I know it's only a subset of Conservative activists, but to have Truss, Frost, Trevelyan and Dorries as the top four suggests they have lost the plot.
I'd think the same if an equivalent Labour survey in 2019 had Pidcock, Burgon, Abbott and Lavery in the top four positions - which was plausible back then.
Two out of four have done an absolutely fantastic job.
The third I'm not sure about, the fourth is simply amusing because of how apoplectic she drives opponents.
Cabinets are a team building exercise and most PMs seem to find it useful to have a Minister for stupidity who makes everyone else feel better about themselves. Its a morale thing, I think. After the departure of Williamson there was a vacancy and Mad Nad seems destined to fill it.
Culture is something Britain is very good at. An example of soft power. Media is vital in the world we live in. And sport too matters.
All 3 deserve a Cabinet Minister of real clout, intelligence and standing not the office joke. This government has cut spending on arts education thus styming opportunities for the young. Culture is not an optional extra. It is vital to a rounded education, an intelligent nation, a country's well being, a country which punches above its weight. That a government led by a man who boasts about his knowledge of the classics and had one of the best educations money can buy should appoint an ignorant dimwit like Dorries to the role is depressing.
Why do we no longer aspire to anything beyond the second-rate at best?
As for the Shadow Cabinet, pleased about Streeting and Philippson. Let's see what they make of their new roles. Cooper has been forensic in her demolition of Patel in Select Committees. But she now has the infinitely harder task of coming up with a migration/refugee policy which is both popular and effective. Is she up to it?
As for Lammy, am in 2 minds about him. He can be very good on some things. But he can also be an arse on others. His recent statements about womens bodies and women "hoarding rights" like dinosaurs has marked him down considerably in my eyes.
Starmer has not been good at choosing people so far. His initial instincts have been poor and he has had to make quite a few changes in 2 years. That is not a great sign of someone who is good at assessing people. May be it is because he felt forced to do so. I'm not sure about that. Still let's see.
Yet Dorries is a best selling author.
It may not be an aspect of culture some are interested in but culture should encompass the widest range of things and isn't only for those with a knowledge of the classics and expensive educations.
Of course - but do you really claim that Dorries' interest in culture is anywhere near so broad ?
I wouldn't know and don't care.
But it reeks of the snobbishness which considers Harold Pinter more important than Coronation Street.
Many of the things now regarded as cultural exports from the Beatles to football were looked down on not long ago.
And it still happens - Iron Maiden have been a huge UK cultural export for decades but you'll struggle to find references to them in the media's cultural sections.
And if you go back to Shakespeare wasn't he sneered at for having 'little Latin and no Greek' ? Or you might say for not having a broad interest in culture.
Nadine doesn’t need to be Alan Yentob. But she could start by not calling journalists “fuckwits” on Twitter.
She also appears - judging by her comments about Ch 4 - to not have the slightest clue what she’s doing.
Exaggeration?
I think she called one journo - James O'Brien - a "public school fuckwit", which seems fair enough and very defensible for accuracy in the knockabout commentary stakes.
That might be your level for ministerial gravitas, it’s not mine.
Nadine Dorries is an incompetent fool and way out of depth as a government minister. Talking like that to members of the media is inappropriate for someone of her position, but I think on this occasion an exception can be made given just how much a fuckwit James O'Brien is. He just reeks of twattishness. Can you imagine having to sit in a pub with him for more than an hour?
PB advice please: Could someone explain to me what "necessary socialising" is?
Y/N
A) Going to round to girlfriend's place Board games night with 8 friends C) Christmas party with only 4 colleagues D) Hogmanay party with 12 friends E) Hillwalking with 5 friends
All of the above, man is a social animal. Stupid thing to say.
Interesting looking at that ConHome survey. Even as a left-of-centre lass it's not often I'd say this but Labour's front page is now more heavyweight than the Government's.
A lot of that is Johnson's fault. He booted out some really good people because he doesn't like people around him who a) stand up to him and b) disagree with him. Another sign of weakness.
I cannot apologise for what my ancestors did. I can try and make things better now.
How do you feel with the opposite emotion? A lot of people take pride in what our ancestors did -- the Battle of Britain, the Normandy landings, defeating Hitler, World War I, defeating Napoleon, etc. Are you also averse to such?
Huge moment. ‘An appalling atrocity,' says Prince Charles of transatlantic slavery. No British royal - or Prime Minister - has come as close to apologising for the 250 years of state-sanctioned exploitation and murder. #Barbados https://t.co/gMBibgB3QY
Costs little, but I'm still not a fan. When/where do you draw the line? Should the Italians apologise for the Roman empire? How about the Egyptians enslaving the people of Israel? If you personally have done something wrong, then apologising is the right thing. When our ancestors did something to their ancestors, I'm not so sure.
If you follow that argument to its logical conclusion, you also don't revel in the glories of a country unless you partook at least in some small way.
I'm ok with that, but not with those who celebrate their country's greatness without also feeling shame for her squalor.
Thankfully we haven't constructed an honours system based around the British Empire under which much of the horrors of transantlantic slavery took place.
We haven't, right?
I was struck by Duke of Rothesay’s speech in Barbados. I cannot recall a member of the British Establishment being so clear on the disgraceful role played by said Establishment in the slave trade.
Maybe he’ll not be such a poor monarch after all?
Well, over the years, he has indulged in such stupid irrelevancies as cross-cultural relations, the environment and housing.
And made some people very angry because he wrote letters to ministers asking about the same.
If he manages to wind up Tories I might become a fan of the Rothesays.
Do you realise (or care) how pretentious you sound using his Scottish title?
PB advice please: Could someone explain to me what "necessary socialising" is?
Y/N
A) Going to round to girlfriend's place Board games night with 8 friends C) Christmas party with only 4 colleagues D) Hogmanay party with 12 friends E) Hillwalking with 5 friends
Yes to all except b ) unless the board game is Cards Against Humanity.
Mr. Eagles, the allegations are very serious, and, coincidentally, totally irrelevant to the Hollywood celebrity who had a gap year as a royal.
Bollocks, this is disgraceful and a million times worse than anything alleged against the Sussexeses.
The Duke of York tried to help a Conservative donor open a bank in Monaco, according to leaked emails.
Prince Andrew corresponded with the palace in Monte Carlo and offered to raise the topic when he met Prince Albert.
The duke risks looking compromised by his relationship with David Rowland whose family bank went on to lend the British Royal £1.5 million and then wrote off the loan.
Mr. Eagles, the allegations are very serious, and, coincidentally, totally irrelevant to the Hollywood celebrity who had a gap year as a royal.
Bollocks, this is disgraceful and a million times worse than anything alleged against the Sussexeses.
The Duke of York tried to help a Conservative donor open a bank in Monaco, according to leaked emails.
Prince Andrew corresponded with the palace in Monte Carlo and offered to raise the topic when he met Prince Albert.
The duke risks looking compromised by his relationship with David Rowland whose family bank went on to lend the British Royal £1.5 million and then wrote off the loan.
It just doesn't sit well for me. A bit like non-religious people getting married in church, and mentioning God in their vows, when they don't believe in God. Bit fake.
Yeah, I did that. Do I get let off because I did it for my wife and she is a believer? Our children are baptised, too.
(I do also know and get on with the vicar really well and the pre-marriage church workshops did change some things for us - complete pooling of finances where we previously had joint account only for shared bills)
Personal choice. I could not do it as I would have been making the most important commitment of my life and lying for part of it. Happily for me my wife thinks the same as me. You made your choice to make your wife happy.
Agree. I couldn't either as I would feel a hypocrite but I have no objection to those non believers who do as I don't feel the hypocrisy is really that bad, after all you don't believe so it just becomes an event and is not real. My wife's family do this. It is a celebration of the event for them. It does however seem a bit disrespectful of those performing the service though.
I am happy to sit in a church for someone else's wedding and christening. I don't take part in prayers etc, but I don't make it obvious that I think it is all nonsense.
Yep. I made sure the vicar was aware of my lack of belief. He was happy to go ahead.
I didn't feel comfortable about it but my wife was keen to have a religious element to the marriage and her mother was super keen. I ultimately went along with it because I didn't care that much and it was making others happy. For me we were making promises to each other in front of our families and friends. So far so good.
If one partner is religious, then fair enough. I just cannot grasp the motivation for irreligious couples to have a religious wedding – there are hundreds of beautiful venues for atheist weddings.
As a society leaves religion behind it does so gradually, and the last religious touchpoints for many in England are weddings and carol services (even I sometimes choose to go to carol services some years).
My parents-in-law used to go to Mass every week. There was a period when the aim would be to be a bit too late, and so they'd have to listen in to Mass from the vestibule (where they could also gossip). This was quite a popular option. Now they've stopped going altogether, except for the annual Mass for the departed matriarch of the family.
