It is hard to see Truss not making the final two and if she is there then she's in with a strong chance.
Why are you sure she will make the final two? Do you know what level of MP support she has?
From above, if say Sunak, Truss, Gove, Javid, Hunt and either Baker/Harper stood in a contest, which two would come through.
I don't know but my best guess would be Sunak and Hunt. Possibly Sunak and Baker/or Harper. And Gove had decent support in the 2019 (narrowly beaten by Hunt into second place). I'm far from convinced that Truss has the MPs' support.
My feel at the moment is the candidate from the pro-Brexit / Blue Collar / economically interventionist wing will make the final round. That grouping is clearly on manoeuvres (eg the letter to the Telegraph), know they have the numbers to get far (the near 100 MPs rebelling against Boris for a start) and have opinions that should appeal to many of the base.
What might be interesting are the shorts. Jeremy Hunt is a classic example of a bet where us sophisticated elites of PB.com project our own views onto the base. Truss is close by.
Do you think blue collar/interventionist has a significant following amongst the Tory members?
I think they will base their vote on who is the best placed leader to keep the Tories in power. I’m sure @HYUFD has a better view than me but I would imagine the base has moved right wards in recent years as many of the pro-EU, socially liberal types have become less comfortable.
From a betting standpoint for next Tory leader, I think the value bets are from that part of the party.
Yes. But the membership is overwhelmingly older, wealthier and more SE based than the electorate as a whole. I can't see them wanting anything approaching a levelling up agenda. Culture War and cuts yes. Culture War isn't blue collar necessarily.
No but they can do the Maths on seats. Sure, picking a Hunt may push off the LD threat in Southern seats but, electorally, the greater threat to the majority are the RW seats. Plus I suspect there will be a lot of messaging in a contest that the next Tory leader has to be representative of their new base.
That isn't their base though. Those are stretch voters. Their base are wealthy, SE, retired home owners. They have the votes. They will choose. They won't choose someone with a Corbyn lite agenda.
Spot on.
Those “stretch voters” have dipped their toes in the Tory shark pool, and clearly didn’t enjoy getting their feet chomped off.
The Tories, like nearly all parties in trouble, will retreat from the centre ground and appeal to their base. Which simply exacerbates the problem.
Black children are also now more than twice as likely to be growing up poor as white children, according to the Labour party research, which was based on government figures for households that have a “relative low income” – defined as being below 60% of the median, the standard definition for poverty.
No it absolutely isn't. It is a metric of an academic term for what is called relative poverty, that is a very different thing and which the originator of such a term has said wasn't meant to misused in this way as a catch all term for people who are living in actual poverty.
Hang on.
While you might argue about what defines poverty, their point was that "black children are twice as likely as white children to grow up in poorer homes." Now, you can say that isn't true poverty - and it certainly isn't compared to the 1930s or even the 1960s - but that point seems largely inarguable.
That wasn't my point. "relative poverty" is really categorising who are poor / poorer in society. That doesn't necessarily poverty e.g. basically all UK grad students on a standard PhD grant are living in "relative" poverty but not actual poverty....
The Guardian rather naughtily missed out a crucial word. But it doesn't get the same emotive response if you say grow up in poor households, rather than in poverty.
But the metric used, an estimated 14.3 million people are in "poverty" in the UK.
It is hard to see Truss not making the final two and if she is there then she's in with a strong chance.
Why are you sure she will make the final two? Do you know what level of MP support she has?
From above, if say Sunak, Truss, Gove, Javid, Hunt and either Baker/Harper stood in a contest, which two would come through.
I don't know but my best guess would be Sunak and Hunt. Possibly Sunak and Baker/or Harper. And Gove had decent support in the 2019 (narrowly beaten by Hunt into second place). I'm far from convinced that Truss has the MPs' support.
My feel at the moment is the candidate from the pro-Brexit / Blue Collar / economically interventionist wing will make the final round. That grouping is clearly on manoeuvres (eg the letter to the Telegraph), know they have the numbers to get far (the near 100 MPs rebelling against Boris for a start) and have opinions that should appeal to many of the base.
What might be interesting are the shorts. Jeremy Hunt is a classic example of a bet where us sophisticated elites of PB.com project our own views onto the base. Truss is close by.
Do you think blue collar/interventionist has a significant following amongst the Tory members?
I think they will base their vote on who is the best placed leader to keep the Tories in power. I’m sure @HYUFD has a better view than me but I would imagine the base has moved right wards in recent years as many of the pro-EU, socially liberal types have become less comfortable.
From a betting standpoint for next Tory leader, I think the value bets are from that part of the party.
Yes. But the membership is overwhelmingly older, wealthier and more SE based than the electorate as a whole. I can't see them wanting anything approaching a levelling up agenda. Culture War and cuts yes. Culture War isn't blue collar necessarily.
Who would be against levelling up? On what basis? As an old fart of Conservative disposition in the Home Counties I would love to see successful levelling up.
Levelling up yes, as long as it does not mean levelling you down with higher tax rises on the South to pay for more spending on the redwall
Pure bliss.
You can almost see the rusty cogs grinding into action.
What makes you think it's true? Your link is to the Daily Mail, and the Daily Mail sources it to The Sun.
Well it has been previously reported that Sildenafil (which is Viagra) is being clinically trialled for this use. So it certainly isn't impossible or improbable.
Given the latest poll has Labour only 5% ahead and the Tories still on 35% and the only poll comparing other potential Tory leaders to Boris had Labour still 3% ahead under Sunak and every other alternative leader doing far worse than Boris, he is safe for now.
Labour would need to be 10% ahead consistently as Kinnock Labour was over Thatcher's Tories in 1990 or the Tories to fall below 30% as May's Tories did in 2019 for Boris to be removed in my view. Unlike IDS, the only other leader to be removed, Boris also has the cushion of having already proved he could win one general election by a landslide
For all the cheerleading of Starmer, he hasn’t pushed Labour past 40%. He also has the issue - as @bigjohnowls has mentioned - that a number who though small disproportionately did the leg work do not like him because of his actions against Corbyn and / or see him as a snake.
I've always disagreed with the centrist belief that the wave of new members who came in under Corbyn were lazy sods who just sat around debating - roughly the same proortion of them as older members came out to do stuff. But the reverse is also true - there are lots of centrists who do loads of legwork.
That said, activism is always a minority. Over the years I'd say about 5% of members are really active (doing something every week or two), rising to 15% at elections (and the 5% are then doing stuff every day). I'm idly curious what the proportions are like in other parties?
