"Women are deserting Boris: Poll shows two thirds of all voters don't trust the PM and one in three is less likely to follow Plan B rules after party row as Tory support falls to 33%"
To be fair, there isn't much evidence that he wanted to bond with previous children. Also he would never be at work if he took it every time!
I suppose the downside is that he and Stanley's genes are scattered about more!
I think what still shakes me about the PM is that declaration one of us noted the other day that he signed that he was never married before as far as the RC church was concerned. And therefore publicly declared his children illegitimate in the eyes of the church in which he and his new wife were getting married. That is not something I could ever do lightly.
FPT it’s a very slippery slope when you start judging people for needing the NHS. When does it end?
@Leon guzzles booze like nobody’s business. That’s a positive act that is likely to be an NHS resource drain in the future. Driving a car at 120mph is also a positive act. Refusing a vaccine is an omission.
It feels profoundly wrong to force people to put something into their own body.
I say this as someone who has had an operation cancelled 3 times already due to NHS pressures. 4th attempt is currently scheduled for Monday.
Fundamentally it completely upends the relationship between the state and the people.
Government is chosen by the people to represent us. They have certain limited authority in the interests of an orderly society and certain rights to secure funding to meet the costs.
If an individual is unwilling to abide by the rules of society (the laws) then the government, acting on behalf of society, can exclude an individual from society. This means internal exile (prison) or external exile (loss of citizenship).
Government has no authority to enforce specific action against the individual without their consent. This is why, for example, the death penalty and mandatory medical treatment (including mandatory vaccination) is morally and philosophically wrong.
There is more of a case that an individual can be asked to pay for excess costs incurred (eg payment for treatment) if they don’t undertake certain actions (voluntary vaccination) although this should be on a retrospective basis rather than prospectively as a means to enforce behaviour change
You're talking here as if the concept of forcing people to do things they don't like in a time of national emergency is something new. It isn't.
We had mass conscription during both world wars and that involved, amongst other things, forcing young men to die horribly fighting pitched battles. Yet somehow asking the public to have a scratch on the arm two or three times a year to avert socio-economic collapse is deemed an unforgiveable violation of civil liberties.
We know that the unvaccinated are vastly over-represented in terms of the burden of Covid patients in hospitals - especially, crucially, in critical care facilities - and we know that the over-stretching of those facilities is the key motivating factor for imposing these hugely destructive lockdowns. Removing the problem of the unvaccinated therefore greatly reduces the likelihood of lockdowns - and doing that by compelling them to have the vaccines is a great deal more humane than the alternative, which is to restrict or exclude them from healthcare when they get sick.
“ Vast majority of Britons have NO PROTECTION against Omicron: After 100 days two AstraZeneca doses offer virtually zero defence while two Pfizer jabs provide just 37% protection against new variant - but boosters cut risk of falling ill by 75%”
This is the simplistic nonsense that will lead us into lockdown before Christmas. Because our PM and Cabinet are too thick and poorly educated to understand why this sound byte is wrong.
I thought they had a team of experts to advise them?
A team of experts in the background is absolutely worthless when the people making the decisions are “thick” and “poorly educated”.
cf Brexit
Problem is, in Gove and Johnson we are governed by ex hacks, backed up by second rate media and comms people. The PM’s personal sounding board at home is an art history grad that worked in Pr.
In Sunak & Javid we have backgrounds who should be capable of absorbing technical info outside their expertise and executing decisions. But they’re greasy pole climbers.
Gove isn't thick at all - I've rarely met a politician more able to absorb the details of a complex brief. He's also very committed to doing stuff, and to confronting vested interests. That leads him into far more controversy than ministers who just keep the ship steady. If he was Chancellor, for instance, I could well imagine massive tax/NI reforms with lots of winners and losers - he would attract real loathing from some, but possibly produce a more sensible outcome for the economy. I'm interested to see what he'll do to the planning system - it won't be trivial.
He doesn't strike me as a great team player, though, and in government it is pretty difficult to achieve very much by working as a lone ranger?
He can be good where he doesn't have mad preconceived ideas and madder advisors. So pisspoor at Education but quite good at farming and environment. Rather a curates egg, but unlike most of the Cabinet does have original ideas.
I agree with the article. Thank you. One extra point: there is no evidence that the message has been picked up that the anti Tory vote is LD. And there is little good reason for it. Labour came second. Not only will a good number of Tories grit their teeth and vote Tory, but there is a chance that the anti Tory vote will split. A result of Con 32%, Lab and LD about 30% isn't impossible.
This isn't a prediction. I have no idea.
Finally, would a Tory win, however flawed, give Boris a break for a few weeks, enough for the fuss to die down. No idea, but possible.
Quite a chart. Scottish govt has implemented over £500m of income tax increases (equivalent to >£5bn in UK terms) These have netted *nothing* in additional revenues relative to no devolution. Scottish incomes have risen more slowly, and income tax base has shrunk, relative to UK
FPT it’s a very slippery slope when you start judging people for needing the NHS. When does it end?
@Leon guzzles booze like nobody’s business. That’s a positive act that is likely to be an NHS resource drain in the future. Driving a car at 120mph is also a positive act. Refusing a vaccine is an omission.
It feels profoundly wrong to force people to put something into their own body.
I say this as someone who has had an operation cancelled 3 times already due to NHS pressures. 4th attempt is currently scheduled for Monday.
Fundamentally it completely upends the relationship between the state and the people.
Government is chosen by the people to represent us. They have certain limited authority in the interests of an orderly society and certain rights to secure funding to meet the costs.
If an individual is unwilling to abide by the rules of society (the laws) then the government, acting on behalf of society, can exclude an individual from society. This means internal exile (prison) or external exile (loss of citizenship).
Government has no authority to enforce specific action against the individual without their consent. This is why, for example, the death penalty and mandatory medical treatment (including mandatory vaccination) is morally and philosophically wrong.
There is more of a case that an individual can be asked to pay for excess costs incurred (eg payment for treatment) if they don’t undertake certain actions (voluntary vaccination) although this should be on a retrospective basis rather than prospectively as a means to enforce behaviour change
You're talking here as if the concept of forcing people to do things they don't like in a time of national emergency is something new. It isn't.
We had mass conscription during both world wars and that involved, amongst other things, forcing young men to die horribly fighting pitched battles. Yet somehow asking the public to have a scratch on the arm two or three times a year to avert socio-economic collapse is deemed an unforgiveable violation of civil liberties.
We know that the unvaccinated are vastly over-represented in terms of the burden of Covid patients in hospitals - especially, crucially, in critical care facilities - and we know that the over-stretching of those facilities is the key motivating factor for imposing these hugely destructive lockdowns. Removing the problem of the unvaccinated therefore greatly reduces the likelihood of lockdowns - and doing that by compelling them to have the vaccines is a great deal more humane than the alternative, which is to restrict or exclude them from healthcare when they get sick.
Mass conscription, incidentally, included mass vaccination, sometimes with very nasty stuff.
To be fair, there isn't much evidence that he wanted to bond with previous children. Also he would never be at work if he took it every time!
I suppose the downside is that he and Stanley's genes are scattered about more!
I think what still shakes me about the PM is that declaration one of us noted the other day that he signed that he was never married before as far as the RC church was concerned. And therefore publicly declared his children illegitimate in the eyes of the church in which he and his new wife were getting married. That is not something I could ever do lightly.
I don't see the issue. Its just religious garbage, the RC doesn't recognise other marriages whatever he declares or doesn't, so its just some silly paperwork to sign. Shouldn't change anything between family members.
To be fair, there isn't much evidence that he wanted to bond with previous children. Also he would never be at work if he took it every time!
I suppose the downside is that he and Stanley's genes are scattered about more!
I think what still shakes me about the PM is that declaration one of us noted the other day that he signed that he was never married before as far as the RC church was concerned. And therefore publicly declared his children illegitimate in the eyes of the church in which he and his new wife were getting married. That is not something I could ever do lightly.
His older children must be getting to an age when they might decide to say 'something' publicly about their father. I wonder if one of them will.
FPT it’s a very slippery slope when you start judging people for needing the NHS. When does it end?
@Leon guzzles booze like nobody’s business. That’s a positive act that is likely to be an NHS resource drain in the future. Driving a car at 120mph is also a positive act. Refusing a vaccine is an omission.
It feels profoundly wrong to force people to put something into their own body.
I say this as someone who has had an operation cancelled 3 times already due to NHS pressures. 4th attempt is currently scheduled for Monday.
Except you're talking about compulsion in a situation of dire national emergency as if it were a totally novel and unprecedented moral outrage. It isn't.
Not so very long ago, millions of our forebears were conscripted to fight in wars. When society was faced with an existential threat, it demanded, amongst other things, that young people fight in battles and get blown up, shot through the head or drown in icy cold seas. And if you were called up then, unless you had a very good excuse (e.g. a reserved occupation or being medically unfit) then you bloody well went. The small minority of hardcore pacifists who refused to do service of any kind were complete social pariahs who ended up imprisoned.
Fast forward a few decades and now it's considered unforgivable to ask people to have a scratch on the arm every three or six months so as to try and avoid the entire bloody country ending up under house arrest for months on end, with the education of the nation's children wrecked, otherwise viable businesses driven to the wall en masse, and the state hurtling every closer to the cliff edge of bankruptcy into the bargain.
And if the cost of your repeated cancelled operations was that you ended up dead, I doubt your surviving relatives would feel so sanguine about this problem.
Yes, exactly
I confess my patience has ENTIRELY snapped with vax refuseniks like Dura, however entertaining he might be, on occasion. It especially snaps when he starts opining on bloody politics. To continue your analogy, it is like some conscientious objector in 1944 complaining about the awful tactics during D Day and demanding resignations. Jeez no. Do one. Fuck. Right. Off. Never speak again
But my anger - which is genuine - is running away with me, and I will rein it in, for the sake of the site. And the mods. FWIW I have the same anger to refuseniks in my personal life, I now find it very hard not to slap them. This is not "personal"
Goodnight
Good night Gilderoy.
Sean a Slytherin?
Makes sense.
Yes, I spotted that! Looks fantastic.
Range is tremendously important for our big car, as we frequently drive up to 6 hours to get into the mountains (usually for skiing, but cycling has exploded in popularity here). So we are looking at the more premium brands. I just do not like Teslas, the design is awful, and the chassis a piece of junk. Polestar have too many faults. BMW have not launched any “normal” all-electric cars yet, Hyundai too plasticky (although it is perhaps my fav at the moment), Kia and VW overpriced,
I hate to be boring, but I’m probably going for another ICE Volvo at this rate. It’ll be third in a row. They call the new ones “light hybrids”, but I don’t swallow much marketing guff.
I can recommend the Audi Q7. Fantastic in the snow and good to drive for such a large car. Loads of room for sports.
Starmer repeatedly used the word “lies” about the prime minister in the clip broadcast by Radio 4’s Midnight News. I was a bit taken aback. This is highly unusual language. He must be very, very confident that the case against BJ is rock solid.
Not really, everyone in the whole World knows that the disingenuous fat philanderer is one of the biggest liars out there.
Indeed, but senior and experienced lawyers, not to mention Leaders of the Opposition, almost never use the word about a prime minister.
It just felt like a watershed moment. Folk are no longer nervous about pointing at the obese, drunken, lazy, mendacious, unfaithful emperor and pointing out that he has no clothes.