My wife went through all the childhood stages - first communion, confirmation (possibly others, I don't know) but she was happy not to have a Catholic wedding. Her brothers have all gone through with the rigmarole of the pre-marriage course, and our nephew and niece have been christened, but none of them attend Mass.
Mostly people don't tend to switch dramatically from religious to not (though my devoutly atheist Dad is an exception). Religious observance simply fades away.
My religious belief faded over a couple of years or so. However, my attendance at mass stopped abruptly when I was 16. It got to the stage where I was only going to keep my mother happy, and then I decided that enough was enough. Yes, she was upset, but I was being true to myself.
So no church wedding for me. And no wife called Bernadette.
PB advice please: Could someone explain to me what "necessary socialising" is?
Y/N
A) Going to round to girlfriend's place Board games night with 8 friends C) Christmas party with only 4 colleagues D) Hogmanay party with 12 friends E) Hillwalking with 5 friends
Yes to all except b ) unless the board game is Cards Against Humanity.
Cards Against Humanity is a card game, not a board game.
I have been into three shops, including Pret, this morning, and nobody was wearing masks.
Mask fatigue? Secret Reform UK supporters? Nobody got the message?
As above though, I think the fear on Omicron might be overdone. What very little evidence we have suggests that while vaccines are less effective against it, it is not more likely to send you to hospital and it may even be more mild than Delta.
It is prudent to be cautious until we know more.
There's general Corona fatigue among those of us that venture out of our houses. I think the perennially scared are just sitting in their front rooms curtain twitching and tutting at people not wearing masks as they pass by on the road.
Interesting looking at that ConHome survey. Even as a left-of-centre lass it's not often I'd say this but Labour's front page is now more heavyweight than the Government's.
A lot of that is Johnson's fault. He booted out some really good people because he doesn't like people around him who a) stand up to him and b) disagree with him. Another sign of weakness.
LOL you're always good for a laugh. 😂
After his most recent reshuffle, the current Cabinet is one of the strongest its been in many years. Sunak, Truss, Javid, Zahawi, Frost etc are all excellent.
My prediction is we will all get it, but it will be pretty much harmless unless you’re un-vaxxed.
A special booster will be available in about 6 months.
Yes, I think that was essentially the OP's point – succinctly put by you.
I am haunted at times like this by what the lung consultant told me a few years back - "it's essential you avoid any more lung infections".
I really do not want to catch this. Even flu or bronchitis causes my lungs further damage, damage which cannot be repaired.
So I am glad I've been triply vaccinated. As is my husband. I'm urging my children to get the 3rd jab as soon as possible. And I'm resigning myself to a more constrained life than I had hoped for even a few weeks back for the immediate future, until we know more.
Fortunately I can use the time to make plans for the garden and other stuff. And I can generally cope with solitariness. But I can't say it fills me with joy and it can get bloody hard at times. If this new variant means we have to go through the last 2 years all over again, I'm not at all sure I will be able to cope with that, to be perfectly honest.
It's a unwelcome development - and a suspenseful wait while they study it - but I don't think there's any realistic possibility of a back to square 1 scenario. Worst case (vaccines badly impaired) is an extension of the pandemic here by a few months.
Huge moment. ‘An appalling atrocity,' says Prince Charles of transatlantic slavery. No British royal - or Prime Minister - has come as close to apologising for the 250 years of state-sanctioned exploitation and murder. #Barbados https://t.co/gMBibgB3QY
Costs little, but I'm still not a fan. When/where do you draw the line? Should the Italians apologise for the Roman empire? How about the Egyptians enslaving the people of Israel? If you personally have done something wrong, then apologising is the right thing. When our ancestors did something to their ancestors, I'm not so sure.
If you follow that argument to its logical conclusion, you also don't revel in the glories of a country unless you partook at least in some small way.
I'm ok with that, but not with those who celebrate their country's greatness without also feeling shame for her squalor.
Thankfully we haven't constructed an honours system based around the British Empire under which much of the horrors of transantlantic slavery took place.
We haven't, right?
I was struck by Duke of Rothesay’s speech in Barbados. I cannot recall a member of the British Establishment being so clear on the disgraceful role played by said Establishment in the slave trade.
Maybe he’ll not be such a poor monarch after all?
Charlie does show occasional glimmers of membership of the human race, his brothers not so much. The cynic in me thinks that they're well advised and realise that the continuation of 'the Firm' means that they get with the programme. See also young bawheid's conversion to the green agenda.
Charles is a very bad man, not only is he a fornicator and adulterer but....
The Prince of Wales unwittingly triggered the royal family’s rift with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex when he speculated about the skin tone of their future children, a book claims.
A book, of which the author wants to sell a lot of copies, "claims"...
Who knows, maybe it’s true. The comment struck me as gauche but essentially harmless.
Meghan Markle has, I think, psychological issues. Which is terribly sad as I believed she could be a massive force for good.
The specific I heard about this authors claim is that he says it was a private breakfast conversation between Charles & Camilla and that Camilla was shocked by the comment. I’m not sure I find that plausible…
And as i mentioned earlier Blair has a completely uneventful first 2 years, nothing happened of any note
Good Friday Agreement and war in Kosovo.
Notably both foreign news stories (in case of NI it's certainly the view of the London media). Both cemented Blair's view of the centrality of Britain's relationship with the US, and Kosovo provided the philosophical justification for war in Iraq.
But I grant you that neither would have been expected to ruffle the feathers of the electorate.
Interesting looking at that ConHome survey. Even as a left-of-centre lass it's not often I'd say this but Labour's front page is now more heavyweight than the Government's.
A lot of that is Johnson's fault. He booted out some really good people because he doesn't like people around him who a) stand up to him and b) disagree with him. Another sign of weakness.
LOL you're always good for a laugh. 😂
After his most recent reshuffle, the current Cabinet is one of the strongest its been in many years. Sunak, Truss, Javid, Zahawi, Frost etc are all excellent.
I think Frost would have been a butler or valet to Bernard Ingham under Thatcher's administration, speaking for myself.
And as i mentioned earlier Blair has a completely uneventful first 2 years, nothing happened of any note
Erm. The most significant single death of the past century, a nation plunged into mourning, a royal family in crisis.
It was an earthquake the like of which this country hadn't experienced outside of wars and pandemics.
And handled bloody brilliantly by Tony Blair.
Wow I thought you were good for a laugh before hand, but you think that the death of Diana was the single most significant death of the past century? 😂😂😂
There's only one person I can think of so far up Blair's arse. You are Andrew Adonis and I claim £5.
I have been into three shops, including Pret, this morning, and nobody was wearing masks.
Mask fatigue? Secret Reform UK supporters? Nobody got the message?
As above though, I think the fear on Omicron might be overdone. What very little evidence we have suggests that while vaccines are less effective against it, it is not more likely to send you to hospital and it may even be more mild than Delta.
And as i mentioned earlier Blair has a completely uneventful first 2 years, nothing happened of any note
Erm. The most significant single death of the past century, a nation plunged into mourning, a royal family in crisis.
It was an earthquake the like of which this country hadn't experienced outside of wars and pandemics.
And handled bloody brilliantly by Tony Blair.
More significant than JFK being shot? Or Hitler killing himself.
I did not know her, I felt sorry for her kids, but her death had absolutely no impact on peoples work, social life, holidays etc etc. Compare that with Covid
Mr. Eagles, the allegations are very serious, and, coincidentally, totally irrelevant to the Hollywood celebrity who had a gap year as a royal.
Bollocks, this is disgraceful and a million times worse than anything alleged against the Sussexeses.
The Duke of York tried to help a Conservative donor open a bank in Monaco, according to leaked emails.
Prince Andrew corresponded with the palace in Monte Carlo and offered to raise the topic when he met Prince Albert.
The duke risks looking compromised by his relationship with David Rowland whose family bank went on to lend the British Royal £1.5 million and then wrote off the loan.
There is no good commercial reason for lending to princes
{Fugger has entered the chat}
Indeed, there is a long history that suggests that lending money to Royals (of any country) is a very good way to ensure you never see that money again.
And as i mentioned earlier Blair has a completely uneventful first 2 years, nothing happened of any note
Erm. The most significant single death of the past century, a nation plunged into mourning, a royal family in crisis.
It was an earthquake the like of which this country hadn't experienced outside of wars and pandemics.
And handled bloody brilliantly by Tony Blair.
It was all that stuff for people who like to think in those terms, or it was a boringly banal object lesson about drink driving and seatbelts. Blair's standard issue unctuosity was thoroughly adequate, but as PM at the time it is hard to see how he could have blown it short of starting a Lady Di bad Taste Joke Club. Position of royals never remotely in danger.
I have been into three shops, including Pret, this morning, and nobody was wearing masks.
Mask fatigue? Secret Reform UK supporters? Nobody got the message?