Much higher in the independence movement. Which goes a long way to explaining how we broke SLab hegemony.
Black children are also now more than twice as likely to be growing up poor as white children, according to the Labour party research, which was based on government figures for households that have a “relative low income” – defined as being below 60% of the median, the standard definition for poverty.
No it absolutely isn't. It is a metric of an academic term for what is called relative poverty, that is a very different thing and which the originator of such a term has said wasn't meant to misused in this way as a catch all term for people who are living in actual poverty.
Hang on.
While you might argue about what defines poverty, their point was that "black children are twice as likely as white children to grow up in poorer homes." Now, you can say that isn't true poverty - and it certainly isn't compared to the 1930s or even the 1960s - but that point seems largely inarguable.
That wasn't my point. "relative poverty" is really categorising who are poor / poorer in society. That doesn't necessarily poverty e.g. basically all UK grad students on a standard PhD grant are living in "relative" poverty but not actual poverty....
The Guardian rather naughtily missed out a crucial word. But it doesn't get the same emotive response if you say grow up in poor households, rather than in poverty.
But the metric used, an estimated 14.3 million people are in "poverty" in the UK.
Back to work with a bump this morning, after doing very little for the past fortnight. The big reconciliation of targets and budgets for the year ahead.
Thanks to @MikeSmithson and the team for this awesome site, and may everyone have a great 2022!
On topic, I think the government’s ratings will slowly start improving from the low base in the next couple of months. As predicted, much of Western Europe is introducing more restrictions, and England isn’t, something that was highlighted on New Year’s Eve and will become more so in the coming weeks. Look at the riots in Amsterdam overnight.
Everyone has been vaccinated, there doesn’t look to be an imminent collapse of the health system and we will just have to start living with it. It’s still going to be a tough couple of weeks for the NHS, with high levels of staff absence due to the virus, even though it looks like the corner is being turned. The key point will turn out to be the Fraser Nelson interrogation of the SAGE scientist, which got the Cabinet asking the right questions of their pandemic advisors.
Q2 looks horrible though, with the planned NI rise (which will surely be cancelled for employees), and energy prices the focus, illustrating the futility of price controls. It’s definitely become clear that opponents of the government, and the PM specifically, are hard at work collecting trivial stories they hope will eventually add up to something.
Assuming there’s not more gaffes coming up, and the PM gets a couple of good new advisors, he’s probably safe this year. The biggest problem, not that he realises it yet, is the wife. He would be much better off sending the family to live at Chequers, and not hang around Downing St getting in the way.
Black children are also now more than twice as likely to be growing up poor as white children, according to the Labour party research, which was based on government figures for households that have a “relative low income” – defined as being below 60% of the median, the standard definition for poverty.
No it absolutely isn't. It is a metric of an academic term for what is called relative poverty, that is a very different thing and which the originator of such a term has said wasn't meant to misused in this way as a catch all term for people who are living in actual poverty.
Another day, another Guardian article deliberately confusing poverty and inequality, and using misleading statistics to ignore the white working class children who have some of the worst educational outcomes of any group.
Ask the working classes of, to pick a random example, Rotherham, how that’s worked out for them over the years.
Levelling up Northern towns doesn’t need to mean levelling down the South East, it means to give opportunities to people in these communities to better themselves. It’s not something accomplished with large piles of public money, but rather with focus and encouragement of private investment and opportunities.
On topic, I think the government’s ratings will slowly start improving from the low base in the next couple of months. As predicted, much of Western Europe is introducing more restrictions, and England isn’t, something that was highlighted on New Year’s Eve and will become more so in the coming weeks. Look at the riots in Amsterdam overnight.
Everyone has been vaccinated, there doesn’t look to be an imminent collapse of the health system and we will just have to start living with it. It’s still going to be a tough couple of weeks for the NHS, with high levels of staff absence due to the virus, even though it looks like the corner is being turned. The key point will turn out to be the Fraser Nelson interrogation of the SAGE scientist, which got the Cabinet asking the right questions of their pandemic advisors.
Q2 looks horrible though, with the planned NI rise (which will surely be cancelled for employees), and energy prices the focus, illustrating the futility of price controls. It’s definitely become clear that opponents of the government, and the PM specifically, are hard at work collecting trivial stories they hope will eventually add up to something.
Assuming there’s not more gaffes coming up, and the PM gets a couple of good new advisors, he’s probably safe this year. The biggest problem, not that he realises it yet, is the wife. He would be much better off sending the family to live at Chequers, and not hang around Downing St getting in the way.
Good morning everyone. Is there no end to the (quasi) celebratory days?
Mr S is making a big assumption, I suspect, in his last paragraph. Our PM clearly likes living with his latest family around him and the chance of him removing his wife as, effectively, senior advisor seems remote. And while she is a senior advisor, the chances of anyone else getting a word in seem unlikely. It's different from the days of Cherie Blair, who at least had a career of her own, as did other PM's spouses.
Ms. Heathener, that's a marvellous impression of a stuck record you can do.
Most people here who offer opinions on betting and the like have got plenty of things wrong. I imagine it's easier to point at those than to recall your own fantastic array of betting insights.
On topic, I think the government’s ratings will slowly start improving from the low base in the next couple of months. As predicted, much of Western Europe is introducing more restrictions, and England isn’t, something that was highlighted on New Year’s Eve and will become more so in the coming weeks. Look at the riots in Amsterdam overnight.
Everyone has been vaccinated, there doesn’t look to be an imminent collapse of the health system and we will just have to start living with it. It’s still going to be a tough couple of weeks for the NHS, with high levels of staff absence due to the virus, even though it looks like the corner is being turned. The key point will turn out to be the Fraser Nelson interrogation of the SAGE scientist, which got the Cabinet asking the right questions of their pandemic advisors.
Q2 looks horrible though, with the planned NI rise (which will surely be cancelled for employees), and energy prices the focus, illustrating the futility of price controls. It’s definitely become clear that opponents of the government, and the PM specifically, are hard at work collecting trivial stories they hope will eventually add up to something.
Assuming there’s not more gaffes coming up, and the PM gets a couple of good new advisors, he’s probably safe this year. The biggest problem, not that he realises it yet, is the wife. He would be much better off sending the family to live at Chequers, and not hang around Downing St getting in the way.
Good morning everyone. Is there no end to the (quasi) celebratory days?