He used the word 'lies' at PMQs in the week. The attribution of those lies is left in the air, so nobody is accused and thus it is not unparliamentary, but it is clear where SKS thinks they are emanating from.
It feels more natural than directly pointing at Boris and using 'must be mistaken', 'correct the record', 'economical with the actualite' and all that circuitous shite that just turns voters off to parliament. It is a good move.
I agree.
Starmer’s had a good week.
But the dilemma facing Tory MPs - should they ditch Boris or stick with him and let him trash the Tory brand - is exactly the same dilemma which faced Labour MPs and Shadow Cabinet Ministers when Corbyn was in charge.
How did they resolve that dilemma? How did Sir Keir? A lot of grumbling and no action.
SKS went for the easy life and climbing up the greasy pole when he faced an equivalent dilemma. So yes he's had a good week. Easy to criticise others for their faults. Far harder to show courage when it involves yourself.
And what is his party doing now? Supporting the Tories. He is not asking what financial support there will be for businesses affected by restrictions. He is not making such support a condition for his support.
To be fair, there isn't much evidence that he wanted to bond with previous children. Also he would never be at work if he took it every time!
I suppose the downside is that he and Stanley's genes are scattered about more!
I think what still shakes me about the PM is that declaration one of us noted the other day that he signed that he was never married before as far as the RC church was concerned. And therefore publicly declared his children illegitimate in the eyes of the church in which he and his new wife were getting married. That is not something I could ever do lightly.
His older children must be getting to an age when they might decide to say 'something' publicly about their father. I wonder if one of them will.
I can't remember, on reflection, if the PM had to sign anything to say he was not previously married - I not having often got married in a PC church - but certainly that is the implication, that the preexisting marriages did not exist at all under RC doctrine.
It’s of quite a lot of concern to me if he’s in the top bracket of parliamentary thinkers. Because it’s pretty plain he approaches everything with a preconceived view and bends everything to fit his optimism bias. I can name 10 publicly anonymous execs I’d rather have in Cabinet than him.
I wouldn't agree with that either. I've only seen him in action in detail in the Defra brief. At the start he made it plain that he wasn't a specialist in the area and had an open mind, and encouraged industry, farmers and NGOs to talk to him and try to persuade him. We won some arguments, lost others, but I always felt we were dealing with an active, enquiring mind. Of course, if one doesn't like the outcome, then one's upset by the single-minded pursuit of it that results (example: education).
Example: there's a long-running controversy over the fact that meat from animals slaughtered without stunning (to meet kosher and some halal consumer preferences) enters the general food chain, discreetly unlabelled. This makes sense for a slaughterhouse serving both religious and general markets (keep it simple, mate), but it deceives consumers who would like to avoid non-stun meat (because slaughter by bleeding of an unstunned animal is terrifying and can lead to minutes of agony) and is incompatible with the spirit of the regulations that reserve non-stun meat for religious communities.
The minefields are obvious, so most politicians leave it alone. Gove, undeterred, called a half-day meeting of representatives of kosher, halal, farming groups and NGOs to talk it through, and he was I think heading for a defensible compromise (require labelling so consumers can see what they're getting - the probable effect would be to slash non-stunned meat production and therefore push the price up, but not ban it) when he was shunted to the Cabinet Office.
Mr. Abode, 2022 will be fascinating. The top teams of 2021 may do well, but there's a lot of scope for improvement (to winning races regularly) for Ferrari, McLaren, Alpine, and Aston Martin.
I agree with the article. Thank you. One extra point: there is no evidence that the message has been picked up that the anti Tory vote is LD. And there is little good reason for it. Labour came second. Not only will a good number of Tories grit their teeth and vote Tory, but there is a chance that the anti Tory vote will split. A result of Con 32%, Lab and LD about 30% isn't impossible.
This isn't a prediction. I have no idea.
Finally, would a Tory win, however flawed, give Boris a break for a few weeks, enough for the fuss to die down. No idea, but possible.
Even if he wins N. Shropshire I believe he needs several dead cats in quick succession to get over this. Triggering A15 is an obvious one, scapegoating the unvaxxed is another, but haven't worked out plans C,D, and E yet.
Starmer repeatedly used the word “lies” about the prime minister in the clip broadcast by Radio 4’s Midnight News. I was a bit taken aback. This is highly unusual language. He must be very, very confident that the case against BJ is rock solid.
Not really, everyone in the whole World knows that the disingenuous fat philanderer is one of the biggest liars out there.
Indeed, but senior and experienced lawyers, not to mention Leaders of the Opposition, almost never use the word about a prime minister.
It just felt like a watershed moment. Folk are no longer nervous about pointing at the obese, drunken, lazy, mendacious, unfaithful emperor and pointing out that he has no clothes.
He used the word 'lies' at PMQs in the week. The attribution of those lies is left in the air, so nobody is accused and thus it is not unparliamentary, but it is clear where SKS thinks they are emanating from.
It feels more natural than directly pointing at Boris and using 'must be mistaken', 'correct the record', 'economical with the actualite' and all that circuitous shite that just turns voters off to parliament. It is a good move.
I agree.
Starmer’s had a good week.
But the dilemma facing Tory MPs - should they ditch Boris or stick with him and let him trash the Tory brand - is exactly the same dilemma which faced Labour MPs and Shadow Cabinet Ministers when Corbyn was in charge.
How did they resolve that dilemma? How did Sir Keir? A lot of grumbling and no action.
SKS went for the easy life and climbing up the greasy pole when he faced an equivalent dilemma. So yes he's had a good week. Easy to criticise others for their faults. Far harder to show courage when it involves yourself.
And what is his party doing now? Supporting the Tories. He is not asking what financial support there will be for businesses affected by restrictions. He is not making such support a condition for his support.
On the last point, despite the Government being reliant on Opposition votes to apply the restrictions, Starmer has no leverage. Labour's USP on Covid, like that of the three devolved governments, is to always be in favour of something at least slightly more severe than what the Tories have proposed.
He cannot, therefore, plausibly threaten to vote against more restrictions - if they fail through lack of Labour support then he's effectively voting for something less severe than what the Tories have proposed, and will be skewered accordingly.
Looking at the graph, the divergence between our performance and that of the EU major economies seems to date from the GFC, but the Las couple of years do show that their equally covid affected economies do seem to be out trading global Britain.
Looking at the graph, the divergence between our performance and that of the EU major economies seems to date from the GFC, but the Las couple of years do show that their equally covid affected economies do seem to be out trading global Britain.
It’s of quite a lot of concern to me if he’s in the top bracket of parliamentary thinkers. Because it’s pretty plain he approaches everything with a preconceived view and bends everything to fit his optimism bias. I can name 10 publicly anonymous execs I’d rather have in Cabinet than him.
I wouldn't agree with that either. I've only seen him in action in detail in the Defra brief. At the start he made it plain that he wasn't a specialist in the area and had an open mind, and encouraged industry, farmers and NGOs to talk to him and try to persuade him. We won some arguments, lost others, but I always felt we were dealing with an active, enquiring mind. Of course, if one doesn't like the outcome, then one's upset by the single-minded pursuit of it that results (example: education).
Example: there's a long-running controversy over the fact that meat from animals slaughtered without stunning (to meet kosher and some halal consumer preferences) enters the general food chain, discreetly unlabelled. This makes sense for a slaughterhouse serving both religious and general markets (keep it simple, mate), but it deceives consumers who would like to avoid non-stun meat (because slaughter by bleeding of an unstunned animal is terrifying and can lead to minutes of agony) and is incompatible with the spirit of the regulations that reserve non-stun meat for religious communities.
The minefields are obvious, so most politicians leave it alone. Gove, undeterred, called a half-day meeting of representatives of kosher, halal, farming groups and NGOs to talk it through, and he was I think heading for a defensible compromise (require labelling so consumers can see what they're getting - the probable effect would be to slash non-stunned meat production and therefore push the price up, but not ban it) when he was shunted to the Cabinet Office.
I really wish that compromise had been pushed through.
Starmer repeatedly used the word “lies” about the prime minister in the clip broadcast by Radio 4’s Midnight News. I was a bit taken aback. This is highly unusual language. He must be very, very confident that the case against BJ is rock solid.
Not really, everyone in the whole World knows that the disingenuous fat philanderer is one of the biggest liars out there.
Indeed, but senior and experienced lawyers, not to mention Leaders of the Opposition, almost never use the word about a prime minister.
It just felt like a watershed moment. Folk are no longer nervous about pointing at the obese, drunken, lazy, mendacious, unfaithful emperor and pointing out that he has no clothes.
He used the word 'lies' at PMQs in the week. The attribution of those lies is left in the air, so nobody is accused and thus it is not unparliamentary, but it is clear where SKS thinks they are emanating from.
It feels more natural than directly pointing at Boris and using 'must be mistaken', 'correct the record', 'economical with the actualite' and all that circuitous shite that just turns voters off to parliament. It is a good move.
I agree.
Starmer’s had a good week.
But the dilemma facing Tory MPs - should they ditch Boris or stick with him and let him trash the Tory brand - is exactly the same dilemma which faced Labour MPs and Shadow Cabinet Ministers when Corbyn was in charge.
How did they resolve that dilemma? How did Sir Keir? A lot of grumbling and no action.
SKS went for the easy life and climbing up the greasy pole when he faced an equivalent dilemma. So yes he's had a good week. Easy to criticise others for their faults. Far harder to show courage when it involves yourself.
And what is his party doing now? Supporting the Tories. He is not asking what financial support there will be for businesses affected by restrictions. He is not making such support a condition for his support.
On the last point, despite the Government being reliant on Opposition votes to apply the restrictions, Starmer has no leverage. Labour's USP on Covid, like that of the three devolved governments, is to always be in favour of something at least slightly more severe than what the Tories have proposed.
He cannot, therefore, plausibly threaten to vote against more restrictions - if they fail through lack of Labour support then he's effectively voting for something less severe than what the Tories have proposed, and will be skewered accordingly.
There's the difference between socialists and liberals, right there.
It’s of quite a lot of concern to me if he’s in the top bracket of parliamentary thinkers. Because it’s pretty plain he approaches everything with a preconceived view and bends everything to fit his optimism bias. I can name 10 publicly anonymous execs I’d rather have in Cabinet than him.
I wouldn't agree with that either. I've only seen him in action in detail in the Defra brief. At the start he made it plain that he wasn't a specialist in the area and had an open mind, and encouraged industry, farmers and NGOs to talk to him and try to persuade him. We won some arguments, lost others, but I always felt we were dealing with an active, enquiring mind. Of course, if one doesn't like the outcome, then one's upset by the single-minded pursuit of it that results (example: education).
Example: there's a long-running controversy over the fact that meat from animals slaughtered without stunning (to meet kosher and some halal consumer preferences) enters the general food chain, discreetly unlabelled. This makes sense for a slaughterhouse serving both religious and general markets (keep it simple, mate), but it deceives consumers who would like to avoid non-stun meat (because slaughter by bleeding of an unstunned animal is terrifying and can lead to minutes of agony) and is incompatible with the spirit of the regulations that reserve non-stun meat for religious communities.
The minefields are obvious, so most politicians leave it alone. Gove, undeterred, called a half-day meeting of representatives of kosher, halal, farming groups and NGOs to talk it through, and he was I think heading for a defensible compromise (require labelling so consumers can see what they're getting - the probable effect would be to slash non-stunned meat production and therefore push the price up, but not ban it) when he was shunted to the Cabinet Office.