As above though, I think the fear on Omicron might be overdone. What very little evidence we have suggests that while vaccines are less effective against it, it is not more likely to send you to hospital and it may even be more mild than Delta.
Morning all, I'm tail end Charlie on the SKS reshuffle but I'm keen to comment on it because I think it's a watershed. There's no longer a shadow of a doubt about Labour's direction. It's back to the centre, ideology is out, profile & pragmatism is in. The dalliance with left radicalism is over - inevitable imo after such a drubbing at the polls. Jeremy Corbyn was a poor leader and by the last election had become a liability. Some of the policies were excellent but others had a retro feel and ‘retro’ is the word I’d use to describe the Corbyn era if allowed only one. Fine for clothes and music - who doesn’t like bell bottom flares and Alright Now by Free – but for progressive politics not so much.
I do feel wistful about it though. I liked certain aspects of how the party changed after 2015, in particular how we stopped being scared to propose big transformational changes to the benefit of those without privilege and the consternation of those with a vested interest in retaining theirs. The only thing worse than losing to the Tories is to stand on a timid platform and still lose to the Tories. 2015 was worse for me than 2019 was and 2017 was fabulous. I hope another 2015 is not where we’re heading. That would be just too sad. It would also mean years more of Boris Johnson and that’s beyond sad.
Another 1987 or 1992 would be grim too imo. I’ve no interest in Starmer being Kinnock - rolling the pitch for Streeting as Blair to end 18 years of Tory rule in 2028 - his mission has to be replacing Johnson as PM at the next election. The bloke has to go. I rank this above being radical so who cares, quite frankly, about whether I feel ‘wistful’ about the quenching of the socialist flame? I certainly don’t. I don’t give a toss that I’m feeling wistful. The only question of importance is does this reshuffle improve the quality of the Labour front bench and therefore the chances of ‘taxi for Johnson’ come the election? I think it does. So I’m happy. Go Keir.
It was a good reshuffle. And shows serious intent. As I posted yesterday next GE will be a lot closer than some think imho.
I agree and also about the election. I got on Starmer Next PM at over 8 a while ago (after Hartlepool) and that's one of the better bets in my politics book. Johnson being replaced before the election would kill it, of course, but I don't see that happening. Looks almost certain to be SKS v BJ.
It just doesn't sit well for me. A bit like non-religious people getting married in church, and mentioning God in their vows, when they don't believe in God. Bit fake.
Yeah, I did that. Do I get let off because I did it for my wife and she is a believer? Our children are baptised, too.
(I do also know and get on with the vicar really well and the pre-marriage church workshops did change some things for us - complete pooling of finances where we previously had joint account only for shared bills)
Personal choice. I could not do it as I would have been making the most important commitment of my life and lying for part of it. Happily for me my wife thinks the same as me. You made your choice to make your wife happy.
Agree. I couldn't either as I would feel a hypocrite but I have no objection to those non believers who do as I don't feel the hypocrisy is really that bad, after all you don't believe so it just becomes an event and is not real. My wife's family do this. It is a celebration of the event for them. It does however seem a bit disrespectful of those performing the service though.
I am happy to sit in a church for someone else's wedding and christening. I don't take part in prayers etc, but I don't make it obvious that I think it is all nonsense.
Yep. I made sure the vicar was aware of my lack of belief. He was happy to go ahead.
I didn't feel comfortable about it but my wife was keen to have a religious element to the marriage and her mother was super keen. I ultimately went along with it because I didn't care that much and it was making others happy. For me we were making promises to each other in front of our families and friends. So far so good.
If one partner is religious, then fair enough. I just cannot grasp the motivation for irreligious couples to have a religious wedding – there are hundreds of beautiful venues for atheist weddings.
Interestingly, the atheism of non-religious weddings is rather rigorously enforced by the state. You either have to explicitly have God in your wedding - i.e. in a church - or leave him out entirely. So, for example, you can't play God Only Knows, by the Beach Boys - one of the finest love songs ever - at a non-religious wedding. Couldn't in my day, anyway.
Is that some sort of joke, as I'm afraid I don't get it. You certainly couldn't play pop songs in any church worth it's salt.
Not a joke, but perhaps I explained it badly. You either have to get married in a church - in which case you can play whatever the vicar likes - or in a secular venue - in which case you can't mention God at all. So you can't play religious music, or even music which obliquely references religion, in a secular wedding venue. Not during the wedding, anyway. At least, that was true back in 2009. Didn't prove a massive inconvenience for me, to be honest, but a minor quirk of the system.
Still struggling to believe that certain pop songs with zero religious value are banned from civil ceremonies. Feels far more likely your registrar was just sick of hearing it.
The only reason for the rule in general would be to try and protect CoE priviliges (and they need all the help they can get to keep struggling on), so the idea they need Beach Boys songs protected as part of their patrimony is a little eccentric.
I'd suggest the main reason was because Mr Cameron was in such a rush that he rather f*cked up the whole thing.
He did not even take the time to integrate his proposals with existing marriage law.
And as i mentioned earlier Blair has a completely uneventful first 2 years, nothing happened of any note
Erm. The most significant single death of the past century, a nation plunged into mourning, a royal family in crisis.
It was an earthquake the like of which this country hadn't experienced outside of wars and pandemics.
And handled bloody brilliantly by Tony Blair.
Wow I thought you were good for a laugh before hand, but you think that the death of Diana was the single most significant death of the past century? 😂😂😂
There's only one person I can think of so far up Blair's arse. You are Andrew Adonis and I claim £5.
I don't usually respond to you because you're not worth it. However, I know you post on here voluminously but you should pause and read a little more carefully.
I didn't write that it was the single most significant death. I wrote that it was the most significant single death. Do you understand the syntactical difference? Diana's death, regardless of whether you're a royalist, was a seismic shock to this nation the after effects of which are still being felt.
Oh and I never once voted for Tony Blair. I've never liked him. But even I have to admit, albeit reluctantly, that of late he has begun to speak a lot of sense.
You can dislike someone and their politics whilst acknowledging their greatness. Or, at least, most of us more moderate types can. That's why in the same breath I can state that Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair are the two greatest Prime Ministers of my lifetime.
The three worst, in no particular order, are Ted Heath, Jim Callaghan and Boris Johnson.
And as i mentioned earlier Blair has a completely uneventful first 2 years, nothing happened of any note
Erm. The most significant single death of the past century, a nation plunged into mourning, a royal family in crisis.
It was an earthquake the like of which this country hadn't experienced outside of wars and pandemics.
And handled bloody brilliantly by Tony Blair.
More significant than JFK being shot? Or Hitler killing himself.
I did not know her, I felt sorry for her kids, but her death had absolutely no impact on peoples work, social life, holidays etc etc. Compare that with Covid
The day of her funeral did impact lives of the country/jobs/social life.
Most shops didn't open until 2pm so staff could watch her funeral.
Holidays were impacted as getting down to London was a nightmare the Friday and Saturday.
The motorways were clogged/shut for the journey to Althorp.
PB advice please: Could someone explain to me what "necessary socialising" is?
Y/N
A) Going to round to girlfriend's place Board games night with 8 friends C) Christmas party with only 4 colleagues D) Hogmanay party with 12 friends E) Hillwalking with 5 friends
I'd maybe ditch the works party if it's only four 'colleagues'. Persuadable if it's a complete freebie and/or they're also friends. Board games also not really my thing and I don't need to visit your girlfriend, lovely as I'm sure she is, but I expect that one is important to you
And as i mentioned earlier Blair has a completely uneventful first 2 years, nothing happened of any note
Erm. The most significant single death of the past century, a nation plunged into mourning, a royal family in crisis.
It was an earthquake the like of which this country hadn't experienced outside of wars and pandemics.
And handled bloody brilliantly by Tony Blair.
It was all that stuff for people who like to think in those terms, or it was a boringly banal object lesson about drink driving and seatbelts. Blair's standard issue unctuosity was thoroughly adequate, but as PM at the time it is hard to see how he could have blown it short of starting a Lady Di bad Taste Joke Club. Position of royals never remotely in danger.
So you're saying it's a good job it didn't happen under the current PM then?
Do you know what the last thing to go through Lady Di's mind was before she died? The windscreen.
It just doesn't sit well for me. A bit like non-religious people getting married in church, and mentioning God in their vows, when they don't believe in God. Bit fake.
Yeah, I did that. Do I get let off because I did it for my wife and she is a believer? Our children are baptised, too.
(I do also know and get on with the vicar really well and the pre-marriage church workshops did change some things for us - complete pooling of finances where we previously had joint account only for shared bills)
Personal choice. I could not do it as I would have been making the most important commitment of my life and lying for part of it. Happily for me my wife thinks the same as me. You made your choice to make your wife happy.
Agree. I couldn't either as I would feel a hypocrite but I have no objection to those non believers who do as I don't feel the hypocrisy is really that bad, after all you don't believe so it just becomes an event and is not real. My wife's family do this. It is a celebration of the event for them. It does however seem a bit disrespectful of those performing the service though.