Mr S is making a big assumption, I suspect, in his last paragraph. Our PM clearly likes living with his latest family around him and the chance of him removing his wife as, effectively, senior advisor seems remote. And while she is a senior advisor, the chances of anyone else getting a word in seem unlikely. It's different from the days of Cherie Blair, who at least had a career of her own, as did other PM's spouses.
Yes, the problem is that she has no formal role, and that her previous job was as a communications manager for the Conservative party.
Unsurprisingly, no-one else wants to be an actual senior advisor in that situation, and why would they?
Moreover, it isn’t accurate. They’re not to be tested *before* starting back, they are to be tested *on* starting back. Given the numbers to be tested that will have to go ahead as stated because there is no time to make changes (most schools starting back tomorrow).
I am very rapidly coming to the conclusion that every single member of the DfE is actively out to destroy education, rather than just being thick as mince. The whole thing is spinning to try and look as if they’re doing something to conceal the fact they have completely failed to take the only two measures that would work - smaller classes and air filters.
And yet the media aren’t even asking the basic questions about this.
Remarkable to see the vast outpouring of love, empathy and compassion for those in overcrowded housing and low paid, unfulfilling jobs. And the disdain for those with comfortable salaries and large gardens. I trust some form of equalisation of this benighted set of circumstances will be the sole consideration when the next election comes around?
Lovely though to see folk who almost certainly thought tina during 1980s de-industrialisation and 2010s austerity realise that there is actually an alternative. Better late than never!
I wonder about our PM's problems sometimes. He must have made excellent financial settlements for all his ex-wives.... I recall the story about his second one ..... and children, and be continuing with that support as necessary or requested. Otherwise, somewhere, there will be a disgruntled ex-wife, or partner. Or even offspring! I'm not entirely sure we've heard the last of Ms Arcuri, either. Although I suspect that revelations from that quarter would only be really damaging if his activities there were found to be co-incidental with the early days of the current Mrs J.
I wonder about our PM's problems sometimes. He must have made excellent financial settlements for all his ex-wives.... I recall the story about his second one ..... and children, and be continuing with that support as necessary or requested. Otherwise, somewhere, there will be a disgruntled ex-wife, or partner. Or even offspring! I'm not entirely sure we've heard the last of Ms Arcuri, either. Although I suspect that revelations from that quarter would only be really damaging if his activities there were found to be co-incidental with the early days of the current Mrs J.
His problems all do appear to have either a financial or sexual aspect to them. I suspect that he’s pretty much skint after his last divorce, is not earning a lot of money by his own standards, and has no idea how he gets out of the situation.
It’s actually a reason to bet against him staying on too long as PM: at some point he’s going to really need the book advance and the speaking fees, and can’t keep hiding loans from old friends. Even Theresa May has managed to bank a couple of million as a speaker, since she stood down from the top job.
Deepti Gurdasani @dgurdasani1 · 2h This is wrong. The only way to avoid lockdowns is mitigating spread. And focused protection doesn't work- because it's impossible and unethical to isolate an entire group of people in society.
====
Erm, but it is ok and possible to isolate an entire society via lockdowns and curfews?
Or perhaps just everyone who can work from home with a decent house and garden and a salary from uni while the others trot up and down the drive delivering the foods and goods and keeping wifi running?
This is exactly the point. The advocates of lockdowns are almost always middle class professionals with spacious houses, nice gardens and the ability to make the best of the restrictions by working from home. For millions of people living in cramped accommodation with no access to green spaces and limited resources lockdown is utter hell.
Except. Most people continued working as normal. Particularly the ones in cramped accommodations.
I simply don't believe that is true. Certainly not during the first lockdown. The lack of vehicles on the roads, lack of people on public transport, points to the falsehood of that claim. Yes some people did have to continue to work normally but even they then had kids at home they had to look after because the schools were closed. Anyone who thinks lockdowns were easy or even 'normal' for the vast majority of people is not living in the real world.
Remarkable to see the vast outpouring of love, empathy and compassion for those in overcrowded housing and low paid, unfulfilling jobs. And the disdain for those with comfortable salaries and large gardens. I trust some form of equalisation of this benighted set of circumstances will be the sole consideration when the next election comes around?
Really not remarkable to see a lockdown fanatic like you misrepresenting what has been written here. There is no disdain for those with large gardens and comfortable salaries. Merely for those in that situation who are then happy to impose lockdowns on those who are not as fortunate as them. It is the blind ignorance that rankles.
I'm not a lockdown fanatic in the slightest. I don't even support one.
Richard's developing a habit of calling anyone who isn't foaming at the mouth against lockdowns as a 'lockdown fanatic'.
He doesn't seem to notice (or care) about the 'fanatics' on his side of the argument...
I wonder about our PM's problems sometimes. He must have made excellent financial settlements for all his ex-wives.... I recall the story about his second one ..... and children, and be continuing with that support as necessary or requested. Otherwise, somewhere, there will be a disgruntled ex-wife, or partner. Or even offspring! I'm not entirely sure we've heard the last of Ms Arcuri, either. Although I suspect that revelations from that quarter would only be really damaging if his activities there were found to be co-incidental with the early days of the current Mrs J.
His problems all do appear to have either a financial or sexual aspect to them. I suspect that he’s pretty much skint after his last divorce, is not earning a lot of money by his own standards, and has no idea how he gets out of the situation.
It’s actually a reason to bet against him staying on too long as PM: at some point he’s going to really need the book advance and the speaking fees, and can’t keep hiding loans from old friends. Even Theresa May has managed to bank a couple of million as a speaker, since she stood down from the top job.
Agree; he's somewhere between a rock and a hard place, financially. I cannot understand why people keep 'loaning' him money. It's not, I would thought, as if they were likely to get it back! In any event continual borrowing against expected income later is highly likely to end in tears.
I wonder about our PM's problems sometimes. He must have made excellent financial settlements for all his ex-wives.... I recall the story about his second one ..... and children, and be continuing with that support as necessary or requested. Otherwise, somewhere, there will be a disgruntled ex-wife, or partner. Or even offspring! I'm not entirely sure we've heard the last of Ms Arcuri, either. Although I suspect that revelations from that quarter would only be really damaging if his activities there were found to be co-incidental with the early days of the current Mrs J.
His problems all do appear to have either a financial or sexual aspect to them. I suspect that he’s pretty much skint after his last divorce, is not earning a lot of money by his own standards, and has no idea how he gets out of the situation.
