschland-a-974fa407-fa2a-4610-bffa-0622a0af6897
(That being said - I'm not sure the article is completely accurate. The Belarussian government is certainly not paying to fly migrants into the country.)
In what way is that a “raid”?
We seem to be going remarkably early on this and the basic infrastructure/model choice doesn't look as if it will be there to me with neither the USA or the EU entirely onboard (Well by 2030).
Our PM's problems aren't coming singly, are they.
Although, since one of my main sources of news is the Guardian, that could be an over-optimistic impression!
It's a big gamble: will the price of EVs decrease enough to make this target realisable, and will the supporting infrastructure be in place by then?
I suspect that his conclusion on the hand wash was both inevitable and helpful. Clearly the company were going to have a spectacular pay day out of Covid regardless. But the failure to understand the most basic elements of conflict of interest rules and the importance of appearances is just weird. Everyone else moved on to this decades ago.
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-pushes-norways-ev-sales-new-record-2021-10-01/#:~:text=The country has been a,from 61.5% a year ago.
China is increasingly the market leader there, and is refining its products and marketing of EVs for European markets.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-10-15/electric-cars-china-fills-norway-with-evs-ahead-of-global-push
It is time to ban outside jobs, and for all MPs investments to be managed by blind trusts. The kleptocracy has to end.
Having had our EV for 18 months now, I am a major convert. Nicer to drive, no real maintenance needed, range accurate at 280 miles is plenty, and after having a couple of months very little range anxiety.
I want the most able people who are willing to give up their time to be MPs. I think we have to accept if we are going to get that additional earnings are a part of the package. But I also expect that people are much more alert to both actual and perceived conflicts of interest and accept that there are somethings that they just cannot do.
But standards and probity are not difficult, the principles around interests and biases, apparent or actual, are well established and known. Yet as you point out in bold there is a culture that thinks these things are unimportant if as individuals they 'know' they are ok.
So, unfortunately, there may not really be any other options. MPs, as a collective, really cannot be trusted to maintain proper registers, make proper declarations, or not involve themselves in things in which they have an interest. Most manage it just fine, but enough of them won't and it is very damaging when that happens, so the collective body may need punishing because of the arrogant few.
But this government, even with all else going on, hasn't even responded to a report from the Committee on Standards in Public Life on local government standards in more than 2 years. A furore over Paterson and others won't make them act, because ultimately it is not in the interests of MPs to hold themselves to high standards.
Banning other jobs would be a sledgehammer to crack a nut, and cause damage to the floor around the nut, but does anyone really believe a more nuanced or targeted series of efforts to improve matters has any chance of happening, or succeeding if it does?
Alternatively, no outside job should pay more than 20% of an MPs salary, or have an hourly rate that is higher.
And yes, if millionaires need to take a pay cut to become MPs then so be it. They usually have enough savings to draw on. I would like to see more people from everyday occupations represented in Parliament. If MPs need expert legal advice on drafting it in then they should pay for that advice like anyone else.
The bad apples will continue to poison the barrel unless stopped. Lowering overall quality by making the role less appealing may be one of the few options that will have some effect at least. The bad apples won't accept anything, so removing their opportunities may be the only thing that works.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/11/07/electric-cars-get-expensive-battery-costs-soar/
“Benchmark says prices for battery grade lithium carbonate in China have climbed more than 300pc since October 2020, hitting $28,765 in October. Prices for nickel and cobalt, also key battery ingredients, have also climbed, with Benchmark’s cathode price index up by 62.4pc over the year.
“It believes the lithium supply shortages are set to deepen next year and continue through the mid-2020s. ”
No, it didn't work out on this occasion, but it demonstrates the desire among a large enough portion of the House to take such action as soon as they can get away with it. If the desire is there, which there demonstrably was, then designing something else is pointless, as workarounds will happen eventually.
As you say standards like these have been known and managed for decades. Parish councillors, by and large, even know not to involve themselves in areas where there is even the potential for conflict of interest. So MPs acting like it is a revelation or blowing their minds, or if outraged that they've only just noticed it, does not provide any confidence it will lead to anything.
They all know this stuff already. They're already supposed to act in proper ways. A new way of them being told they should not do so won't achieve anything compared to not giving them the chance in the first place.
That's unfair on the vast majority, but the minority are too ingrained to change.
I recently spoke to a doctor in A&E. His description of the management practises, including the way that his working time was observed by (literal) clip board wielding "time ad motion" inspectors, was out of the 1950s. He even noted* that his personal response to the management by these methods was straight out of Taylorist theory..... "soldiering".
The methods of the 1950s lead to the results of the 1950s.
*He turned out to have a post grad degree in Operations Research.
I think he likely has a more realistic approach to climate unlike Boris who likes to please whoever he was in the room with last.
Getting 27 nations to agree to suspend the TCA looking rather unlikely, at least according to the Sun(!)
1) They aren't rare
2) They aren't earths
3) Lithium isn't a Rare Earth
The next generation of batteries pretty much eliminate Cobalt from their chemistry.