I am happy to sit in a church for someone else's wedding and christening. I don't take part in prayers etc, but I don't make it obvious that I think it is all nonsense.
Yep. I made sure the vicar was aware of my lack of belief. He was happy to go ahead.
I didn't feel comfortable about it but my wife was keen to have a religious element to the marriage and her mother was super keen. I ultimately went along with it because I didn't care that much and it was making others happy. For me we were making promises to each other in front of our families and friends. So far so good.
If one partner is religious, then fair enough. I just cannot grasp the motivation for irreligious couples to have a religious wedding – there are hundreds of beautiful venues for atheist weddings.
Interestingly, the atheism of non-religious weddings is rather rigorously enforced by the state. You either have to explicitly have God in your wedding - i.e. in a church - or leave him out entirely. So, for example, you can't play God Only Knows, by the Beach Boys - one of the finest love songs ever - at a non-religious wedding. Couldn't in my day, anyway.
Which is a massive prejudice against us non-denominational theists. My wife and I wanted to have some divine cited in our wedding without clouding it with nonsense about three gods in one.
And as i mentioned earlier Blair has a completely uneventful first 2 years, nothing happened of any note
Erm. The most significant single death of the past century, a nation plunged into mourning, a royal family in crisis.
It was an earthquake the like of which this country hadn't experienced outside of wars and pandemics.
And handled bloody brilliantly by Tony Blair.
More significant than JFK being shot? Or Hitler killing himself.
I did not know her, I felt sorry for her kids, but her death had absolutely no impact on peoples work, social life, holidays etc etc. Compare that with Covid
The day of her funeral did impact lives of the country/jobs/social life.
Most shops didn't open until 2pm so staff could watch her funeral.
Holidays were impacted as getting down to London was a nightmare the Friday and Saturday.
The motorways were clogged/shut for the journey to Althorp.
And as i mentioned earlier Blair has a completely uneventful first 2 years, nothing happened of any note
Erm. The most significant single death of the past century, a nation plunged into mourning, a royal family in crisis.
It was an earthquake the like of which this country hadn't experienced outside of wars and pandemics.
And handled bloody brilliantly by Tony Blair.
It was all that stuff for people who like to think in those terms, or it was a boringly banal object lesson about drink driving and seatbelts. Blair's standard issue unctuosity was thoroughly adequate, but as PM at the time it is hard to see how he could have blown it short of starting a Lady Di bad Taste Joke Club. Position of royals never remotely in danger.
I remember the Queen looking quite nervous when she did that heavily pressured broadcast, with the crowds milling around in the background at the gates of Buckingham Palace. She's learnt a lot on how to communicate more openly, while simultaneously retaining dignity, since then.
Sir Keir Starmer is a friend of the North, unlike Boris the Bastard, Harrier of the North.
Labour's revamped top team has 12 northern MPs compared to four in Boris Johnson's cabinet - interesting to see if this has any impact on Keir Starmer's bid to win back heartland voters that deserted the party in 2019, more in today's @NorthernAgenda_
And as i mentioned earlier Blair has a completely uneventful first 2 years, nothing happened of any note
Erm. The most significant single death of the past century, a nation plunged into mourning, a royal family in crisis.
It was an earthquake the like of which this country hadn't experienced outside of wars and pandemics.
And handled bloody brilliantly by Tony Blair.
Wow I thought you were good for a laugh before hand, but you think that the death of Diana was the single most significant death of the past century? 😂😂😂
There's only one person I can think of so far up Blair's arse. You are Andrew Adonis and I claim £5.
I don't usually respond to you because you're not worth it. However, I know you post on here voluminously but you should pause and read a little more carefully.
I didn't write that it was the single most significant death. I wrote that it was the most significant single death. Do you understand the syntactical difference? Diana's death, regardless of whether you're a royalist, was a seismic shock to this nation the after effects of which are still being felt.
Oh and I never once voted for Tony Blair. I've never liked him. But even I have to admit, albeit reluctantly, that of late he has begun to speak a lot of sense.
You can dislike someone and their politics whilst acknowledging their greatness. Or, at least, most of us more moderate types can. That's why in the same breath I can state that Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair were the two greatest Prime Ministers of my lifetime.
The three worst, in no particular order, are Ted Heath, Jim Callaghan and Boris Johnson.
So you're doubling down on the death of Lady Di being the most important single death in the past hundred years?
More important than the suicide of Adolph Hitler? More important than the murder of JFK?
Lady Di doesn't even come close to those. Heck, her death has changed less than the death of George Floyd.
It just doesn't sit well for me. A bit like non-religious people getting married in church, and mentioning God in their vows, when they don't believe in God. Bit fake.
Yeah, I did that. Do I get let off because I did it for my wife and she is a believer? Our children are baptised, too.
(I do also know and get on with the vicar really well and the pre-marriage church workshops did change some things for us - complete pooling of finances where we previously had joint account only for shared bills)
Personal choice. I could not do it as I would have been making the most important commitment of my life and lying for part of it. Happily for me my wife thinks the same as me. You made your choice to make your wife happy.
Agree. I couldn't either as I would feel a hypocrite but I have no objection to those non believers who do as I don't feel the hypocrisy is really that bad, after all you don't believe so it just becomes an event and is not real. My wife's family do this. It is a celebration of the event for them. It does however seem a bit disrespectful of those performing the service though.
I am happy to sit in a church for someone else's wedding and christening. I don't take part in prayers etc, but I don't make it obvious that I think it is all nonsense.
Yep. I made sure the vicar was aware of my lack of belief. He was happy to go ahead.
I didn't feel comfortable about it but my wife was keen to have a religious element to the marriage and her mother was super keen. I ultimately went along with it because I didn't care that much and it was making others happy. For me we were making promises to each other in front of our families and friends. So far so good.
If one partner is religious, then fair enough. I just cannot grasp the motivation for irreligious couples to have a religious wedding – there are hundreds of beautiful venues for atheist weddings.
Interestingly, the atheism of non-religious weddings is rather rigorously enforced by the state. You either have to explicitly have God in your wedding - i.e. in a church - or leave him out entirely. So, for example, you can't play God Only Knows, by the Beach Boys - one of the finest love songs ever - at a non-religious wedding. Couldn't in my day, anyway.
Is that some sort of joke, as I'm afraid I don't get it. You certainly couldn't play pop songs in any church worth it's salt.
Not a joke, but perhaps I explained it badly. You either have to get married in a church - in which case you can play whatever the vicar likes - or in a secular venue - in which case you can't mention God at all. So you can't play religious music, or even music which obliquely references religion, in a secular wedding venue. Not during the wedding, anyway. At least, that was true back in 2009. Didn't prove a massive inconvenience for me, to be honest, but a minor quirk of the system.
Still struggling to believe that certain pop songs with zero religious value are banned from civil ceremonies. Feels far more likely your registrar was just sick of hearing it.
We were told the same when we registered. An example used with us (not that we wanted it anyway) was that you couldn't have Robbie Williams Angels.
Ha, what jobsworths. More or less confirmation that as well as not being too bright, the civil servants involved know nothing about religion either.
Good grief I knew none of this. It's bollocks isn't it. What the hell has it got to do with the state what music you play at your wedding. What prat thought this up.
And as i mentioned earlier Blair has a completely uneventful first 2 years, nothing happened of any note
Erm. The most significant single death of the past century, a nation plunged into mourning, a royal family in crisis.
It was an earthquake the like of which this country hadn't experienced outside of wars and pandemics.
And handled bloody brilliantly by Tony Blair.
Wow I thought you were good for a laugh before hand, but you think that the death of Diana was the single most significant death of the past century? 😂😂😂
There's only one person I can think of so far up Blair's arse. You are Andrew Adonis and I claim £5.
I don't usually respond to you because you're not worth it. However, I know you post on here voluminously but you should pause and read a little more carefully.
I didn't write that it was the single most significant death. I wrote that it was the most significant single death. Do you understand the syntactical difference? Diana's death, regardless of whether you're a royalist, was a seismic shock to this nation the after effects of which are still being felt.
Oh and I never once voted for Tony Blair. I've never liked him. But even I have to admit, albeit reluctantly, that of late he has begun to speak a lot of sense.
You can dislike someone and their politics whilst acknowledging their greatness. Or, at least, most of us more moderate types can. That's why in the same breath I can state that Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair were the two greatest Prime Ministers of my lifetime.
The three worst, in no particular order, are Ted Heath, Jim Callaghan and Boris Johnson.
I don't understand your syntactical point. twasn't a single death anyway, there was Dodi and the driver.
I cannot apologise for what my ancestors did. I can try and make things better now.
How do you feel with the opposite emotion? A lot of people take pride in what our ancestors did -- the Battle of Britain, the Normandy landings, defeating Hitler, World War I, defeating Napoleon, etc. Are you also averse to such?