It’s actually a reason to bet against him staying on too long as PM: at some point he’s going to really need the book advance and the speaking fees, and can’t keep hiding loans from old friends. Even Theresa May has managed to bank a couple of million as a speaker, since she stood down from the top job.
I’m surprised at this ‘even Theresa May’ gibe I keep seeing.
1) When giving speeches not on politics, all the evidence is she is witty, intelligent, well informed and quite capable of laughing at herself. The perfect after dinner speaker.
2) She is also a very powerful speaker when she puts her mind to it. Who could forget that time she roasted the police?
3) She’s an ex-PM who led through some very tough times and did in fact lay the groundwork for our departure from the EU, although Johnson negotiated a deal one stage back from hers and then shamelessly took credit. Why wouldn’t you want to hear from such a person?
4) She’s still an MP and has emerged as one of the more thoughtful and independently-minded Tories out there (not saying much).
Why wouldn’t you pay good money to hear from such a person?
I think the reason she came across so badly as PM was partly the very difficult situation she was in and partly appalling advice.
I wonder about our PM's problems sometimes. He must have made excellent financial settlements for all his ex-wives.... I recall the story about his second one ..... and children, and be continuing with that support as necessary or requested. Otherwise, somewhere, there will be a disgruntled ex-wife, or partner. Or even offspring! I'm not entirely sure we've heard the last of Ms Arcuri, either. Although I suspect that revelations from that quarter would only be really damaging if his activities there were found to be co-incidental with the early days of the current Mrs J.
His problems all do appear to have either a financial or sexual aspect to them. I suspect that he’s pretty much skint after his last divorce, is not earning a lot of money by his own standards, and has no idea how he gets out of the situation.
It’s actually a reason to bet against him staying on too long as PM: at some point he’s going to really need the book advance and the speaking fees, and can’t keep hiding loans from old friends. Even Theresa May has managed to bank a couple of million as a speaker, since she stood down from the top job.
Agree; he's somewhere between a rock and a hard place, financially. I cannot understand why people keep 'loaning' him money. It's not, I would thought, as if they were likely to get it back! In any event continual borrowing against expected income later is highly likely to end in tears.
It’s actually a reason to bet against him staying on too long as PM: at some point he’s going to really need the book advance and the speaking fees, and can’t keep hiding loans from old friends. Even Theresa May has managed to bank a couple of million as a speaker, since she stood down from the top job.
He could get a million quid advance on a book deal tomorrow if he wanted one. He's going nowhere as he and NutNut enjoy the trappings of high office to which they feel they are entitled.
The only possible wildcard is he gets tired of firing into that busted out twat and they split up. Then anything could happen.
Leon's right. It really seems to have dragged on this year. It being a Saturday Xmas didn't help. The extra Bank Holidays would have been much more appreciated later in the year some time imho.
Leon's right. It really seems to have dragged on this year. It being a Saturday Xmas didn't help. The extra Bank Holidays would have been much more appreciated later in the year some time imho.
Dutch lockdown update: Covid case rate for January 2nd reported as 843 per million - source: https://ourworldindata.org/covid-cases - the fifth consecutive daily increase and now above the rate reported when the lockdown began on December 19th.
As per yesterday's update, it's still a very long way behind us and other countries that did not lock down (albeit that the Netherlands does only a small fraction of the amount of testing that we do,) but Omicron does appear to be gradually overcoming the severe restrictions at this stage.
Leon's right. It really seems to have dragged on this year. It being a Saturday Xmas didn't help. The extra Bank Holidays would have been much more appreciated later in the year some time imho.
When it’ll be colder?
Since most people, given the opportunity, would take the whole Christmas/New Year week off work in order to spend more time with their families, there has effectively been only one extra day from the substitute bank holidays, which is today (and tomorrow in Scotland).
Moreover, it isn’t accurate. They’re not to be tested *before* starting back, they are to be tested *on* starting back. Given the numbers to be tested that will have to go ahead as stated because there is no time to make changes (most schools starting back tomorrow).
I am very rapidly coming to the conclusion that every single member of the DfE is actively out to destroy education, rather than just being thick as mince. The whole thing is spinning to try and look as if they’re doing something to conceal the fact they have completely failed to take the only two measures that would work - smaller classes and air filters.
And yet the media aren’t even asking the basic questions about this.
Yep. I wasn't paying close attention TBH but they were interviewing Zahawi on the TV a few minutes ago, and most of the discussion seemed to revolve around masks, before it moved on to generic stuff about the NHS and staff absences.
Leaky cotton or paper masks are almost certainly useless against Omicron and, therefore, constitute futile something-must-be-done-ism, but they are also highly visible and a nuisance, divisive imposition which therefore attracts a lot of media attention and argument. Ventilation is boring so nobody's interested in talking about it.
Moreover, it isn’t accurate. They’re not to be tested *before* starting back, they are to be tested *on* starting back. Given the numbers to be tested that will have to go ahead as stated because there is no time to make changes (most schools starting back tomorrow).
I am very rapidly coming to the conclusion that every single member of the DfE is actively out to destroy education, rather than just being thick as mince. The whole thing is spinning to try and look as if they’re doing something to conceal the fact they have completely failed to take the only two measures that would work - smaller classes and air filters.
And yet the media aren’t even asking the basic questions about this.
Yep. I wasn't paying close attention TBH but they were interviewing Zahawi on the TV a few minutes ago, and most of the discussion seemed to revolve around masks, before it moved on to generic stuff about the NHS and staff absences.
Leaky cotton or paper masks are almost certainly useless against Omicron and, therefore, constitute futile something-must-be-done-ism, but they are also highly visible and a nuisance, divisive imposition which therefore attracts a lot of media attention and argument. Ventilation is boring so nobody's interested in talking about it.
It just shows how useless the government is. A year on from the last winter wave and bugger all done about school (and other crowded indoor space) ventilation. Sweet FA on preventing hospital acquired covid either, even though effective measures for each exist that don't impinge on freedoms or economy.
It is particularly disingenuous and downright dangerous of the right-wing boneheads to be hiding behind the lack of covid data from c. 21st Dec to 06th Jan in order to promote their freedom-at-all-costs agenda.
We do NOT yet know how this is going to pan out. Prudence would have been to have additional restrictions in place until we see how the tree shakes.
Crowing about 'success' of a policy based on a paucity of data is disingenuous (at best).
p.s. as it happens I'm not really in favour of masking children. I find it absolutely bizarre that we're happy to let adults frolick around in a pub without any protection or restrictions whilst we're prepared to gag our children.