Fwiw, Nick, my son who has worked closely with Defra for many years speaks favorably of Gove in much the same way that you have here.
For the avoidance of doubt I should add that said son does not generally talk favorably of Conservative Ministers.
I agree with the article. Thank you. One extra point: there is no evidence that the message has been picked up that the anti Tory vote is LD. And there is little good reason for it. Labour came second. Not only will a good number of Tories grit their teeth and vote Tory, but there is a chance that the anti Tory vote will split. A result of Con 32%, Lab and LD about 30% isn't impossible.
This isn't a prediction. I have no idea.
Finally, would a Tory win, however flawed, give Boris a break for a few weeks, enough for the fuss to die down. No idea, but possible.
Even if he wins N. Shropshire I believe he needs several dead cats in quick succession to get over this. Triggering A15 is an obvious one, scapegoating the unvaxxed is another, but haven't worked out plans C,D, and E yet.
Triggering A16 is long-trailed and well-justified if the EU don't move far enough first.
Starmer repeatedly used the word “lies” about the prime minister in the clip broadcast by Radio 4’s Midnight News. I was a bit taken aback. This is highly unusual language. He must be very, very confident that the case against BJ is rock solid.
Not really, everyone in the whole World knows that the disingenuous fat philanderer is one of the biggest liars out there.
Indeed, but senior and experienced lawyers, not to mention Leaders of the Opposition, almost never use the word about a prime minister.
It just felt like a watershed moment. Folk are no longer nervous about pointing at the obese, drunken, lazy, mendacious, unfaithful emperor and pointing out that he has no clothes.
He used the word 'lies' at PMQs in the week. The attribution of those lies is left in the air, so nobody is accused and thus it is not unparliamentary, but it is clear where SKS thinks they are emanating from.
It feels more natural than directly pointing at Boris and using 'must be mistaken', 'correct the record', 'economical with the actualite' and all that circuitous shite that just turns voters off to parliament. It is a good move.
I agree.
Starmer’s had a good week.
But the dilemma facing Tory MPs - should they ditch Boris or stick with him and let him trash the Tory brand - is exactly the same dilemma which faced Labour MPs and Shadow Cabinet Ministers when Corbyn was in charge.
How did they resolve that dilemma? How did Sir Keir? A lot of grumbling and no action.
SKS went for the easy life and climbing up the greasy pole when he faced an equivalent dilemma. So yes he's had a good week. Easy to criticise others for their faults. Far harder to show courage when it involves yourself.
And what is his party doing now? Supporting the Tories. He is not asking what financial support there will be for businesses affected by restrictions. He is not making such support a condition for his support.
On the last point, despite the Government being reliant on Opposition votes to apply the restrictions, Starmer has no leverage. Labour's USP on Covid, like that of the three devolved governments, is to always be in favour of something at least slightly more severe than what the Tories have proposed.
He cannot, therefore, plausibly threaten to vote against more restrictions - if they fail through lack of Labour support then he's effectively voting for something less severe than what the Tories have proposed, and will be skewered accordingly.
Indeed. Important to push for compensation of some sort for hospitality businesses at a critical time though, and sick pay for isolation.
Looking at the graph, the divergence between our performance and that of the EU major economies seems to date from the GFC, but the Las couple of years do show that their equally covid affected economies do seem to be out trading global Britain.
Which is why Truss will not be the next leader...
Indeed, that is what I think the Express were doing by dissing her efforts.
The runners are lining up on the blocks, but when will we get the starting gun?
To be fair, there isn't much evidence that he wanted to bond with previous children. Also he would never be at work if he took it every time!
I suppose the downside is that he and Stanley's genes are scattered about more!
I think what still shakes me about the PM is that declaration one of us noted the other day that he signed that he was never married before as far as the RC church was concerned. And therefore publicly declared his children illegitimate in the eyes of the church in which he and his new wife were getting married. That is not something I could ever do lightly.
I don't see the issue. Its just religious garbage, the RC doesn't recognise other marriages whatever he declares or doesn't, so its just some silly paperwork to sign. Shouldn't change anything between family members.
Agree with this. I find the whole notion of children being "illegitimate" on the basis of their parents' marital status deeply disturbing and offensive, and have said as much when a previous PB poster wanted to make something of it. I'm not about to suddenly take the other side of the argument just because it's something that can be used to criticise Boris Johnson with.
Hilarious interview with the formidable Misha Hussein. Were there any journalists from the Times and Telegraph at the No 10 Party? Could this be why those two newspapers were slow on the uptake? This and more in to -days episode of 'Sleaze at 10'.
Starmer repeatedly used the word “lies” about the prime minister in the clip broadcast by Radio 4’s Midnight News. I was a bit taken aback. This is highly unusual language. He must be very, very confident that the case against BJ is rock solid.
Not really, everyone in the whole World knows that the disingenuous fat philanderer is one of the biggest liars out there.
Indeed, but senior and experienced lawyers, not to mention Leaders of the Opposition, almost never use the word about a prime minister.
It just felt like a watershed moment. Folk are no longer nervous about pointing at the obese, drunken, lazy, mendacious, unfaithful emperor and pointing out that he has no clothes.
He used the word 'lies' at PMQs in the week. The attribution of those lies is left in the air, so nobody is accused and thus it is not unparliamentary, but it is clear where SKS thinks they are emanating from.
It feels more natural than directly pointing at Boris and using 'must be mistaken', 'correct the record', 'economical with the actualite' and all that circuitous shite that just turns voters off to parliament. It is a good move.
I agree.
Starmer’s had a good week.
But the dilemma facing Tory MPs - should they ditch Boris or stick with him and let him trash the Tory brand - is exactly the same dilemma which faced Labour MPs and Shadow Cabinet Ministers when Corbyn was in charge.
How did they resolve that dilemma? How did Sir Keir? A lot of grumbling and no action.
SKS went for the easy life and climbing up the greasy pole when he faced an equivalent dilemma. So yes he's had a good week. Easy to criticise others for their faults. Far harder to show courage when it involves yourself.
And what is his party doing now? Supporting the Tories. He is not asking what financial support there will be for businesses affected by restrictions. He is not making such support a condition for his support.
On the last point, despite the Government being reliant on Opposition votes to apply the restrictions, Starmer has no leverage. Labour's USP on Covid, like that of the three devolved governments, is to always be in favour of something at least slightly more severe than what the Tories have proposed.
He cannot, therefore, plausibly threaten to vote against more restrictions - if they fail through lack of Labour support then he's effectively voting for something less severe than what the Tories have proposed, and will be skewered accordingly.
Indeed. Important to push for compensation of some sort for hospitality businesses at a critical time though, and sick pay for isolation.
I don't know about business support, but I'm pretty sure they've been banging the drum over self-isolation payments again recently.
Regardless, if Starmer were to try to extract concessions by threatening not to back the restrictions then he'd be taking an enormous gamble - namely that the Government was so desperate to bring them in straight away that they'd offer him what he wanted, as distinct from letting the vote fail and then blaming him for the measures not getting through.
The best political outcome for the Government under such circumstances would be the latter, as it could then seek to portray Labour as both hypocritical and irresponsible. Starmer presumably realises this, hence the fact that he has thus far shown no inclination to roll the dice.
I agree with the article. Thank you. One extra point: there is no evidence that the message has been picked up that the anti Tory vote is LD. And there is little good reason for it. Labour came second. Not only will a good number of Tories grit their teeth and vote Tory, but there is a chance that the anti Tory vote will split. A result of Con 32%, Lab and LD about 30% isn't impossible.
This isn't a prediction. I have no idea.
Finally, would a Tory win, however flawed, give Boris a break for a few weeks, enough for the fuss to die down. No idea, but possible.
Even if he wins N. Shropshire I believe he needs several dead cats in quick succession to get over this. Triggering A15 is an obvious one, scapegoating the unvaxxed is another, but haven't worked out plans C,D, and E yet.
There's a Macchiavellian case for hoping for the outcome you suggest. On the one hand, it keeps a controversial PM in office. On the other hand, it makes it obvious that the opposition parties need to strike a deal. Personally I expect a narrow LD win.
But I think those of us really interested in these things underestimate the power of inertia. Whether the Tories hold the seat or lose it, the immediate sequel will not be that anyone resigns or that the political landsape is transformed, but that Christmas arrives. If you're an unhappy, exhausted backbench Tory, do you really want to spend the holiday plotting to make X rather than Y the possible successor? No, you say "I'll see how things look when we get back". And by then we'll all be talking about the Omicron surge and that won't be the moment for a coup either.
Similarly, the Opposition parties will look at whatever the result is and say "Hmm!" And not that much more will happen.
In the medium term, if damaging stories keep emerging and the Labour revial continues, I've no doubt the Tories will try the "new leader, give him/her a chance" card nearer the election. But not now.
Must say that I’m struggling to buy the idea that a Fiat 500 is good in snow and ice. They are awful cars. A triumph of style over content.
Yes, I was surprised how good it is on Ice. I have had it 13 years and over 100 000 miles of nearly entirely trouble free motoring. It is a pretty good city car, not so good on a road trip.
Starmer repeatedly used the word “lies” about the prime minister in the clip broadcast by Radio 4’s Midnight News. I was a bit taken aback. This is highly unusual language. He must be very, very confident that the case against BJ is rock solid.
Not really, everyone in the whole World knows that the disingenuous fat philanderer is one of the biggest liars out there.
Indeed, but senior and experienced lawyers, not to mention Leaders of the Opposition, almost never use the word about a prime minister.
It just felt like a watershed moment. Folk are no longer nervous about pointing at the obese, drunken, lazy, mendacious, unfaithful emperor and pointing out that he has no clothes.
He used the word 'lies' at PMQs in the week. The attribution of those lies is left in the air, so nobody is accused and thus it is not unparliamentary, but it is clear where SKS thinks they are emanating from.
It feels more natural than directly pointing at Boris and using 'must be mistaken', 'correct the record', 'economical with the actualite' and all that circuitous shite that just turns voters off to parliament. It is a good move.
I agree.
Starmer’s had a good week.
But the dilemma facing Tory MPs - should they ditch Boris or stick with him and let him trash the Tory brand - is exactly the same dilemma which faced Labour MPs and Shadow Cabinet Ministers when Corbyn was in charge.
How did they resolve that dilemma? How did Sir Keir? A lot of grumbling and no action.
SKS went for the easy life and climbing up the greasy pole when he faced an equivalent dilemma. So yes he's had a good week. Easy to criticise others for their faults. Far harder to show courage when it involves yourself.
And what is his party doing now? Supporting the Tories. He is not asking what financial support there will be for businesses affected by restrictions. He is not making such support a condition for his support.
On the last point, despite the Government being reliant on Opposition votes to apply the restrictions, Starmer has no leverage. Labour's USP on Covid, like that of the three devolved governments, is to always be in favour of something at least slightly more severe than what the Tories have proposed.
He cannot, therefore, plausibly threaten to vote against more restrictions - if they fail through lack of Labour support then he's effectively voting for something less severe than what the Tories have proposed, and will be skewered accordingly.
And that is why - for all the "ooh look Labour have had a good week" froth - they are not providing any sort of alternative to the Tories.
He is abandoning businesses like my Daughter's just like the Tories.