My great-grandfather had the first electric hoover in the city of Edinburgh.
I take no pride (or indeed shame) in that. His achievement/foresightedness/cleanliness/precociousness is not mine, and does not really reflect on me. But I do find it interesting.
I do take pride in my grandfather defeating Hitler (I think there were some other people helping him too). But that was because I knew him (my grandfather, not Hitler). But I take no particular pride in 'the British' defeating Napoleon, for example, because those British people are just too abstract and removed from me.
However, for reasons I can't adequately explain, I do take pride in the achievements of Greater Manchester. The computer, splitting the atom, a man with a massive papier mache head, the railway, the Whitworth screw, the musical scene of the 1980-1994 period, the invention of several different strands of political thought including some I am massively hostile too (but where else names a concert venue after the concept of trading freely?) - I take a small, strange and entirely unjustified pride in all of these.
Maybe it's just that we're allowed to be proud of our locales while being encouraged to feel ashamed of our country.
And as i mentioned earlier Blair has a completely uneventful first 2 years, nothing happened of any note
Erm. The most significant single death of the past century, a nation plunged into mourning, a royal family in crisis.
It was an earthquake the like of which this country hadn't experienced outside of wars and pandemics.
And handled bloody brilliantly by Tony Blair.
More significant than JFK being shot? Or Hitler killing himself.
I did not know her, I felt sorry for her kids, but her death had absolutely no impact on peoples work, social life, holidays etc etc. Compare that with Covid
The day of her funeral did impact lives of the country/jobs/social life.
Most shops didn't open until 2pm so staff could watch her funeral.
Holidays were impacted as getting down to London was a nightmare the Friday and Saturday.
The motorways were clogged/shut for the journey to Althorp.
The suffering. The humanity.
It was a nightmare for some, it was the month many of friends started university that month, moving halfway across the country, leaving your parents for the first time, and Princess Diana dying, well it was a terrible toll on my university generation.
Anecdotal - All two staffed and three out of four staff masked up when I got my lunch 20 minutes ago from the Tesco Fuel shop. Complete 180 compared to last time I went in.
And as i mentioned earlier Blair has a completely uneventful first 2 years, nothing happened of any note
Erm. The most significant single death of the past century, a nation plunged into mourning, a royal family in crisis.
It was an earthquake the like of which this country hadn't experienced outside of wars and pandemics.
And handled bloody brilliantly by Tony Blair.
More significant than JFK being shot? Or Hitler killing himself.
I did not know her, I felt sorry for her kids, but her death had absolutely no impact on peoples work, social life, holidays etc etc. Compare that with Covid
The day of her funeral did impact lives of the country/jobs/social life.
Most shops didn't open until 2pm so staff could watch her funeral.
Holidays were impacted as getting down to London was a nightmare the Friday and Saturday.
The motorways were clogged/shut for the journey to Althorp.
I wouldn't know - we went to France for the day to avoid all the hassle. The only piece of the funeral we saw was 10 seconds in a cafe in St Omar..
The real point here is that, love him or loathe him, Tony Blair handled Diana's death superbly. He was the supreme statesman, who managed to speak for the nation. There are many (perhaps himself included) who felt he saved the royal family.
As I say, I've never liked the man but he was great Prime Minister. And the reason for his soaring popularity in the relevant passage of time, which is what began this discussion, is in large part because he was bloody brilliant at the time of Diana's death.
I fear that the frothing PT knee-jerked without adequately considering his response.
A bid you all adieu for the day. I don't like argumentativeness and what I posted about Tony Blair at Diana's death really, in any sane setting, would merely invoke nodding agreement. From Left or Right.
And as i mentioned earlier Blair has a completely uneventful first 2 years, nothing happened of any note
Erm. The most significant single death of the past century, a nation plunged into mourning, a royal family in crisis.
It was an earthquake the like of which this country hadn't experienced outside of wars and pandemics.
And handled bloody brilliantly by Tony Blair.
More significant than JFK being shot? Or Hitler killing himself.
I did not know her, I felt sorry for her kids, but her death had absolutely no impact on peoples work, social life, holidays etc etc. Compare that with Covid
The day of her funeral did impact lives of the country/jobs/social life.
Most shops didn't open until 2pm so staff could watch her funeral.
Holidays were impacted as getting down to London was a nightmare the Friday and Saturday.
The motorways were clogged/shut for the journey to Althorp.
The suffering. The humanity.
It was a nightmare for some, it was the month many of friends started university that month, moving halfway across the country, leaving your parents for the first time, and Princess Diana dying, well it was a terrible toll on my university generation.
On the other hand, if you weren't using the M1, and you were driving, the day was a joy. I was regularly travelling between Nottingham and Stockport at the time, and I never came close to the time I achieved on that day of slightly under 90 minutes.
And as i mentioned earlier Blair has a completely uneventful first 2 years, nothing happened of any note
Erm. The most significant single death of the past century, a nation plunged into mourning, a royal family in crisis.
It was an earthquake the like of which this country hadn't experienced outside of wars and pandemics.
And handled bloody brilliantly by Tony Blair.
It was all that stuff for people who like to think in those terms, or it was a boringly banal object lesson about drink driving and seatbelts. Blair's standard issue unctuosity was thoroughly adequate, but as PM at the time it is hard to see how he could have blown it short of starting a Lady Di bad Taste Joke Club. Position of royals never remotely in danger.
So you're saying it's a good job it didn't happen under the current PM then?
Do you know what the last thing to go through Lady Di's mind was before she died? The windscreen.
I was going to say the mods won't like that, but if the mods is tse they'll probably steal it
I would almost trust Boris to do an OK job if it had happened on his watch, but those Peppa Pig digressions can pop up anywhere
If you're working class in London you'd clearly have no idea about working class people elsewhere in the country, snobbery is now allowed and encouraged as long as it's against Londoners.
Anecdotal - All two staffed and three out of four staff masked up when I got my lunch 20 minutes ago from the Tesco Fuel shop. Complete 180 compared to last time I went in.
Savile Street?
If so, we must have missed each other by 10 minutes.
And as i mentioned earlier Blair has a completely uneventful first 2 years, nothing happened of any note
Erm. The most significant single death of the past century, a nation plunged into mourning, a royal family in crisis.
It was an earthquake the like of which this country hadn't experienced outside of wars and pandemics.
And handled bloody brilliantly by Tony Blair.
More significant than JFK being shot? Or Hitler killing himself.
I did not know her, I felt sorry for her kids, but her death had absolutely no impact on peoples work, social life, holidays etc etc. Compare that with Covid
The day of her funeral did impact lives of the country/jobs/social life.
Most shops didn't open until 2pm so staff could watch her funeral.
Holidays were impacted as getting down to London was a nightmare the Friday and Saturday.
The motorways were clogged/shut for the journey to Althorp.
I wouldn't know - we went to France for the day to avoid all the hassle. The only piece of the funeral we saw was 10 seconds in a cafe in St Omar..
My prediction is we will all get it, but it will be pretty much harmless unless you’re un-vaxxed.
A special booster will be available in about 6 months.
Yes, I think that was essentially the OP's point – succinctly put by you.
I am haunted at times like this by what the lung consultant told me a few years back - "it's essential you avoid any more lung infections".
I really do not want to catch this. Even flu or bronchitis causes my lungs further damage, damage which cannot be repaired.
So I am glad I've been triply vaccinated. As is my husband. I'm urging my children to get the 3rd jab as soon as possible. And I'm resigning myself to a more constrained life than I had hoped for even a few weeks back for the immediate future, until we know more.
Fortunately I can use the time to make plans for the garden and other stuff. And I can generally cope with solitariness. But I can't say it fills me with joy and it can get bloody hard at times. If this new variant means we have to go through the last 2 years all over again, I'm not at all sure I will be able to cope with that, to be perfectly honest.
It's a unwelcome development - and a suspenseful wait while they study it - but I don't think there's any realistic possibility of a back to square 1 scenario. Worst case (vaccines badly impaired) is an extension of the pandemic here by a few months.
Yes, I agree. It'll be tense for a couple of weeks, and it will provide unwanted succour to the lockdown-and-masks-forever lobby. And I'd certainly prefer a world in which this hadn't happened. But we just don't know yet, and it's not ridiculous to foresee a future in which this turned out to be nothing much to worry about.
The real point here is that, love him or loathe him, Tony Blair handled Diana's death superbly. He was the supreme statesman, who managed to speak for the nation. There are many (perhaps himself included) who felt he saved the royal family.
As I say, I've never liked the man but he was great Prime Minister. And the reason for his soaring popularity in the relevant passage of time, which is what began this discussion, is in large part because he was bloody brilliant at the time of Diana's death.
I fear that the frothing PT knee-jerked without adequately considering his response.