Moreover, it isn’t accurate. They’re not to be tested *before* starting back, they are to be tested *on* starting back. Given the numbers to be tested that will have to go ahead as stated because there is no time to make changes (most schools starting back tomorrow).
I am very rapidly coming to the conclusion that every single member of the DfE is actively out to destroy education, rather than just being thick as mince. The whole thing is spinning to try and look as if they’re doing something to conceal the fact they have completely failed to take the only two measures that would work - smaller classes and air filters.
And yet the media aren’t even asking the basic questions about this.
Yep. I wasn't paying close attention TBH but they were interviewing Zahawi on the TV a few minutes ago, and most of the discussion seemed to revolve around masks, before it moved on to generic stuff about the NHS and staff absences.
Leaky cotton or paper masks are almost certainly useless against Omicron and, therefore, constitute futile something-must-be-done-ism, but they are also highly visible and a nuisance, divisive imposition which therefore attracts a lot of media attention and argument. Ventilation is boring so nobody's interested in talking about it.
It just shows how useless the government is. A year on from the last winter wave and bugger all done about school (and other crowded indoor space) ventilation. Sweet FA on preventing hospital acquired covid either, even though effective measures for each exist that don't impinge on freedoms or economy.
And now, of course, it's pretty well too late for these kinds of interventions to make any difference. Teachers can try opening some windows (if that isn't going to simply freeze the children to death) but that's about it. More sophisticated equipment will, for the most part, not be installed until after the peak of the Omicron wave is well past.
Leon's right. It really seems to have dragged on this year. It being a Saturday Xmas didn't help. The extra Bank Holidays would have been much more appreciated later in the year some time imho.
When it’ll be colder?
Since most people, given the opportunity, would take the whole Christmas/New Year week off work in order to spend more time with their families, there has effectively been only one extra day from the substitute bank holidays, which is today (and tomorrow in Scotland).
Yes, but people do tend to take the days because they can get a week or longer off for just 3 days of annual leave.
Moreover, it isn’t accurate. They’re not to be tested *before* starting back, they are to be tested *on* starting back. Given the numbers to be tested that will have to go ahead as stated because there is no time to make changes (most schools starting back tomorrow).
I am very rapidly coming to the conclusion that every single member of the DfE is actively out to destroy education, rather than just being thick as mince. The whole thing is spinning to try and look as if they’re doing something to conceal the fact they have completely failed to take the only two measures that would work - smaller classes and air filters.
And yet the media aren’t even asking the basic questions about this.
Yep. I wasn't paying close attention TBH but they were interviewing Zahawi on the TV a few minutes ago, and most of the discussion seemed to revolve around masks, before it moved on to generic stuff about the NHS and staff absences.
Leaky cotton or paper masks are almost certainly useless against Omicron and, therefore, constitute futile something-must-be-done-ism, but they are also highly visible and a nuisance, divisive imposition which therefore attracts a lot of media attention and argument. Ventilation is boring so nobody's interested in talking about it.
It just shows how useless the government is. A year on from the last winter wave and bugger all done about school (and other crowded indoor space) ventilation. Sweet FA on preventing hospital acquired covid either, even though effective measures for each exist that don't impinge on freedoms or economy.
And now, of course, it's pretty well too late for these kinds of interventions to make any difference. Teachers can try opening some windows (if that isn't going to simply freeze the children to death) but that's about it. More sophisticated equipment will, for the most part, not be installed until after the peak of the Omicron wave is well past.
I think that FFP3 masks for all health care workers and restrictions of visitors, such as mandatory LFT, could make a difference to hospital disease and staff absences even at this late stage.
Moreover, it isn’t accurate. They’re not to be tested *before* starting back, they are to be tested *on* starting back. Given the numbers to be tested that will have to go ahead as stated because there is no time to make changes (most schools starting back tomorrow).
I am very rapidly coming to the conclusion that every single member of the DfE is actively out to destroy education, rather than just being thick as mince. The whole thing is spinning to try and look as if they’re doing something to conceal the fact they have completely failed to take the only two measures that would work - smaller classes and air filters.
And yet the media aren’t even asking the basic questions about this.
Yep. I wasn't paying close attention TBH but they were interviewing Zahawi on the TV a few minutes ago, and most of the discussion seemed to revolve around masks, before it moved on to generic stuff about the NHS and staff absences.
Leaky cotton or paper masks are almost certainly useless against Omicron and, therefore, constitute futile something-must-be-done-ism, but they are also highly visible and a nuisance, divisive imposition which therefore attracts a lot of media attention and argument. Ventilation is boring so nobody's interested in talking about it.
I'm furious about masks, but actually the more alarming implication is that if the government press release is accurate they have made a major change in policy and announced it with just 24 hours' warning without being clear.
All secondary schools have been asked to provide one on-site test for pupils ahead of their return to the classroom this term to help reduce the transmission of Covid-19.
Now, back in November we were told to provide testing *upon* their return to the classroom. That is, they return to school and we take them out of lessons to do a test. And we have planned and communicated with parents on that basis.
If they have to be tested *before* returning to the classroom that entire timetable is straight out of the window, because we can't test all of them before tomorrow(!) or even just tomorrow. It takes three days to do the physical tests.
So suddenly, are we supposed to tell parents who do not work from home - 90% given I work in an industrial area - that they have under 24 hours to find childcare and make arrangements to get their children to school for these tests?
Because if we do, that's a very serious matter. It needs much more notice than a badly worded press release written by a moron the day before.
And if we don't that press release is announcing something that's already been announced, months ago, but is describing it incorrectly. Which is worse than unnecessary as it will only cause confusion.
Either way the media should be asking very searching questions and they're not.
I am curious to see the governments response to fuel bills doubling/trebling over the coming weeks. There must be a political dimension to folks having to find up to 300 pounds extra per month.
p.s. as it happens I'm not really in favour of masking children. I find it absolutely bizarre that we're happy to let adults frolick around in a pub without any protection or restrictions whilst we're prepared to gag our children.
Child abuse.
Finally, something we agree on
It's worse for me from a purely personal point of view because I have hearing loss and rely on lip reading, particularly if there is any background noise (so it's really lucky adolescents are so polite and thoughtful and never talk across others). So this buggers me sideways.
I'd object less if I thought it was doing any good, but it clearly isn't or Scotland would have a far lower case rate than we do.