"Women are deserting Boris: Poll shows two thirds of all voters don't trust the PM and one in three is less likely to follow Plan B rules after party row as Tory support falls to 33%"
Women don’t like being banned from hosting friends and family at Christmas by a hypocritical liar who held parties with his workmates at the same time.
I have been invited to a lunch party today. Would like to go. But mostly strangers.
Am triple vaccinated. Due to go back north later this week. If catch Covid have to isolate & also don't want to put Daughter at risk.
Mind you son meets strangers all day and comes home in the evening and have survived that.
Lots of hysteria and hyperbole about this new variant around - not least on here!
But seriously can I disregard or should I take precautions like this time last year?
That's up to how you view the risk, of course, but personally I'm getting on with everything that I'm allowed to enjoy doing before it gets taken away again. If the worse happens and the Government does pull the lockdown lever yet again then this is going to be a very long, deeply depressing Winter. Scuttling back into self-imposed lockdown before the actual one would only artificially prolong the misery.
Looking at the graph, the divergence between our performance and that of the EU major economies seems to date from the GFC, but the Las couple of years do show that their equally covid affected economies do seem to be out trading global Britain.
Which is why Truss will not be the next leader...
We did this yesderday. That the graph does not say what the graph is measuring tells us all we need to know.
There are no actual trade figures in the article; in fact it is based on trade as a proportion of GDP.
One of the structural changes aiui in the UK is that we are doing more domestic consumption of food grown here, so of course the figures have changed in that way, and similarly across categories. There's a lot of investment going in to Thanet Earth like units.
After all those years of gibber about food security, perhaps it is a good thing.
Here's a picture of a rabbit. Therefore we must be killing more rabbits than before Brexit.
Looks like it will be the biggest backbench Tory rebellion since May's Brexit Deal. However unlike May, who faced Corbyn ordering Labour to side with the Tory rebels against her Deal, Sir Keir is actually doing the sensible thing and ordering Labour to vote with Boris this time to get the vaxports for clubs and large events through
I have been invited to a lunch party today. Would like to go. But mostly strangers.
Am triple vaccinated. Due to go back north later this week. If catch Covid have to isolate & also don't want to put Daughter at risk.
Mind you son meets strangers all day and comes home in the evening and have survived that.
Lots of hysteria and hyperbole about this new variant around - not least on here!
But seriously can I disregard or should I take precautions like this time last year?
It's a difficult one because not only do you have to balance the risk of illness from the virus, but also of having to comply with the self-isolation measures.
My personal view is that I, and other members of my family, are likely at very low risk from the virus, but I am taking extra steps to be cautious and avoid infection, because I do not want the requirement to self-isolate to interfere with my travel plans.
I have been invited to a lunch party today. Would like to go. But mostly strangers.
Am triple vaccinated. Due to go back north later this week. If catch Covid have to isolate & also don't want to put Daughter at risk.
Mind you son meets strangers all day and comes home in the evening and have survived that.
Lots of hysteria and hyperbole about this new variant around - not least on here!
But seriously can I disregard or should I take precautions like this time last year?
If triple vaccinated go or ask everyone to do a lateral flow test beforehand
Yes, that's what we're doing in my circle - party of 10 this evening in a friend's large, reasonably ventilated home. We're all triple-jabbed and 4 of us have actually had Covid, in one case being hospitalised and narrowly surviving. People are anxious not to spoil their Christmas social life, so we've agreed we'll all do LFTs this morning and anyone who shows positive simply won't come.
FPT it’s a very slippery slope when you start judging people for needing the NHS. When does it end?
@Leon guzzles booze like nobody’s business. That’s a positive act that is likely to be an NHS resource drain in the future. Driving a car at 120mph is also a positive act. Refusing a vaccine is an omission.
It feels profoundly wrong to force people to put something into their own body.
I say this as someone who has had an operation cancelled 3 times already due to NHS pressures. 4th attempt is currently scheduled for Monday.
Except you're talking about compulsion in a situation of dire national emergency as if it were a totally novel and unprecedented moral outrage. It isn't.
Not so very long ago, millions of our forebears were conscripted to fight in wars. When society was faced with an existential threat, it demanded, amongst other things, that young people fight in battles and get blown up, shot through the head or drown in icy cold seas. And if you were called up then, unless you had a very good excuse (e.g. a reserved occupation or being medically unfit) then you bloody well went. The small minority of hardcore pacifists who refused to do service of any kind were complete social pariahs who ended up imprisoned.
Fast forward a few decades and now it's considered unforgivable to ask people to have a scratch on the arm every three or six months so as to try and avoid the entire bloody country ending up under house arrest for months on end, with the education of the nation's children wrecked, otherwise viable businesses driven to the wall en masse, and the state hurtling every closer to the cliff edge of bankruptcy into the bargain.
And if the cost of your repeated cancelled operations was that you ended up dead, I doubt your surviving relatives would feel so sanguine about this problem.
Yes, exactly
I confess my patience has ENTIRELY snapped with vax refuseniks like Dura, however entertaining he might be, on occasion. It especially snaps when he starts opining on bloody politics. To continue your analogy, it is like some conscientious objector in 1944 complaining about the awful tactics during D Day and demanding resignations. Jeez no. Do one. Fuck. Right. Off. Never speak again
But my anger - which is genuine - is running away with me, and I will rein it in, for the sake of the site. And the mods. FWIW I have the same anger to refuseniks in my personal life, I now find it very hard not to slap them. This is not "personal"
Goodnight
Good night Gilderoy.
Sean a Slytherin?
Makes sense.
Yes, I spotted that! Looks fantastic.
Range is tremendously important for our big car, as we frequently drive up to 6 hours to get into the mountains (usually for skiing, but cycling has exploded in popularity here). So we are looking at the more premium brands. I just do not like Teslas, the design is awful, and the chassis a piece of junk. Polestar have too many faults. BMW have not launched any “normal” all-electric cars yet, Hyundai too plasticky (although it is perhaps my fav at the moment), Kia and VW overpriced,
I hate to be boring, but I’m probably going for another ICE Volvo at this rate. It’ll be third in a row. They call the new ones “light hybrids”, but I don’t swallow much marketing guff.
I can recommend the Audi Q7. Fantastic in the snow and good to drive for such a large car. Loads of room for sports.
"Loads of room for sports"?
Err... just what are you getting up top in that car?
Starmer repeatedly used the word “lies” about the prime minister in the clip broadcast by Radio 4’s Midnight News. I was a bit taken aback. This is highly unusual language. He must be very, very confident that the case against BJ is rock solid.
Not really, everyone in the whole World knows that the disingenuous fat philanderer is one of the biggest liars out there.
Indeed, but senior and experienced lawyers, not to mention Leaders of the Opposition, almost never use the word about a prime minister.
It just felt like a watershed moment. Folk are no longer nervous about pointing at the obese, drunken, lazy, mendacious, unfaithful emperor and pointing out that he has no clothes.
He used the word 'lies' at PMQs in the week. The attribution of those lies is left in the air, so nobody is accused and thus it is not unparliamentary, but it is clear where SKS thinks they are emanating from.
It feels more natural than directly pointing at Boris and using 'must be mistaken', 'correct the record', 'economical with the actualite' and all that circuitous shite that just turns voters off to parliament. It is a good move.
I agree.
Starmer’s had a good week.
But the dilemma facing Tory MPs - should they ditch Boris or stick with him and let him trash the Tory brand - is exactly the same dilemma which faced Labour MPs and Shadow Cabinet Ministers when Corbyn was in charge.
How did they resolve that dilemma? How did Sir Keir? A lot of grumbling and no action.
SKS went for the easy life and climbing up the greasy pole when he faced an equivalent dilemma. So yes he's had a good week. Easy to criticise others for their faults. Far harder to show courage when it involves yourself.
And what is his party doing now? Supporting the Tories. He is not asking what financial support there will be for businesses affected by restrictions. He is not making such support a condition for his support.
On the last point, despite the Government being reliant on Opposition votes to apply the restrictions, Starmer has no leverage. Labour's USP on Covid, like that of the three devolved governments, is to always be in favour of something at least slightly more severe than what the Tories have proposed.
He cannot, therefore, plausibly threaten to vote against more restrictions - if they fail through lack of Labour support then he's effectively voting for something less severe than what the Tories have proposed, and will be skewered accordingly.
He has an easy work-around.
He simply says that the principle is correct but on all known evidence the implementation will be so appallingly bad that that it will do more harm than good - and that is even if Ministers stick to the regulations themselves this time.
So, no; stick your Plan B up your bum and get rid of the tosser at the top.
I have been invited to a lunch party today. Would like to go. But mostly strangers.
Am triple vaccinated. Due to go back north later this week. If catch Covid have to isolate & also don't want to put Daughter at risk.
Mind you son meets strangers all day and comes home in the evening and have survived that.
Lots of hysteria and hyperbole about this new variant around - not least on here!
But seriously can I disregard or should I take precautions like this time last year?
From a statistical point of view roughly 1 in 50 of us have covid at any one time. If you are triple vaxxed and have low social, school and work contacts you will be significantly less likely than that. Omicron is obviously more transmissible so that probably counteracts that.
As a very rough approximation, the chance of having covid next week and therefore isolating might be in the order of 1-4% if you go and 0.5-2% if you don't. The vast majority of the time you will be fine. Whether that makes it worth the risk is a personal decision.
Starmer repeatedly used the word “lies” about the prime minister in the clip broadcast by Radio 4’s Midnight News. I was a bit taken aback. This is highly unusual language. He must be very, very confident that the case against BJ is rock solid.
Not really, everyone in the whole World knows that the disingenuous fat philanderer is one of the biggest liars out there.
Indeed, but senior and experienced lawyers, not to mention Leaders of the Opposition, almost never use the word about a prime minister.
It just felt like a watershed moment. Folk are no longer nervous about pointing at the obese, drunken, lazy, mendacious, unfaithful emperor and pointing out that he has no clothes.
He used the word 'lies' at PMQs in the week. The attribution of those lies is left in the air, so nobody is accused and thus it is not unparliamentary, but it is clear where SKS thinks they are emanating from.
It feels more natural than directly pointing at Boris and using 'must be mistaken', 'correct the record', 'economical with the actualite' and all that circuitous shite that just turns voters off to parliament. It is a good move.
I agree.
Starmer’s had a good week.
But the dilemma facing Tory MPs - should they ditch Boris or stick with him and let him trash the Tory brand - is exactly the same dilemma which faced Labour MPs and Shadow Cabinet Ministers when Corbyn was in charge.
How did they resolve that dilemma? How did Sir Keir? A lot of grumbling and no action.
SKS went for the easy life and climbing up the greasy pole when he faced an equivalent dilemma. So yes he's had a good week. Easy to criticise others for their faults. Far harder to show courage when it involves yourself.
And what is his party doing now? Supporting the Tories. He is not asking what financial support there will be for businesses affected by restrictions. He is not making such support a condition for his support.
On the last point, despite the Government being reliant on Opposition votes to apply the restrictions, Starmer has no leverage. Labour's USP on Covid, like that of the three devolved governments, is to always be in favour of something at least slightly more severe than what the Tories have proposed.
He cannot, therefore, plausibly threaten to vote against more restrictions - if they fail through lack of Labour support then he's effectively voting for something less severe than what the Tories have proposed, and will be skewered accordingly.
Indeed. Important to push for compensation of some sort for hospitality businesses at a critical time though, and sick pay for isolation.
But Labour aren't doing that. No-one is, as far as I can see. Businesses are being hung out to dry. Again.