A bid you all adieu for the day. I don't like argumentativeness and what I posted about Tony Blair at Diana's death really, in any sane setting, would merely invoke nodding agreement. From Left or Right.
He was selling pure ham, when ham was exactly what was needed
Anecdotal - All two staffed and three out of four staff masked up when I got my lunch 20 minutes ago from the Tesco Fuel shop. Complete 180 compared to last time I went in.
Savile Street?
If so, we must have missed each other by 10 minutes.
It just doesn't sit well for me. A bit like non-religious people getting married in church, and mentioning God in their vows, when they don't believe in God. Bit fake.
Yeah, I did that. Do I get let off because I did it for my wife and she is a believer? Our children are baptised, too.
(I do also know and get on with the vicar really well and the pre-marriage church workshops did change some things for us - complete pooling of finances where we previously had joint account only for shared bills)
Personal choice. I could not do it as I would have been making the most important commitment of my life and lying for part of it. Happily for me my wife thinks the same as me. You made your choice to make your wife happy.
Agree. I couldn't either as I would feel a hypocrite but I have no objection to those non believers who do as I don't feel the hypocrisy is really that bad, after all you don't believe so it just becomes an event and is not real. My wife's family do this. It is a celebration of the event for them. It does however seem a bit disrespectful of those performing the service though.
I am happy to sit in a church for someone else's wedding and christening. I don't take part in prayers etc, but I don't make it obvious that I think it is all nonsense.
Yep. I made sure the vicar was aware of my lack of belief. He was happy to go ahead.
I didn't feel comfortable about it but my wife was keen to have a religious element to the marriage and her mother was super keen. I ultimately went along with it because I didn't care that much and it was making others happy. For me we were making promises to each other in front of our families and friends. So far so good.
If one partner is religious, then fair enough. I just cannot grasp the motivation for irreligious couples to have a religious wedding – there are hundreds of beautiful venues for atheist weddings.
Interestingly, the atheism of non-religious weddings is rather rigorously enforced by the state. You either have to explicitly have God in your wedding - i.e. in a church - or leave him out entirely. So, for example, you can't play God Only Knows, by the Beach Boys - one of the finest love songs ever - at a non-religious wedding. Couldn't in my day, anyway.
Is that some sort of joke, as I'm afraid I don't get it. You certainly couldn't play pop songs in any church worth it's salt.
Not a joke, but perhaps I explained it badly. You either have to get married in a church - in which case you can play whatever the vicar likes - or in a secular venue - in which case you can't mention God at all. So you can't play religious music, or even music which obliquely references religion, in a secular wedding venue. Not during the wedding, anyway. At least, that was true back in 2009. Didn't prove a massive inconvenience for me, to be honest, but a minor quirk of the system.
Still struggling to believe that certain pop songs with zero religious value are banned from civil ceremonies. Feels far more likely your registrar was just sick of hearing it.
We were told the same when we registered. An example used with us (not that we wanted it anyway) was that you couldn't have Robbie Williams Angels.
Ha, what jobsworths. More or less confirmation that as well as not being too bright, the civil servants involved know nothing about religion either.
Good grief I knew none of this. It's bollocks isn't it. What the hell has it got to do with the state what music you play at your wedding. What prat thought this up.
The omicron variant was already in the Netherlands when South Africa alerted the World Health Organization about it last week, Dutch health authorities said Tuesday, adding to fear and confusion over the new version of the coronavirus in a weary world hoping it had left the worst of the pandemicbehind.
The Netherlands' RIVM health institute found omicron in samples dating from Nov. 19 and 23. The WHO said South Africa first reported the the variant to the U.N. healthy agency on Nov. 24.
It remains unclear where or when the variant first emerged — but that hasn't stopped wary nations from rushing to impose travel restrictions, especially on visitors coming from southern Africa. Those moves have been criticized by South Africa and the WHO has urged against them, noting their limited effect.
Anecdotal - All two staffed and three out of four staff masked up when I got my lunch 20 minutes ago from the Tesco Fuel shop. Complete 180 compared to last time I went in.
Savile Street?
If so, we must have missed each other by 10 minutes.
Yep !
Is Savile Street any relation to Savile Row ? I was watching various spectators climbing out on to the roof on Savile Row on the new Beatles documentary on the weekend.
Incidentally , it comes highly recommended - reality TV as it should be, with the expertise of the late 1960's British film industry, and strong hints of the more sensitive 1970's and 1980's fly-on-the-wall documentaries to come in the original camerawork and direction. Even if we eavesdrop The Beatles are also shown as in charge of their own creative process, rather than exploited reality TV victims.
Sir Keir Starmer is a friend of the North, unlike Boris the Bastard, Harrier of the North.
Labour's revamped top team has 12 northern MPs compared to four in Boris Johnson's cabinet - interesting to see if this has any impact on Keir Starmer's bid to win back heartland voters that deserted the party in 2019, more in today's @NorthernAgenda_
"What do you think about Angela Rayner not appearing to know about the reshuffle?"
"I've been around for lots of reshuffles. The gaffer picks the team and that's that"
That's Red Wall talk right there. I reckon Nandy will be good in her new role.
However, Cooper, Thornberry, Streeting, Lammy who were all promoted yesterday wouldnt have a clue about Red Wall voters
Not sure I agree. Cooper has a Red Wall seat so I doubt she'd be clueless. And Streeting to me has lots of Red Wall energy. Lammy is no London luvvie either. Thornberry, ok, but she's only in a minor job. Her ability merits something bigger and maybe it's because she's considered offputting to voters in northern target seats that she hasn't got it.
From a medical perspective the best advice is to never leave home, certainly never socialise. Not sure that’s good for things like the economy.
The best advice would be for no-one to ever leave home - the Mrs gave me Covid after she got it at a concert she went to that I definitely didn't go to.
Anecdotal - All two staffed and three out of four staff masked up when I got my lunch 20 minutes ago from the Tesco Fuel shop. Complete 180 compared to last time I went in.
Savile Street?
If so, we must have missed each other by 10 minutes.
Yep !
You should have gone inside the store, much better variety of meal deals and lunch options.
Sir Keir Starmer is a friend of the North, unlike Boris the Bastard, Harrier of the North.
Labour's revamped top team has 12 northern MPs compared to four in Boris Johnson's cabinet - interesting to see if this has any impact on Keir Starmer's bid to win back heartland voters that deserted the party in 2019, more in today's @NorthernAgenda_
Don’t tell BJO, the one-man member of the pressure group “Corbynistas for Boris”.
BJO is entirely inconsistent. Seems to hate Starmer but think Corbyn did a great job despite losing twice. But thinks Burnham who polls worse than Starmer and was terrible in 2015, is the answer
The real point here is that, love him or loathe him, Tony Blair handled Diana's death superbly. He was the supreme statesman, who managed to speak for the nation. There are many (perhaps himself included) who felt he saved the royal family.
As I say, I've never liked the man but he was great Prime Minister. And the reason for his soaring popularity in the relevant passage of time, which is what began this discussion, is in large part because he was bloody brilliant at the time of Diana's death.
I fear that the frothing PT knee-jerked without adequately considering his response.
A bid you all adieu for the day. I don't like argumentativeness and what I posted about Tony Blair at Diana's death really, in any sane setting, would merely invoke nodding agreement. From Left or Right.
From a medical perspective the best advice is to never leave home, certainly never socialise. Not sure that’s good for things like the economy.
To reduce risk of infectious disease, sure. But for overall health, including mental health, but also physical things relating to movement, obesity etc? I doubt it.
Edit: maybe not even that clear-cut for infectious disease - encountering very little in the way of infections might increase vulnerability to pathogens that did get in, e.g. on food?
From a medical perspective the best advice is to never leave home, certainly never socialise. Not sure that’s good for things like the economy.
To reduce risk of infectious disease, sure. But for overall health, including mental health, but also physical things relating to movement, obesity etc? I doubt it.
Edit: maybe not even that clear-cut for infectious disease - encountering very little in the way of infections might increase vulnerability to pathogens that did get in, e.g. on food?
not even sure its the best medical advice in that you build up no immunity from never catching anything
Sir Keir Starmer is a friend of the North, unlike Boris the Bastard, Harrier of the North.
Labour's revamped top team has 12 northern MPs compared to four in Boris Johnson's cabinet - interesting to see if this has any impact on Keir Starmer's bid to win back heartland voters that deserted the party in 2019, more in today's @NorthernAgenda_
Don’t tell BJO, the one-man member of the pressure group “Corbynistas for Boris”.
BJO is entirely inconsistent. Seems to hate Starmer but think Corbyn did a great job despite losing twice. But thinks Burnham who polls worse than Starmer and was terrible in 2015, is the answer
Yes. Though I want to cut him a lot of slack as he’s the only PB to survive a terrorist attack. And post about it in real time.
And as i mentioned earlier Blair has a completely uneventful first 2 years, nothing happened of any note
Erm. The most significant single death of the past century, a nation plunged into mourning, a royal family in crisis.