Moreover, it isn’t accurate. They’re not to be tested *before* starting back, they are to be tested *on* starting back. Given the numbers to be tested that will have to go ahead as stated because there is no time to make changes (most schools starting back tomorrow).
I am very rapidly coming to the conclusion that every single member of the DfE is actively out to destroy education, rather than just being thick as mince. The whole thing is spinning to try and look as if they’re doing something to conceal the fact they have completely failed to take the only two measures that would work - smaller classes and air filters.
And yet the media aren’t even asking the basic questions about this.
Yep. I wasn't paying close attention TBH but they were interviewing Zahawi on the TV a few minutes ago, and most of the discussion seemed to revolve around masks, before it moved on to generic stuff about the NHS and staff absences.
Leaky cotton or paper masks are almost certainly useless against Omicron and, therefore, constitute futile something-must-be-done-ism, but they are also highly visible and a nuisance, divisive imposition which therefore attracts a lot of media attention and argument. Ventilation is boring so nobody's interested in talking about it.
It just shows how useless the government is. A year on from the last winter wave and bugger all done about school (and other crowded indoor space) ventilation. Sweet FA on preventing hospital acquired covid either, even though effective measures for each exist that don't impinge on freedoms or economy.
Government by soundbites. Masks are visible. Useful measures are not.
They're like a swan trying to swim upside down - legs pumping furiously while stuck in the same place and slowly drowning to boot.
Moreover, it isn’t accurate. They’re not to be tested *before* starting back, they are to be tested *on* starting back. Given the numbers to be tested that will have to go ahead as stated because there is no time to make changes (most schools starting back tomorrow).
I am very rapidly coming to the conclusion that every single member of the DfE is actively out to destroy education, rather than just being thick as mince. The whole thing is spinning to try and look as if they’re doing something to conceal the fact they have completely failed to take the only two measures that would work - smaller classes and air filters.
And yet the media aren’t even asking the basic questions about this.
Yep. I wasn't paying close attention TBH but they were interviewing Zahawi on the TV a few minutes ago, and most of the discussion seemed to revolve around masks, before it moved on to generic stuff about the NHS and staff absences.
Leaky cotton or paper masks are almost certainly useless against Omicron and, therefore, constitute futile something-must-be-done-ism, but they are also highly visible and a nuisance, divisive imposition which therefore attracts a lot of media attention and argument. Ventilation is boring so nobody's interested in talking about it.
It just shows how useless the government is. A year on from the last winter wave and bugger all done about school (and other crowded indoor space) ventilation. Sweet FA on preventing hospital acquired covid either, even though effective measures for each exist that don't impinge on freedoms or economy.
Can't hospitals act without government instructions?
p.s. as it happens I'm not really in favour of masking children. I find it absolutely bizarre that we're happy to let adults frolick around in a pub without any protection or restrictions whilst we're prepared to gag our children.
Child abuse.
The approach to masking is easily explicable.
The Government has exempted hospitality businesses because they've been battered by cancellations anyway, and it wants to avoid doing them any more harm, because that might be expensive - either as a consequence of business failures, or the Treasury finally being compelled to dish out more financial support to avert them.
The Government has applied masks to schools because the children are a captive market - they can't choose not to go - and because it's a quick and easy way of signalling that they take Omicron seriously, without doing anything useful (or expensive) about it.
In short, they want to spend as little money as they can get away with, and they must know or strongly suspect that cotton or paper masks are useless against Omicron. Thus, no point applying them where they might do even more economic damage, but useful for virtue signalling where they won't.
p.s. as it happens I'm not really in favour of masking children. I find it absolutely bizarre that we're happy to let adults frolick around in a pub without any protection or restrictions whilst we're prepared to gag our children.
Child abuse.
The approach to masking is easily explicable.
The Government has exempted hospitality businesses because they've been battered by cancellations anyway, and it wants to avoid doing them any more harm, because that might be expensive - either as a consequence of business failures, or the Treasury finally being compelled to dish out more financial support to avert them.
The Government has applied masks to schools because the children are a captive market - they can't choose not to go - and because it's a quick and easy way of signalling that they take Omicron seriously, without doing anything useful (or expensive) about it.
In short, they want to spend as little money as they can get away with, and they must know or strongly suspect that cotton or paper masks are useless against Omicron. Thus, no point applying them where they might do even more economic damage, but useful for virtue signalling where they won't.
Now that the LFT doesn't have to be confirmed by a PCR, I wonder if you are correct about 'they can choose not to go.'
But to be honest there are going to be so many positive tests I doubt if it will make much practical difference.
p.s. as it happens I'm not really in favour of masking children. I find it absolutely bizarre that we're happy to let adults frolick around in a pub without any protection or restrictions whilst we're prepared to gag our children.
Child abuse.
they must know or strongly suspect that cotton or paper masks are useless against Omicron. Thus, no point applying them where they might do even more economic damage, but useful for virtue signalling where they won't.
I don't disagree with anything in your post except your repeated denigration of the use of cotton or paper masks. We went through all of this at the beginning of covid and unless you are a scientist and can prove your point (which you won't be able to) it's obviously preferable to wear a less-than-perfect mask than not wear one at all. So pack it in please.
The rest of your post is good though. It is, as you say, basically about money and virtue signalling.
Moreover, it isn’t accurate. They’re not to be tested *before* starting back, they are to be tested *on* starting back. Given the numbers to be tested that will have to go ahead as stated because there is no time to make changes (most schools starting back tomorrow).
I am very rapidly coming to the conclusion that every single member of the DfE is actively out to destroy education, rather than just being thick as mince. The whole thing is spinning to try and look as if they’re doing something to conceal the fact they have completely failed to take the only two measures that would work - smaller classes and air filters.
And yet the media aren’t even asking the basic questions about this.
Yep. I wasn't paying close attention TBH but they were interviewing Zahawi on the TV a few minutes ago, and most of the discussion seemed to revolve around masks, before it moved on to generic stuff about the NHS and staff absences.
Leaky cotton or paper masks are almost certainly useless against Omicron and, therefore, constitute futile something-must-be-done-ism, but they are also highly visible and a nuisance, divisive imposition which therefore attracts a lot of media attention and argument. Ventilation is boring so nobody's interested in talking about it.
It just shows how useless the government is. A year on from the last winter wave and bugger all done about school (and other crowded indoor space) ventilation. Sweet FA on preventing hospital acquired covid either, even though effective measures for each exist that don't impinge on freedoms or economy.