Yeah the anger about rule-breaking parties is real and lying about them. It sounds as if pretty much every govt department was doing them and waving 2 fingers at the rules.
And probably quite a few other people as well.
But businesses cannot do that because they risk losing their licence to trade and they need the revenue. So instead of obsessing about what happened a year ago, what are we going to do now to help those affected while taking reasonable public health measures?
No-one is thinking sensibly about this. Instead it's just a pissing contest about parties and what happens in Westminster.
Daughter needs to plan what to buy in, by when, staff rotas, bookings etc - same as every other business and they've been left hanging.
I have been invited to a lunch party today. Would like to go. But mostly strangers.
Am triple vaccinated. Due to go back north later this week. If catch Covid have to isolate & also don't want to put Daughter at risk.
Mind you son meets strangers all day and comes home in the evening and have survived that.
Lots of hysteria and hyperbole about this new variant around - not least on here!
But seriously can I disregard or should I take precautions like this time last year?
You have to make your own call, but…
My view on all of this is simply that as I send my son to school every day, and my wife goes into the office 3-5 days a week, then I’m exposed to the virus anyway, regardless of what I myself do. What most people appear to be scared of now (rationally) is the ludicrous 10 day isolation rule.
At some point in the future, when the doves regain the upper hand, somebody needs to take on the 10 day rule. We cannot go on like this - where people fear the isolation far more than the virus itself!
Looking at the graph, the divergence between our performance and that of the EU major economies seems to date from the GFC, but the Las couple of years do show that their equally covid affected economies do seem to be out trading global Britain.
Interesting how the Express already has figures for the end of 2021, when they are normally published later.
Spreading more quickly in other parts of Europe than the UK. Perhaps we have an opportunity to watch and learn, particularly as in addition our detection system is supposed to be the quickest.
Starmer repeatedly used the word “lies” about the prime minister in the clip broadcast by Radio 4’s Midnight News. I was a bit taken aback. This is highly unusual language. He must be very, very confident that the case against BJ is rock solid.
Not really, everyone in the whole World knows that the disingenuous fat philanderer is one of the biggest liars out there.
Indeed, but senior and experienced lawyers, not to mention Leaders of the Opposition, almost never use the word about a prime minister.
It just felt like a watershed moment. Folk are no longer nervous about pointing at the obese, drunken, lazy, mendacious, unfaithful emperor and pointing out that he has no clothes.
He used the word 'lies' at PMQs in the week. The attribution of those lies is left in the air, so nobody is accused and thus it is not unparliamentary, but it is clear where SKS thinks they are emanating from.
It feels more natural than directly pointing at Boris and using 'must be mistaken', 'correct the record', 'economical with the actualite' and all that circuitous shite that just turns voters off to parliament. It is a good move.
I agree.
Starmer’s had a good week.
But the dilemma facing Tory MPs - should they ditch Boris or stick with him and let him trash the Tory brand - is exactly the same dilemma which faced Labour MPs and Shadow Cabinet Ministers when Corbyn was in charge.
How did they resolve that dilemma? How did Sir Keir? A lot of grumbling and no action.
SKS went for the easy life and climbing up the greasy pole when he faced an equivalent dilemma. So yes he's had a good week. Easy to criticise others for their faults. Far harder to show courage when it involves yourself.
And what is his party doing now? Supporting the Tories. He is not asking what financial support there will be for businesses affected by restrictions. He is not making such support a condition for his support.
On the last point, despite the Government being reliant on Opposition votes to apply the restrictions, Starmer has no leverage. Labour's USP on Covid, like that of the three devolved governments, is to always be in favour of something at least slightly more severe than what the Tories have proposed.
He cannot, therefore, plausibly threaten to vote against more restrictions - if they fail through lack of Labour support then he's effectively voting for something less severe than what the Tories have proposed, and will be skewered accordingly.
Indeed. Important to push for compensation of some sort for hospitality businesses at a critical time though, and sick pay for isolation.
But Labour aren't doing that. No-one is, as far as I can see. Businesses are being hung out to dry. Again.
Yeah the anger about rule-breaking parties is real and lying about them. It sounds as if pretty much every govt department was doing them and waving 2 fingers at the rules.
And probably quite a few other people as well.
But businesses cannot do that because they risk losing their licence to trade and they need the revenue. So instead of obsessing about what happened a year ago, what are we going to do now to help those affected while taking reasonable public health measures?
No-one is thinking sensibly about this. Instead it's just a pissing contest about parties and what happens in Westminster.
Daughter needs to plan what to buy in, by when, staff rotas, bookings etc - same as every other business and they've been left hanging.
The situation is comparable to Leadership Crisis after the Norway fiasco in 1940. Government was paarlysed by a lack of credibility and talent.
As then, the need is for a change at the top and in the Cabinet. The latter is too full of placemen who owe their position to support for Boris and Brexit.
Time for them to go. You may then see some realistic and practical action in the areas you have highlighted.
I agree with the article. Thank you. One extra point: there is no evidence that the message has been picked up that the anti Tory vote is LD. And there is little good reason for it. Labour came second. Not only will a good number of Tories grit their teeth and vote Tory, but there is a chance that the anti Tory vote will split. A result of Con 32%, Lab and LD about 30% isn't impossible.
This isn't a prediction. I have no idea.
Finally, would a Tory win, however flawed, give Boris a break for a few weeks, enough for the fuss to die down. No idea, but possible.
Even if he wins N. Shropshire I believe he needs several dead cats in quick succession to get over this. Triggering A15 is an obvious one, scapegoating the unvaxxed is another, but haven't worked out plans C,D, and E yet.
There's a Macchiavellian case for hoping for the outcome you suggest. On the one hand, it keeps a controversial PM in office. On the other hand, it makes it obvious that the opposition parties need to strike a deal. Personally I expect a narrow LD win.
But I think those of us really interested in these things underestimate the power of inertia. Whether the Tories hold the seat or lose it, the immediate sequel will not be that anyone resigns or that the political landsape is transformed, but that Christmas arrives. If you're an unhappy, exhausted backbench Tory, do you really want to spend the holiday plotting to make X rather than Y the possible successor? No, you say "I'll see how things look when we get back". And by then we'll all be talking about the Omicron surge and that won't be the moment for a coup either.
Similarly, the Opposition parties will look at whatever the result is and say "Hmm!" And not that much more will happen.
In the medium term, if damaging stories keep emerging and the Labour revial continues, I've no doubt the Tories will try the "new leader, give him/her a chance" card nearer the election. But not now.
The one thing in the Tories favour is that governance has been personified as Johnson so should Johnson be jettisoned a new leader can disassociate him or herself with what went before.
However there is a dilemma too for the Conservatives. If Johnson goes early the honeymoon effect may well have evaporated before the GE, and if he hangs on, the honeymoon will be neutralised by more stories of Johnson's mischief being endorsed by the wider Conservative Party.
I really wish that compromise had been pushed through.
It may yet be. The current Sec of State, George Eustice, has issued a Call for Evidence on labelling (just closed - I spent most of last week helping to write a 40-page submission), and non-stun labelling is one of the issues being consulted on. We'll know more next year.
Starmer repeatedly used the word “lies” about the prime minister in the clip broadcast by Radio 4’s Midnight News. I was a bit taken aback. This is highly unusual language. He must be very, very confident that the case against BJ is rock solid.
Not really, everyone in the whole World knows that the disingenuous fat philanderer is one of the biggest liars out there.
Indeed, but senior and experienced lawyers, not to mention Leaders of the Opposition, almost never use the word about a prime minister.
It just felt like a watershed moment. Folk are no longer nervous about pointing at the obese, drunken, lazy, mendacious, unfaithful emperor and pointing out that he has no clothes.
He used the word 'lies' at PMQs in the week. The attribution of those lies is left in the air, so nobody is accused and thus it is not unparliamentary, but it is clear where SKS thinks they are emanating from.
It feels more natural than directly pointing at Boris and using 'must be mistaken', 'correct the record', 'economical with the actualite' and all that circuitous shite that just turns voters off to parliament. It is a good move.
I agree.
Starmer’s had a good week.
But the dilemma facing Tory MPs - should they ditch Boris or stick with him and let him trash the Tory brand - is exactly the same dilemma which faced Labour MPs and Shadow Cabinet Ministers when Corbyn was in charge.
How did they resolve that dilemma? How did Sir Keir? A lot of grumbling and no action.
SKS went for the easy life and climbing up the greasy pole when he faced an equivalent dilemma. So yes he's had a good week. Easy to criticise others for their faults. Far harder to show courage when it involves yourself.
And what is his party doing now? Supporting the Tories. He is not asking what financial support there will be for businesses affected by restrictions. He is not making such support a condition for his support.
On the last point, despite the Government being reliant on Opposition votes to apply the restrictions, Starmer has no leverage. Labour's USP on Covid, like that of the three devolved governments, is to always be in favour of something at least slightly more severe than what the Tories have proposed.
He cannot, therefore, plausibly threaten to vote against more restrictions - if they fail through lack of Labour support then he's effectively voting for something less severe than what the Tories have proposed, and will be skewered accordingly.
And that is why - for all the "ooh look Labour have had a good week" froth - they are not providing any sort of alternative to the Tories.
He is abandoning businesses like my Daughter's just like the Tories.
Labour's core support consists of overlapping groups of socialists, young people and public sector workers, who are united by a dislike of private enterprise (and I was going to add "and a love of free stuff paid for by other people," but the Tory core of featherbedded codgers is as bad if not worse.) The idea that they'd be that bothered about small businesses being immolated by endless cyclical restrictions borders on the absurd.
The one thing in the Tories favour is that governance has been personified as Johnson so should Johnson be jettisoned a new leader can disassociate him or herself with what went before.
Starmer repeatedly used the word “lies” about the prime minister in the clip broadcast by Radio 4’s Midnight News. I was a bit taken aback. This is highly unusual language. He must be very, very confident that the case against BJ is rock solid.
Not really, everyone in the whole World knows that the disingenuous fat philanderer is one of the biggest liars out there.
Indeed, but senior and experienced lawyers, not to mention Leaders of the Opposition, almost never use the word about a prime minister.
It just felt like a watershed moment. Folk are no longer nervous about pointing at the obese, drunken, lazy, mendacious, unfaithful emperor and pointing out that he has no clothes.
He used the word 'lies' at PMQs in the week. The attribution of those lies is left in the air, so nobody is accused and thus it is not unparliamentary, but it is clear where SKS thinks they are emanating from.
It feels more natural than directly pointing at Boris and using 'must be mistaken', 'correct the record', 'economical with the actualite' and all that circuitous shite that just turns voters off to parliament. It is a good move.
I agree.
Starmer’s had a good week.
But the dilemma facing Tory MPs - should they ditch Boris or stick with him and let him trash the Tory brand - is exactly the same dilemma which faced Labour MPs and Shadow Cabinet Ministers when Corbyn was in charge.
How did they resolve that dilemma? How did Sir Keir? A lot of grumbling and no action.
SKS went for the easy life and climbing up the greasy pole when he faced an equivalent dilemma. So yes he's had a good week. Easy to criticise others for their faults. Far harder to show courage when it involves yourself.
And what is his party doing now? Supporting the Tories. He is not asking what financial support there will be for businesses affected by restrictions. He is not making such support a condition for his support.