It was an earthquake the like of which this country hadn't experienced outside of wars and pandemics.
And handled bloody brilliantly by Tony Blair.
More significant than JFK being shot? Or Hitler killing himself.
I did not know her, I felt sorry for her kids, but her death had absolutely no impact on peoples work, social life, holidays etc etc. Compare that with Covid
The day of her funeral did impact lives of the country/jobs/social life.
Most shops didn't open until 2pm so staff could watch her funeral.
Holidays were impacted as getting down to London was a nightmare the Friday and Saturday.
The motorways were clogged/shut for the journey to Althorp.
I wouldn't know - we went to France for the day to avoid all the hassle. The only piece of the funeral we saw was 10 seconds in a cafe in St Omar..
I polished the car.
Before the crash, presumably? It was working fine when you left it? No one from MI5 asked you to do anything to it?
Sir Keir Starmer is a friend of the North, unlike Boris the Bastard, Harrier of the North.
Labour's revamped top team has 12 northern MPs compared to four in Boris Johnson's cabinet - interesting to see if this has any impact on Keir Starmer's bid to win back heartland voters that deserted the party in 2019, more in today's @NorthernAgenda_
Don’t tell BJO, the one-man member of the pressure group “Corbynistas for Boris”.
BJO is entirely inconsistent. Seems to hate Starmer but think Corbyn did a great job despite losing twice. But thinks Burnham who polls worse than Starmer and was terrible in 2015, is the answer
But Burnham, as a Mayor, does everything Khan's detractors say he doesn't do. He also wins by an absolute street, polling hugely above his Party. The very opposite of the London mayor. He does this in 2021. A different politics altogether to 2015.
What will Nadine's rating be with ConHome in a few months time once she has:
1) Caved on the BBC Licence Fee settlement - most likely "imposing" a piddling one year freeze and then CPI increases for the five years after that
2) Caved on Channel 4 privatisation
She'll then be viewed the same way as Priti - lots of talk but unable to actually face people down and get anything done.
The BBC cave will surely go down very badly - a big chunk of Con members want the LF abolished - what will they think of business as usual increases for the foreseeable future? Contrast with Osborne's six year freeze from 2011 (albeit the BBC then ran rings round him in the 2017 settlement re Over 75s LFs).
Sir Keir Starmer is a friend of the North, unlike Boris the Bastard, Harrier of the North.
Labour's revamped top team has 12 northern MPs compared to four in Boris Johnson's cabinet - interesting to see if this has any impact on Keir Starmer's bid to win back heartland voters that deserted the party in 2019, more in today's @NorthernAgenda_
Don’t tell BJO, the one-man member of the pressure group “Corbynistas for Boris”.
BJO is entirely inconsistent. Seems to hate Starmer but think Corbyn did a great job despite losing twice. But thinks Burnham who polls worse than Starmer and was terrible in 2015, is the answer
But Burnham, as a Mayor, does everything Khan's detractors say he doesn't do. He also wins by an absolute street, polling hugely above his Party. The very opposite of the London mayor. He does this in 2021. A different politics altogether to 2015.
I don't understand I am afraid. Khan polls very well in London and won re-election by a greater margin than Johnson did
And as i mentioned earlier Blair has a completely uneventful first 2 years, nothing happened of any note
Erm. The most significant single death of the past century, a nation plunged into mourning, a royal family in crisis.
It was an earthquake the like of which this country hadn't experienced outside of wars and pandemics.
And handled bloody brilliantly by Tony Blair.
More significant than JFK being shot? Or Hitler killing himself.
I did not know her, I felt sorry for her kids, but her death had absolutely no impact on peoples work, social life, holidays etc etc. Compare that with Covid
The day of her funeral did impact lives of the country/jobs/social life.
Most shops didn't open until 2pm so staff could watch her funeral.
Holidays were impacted as getting down to London was a nightmare the Friday and Saturday.
The motorways were clogged/shut for the journey to Althorp.
Also they postponed the first episode of Michael Palin's "Full Circle".
The real point here is that, love him or loathe him, Tony Blair handled Diana's death superbly. He was the supreme statesman, who managed to speak for the nation. There are many (perhaps himself included) who felt he saved the royal family.
As I say, I've never liked the man but he was great Prime Minister. And the reason for his soaring popularity in the relevant passage of time, which is what began this discussion, is in large part because he was bloody brilliant at the time of Diana's death.
I fear that the frothing PT knee-jerked without adequately considering his response.
A bid you all adieu for the day. I don't like argumentativeness and what I posted about Tony Blair at Diana's death really, in any sane setting, would merely invoke nodding agreement. From Left or Right.
If you dont like argumentativeness maybe stop insulting the forum saying it is not a sane setting etc
The real point here is that, love him or loathe him, Tony Blair handled Diana's death superbly. He was the supreme statesman, who managed to speak for the nation. There are many (perhaps himself included) who felt he saved the royal family.
As I say, I've never liked the man but he was great Prime Minister. And the reason for his soaring popularity in the relevant passage of time, which is what began this discussion, is in large part because he was bloody brilliant at the time of Diana's death.
I fear that the frothing PT knee-jerked without adequately considering his response.
A bid you all adieu for the day. I don't like argumentativeness and what I posted about Tony Blair at Diana's death really, in any sane setting, would merely invoke nodding agreement. From Left or Right.
If you dont like argumentativeness maybe stop insulting the forum saying it is not a sane setting etc
Anecdotal - All two staffed and three out of four staff masked up when I got my lunch 20 minutes ago from the Tesco Fuel shop. Complete 180 compared to last time I went in.
Never like doing it but sometimes you have to so i broke the law today by not wearing a facemask over my face in a shop. Glad somebody else in there with me was also doing. The state has no right to impose dictaks like this and especially so that is has next to no consequence in controlling a pandemic
Anecdotal - All two staffed and three out of four staff masked up when I got my lunch 20 minutes ago from the Tesco Fuel shop. Complete 180 compared to last time I went in.
Never like doing it but sometimes you have to so i broke the law today by not wearing a facemask over my face in a shop. Glad somebody else in there with me was also doing. The state has no right to impose dictaks like this and especially so that is has next to no consequence in controlling a pandemic
Incidentally, I've just spotted @BlancheLivermore 's new avatar - and been reminded that Boris Johnson already appears in Peppa Pig's parallel universe of Ben and Holly's little kingdom, in which the character of 'the mayor' is very obviously based on Boris (in both look and mannerism) - dating from his time as mayor of London. I think Astley Baker Davies managed to tread a clever line which managed to be funny without straying too far into lampoonery and/or getting too political for a children's show.
Anecdotal - All two staffed and three out of four staff masked up when I got my lunch 20 minutes ago from the Tesco Fuel shop. Complete 180 compared to last time I went in.
Never like doing it but sometimes you have to so i broke the law today by not wearing a facemask over my face in a shop. Glad somebody else in there with me was also doing. The state has no right to impose dictaks like this and especially so that is has next to no consequence in controlling a pandemic
Let's use this for all laws we don't like, murder etc
Anecdotal - All two staffed and three out of four staff masked up when I got my lunch 20 minutes ago from the Tesco Fuel shop. Complete 180 compared to last time I went in.
Never like doing it but sometimes you have to so i broke the law today by not wearing a facemask over my face in a shop. Glad somebody else in there with me was also doing. The state has no right to impose dictaks like this and especially so that is has next to no consequence in controlling a pandemic
If you have Covid, and someone in the shop gets sick and dies as a result of you being in there, it could be that you've killed them.
Currently reading 'England, Arise" by Juliet Barker, about the 1381 revolts. Lots of back story about the wealth of the church and so on. Reformation was a long time coming.
I'm currently rereading _The Stripping of the Altars_ by Eamon Duffy, which I think is very good on what was swept away in the Reformation from the point of view of the average lay person of the time -- the ritual, beliefs and practices that had been the experience of traditional Christian religion for generations up to that point.
I have this too - only read the first half so far. Its astonishing what was in place before the reformation. Something not always appreciated by people looking back. It was not a trivial change.
Sir Keir Starmer is a friend of the North, unlike Boris the Bastard, Harrier of the North.
Labour's revamped top team has 12 northern MPs compared to four in Boris Johnson's cabinet - interesting to see if this has any impact on Keir Starmer's bid to win back heartland voters that deserted the party in 2019, more in today's @NorthernAgenda_
Don’t tell BJO, the one-man member of the pressure group “Corbynistas for Boris”.
BJO is entirely inconsistent. Seems to hate Starmer but think Corbyn did a great job despite losing twice. But thinks Burnham who polls worse than Starmer and was terrible in 2015, is the answer
But Burnham, as a Mayor, does everything Khan's detractors say he doesn't do. He also wins by an absolute street, polling hugely above his Party. The very opposite of the London mayor. He does this in 2021. A different politics altogether to 2015.