Government by soundbites. Masks are visible. Useful measures are not.
They're like a swan trying to swim upside down - legs pumping furiously while stuck in the same place and slowly drowning to boot.
It is hard to see Truss not making the final two and if she is there then she's in with a strong chance.
Why are you sure she will make the final two? Do you know what level of MP support she has?
From above, if say Sunak, Truss, Gove, Javid, Hunt and either Baker/Harper stood in a contest, which two would come through.
I don't know but my best guess would be Sunak and Hunt. Possibly Sunak and Baker/or Harper. And Gove had decent support in the 2019 (narrowly beaten by Hunt into second place). I'm far from convinced that Truss has the MPs' support.
My feel at the moment is the candidate from the pro-Brexit / Blue Collar / economically interventionist wing will make the final round. That grouping is clearly on manoeuvres (eg the letter to the Telegraph), know they have the numbers to get far (the near 100 MPs rebelling against Boris for a start) and have opinions that should appeal to many of the base.
What might be interesting are the shorts. Jeremy Hunt is a classic example of a bet where us sophisticated elites of PB.com project our own views onto the base. Truss is close by.
Do you think blue collar/interventionist has a significant following amongst the Tory members?
I think they will base their vote on who is the best placed leader to keep the Tories in power. I’m sure @HYUFD has a better view than me but I would imagine the base has moved right wards in recent years as many of the pro-EU, socially liberal types have become less comfortable.
From a betting standpoint for next Tory leader, I think the value bets are from that part of the party.
Yes. But the membership is overwhelmingly older, wealthier and more SE based than the electorate as a whole. I can't see them wanting anything approaching a levelling up agenda. Culture War and cuts yes. Culture War isn't blue collar necessarily.
Who would be against levelling up? On what basis? As an old fart of Conservative disposition in the Home Counties I would love to see successful levelling up.
Levelling up yes, as long as it does not mean levelling you down with higher tax rises on the South to pay for more spending on the redwall
By definition levelling up implies making the lower deciles better off. There is obviously a cost to that aka taxation. So long as it is levelling up to generate a better outcome and not levelling down I'm relaxed about it. Extra taxation isn't a deal breaker.
But you can't have levelling up without someone being levelled down. That's pure fantasy.
Of course you can.
That’s the fundamental difference between left and right.
Equality of opportunity and extra investment; more growth overall but the north gets richer faster (hence levelling up). That’s the right’s approach
The left would prefer equality of outcome, delivered through taxation and redistribution, which results in levelling down
Morning all! Have been enjoying the darts, some brilliant matches at the world championships. Its obvious that the crowd have been getting lairy for the past few days but I hadn't realised just how bad - some of the time they have been pretty hushed.
Turns out that Sky have been muting the crowd due to endless have been chanting "you're a sheep shagging bastard" at the Welsh and "stand up if you hate Scotland" during the all-Scotland Wright - Anderson semi.
If *that* crowd are also singing - endlessly - "stand up if you hate Boris" then he really is in trouble.
p.s. as it happens I'm not really in favour of masking children. I find it absolutely bizarre that we're happy to let adults frolick around in a pub without any protection or restrictions whilst we're prepared to gag our children.
Child abuse.
Finally, something we agree on
It's worse for me from a purely personal point of view because I have hearing loss and rely on lip reading, particularly if there is any background noise (so it's really lucky adolescents are so polite and thoughtful and never talk across others). So this buggers me sideways.
I'd object less if I thought it was doing any good, but it clearly isn't or Scotland would have a far lower case rate than we do.
Note: the seven day case rates for the UK are now updated on the dashboard as far as December 28th. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have all now surpassed England and their rates are also climbing much more rapidly.
If additional mild to moderate restrictions work then why is this?
Moreover, it isn’t accurate. They’re not to be tested *before* starting back, they are to be tested *on* starting back. Given the numbers to be tested that will have to go ahead as stated because there is no time to make changes (most schools starting back tomorrow).
I am very rapidly coming to the conclusion that every single member of the DfE is actively out to destroy education, rather than just being thick as mince. The whole thing is spinning to try and look as if they’re doing something to conceal the fact they have completely failed to take the only two measures that would work - smaller classes and air filters.
And yet the media aren’t even asking the basic questions about this.
Yep. I wasn't paying close attention TBH but they were interviewing Zahawi on the TV a few minutes ago, and most of the discussion seemed to revolve around masks, before it moved on to generic stuff about the NHS and staff absences.
Leaky cotton or paper masks are almost certainly useless against Omicron and, therefore, constitute futile something-must-be-done-ism, but they are also highly visible and a nuisance, divisive imposition which therefore attracts a lot of media attention and argument. Ventilation is boring so nobody's interested in talking about it.
It just shows how useless the government is. A year on from the last winter wave and bugger all done about school (and other crowded indoor space) ventilation. Sweet FA on preventing hospital acquired covid either, even though effective measures for each exist that don't impinge on freedoms or economy.
Can't hospitals act without government instructions?
But the system is now under centralised command and control. I don't know how good stocks are, but it seems much less of an issue than the first wave, when we were issued with masks 5 years out of date.
It is hard to see Truss not making the final two and if she is there then she's in with a strong chance.
Why are you sure she will make the final two? Do you know what level of MP support she has?
From above, if say Sunak, Truss, Gove, Javid, Hunt and either Baker/Harper stood in a contest, which two would come through.
I don't know but my best guess would be Sunak and Hunt. Possibly Sunak and Baker/or Harper. And Gove had decent support in the 2019 (narrowly beaten by Hunt into second place). I'm far from convinced that Truss has the MPs' support.
My feel at the moment is the candidate from the pro-Brexit / Blue Collar / economically interventionist wing will make the final round. That grouping is clearly on manoeuvres (eg the letter to the Telegraph), know they have the numbers to get far (the near 100 MPs rebelling against Boris for a start) and have opinions that should appeal to many of the base.
What might be interesting are the shorts. Jeremy Hunt is a classic example of a bet where us sophisticated elites of PB.com project our own views onto the base. Truss is close by.
Do you think blue collar/interventionist has a significant following amongst the Tory members?
I think they will base their vote on who is the best placed leader to keep the Tories in power. I’m sure @HYUFD has a better view than me but I would imagine the base has moved right wards in recent years as many of the pro-EU, socially liberal types have become less comfortable.