On the last point, despite the Government being reliant on Opposition votes to apply the restrictions, Starmer has no leverage. Labour's USP on Covid, like that of the three devolved governments, is to always be in favour of something at least slightly more severe than what the Tories have proposed.
He cannot, therefore, plausibly threaten to vote against more restrictions - if they fail through lack of Labour support then he's effectively voting for something less severe than what the Tories have proposed, and will be skewered accordingly.
He has an easy work-around.
He simply says that the principle is correct but on all known evidence the implementation will be so appallingly bad that that it will do more harm than good - and that is even if Ministers stick to the regulations themselves this time.
So, no; stick your Plan B up your bum and get rid of the tosser at the top.
The smart move would be to demand huge compensation for businesses afflicted by Plan B as a condition of supporting it.
Spreading more quickly in other parts of Europe than the UK. Perhaps we have an opportunity to watch and learn, particularly as in addition our detection system is supposed to be the quickest.
Judging by the speed it doubles from what scientists are saying, then the time we will have to watch and learn will be mere days I suspect.
Jade here, feet up as guest in beautiful scenic house after pleasure drive south east from London in my beloved Toyota GR Yaris - Paging as usual @Malky the Super Stud @Stodge and @anyone who wants to join in PBs Morning Line and talk or add racing tips 🐎
Malcolm is still much ahead slipping us winning tips, tipping 2 here last week. I followed up tipping 18-1 winner two weeks ago tipping 8-1 last week, so sneaking back towards my better form.
A NAP, next best and Long shot for you, all from Hurdle races, and with tendency to front run.
14:05 Doncaster - LUCKY ONE (NAP) 15:00 Cheltenham Song For Someone (nb) in my notebook I put “this one ran on well”
Seems so long ago now I was at Cheltenham, back in those days Boris Johnson certain to lead Tories into next election and win it, Starmer was so crap there were calls for him to resign and give a lady a chance, and that was only the November Meeting! 😆
My “moon shot” today perfect long shot if you check it’s form. It ain’t got any! I don’t want to upset Topping again, but I have so often been impressed watching horses win point to point, because knowing if it joined the rules it’s the same impressive horse isn’t it only likely to be rather long in the betting. Here’s an example. What’s going to happen? I haven’t seen this horse run because it’s Irish and I have only been over there twice in my life. But I am tipping it to draw attention how does a point to point winner go at Cheltenham. You could say I am trying to make a (Point to) point.
2.25 Cheltenham - Ballygrifincottage (Long Shot)
Whatever you do today, good luck have a great Saturday. 🙂
I agree with the article. Thank you. One extra point: there is no evidence that the message has been picked up that the anti Tory vote is LD. And there is little good reason for it. Labour came second. Not only will a good number of Tories grit their teeth and vote Tory, but there is a chance that the anti Tory vote will split. A result of Con 32%, Lab and LD about 30% isn't impossible.
This isn't a prediction. I have no idea.
Finally, would a Tory win, however flawed, give Boris a break for a few weeks, enough for the fuss to die down. No idea, but possible.
Even if he wins N. Shropshire I believe he needs several dead cats in quick succession to get over this. Triggering A15 is an obvious one, scapegoating the unvaxxed is another, but haven't worked out plans C,D, and E yet.
Triggering A16 is long-trailed and well-justified if the EU don't move far enough first.
Its not a feline of any type.
A16 being triggered would be BAD in so many ways. The currently volatile situation in NI would presumably become moreso. Even Frosty has stepped back from that brink.
Johnson on the other hand is malevolent enough to sacrifice peace in Northern Ireland to bolster his position.
I agree North Shropshire could still be a narrow Tory hold. Voteshares something like Tories 40% LDs 35% Labour 10% RefUK 8% Others 7% is possible
I can't see the conservative voters of North Shropshire voting LD or Labour. I can see them sitting on their hands in great numbers. You may see a very low turnout as a result in which case you would have huge distortions to the figures for percentage shares. You might then see something extreme and unprecedented, like for example:
LDs 50%, Labour 20%, Ref UK 15%, Others (including Conservative) 15%.
This is not a prediction, but if I could find the appropriate market it would be the basis for a punt.
I have been invited to a lunch party today. Would like to go. But mostly strangers.
Am triple vaccinated. Due to go back north later this week. If catch Covid have to isolate & also don't want to put Daughter at risk.
Mind you son meets strangers all day and comes home in the evening and have survived that.
Lots of hysteria and hyperbole about this new variant around - not least on here!
But seriously can I disregard or should I take precautions like this time last year?
It's a difficult one because not only do you have to balance the risk of illness from the virus, but also of having to comply with the self-isolation measures.
My personal view is that I, and other members of my family, are likely at very low risk from the virus, but I am taking extra steps to be cautious and avoid infection, because I do not want the requirement to self-isolate to interfere with my travel plans.
If you have travel plans then I would say don't go to the lunch. But depends how important the travel is vs the lunch.
“ Vast majority of Britons have NO PROTECTION against Omicron: After 100 days two AstraZeneca doses offer virtually zero defence while two Pfizer jabs provide just 37% protection against new variant - but boosters cut risk of falling ill by 75%”
This is the simplistic nonsense that will lead us into lockdown before Christmas. Because our PM and Cabinet are too thick and poorly educated to understand why this sound byte is wrong.
I thought they had a team of experts to advise them?
A team of experts in the background is absolutely worthless when the people making the decisions are “thick” and “poorly educated”.
cf Brexit
Problem is, in Gove and Johnson we are governed by ex hacks, backed up by second rate media and comms people. The PM’s personal sounding board at home is an art history grad that worked in Pr.
In Sunak & Javid we have backgrounds who should be capable of absorbing technical info outside their expertise and executing decisions. But they’re greasy pole climbers.
Gove isn't thick at all - I've rarely met a politician more able to absorb the details of a complex brief. He's also very committed to doing stuff, and to confronting vested interests. That leads him into far more controversy than ministers who just keep the ship steady. If he was Chancellor, for instance, I could well imagine massive tax/NI reforms with lots of winners and losers - he would attract real loathing from some, but possibly produce a more sensible outcome for the economy. I'm interested to see what he'll do to the planning system - it won't be trivial.
It's why Cummings likes him - Gove is, for Cummings, one of the few politicians that are intelligent enough to be leading us.
To be fair, there isn't much evidence that he wanted to bond with previous children. Also he would never be at work if he took it every time!
I suppose the downside is that he and Stanley's genes are scattered about more!
I think what still shakes me about the PM is that declaration one of us noted the other day that he signed that he was never married before as far as the RC church was concerned. And therefore publicly declared his children illegitimate in the eyes of the church in which he and his new wife were getting married. That is not something I could ever do lightly.
His older children must be getting to an age when they might decide to say 'something' publicly about their father. I wonder if one of them will.
I can't remember, on reflection, if the PM had to sign anything to say he was not previously married - I not having often got married in a PC church - but certainly that is the implication, that the preexisting marriages did not exist at all under RC doctrine.
That's about the size of it.
But that's imo just a twist in RC theology to get over the problems of RC theological absolutism. Once you land yourself with a series of "no way back" dogmas, then you are always going to end up obfuscating at the cost of ignoring, trimming or circumlocuting something else.
It's instructive how some of the more conservative protestant sects do their thinking on divorce, for example, compared to the RC approach.
RC has to declare that the former marriage never existed. Protestants also hold to absolutist standards wrt lifelong marriage once for all, but apply the Doctrines of forgiveness for making a mistake, which in divorce seems to me to be more human. Other systems do similar things.
OTOH on absolutist doctrinal views, RC theology is quite good with a recognition of 'individual conscience'.
Spreading more quickly in other parts of Europe than the UK. Perhaps we have an opportunity to watch and learn, particularly as in addition our detection system is supposed to be the quickest.
Judging by the speed it doubles from what scientists are saying, then the time we will have to watch and learn will be mere days I suspect.
The bods that be reckon London is 1/3 Omicron infected already (Of total cases), so we should get an idea quite soon within our own shores.
FPT it’s a very slippery slope when you start judging people for needing the NHS. When does it end?
@Leon guzzles booze like nobody’s business. That’s a positive act that is likely to be an NHS resource drain in the future. Driving a car at 120mph is also a positive act. Refusing a vaccine is an omission.
It feels profoundly wrong to force people to put something into their own body.
I say this as someone who has had an operation cancelled 3 times already due to NHS pressures. 4th attempt is currently scheduled for Monday.
Except you're talking about compulsion in a situation of dire national emergency as if it were a totally novel and unprecedented moral outrage. It isn't.
Not so very long ago, millions of our forebears were conscripted to fight in wars. When society was faced with an existential threat, it demanded, amongst other things, that young people fight in battles and get blown up, shot through the head or drown in icy cold seas. And if you were called up then, unless you had a very good excuse (e.g. a reserved occupation or being medically unfit) then you bloody well went. The small minority of hardcore pacifists who refused to do service of any kind were complete social pariahs who ended up imprisoned.
Fast forward a few decades and now it's considered unforgivable to ask people to have a scratch on the arm every three or six months so as to try and avoid the entire bloody country ending up under house arrest for months on end, with the education of the nation's children wrecked, otherwise viable businesses driven to the wall en masse, and the state hurtling every closer to the cliff edge of bankruptcy into the bargain.
And if the cost of your repeated cancelled operations was that you ended up dead, I doubt your surviving relatives would feel so sanguine about this problem.
Yes, exactly
I confess my patience has ENTIRELY snapped with vax refuseniks like Dura, however entertaining he might be, on occasion. It especially snaps when he starts opining on bloody politics. To continue your analogy, it is like some conscientious objector in 1944 complaining about the awful tactics during D Day and demanding resignations. Jeez no. Do one. Fuck. Right. Off. Never speak again
But my anger - which is genuine - is running away with me, and I will rein it in, for the sake of the site. And the mods. FWIW I have the same anger to refuseniks in my personal life, I now find it very hard not to slap them. This is not "personal"
Goodnight
Good night Gilderoy.
Sean a Slytherin?
Makes sense.
Yes, I spotted that! Looks fantastic.
Range is tremendously important for our big car, as we frequently drive up to 6 hours to get into the mountains (usually for skiing, but cycling has exploded in popularity here). So we are looking at the more premium brands. I just do not like Teslas, the design is awful, and the chassis a piece of junk. Polestar have too many faults. BMW have not launched any “normal” all-electric cars yet, Hyundai too plasticky (although it is perhaps my fav at the moment), Kia and VW overpriced,
I hate to be boring, but I’m probably going for another ICE Volvo at this rate. It’ll be third in a row. They call the new ones “light hybrids”, but I don’t swallow much marketing guff.
I can recommend the Audi Q7. Fantastic in the snow and good to drive for such a large car. Loads of room for sports.
"Loads of room for sports"?
Err... just what are you getting up top in that car?
Low stakes at rubbish odds? I just don’t get it. A thrilling game of tiddlywinks would create more adrenaline.
It means that there is more uncertainty to this forecast than others (for example, I felt very confident on my Keir Starmer to fight the next election bets) so it makes sense to bet less than normal. But the odds on the Tories are good odds.
Like, I'd bet more on a 1/2 I thought was 75% likely to happen than an evens bet I thought was 60% likely to happen. But they are both good bets.
Looking at the graph, the divergence between our performance and that of the EU major economies seems to date from the GFC, but the Las couple of years do show that their equally covid affected economies do seem to be out trading global Britain.