I don't understand I am afraid. Khan polls very well in London and won re-election by a greater margin than Johnson did
Putting aside polling for a second, Burnham is a great and passionate advocate for his city.
Khan behaves like a supply teacher who is taking 7F for a particular dull session of RE. He does not appear to have any interest in London.
Sir Keir Starmer is a friend of the North, unlike Boris the Bastard, Harrier of the North.
Labour's revamped top team has 12 northern MPs compared to four in Boris Johnson's cabinet - interesting to see if this has any impact on Keir Starmer's bid to win back heartland voters that deserted the party in 2019, more in today's @NorthernAgenda_
Don’t tell BJO, the one-man member of the pressure group “Corbynistas for Boris”.
BJO is entirely inconsistent. Seems to hate Starmer but think Corbyn did a great job despite losing twice. But thinks Burnham who polls worse than Starmer and was terrible in 2015, is the answer
But Burnham, as a Mayor, does everything Khan's detractors say he doesn't do. He also wins by an absolute street, polling hugely above his Party. The very opposite of the London mayor. He does this in 2021. A different politics altogether to 2015.
I don't understand I am afraid. Khan polls very well in London and won re-election by a greater margin than Johnson did
Putting aside polling for a second, Burnham is a great and passionate advocate for his city.
Khan behaves like a supply teacher who is taking 7F for a particular dull session of RE. He does not appear to have any interest in London.
He does his best whilst Central Government destroys London from the outside
Comments
A lot of that is Johnson's fault. He booted out some really good people because he doesn't like people around him who a) stand up to him and b) disagree with him. Another sign of weakness.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mbvWn1EY6g
Apologies, in advance.
And have you lurched to the left overnight?
On median average he is exactly the median average. The mean average is completely lopsided because of Blair alone.
It was an earthquake the like of which this country hadn't experienced outside of wars and pandemics.
And handled bloody brilliantly by Tony Blair.
So no church wedding for me. And no wife called Bernadette.
After his most recent reshuffle, the current Cabinet is one of the strongest its been in many years. Sunak, Truss, Javid, Zahawi, Frost etc are all excellent.
Notably both foreign news stories (in case of NI it's certainly the view of the London media). Both cemented Blair's view of the centrality of Britain's relationship with the US, and Kosovo provided the philosophical justification for war in Iraq.
But I grant you that neither would have been expected to ruffle the feathers of the electorate.
There's only one person I can think of so far up Blair's arse. You are Andrew Adonis and I claim £5.
330% increase in hospitalisations in the relevant area of South Africa in the past fortnight
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-10255315/South-Africa-province-Omicron-variant-detected-sees-330-surge-hospitalizations.html
And there is a big increase in mask wearing with a crackdown on TfL this morning
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10257233/Covid-rule-returns-Masks-worn-shops-transport-travellers-tests.html
It's 1942 not 1945. We need to gird up our loins.
I did not know her, I felt sorry for her kids, but her death had absolutely no impact on peoples work, social life, holidays etc etc. Compare that with Covid
Indeed, there is a long history that suggests that lending money to Royals (of any country) is a very good way to ensure you never see that money again.
(Earlier I posted that tube mask-wearing was 100%).
My “optimistic” view on Omicron is not based on nothing - it is certainly much more infectious. But recall that RSA has low vax rates.
He did not even take the time to integrate his proposals with existing marriage law.
I didn't write that it was the single most significant death. I wrote that it was the most significant single death. Do you understand the syntactical difference? Diana's death, regardless of whether you're a royalist, was a seismic shock to this nation the after effects of which are still being felt.
Oh and I never once voted for Tony Blair. I've never liked him. But even I have to admit, albeit reluctantly, that of late he has begun to speak a lot of sense.
You can dislike someone and their politics whilst acknowledging their greatness. Or, at least, most of us more moderate types can. That's why in the same breath I can state that Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair are the two greatest Prime Ministers of my lifetime.
The three worst, in no particular order, are Ted Heath, Jim Callaghan and Boris Johnson.
Most shops didn't open until 2pm so staff could watch her funeral.
Holidays were impacted as getting down to London was a nightmare the Friday and Saturday.
The motorways were clogged/shut for the journey to Althorp.
Do you know what the last thing to go through Lady Di's mind was before she died? The windscreen.
Labour's revamped top team has 12 northern MPs compared to four in Boris Johnson's cabinet - interesting to see if this has any impact on Keir Starmer's bid to win back heartland voters that deserted the party in 2019, more in today's @NorthernAgenda_
https://twitter.com/MrDanDonoghue/status/1465653763549634567
More important than the suicide of Adolph Hitler?
More important than the murder of JFK?
Lady Di doesn't even come close to those. Heck, her death has changed less than the death of George Floyd.
anyway, JFK?
I take no pride (or indeed shame) in that. His achievement/foresightedness/cleanliness/precociousness is not mine, and does not really reflect on me. But I do find it interesting.
I do take pride in my grandfather defeating Hitler (I think there were some other people helping him too). But that was because I knew him (my grandfather, not Hitler). But I take no particular pride in 'the British' defeating Napoleon, for example, because those British people are just too abstract and removed from me.
However, for reasons I can't adequately explain, I do take pride in the achievements of Greater Manchester. The computer, splitting the atom, a man with a massive papier mache head, the railway, the Whitworth screw, the musical scene of the 1980-1994 period, the invention of several different strands of political thought including some I am massively hostile too (but where else names a concert venue after the concept of trading freely?) - I take a small, strange and entirely unjustified pride in all of these.
Maybe it's just that we're allowed to be proud of our locales while being encouraged to feel ashamed of our country.
Complete 180 compared to last time I went in.
As I say, I've never liked the man but he was great Prime Minister. And the reason for his soaring popularity in the relevant passage of time, which is what began this discussion, is in large part because he was bloody brilliant at the time of Diana's death.
I fear that the frothing PT knee-jerked without adequately considering his response.
A bid you all adieu for the day. I don't like argumentativeness and what I posted about Tony Blair at Diana's death really, in any sane setting, would merely invoke nodding agreement. From Left or Right.
I would almost trust Boris to do an OK job if it had happened on his watch, but those Peppa Pig digressions can pop up anywhere
I spent yesterday pulling together hospitalisations for Gauteng province, so we can compare the fledging Omicron wave to those that preceded it.
So far admissions following ~same path as past waves.
https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1465659957546782725?s=20
Worth reading rest of thread.
Levelling up = levelling down London
If so, we must have missed each other by 10 minutes.
But we just don't know yet, and it's not ridiculous to foresee a future in which this turned out to be nothing much to worry about.
The Netherlands' RIVM health institute found omicron in samples dating from Nov. 19 and 23. The WHO said South Africa first reported the the variant to the U.N. healthy agency on Nov. 24.
It remains unclear where or when the variant first emerged — but that hasn't stopped wary nations from rushing to impose travel restrictions, especially on visitors coming from southern Africa. Those moves have been criticized by South Africa and the WHO has urged against them, noting their limited effect.
https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/coronavirus/nations-close-borders-but-more-omicron-cases-emerge-globally/2769013/?_osource=SocialFlowTwt_LABrand
Only time will tell, who is right.
Incidentally , it comes highly recommended - reality TV as it should be, with the expertise of the late 1960's British film industry, and strong hints of the more sensitive 1970's and 1980's fly-on-the-wall documentaries to come in the original camerawork and direction. Even if we eavesdrop The Beatles are also shown as in charge of their own creative process, rather than exploited reality TV victims.
Edit. Just heard on WATO that she's been slapped down "she advises the Government, but doesn't speak for it".
Edit: maybe not even that clear-cut for infectious disease - encountering very little in the way of infections might increase vulnerability to pathogens that did get in, e.g. on food?
Before the crash, presumably? It was working fine when you left it? No one from MI5 asked you to do anything to it?
He does this in 2021. A different politics altogether to 2015.
1) Caved on the BBC Licence Fee settlement - most likely "imposing" a piddling one year freeze and then CPI increases for the five years after that
2) Caved on Channel 4 privatisation
She'll then be viewed the same way as Priti - lots of talk but unable to actually face people down and get anything done.
The BBC cave will surely go down very badly - a big chunk of Con members want the LF abolished - what will they think of business as usual increases for the foreseeable future? Contrast with Osborne's six year freeze from 2011 (albeit the BBC then ran rings round him in the 2017 settlement re Over 75s LFs).
Hopefully it'll still happen.
Facemasks in shops ? Not bothered either way, I'll follow the rules.
Gov't cancelling entertainment ? I'll be furious.
I think Astley Baker Davies managed to tread a clever line which managed to be funny without straying too far into lampoonery and/or getting too political for a children's show.
Khan behaves like a supply teacher who is taking 7F for a particular dull session of RE. He does not appear to have any interest in London.