Our current internal combustion engine car is still running fine at 18.5 years old, so there will still be lots of internal combustion engine cars on the road in the 2030s, so I think there will be time for the infrastructure to be put in place to support the transition from ICE cars to electric ones.
Consider - no unpleasant trying-to-make-money, climbing-the-social-ladder etc. Either the family trust is opaque enough to render questions moot, or the family just owns the nicer half of Shropshire.
Plus no complaints about MPs pay.
What's not to like?
Which said MPs had voted to impose on us, of course.
https://www.rferl.org/a/belarus-poland-migrant-crisis-syria/31549911.html
The migrants pay thousands, apparently. But it’s certainly by design of the Belarusian government, since they require visas, which would otherwise be difficult to obtain - and of course Belarus is rather strict about the control of its airspace.
The price of a flight from Damascus to Minsk is in the hundreds, not thousands.
The tactics certainly have the smell of Putin about them. And serve to increase the divide between the Polish right and left. The semi fascist Polish government is responding with predictable brutality, and a lot of refugees may die this winter.
(edit)Guardian article this morning.
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2021/nov/09/unacceptable-migrants-face-desperate-situation-at-poland-belarus-border
A brick would be better qualified
The rare earth element comes in the form of neodymium, often used in permanent magnets in the drivetrain. But Tesla has shown it is perfectly possible to make mass market EV drive trains without it.
Battery grade Nickel is the thing that’s scarce when it comes to batteries. Plenty of it in Russia, says Mr Putin as he strokes the white cat on his knee. Hence the growing shifting to iron phosphate batteries.
As for cobalt, yup that’s being substituted out. If people really want to fall off their moral high horse they should ponder the likely source of the tin in the smartphone they're holding.
Luckily overnight @hzeffman found one - uncovering this:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/990b394c-41b0-11ec-96bf-de0821791f3f?shareToken=d93858f6b2ec431c7ad2c7dc8fbc737d
“It’s hard to avoid the suspicion that the prime minister sees a day trip to the COP as a useful way of distracting from the sleaze surrounding the Tory party rather than a chance to get a grip and engage in the substance like a statesman.”
https://twitter.com/tamcohen/status/1458340703826743300
So much fecking arrogance encapsulates the entire story from IDS and the PM.
Why? “Well,” he says awkwardly, “it’s a kind of mutual decision. Basically, just looking ahead, having been at two start-ups, first with TV-am and then Sky, I think it looks like the direction which Sky News wants to go over the next few years is not one that’s a particularly good fit for me.”
He refers me to an article his boss, Sky News’s head John Ryley, recently wrote in Press Gazette, a last rites for the age of the “all-powerful anchor”. Reporters were now experts, he wrote; the votive anchor’s role had shrunk.
“And also,” Boulton says, “he’s made it quite clear he believes the future of news is digital, is on the platform for phones and is very strongly based around data journalism. At that point you do start thinking . . .”
He acknowledges a genuine problem. For decades Sky News broke the news. Now Twitter, unobligated to check its sources, does.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/adam-boulton-on-leaving-sky-news-we-baby-boomers-have-had-our-day-hhkrv33sb
Angela Rayner Jumps the shark?
NEW THREAD
Cox, who is the MP for Torridge & West Devon, is understood to be determined to fight his corner and has told friends that there is “nothing new” in the reports. He is said to have privately dismissed calls for him to resign.
"Conflict of interest statement
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Funding sources
None."
Or have you returned that to the pensioners it was stolen from?
Neither exactly scarce.
The case of Cox seems much more political mischief making - “he wasn’t in his constituency so he wasn’t doing his job” rather than anything specifically wrong?
It was a massive undertaking.
My mind boggles. The only explanation for how the party can keep making self-inflicted screwup after another, unforced errors that kick the scandal along and make the press pack chasing it more determined is sneering arrogance.
And then we have the people who make no cash from this - indeed it is their cash these shysters are stealing - who pop up willing to excuse literally anything because its their team stealing their money.
When I was at LSHTM for example, I disclosed my interests as the first item on the agenda of every meeting (as did everyone else)
This morning I've enjoyed the industry lobby story about "there will be a shortage of 35k BEV mechanics by 2030". Quick - government must solve the problem.
Hook, line and sinker by the BBC, may their socks forever stink.
Meanwhile, the motor industry has 200k+ mechanics, and there is this thing known as "training."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0b2fbw4
I’m slowly going to start buying up V8s, because they’ll be going up in value once you can’t buy them new any more.
Norway – a major oil and gas exporter – needs to sell over 100 barrels of oil (which emits 40 tonnes of CO2) to pay for the tax breaks it gives EVs to avoid one tonne of CO2.
https://energypost.eu/norway-an-ev-role-model-their-pathway-is-expensive-and-paid-for-with-oil-gas-exports/
But even Tories deserve due process
A Windsor by election on the other hand would be pretty dangerous for the Tories and I'd make the Lib Dems narrow favourites there like just about any other seat in the Southeast of England where the LDs start in 2nd place.