Which is why Truss will not be the next leader...
We did this yesderday. That the graph does not say what the graph is measuring tells us all we need to know.
There are no actual trade figures in the article; in fact it is based on trade as a proportion of GDP.
One of the structural changes aiui in the UK is that we are doing more domestic consumption of food grown here, so of course the figures have changed in that way, and similarly across categories. There's a lot of investment going in to Thanet Earth like units.
After all those years of gibber about food security, perhaps it is a good thing.
Here's a picture of a rabbit. Therefore we must be killing more rabbits than before Brexit.
"Less global. The UK economy has become less globalised, with effects from the pandemic exacerbated by Brexit. For example, compared to the 2019 average, trade flows (imports plus exports as a share of GDP) in the UK have fallen by far more than in any other G7 country. Indeed in Q3 this year, the UK’s trade flows (as a share of GDP) were the lowest since 2009. By contrast, among the EU countries, trade as a share of GDP has largely recovered to pre-pandemic levels. Moreover, UK firms report greater frictions in the process of importing and exporting.footnote[5] The UK labour market also has become less global: there has been a marked drop in the numbers of EU nationals working in the UK, and firms report greater difficulties in hiring EU staff to work in the UK.
Figure 3. UK and Main EU Countries – Trade Flows (Imports Plus Exports) as per cent of GDP"
Spreading more quickly in other parts of Europe than the UK. Perhaps we have an opportunity to watch and learn, particularly as in addition our detection system is supposed to be the quickest.
Judging by the speed it doubles from what scientists are saying, then the time we will have to watch and learn will be mere days I suspect.
I really wish that compromise had been pushed through.
It may yet be. The current Sec of State, George Eustice, has issued a Call for Evidence on labelling (just closed - I spent most of last week helping to write a 40-page submission), and non-stun labelling is one of the issues being consulted on. We'll know more next year.
Nick,
Were you involved in lobbying the NT on Trail Hunting recently?
Having followed-up my chat with my window cleaner yesterday with a conversation with my equally right-wing father-in-law last night I'm even more convinced that Johnson is a liability for his own party. He's lost his most reliable supporters, so the question that remains is will they oust him soon enough to recover things in time for 2024?
So, tail-between-my-legs, I've been backing out of some of my "Tory Majority at next GE" bets this morning. I think this market is now a lay.
What I shall do is see if they lose North Shropshire and if so then immediately increase my position on the Tory Most Seats market in anticipation of a leadership change.
The last time the lib Dems won a by election from 3rd place was Leicester South in 2004. They also nearly won Bromley and Chislehurst from 3rd in 2006.
I was initially very dubious based on reasons such as not electing any cllrs in May but I think they will narrowly pull it off and 40% could be enough. They just have to increase their vote by ~30% like in Richmond Park and Chesham and Amersham plus the Tories are now in a much worse position.
Spreading more quickly in other parts of Europe than the UK. Perhaps we have an opportunity to watch and learn, particularly as in addition our detection system is supposed to be the quickest.
Judging by the speed it doubles from what scientists are saying, then the time we will have to watch and learn will be mere days I suspect.
I don't think sequencing is very instant, so probably a week behind too.
I agree with the article. Thank you. One extra point: there is no evidence that the message has been picked up that the anti Tory vote is LD. And there is little good reason for it. Labour came second. Not only will a good number of Tories grit their teeth and vote Tory, but there is a chance that the anti Tory vote will split. A result of Con 32%, Lab and LD about 30% isn't impossible.
This isn't a prediction. I have no idea.
Finally, would a Tory win, however flawed, give Boris a break for a few weeks, enough for the fuss to die down. No idea, but possible.
Even if he wins N. Shropshire I believe he needs several dead cats in quick succession to get over this. Triggering A15 is an obvious one, scapegoating the unvaxxed is another, but haven't worked out plans C,D, and E yet.
Triggering A16 is long-trailed and well-justified if the EU don't move far enough first.
Its not a feline of any type.
A16 being triggered would be BAD in so many ways. The currently volatile situation in NI would presumably become moreso. Even Frosty has stepped back from that brink.
Johnson on the other hand is malevolent enough to sacrifice peace in Northern Ireland to bolster his position.
Yup - wouldn’t put it past the clown to trigger it to shore up the Brexiter vote
Indeed. I'm interested in whether HYUFD thinks a challenge is an odds-on chance if NS is lost. If the required letters go in but Johnson decides to compete in the resulting vote would he survive?
A double whammy for Liz Truss in @thetimes today from Matthew Parris and the leader column following her atrocious speech speech at Chatham House. As Matthew says, do read it to see for yourself to appreciate the depth of abasement of British foreign policy. https://twitter.com/Simon_Nixon/status/1469606410698858503/photo/1
I sold 90% or my equities in Feb2020 and bought back in in April and MY of 2020. I timed it pretty well. Not an easy one to repeat!
Nice. Out of interest what motivated the buying back part? Did the crash just seem like it had gone further than it should, or did your take on the underlying situation change between February and April?
The first wave was visibly receding so I thought it safe to go back in, a bit tentatively at first.
A pal of mine, who built a small fortune on a lucrative patent, did much the same as you. He just bought himself a Tesla Y.
Talking of which, I’ve just started doing some research for our next car purchase. I just cannot decide on a safe strategy. Is it really wise to have 2 electric cars (not hybrids, but 100% electric)? My wife has just ordered a small electric car for delivery in March, but the big car needs replaced in the summer, and I just can’t make up my mind between all-electric for that one too, or a conventional internal combustion engine. (I’ve pretty much decided against hybrid.)
Any thoughts?
If you can simultaneously charge both at home then having two BEVs is the obvious move.
Unless you have some requirement that a BEV can't meet like towing a 2 ton caravan 500km every weekend.
Yes, we have a detached modern house with robust electric system in good condition. Big driveway and garden. So charging two cars simultaneously is no problem. We never tow anything. The tow bar is almost purely cosmetic (occasional bike transport).
The warning, though, is that even if he has not (yet) suffered a single defining humiliation that undermines the essence of what his government was elected to do, it may be only a matter of time, and history suggests that such setbacks are hard to overcome without a clear strategy that allows them to be explained within a wider and triumphant narrative. It is when prime ministers fail on their own terms—or are seen to have abandoned their core purpose—that they are really in trouble.
Today, it is clear that Johnson has had his [Brexit] revolution, but far from clear that he has the grip, the determination, or the ideological clarity to define what it was all for. When I spent time with him earlier in the year, Johnson seemed to have an answer to this question. It was, he said, to “unite and level up” the country and become “global.” These were shorthand slogans for putting Britain’s Brexit civil war to bed, avoiding Scottish secession, and bringing to the rest of the country the kind of prosperity enjoyed in London and the southeast.
The problem is, no serious economist believes that such a high-wage economy will magically emerge without significant structural reform. Indeed, most believe that such a prospect has been made harder by Britain’s withdrawal from the EU’s single market.
Today, Johnson’s success—such as it was—is that he secured Brexit. Yet this success contains within it the germs of his current failure, because without that existential combat he has yet to really identify how to fight the next battle, leaving himself exposed to the tide of events and scandals caused by his carelessness. Maybe he never will. But without such clarity, his problem will not be that he gets bored with the job, like de Gaulle in the spring of 1968, but that the country will get bored with his inability to do it—and that history will speed past him before he has figured it out.
The last time the lib Dems won a by election from 3rd place was Leicester South in 2004. They also nearly won Bromley and Chislehurst from 3rd in 2006.
I was initially very dubious based on reasons such as not electing any cllrs in May but I think they will narrowly pull it off and 40% could be enough. They just have to increase their vote by ~30% like in Richmond Park and Chesham and Amersham plus the Tories are now in a much worse position.
Different landscape though - where are the votes coming from? - what it would be useful to know is the number of Chesham and Amersham leave-voting Tory supporters who switched to the LDs. I suspect very few.
Seems to me that CP's biggest worry is that their supporters stay at home in disgust. Postal voting though.
I have been invited to a lunch party today. Would like to go. But mostly strangers.
Am triple vaccinated. Due to go back north later this week. If catch Covid have to isolate & also don't want to put Daughter at risk.
Mind you son meets strangers all day and comes home in the evening and have survived that.
Lots of hysteria and hyperbole about this new variant around - not least on here!
But seriously can I disregard or should I take precautions like this time last year?
A tricky one. I am done with Christmas socialising and will be wearing an FFP3 when shopping later, and at the footy tomorrow. Unlike London there doesn't seem to be much Omnicron in Leicester just yet, but pretty nailed on there will be soon.
I am covering for colleagues on long overdue leave over the holidays, so really don't want to be isolating. Nor to miss out on seeing my brother and parents on Boxing Day.
"Women are deserting Boris: Poll shows two thirds of all voters don't trust the PM and one in three is less likely to follow Plan B rules after party row as Tory support falls to 33%"
Indeed. I'm interested in whether HYUFD thinks a challenge is an odds-on chance if NS is lost. If the required letters go in but Johnson decides to compete in the resulting vote would he survive?
I am hoping my forecast for a lib dem landslide in North Shropshire happens and then Brady and his committee go and tell Boris to resign, or he will be facing an immediate ballot
Comments
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10297923/Women-deserting-Boris-Johnson-Poll-shows-two-thirds-voters-dont-trust-PM.html
We had mass conscription during both world wars and that involved, amongst other things, forcing young men to die horribly fighting pitched battles. Yet somehow asking the public to have a scratch on the arm two or three times a year to avert socio-economic collapse is deemed an unforgiveable violation of civil liberties.
We know that the unvaccinated are vastly over-represented in terms of the burden of Covid patients in hospitals - especially, crucially, in critical care facilities - and we know that the over-stretching of those facilities is the key motivating factor for imposing these hugely destructive lockdowns. Removing the problem of the unvaccinated therefore greatly reduces the likelihood of lockdowns - and doing that by compelling them to have the vaccines is a great deal more humane than the alternative, which is to restrict or exclude them from healthcare when they get sick.
This isn't a prediction. I have no idea.
Finally, would a Tory win, however flawed, give Boris a break for a few weeks, enough for the fuss to die down. No idea, but possible.
How did they resolve that dilemma? How did Sir Keir? A lot of grumbling and no action.
SKS went for the easy life and climbing up the greasy pole when he faced an equivalent dilemma. So yes he's had a good week. Easy to criticise others for their faults. Far harder to show courage when it involves yourself.
And what is his party doing now? Supporting the Tories. He is not asking what financial support there will be for businesses affected by restrictions. He is not making such support a condition for his support.
Example: there's a long-running controversy over the fact that meat from animals slaughtered without stunning (to meet kosher and some halal consumer preferences) enters the general food chain, discreetly unlabelled. This makes sense for a slaughterhouse serving both religious and general markets (keep it simple, mate), but it deceives consumers who would like to avoid non-stun meat (because slaughter by bleeding of an unstunned animal is terrifying and can lead to minutes of agony) and is incompatible with the spirit of the regulations that reserve non-stun meat for religious communities.
The minefields are obvious, so most politicians leave it alone. Gove, undeterred, called a half-day meeting of representatives of kosher, halal, farming groups and NGOs to talk it through, and he was I think heading for a defensible compromise (require labelling so consumers can see what they're getting - the probable effect would be to slash non-stunned meat production and therefore push the price up, but not ban it) when he was shunted to the Cabinet Office.
He cannot, therefore, plausibly threaten to vote against more restrictions - if they fail through lack of Labour support then he's effectively voting for something less severe than what the Tories have proposed, and will be skewered accordingly.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1534017/UK-trade-data-post-Brexit-GDP-EU-evg
Looking at the graph, the divergence between our performance and that of the EU major economies seems to date from the GFC, but the Las couple of years do show that their equally covid affected economies do seem to be out trading global Britain.
For the avoidance of doubt I should add that said son does not generally talk favorably of Conservative Ministers.
Its not a feline of any type.
You can also switch traction control off and do massive drifts until you run out of steering angle and exit backwards into the scenery.
Vaccine passports now dependant on Labour vote.
Full list of rebels: https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/full-list-the-plan-b-tory-rebels
The runners are lining up on the blocks, but when will we get the starting gun?
I have been invited to a lunch party today. Would like to go. But mostly strangers.
Am triple vaccinated. Due to go back north later this week. If catch Covid have to isolate & also don't want to put Daughter at risk.
Mind you son meets strangers all day and comes home in the evening and have survived that.
Lots of hysteria and hyperbole about this new variant around - not least on here!
But seriously can I disregard or should I take precautions like this time last year?
It's 2021 ffs. Illegitimate? Do one.
Regardless, if Starmer were to try to extract concessions by threatening not to back the restrictions then he'd be taking an enormous gamble - namely that the Government was so desperate to bring them in straight away that they'd offer him what he wanted, as distinct from letting the vote fail and then blaming him for the measures not getting through.
The best political outcome for the Government under such circumstances would be the latter, as it could then seek to portray Labour as both hypocritical and irresponsible. Starmer presumably realises this, hence the fact that he has thus far shown no inclination to roll the dice.
But I think those of us really interested in these things underestimate the power of inertia. Whether the Tories hold the seat or lose it, the immediate sequel will not be that anyone resigns or that the political landsape is transformed, but that Christmas arrives. If you're an unhappy, exhausted backbench Tory, do you really want to spend the holiday plotting to make X rather than Y the possible successor? No, you say "I'll see how things look when we get back". And by then we'll all be talking about the Omicron surge and that won't be the moment for a coup either.
Similarly, the Opposition parties will look at whatever the result is and say "Hmm!" And not that much more will happen.
In the medium term, if damaging stories keep emerging and the Labour revial continues, I've no doubt the Tories will try the "new leader, give him/her a chance" card nearer the election. But not now.
He is abandoning businesses like my Daughter's just like the Tories.
Who knew?
There are no actual trade figures in the article; in fact it is based on trade as a proportion of GDP.
One of the structural changes aiui in the UK is that we are doing more domestic consumption of food grown here, so of course the figures have changed in that way, and similarly across categories. There's a lot of investment going in to Thanet Earth like units.
After all those years of gibber about food security, perhaps it is a good thing.
Here's a picture of a rabbit. Therefore we must be killing more rabbits than before Brexit.
My personal view is that I, and other members of my family, are likely at very low risk from the virus, but I am taking extra steps to be cautious and avoid infection, because I do not want the requirement to self-isolate to interfere with my travel plans.
Err... just what are you getting up top in that car?
He simply says that the principle is correct but on all known evidence the implementation will be so appallingly bad that that it will do more harm than good - and that is even if Ministers stick to the regulations themselves this time.
So, no; stick your Plan B up your bum and get rid of the tosser at the top.
As a very rough approximation, the chance of having covid next week and therefore isolating might be in the order of 1-4% if you go and 0.5-2% if you don't. The vast majority of the time you will be fine. Whether that makes it worth the risk is a personal decision.
Yeah the anger about rule-breaking parties is real and lying about them. It sounds as if pretty much every govt department was doing them and waving 2 fingers at the rules.
And probably quite a few other people as well.
But businesses cannot do that because they risk losing their licence to trade and they need the revenue. So instead of obsessing about what happened a year ago, what are we going to do now to help those affected while taking reasonable public health measures?
No-one is thinking sensibly about this. Instead it's just a pissing contest about parties and what happens in Westminster.
Daughter needs to plan what to buy in, by when, staff rotas, bookings etc - same as every other business and they've been left hanging.
My view on all of this is simply that as I send my son to school every day, and my wife goes into the office 3-5 days a week, then I’m exposed to the virus anyway, regardless of what I myself do. What most people appear to be scared of now (rationally) is the ludicrous 10 day isolation rule.
At some point in the future, when the doves regain the upper hand, somebody needs to take on the 10 day rule. We cannot go on like this - where people fear the isolation far more than the virus itself!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0012fbh
Spreading more quickly in other parts of Europe than the UK. Perhaps we have an opportunity to watch and learn, particularly as in addition our detection system is supposed to be the quickest.
As then, the need is for a change at the top and in the Cabinet. The latter is too full of placemen who owe their position to support for Boris and Brexit.
Time for them to go. You may then see some realistic and practical action in the areas you have highlighted.
However there is a dilemma too for the Conservatives. If Johnson goes early the honeymoon effect may well have evaporated before the GE, and if he hangs on, the honeymoon will be neutralised by more stories of Johnson's mischief being endorsed by the wider Conservative Party.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-tory-mps-leadership-b1973964.html
Priti has to go too.
And how does Sunak stay in post?
Nadine Dorries?
Total cabinet refresh needed...
Jade here, feet up as guest in beautiful scenic house after pleasure drive south east from London in my beloved Toyota GR Yaris - Paging as usual @Malky the Super Stud @Stodge and @anyone who wants to join in PBs Morning Line and talk or add racing tips 🐎
Malcolm is still much ahead slipping us winning tips, tipping 2 here last week. I followed up tipping 18-1 winner two weeks ago tipping 8-1 last week, so sneaking back towards my better form.
A NAP, next best and Long shot for you, all from Hurdle races, and with tendency to front run.
14:05 Doncaster - LUCKY ONE (NAP)
15:00 Cheltenham Song For Someone (nb) in my notebook I put “this one ran on well”
Seems so long ago now I was at Cheltenham, back in those days Boris Johnson certain to lead Tories into next election and win it, Starmer was so crap there were calls for him to resign and give a lady a chance, and that was only the November Meeting! 😆
My “moon shot” today perfect long shot if you check it’s form. It ain’t got any! I don’t want to upset Topping again, but I have so often been impressed watching horses win point to point, because knowing if it joined the rules it’s the same impressive horse isn’t it only likely to be rather long in the betting. Here’s an example. What’s going to happen? I haven’t seen this horse run because it’s Irish and I have only been over there twice in my life. But I am tipping it to draw attention how does a point to point winner go at Cheltenham. You could say I am trying to make a (Point to) point.
2.25 Cheltenham - Ballygrifincottage (Long Shot)
Whatever you do today, good luck have a great Saturday. 🙂
Johnson on the other hand is malevolent enough to sacrifice peace in Northern Ireland to bolster his position.
LDs 50%, Labour 20%, Ref UK 15%, Others (including Conservative) 15%.
This is not a prediction, but if I could find the appropriate market it would be the basis for a punt.
I'm not overly surprised given what we knew about him, but it's quite striking.
Laying Starmer for next PM probably wise given it's very unlikely Boris will last until the next election.
I assume that you will personally be lining them up against the wall?
The revolution was to install and sustain Johnson in 10 Downing Street.
I don't believe there was any wider ideology.
But that's imo just a twist in RC theology to get over the problems of RC theological absolutism. Once you land yourself with a series of "no way back" dogmas, then you are always going to end up obfuscating at the cost of ignoring, trimming or circumlocuting something else.
It's instructive how some of the more conservative protestant sects do their thinking on divorce, for example, compared to the RC approach.
RC has to declare that the former marriage never existed. Protestants also hold to absolutist standards wrt lifelong marriage once for all, but apply the Doctrines of forgiveness for making a mistake, which in divorce seems to me to be more human.
Other systems do similar things.
OTOH on absolutist doctrinal views, RC theology is quite good with a recognition of 'individual conscience'.
Like, I'd bet more on a 1/2 I thought was 75% likely to happen than an evens bet I thought was 60% likely to happen. But they are both good bets.
https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/speech/2021/december/michael-saunders-speech-at-a-boe-hosted-event?s=09
"Less global. The UK economy has become less globalised, with effects from the pandemic exacerbated by Brexit. For example, compared to the 2019 average, trade flows (imports plus exports as a share of GDP) in the UK have fallen by far more than in any other G7 country. Indeed in Q3 this year, the UK’s trade flows (as a share of GDP) were the lowest since 2009. By contrast, among the EU countries, trade as a share of GDP has largely recovered to pre-pandemic levels. Moreover, UK firms report greater frictions in the process of importing and exporting.footnote[5] The UK labour market also has become less global: there has been a marked drop in the numbers of EU nationals working in the UK, and firms report greater difficulties in hiring EU staff to work in the UK.
Figure 3. UK and Main EU Countries – Trade Flows (Imports Plus Exports) as per cent of GDP"
Mere days are a long time in politics
https://twitter.com/gunsnrosesgirl3/status/1469280511990321153?t=2ppw_WtfnyTjkqTCNZ8wHQ&s=19
I do - the sooner the better
Were you involved in lobbying the NT on Trail Hunting recently?
So, tail-between-my-legs, I've been backing out of some of my "Tory Majority at next GE" bets this morning. I think this market is now a lay.
What I shall do is see if they lose North Shropshire and if so then immediately increase my position on the Tory Most Seats market in anticipation of a leadership change.
I was initially very dubious based on reasons such as not electing any cllrs in May but I think they will narrowly pull it off and 40% could be enough. They just have to increase their vote by ~30% like in Richmond Park and Chesham and Amersham plus the Tories are now in a much worse position.
With +/- change compared to last published Focaldata poll 29-30 April:
Lab: 41% (+2)
Con: 33% (-7)
LD: 7% (+1)
Grn: 6% (+2)
SNP: 5% (+1)
In other words, the drop in the Con vote is statistically significant, and they have seeped support to all other parties.
(The one thing that polls are very poor at measuring is “churn”, which is likely here.)
I tend to agree, I think we’ll go for two EVs.
Today, it is clear that Johnson has had his [Brexit] revolution, but far from clear that he has the grip, the determination, or the ideological clarity to define what it was all for. When I spent time with him earlier in the year, Johnson seemed to have an answer to this question. It was, he said, to “unite and level up” the country and become “global.” These were shorthand slogans for putting Britain’s Brexit civil war to bed, avoiding Scottish secession, and bringing to the rest of the country the kind of prosperity enjoyed in London and the southeast.
The problem is, no serious economist believes that such a high-wage economy will magically emerge without significant structural reform. Indeed, most believe that such a prospect has been made harder by Britain’s withdrawal from the EU’s single market.
Today, Johnson’s success—such as it was—is that he secured Brexit. Yet this success contains within it the germs of his current failure, because without that existential combat he has yet to really identify how to fight the next battle, leaving himself exposed to the tide of events and scandals caused by his carelessness. Maybe he never will. But without such clarity, his problem will not be that he gets bored with the job, like de Gaulle in the spring of 1968, but that the country will get bored with his inability to do it—and that history will speed past him before he has figured it out.
Seems to me that CP's biggest worry is that their supporters stay at home in disgust. Postal voting though.
I am covering for colleagues on long overdue leave over the holidays, so really don't want to be isolating. Nor to miss out on seeing my brother and parents on Boxing Day.
Who knew?