From a betting standpoint for next Tory leader, I think the value bets are from that part of the party.
Yes. But the membership is overwhelmingly older, wealthier and more SE based than the electorate as a whole. I can't see them wanting anything approaching a levelling up agenda. Culture War and cuts yes. Culture War isn't blue collar necessarily.
Who would be against levelling up? On what basis? As an old fart of Conservative disposition in the Home Counties I would love to see successful levelling up.
Levelling up yes, as long as it does not mean levelling you down with higher tax rises on the South to pay for more spending on the redwall
By definition levelling up implies making the lower deciles better off. There is obviously a cost to that aka taxation. So long as it is levelling up to generate a better outcome and not levelling down I'm relaxed about it. Extra taxation isn't a deal breaker.
But you can't have levelling up without someone being levelled down. That's pure fantasy.
Of course you can.
That’s the fundamental difference between left and right.
Equality of opportunity and extra investment; more growth overall but the north gets richer faster (hence levelling up). That’s the right’s approach
The left would prefer equality of outcome, delivered through taxation and redistribution, which results in levelling down
In which case this is quite a left wing government, albeit an ineffective and incompetent one, with its NI rise to preserve southerners inheritances.
Leon's right. It really seems to have dragged on this year. It being a Saturday Xmas didn't help. The extra Bank Holidays would have been much more appreciated later in the year some time imho.
When it’ll be colder?
Since most people, given the opportunity, would take the whole Christmas/New Year week off work in order to spend more time with their families, there has effectively been only one extra day from the substitute bank holidays, which is today (and tomorrow in Scotland).
Yes, but people do tend to take the days because they can get a week or longer off for just 3 days of annual leave.
An important factor, certainly, but the point is there is only one "extra" day this year so if the holiday season has dragged, there is likely a different reason. Tbh I used to work the intermediate days, which were invariably very quiet in the IT game because everyone had change freezes (ie no changes allowed, so nothing to do and nothing to break) in place.
I regret to inform you France is doing the "EU institutions need to speak French" thing again. Feels half-hearted (they want to encourage eurocrats and diplomats to take lessons) but they have not given up.
You’d have thought with the UK having left they’d be more relaxed about English being the lingua franca of the EU. Ireland and Malta are unlikely to disproportionately benefit from its use…
It is hard to see Truss not making the final two and if she is there then she's in with a strong chance.
Why are you sure she will make the final two? Do you know what level of MP support she has?
From above, if say Sunak, Truss, Gove, Javid, Hunt and either Baker/Harper stood in a contest, which two would come through.
I don't know but my best guess would be Sunak and Hunt. Possibly Sunak and Baker/or Harper. And Gove had decent support in the 2019 (narrowly beaten by Hunt into second place). I'm far from convinced that Truss has the MPs' support.
My feel at the moment is the candidate from the pro-Brexit / Blue Collar / economically interventionist wing will make the final round. That grouping is clearly on manoeuvres (eg the letter to the Telegraph), know they have the numbers to get far (the near 100 MPs rebelling against Boris for a start) and have opinions that should appeal to many of the base.
What might be interesting are the shorts. Jeremy Hunt is a classic example of a bet where us sophisticated elites of PB.com project our own views onto the base. Truss is close by.
Do you think blue collar/interventionist has a significant following amongst the Tory members?
I think they will base their vote on who is the best placed leader to keep the Tories in power. I’m sure @HYUFD has a better view than me but I would imagine the base has moved right wards in recent years as many of the pro-EU, socially liberal types have become less comfortable.
From a betting standpoint for next Tory leader, I think the value bets are from that part of the party.
Yes. But the membership is overwhelmingly older, wealthier and more SE based than the electorate as a whole. I can't see them wanting anything approaching a levelling up agenda. Culture War and cuts yes. Culture War isn't blue collar necessarily.
Who would be against levelling up? On what basis? As an old fart of Conservative disposition in the Home Counties I would love to see successful levelling up.
Levelling up yes, as long as it does not mean levelling you down with higher tax rises on the South to pay for more spending on the redwall
By definition levelling up implies making the lower deciles better off. There is obviously a cost to that aka taxation. So long as it is levelling up to generate a better outcome and not levelling down I'm relaxed about it. Extra taxation isn't a deal breaker.
But you can't have levelling up without someone being levelled down. That's pure fantasy.
Of course you can.
That’s the fundamental difference between left and right.
Equality of opportunity and extra investment; more growth overall but the north gets richer faster (hence levelling up). That’s the right’s approach
The left would prefer equality of outcome, delivered through taxation and redistribution, which results in levelling down
Morning all! Have been enjoying the darts, some brilliant matches at the world championships. Its obvious that the crowd have been getting lairy for the past few days but I hadn't realised just how bad - some of the time they have been pretty hushed.
Turns out that Sky have been muting the crowd due to endless have been chanting "you're a sheep shagging bastard" at the Welsh and "stand up if you hate Scotland" during the all-Scotland Wright - Anderson semi.
If *that* crowd are also singing - endlessly - "stand up if you hate Boris" then he really is in trouble.
Darts fans have been singing worse than that about our glorious leader.
It is hard to see Truss not making the final two and if she is there then she's in with a strong chance.
Why are you sure she will make the final two? Do you know what level of MP support she has?
From above, if say Sunak, Truss, Gove, Javid, Hunt and either Baker/Harper stood in a contest, which two would come through.
I don't know but my best guess would be Sunak and Hunt. Possibly Sunak and Baker/or Harper. And Gove had decent support in the 2019 (narrowly beaten by Hunt into second place). I'm far from convinced that Truss has the MPs' support.
My feel at the moment is the candidate from the pro-Brexit / Blue Collar / economically interventionist wing will make the final round. That grouping is clearly on manoeuvres (eg the letter to the Telegraph), know they have the numbers to get far (the near 100 MPs rebelling against Boris for a start) and have opinions that should appeal to many of the base.
What might be interesting are the shorts. Jeremy Hunt is a classic example of a bet where us sophisticated elites of PB.com project our own views onto the base. Truss is close by.
Do you think blue collar/interventionist has a significant following amongst the Tory members?
I think they will base their vote on who is the best placed leader to keep the Tories in power. I’m sure @HYUFD has a better view than me but I would imagine the base has moved right wards in recent years as many of the pro-EU, socially liberal types have become less comfortable.
From a betting standpoint for next Tory leader, I think the value bets are from that part of the party.
Yes. But the membership is overwhelmingly older, wealthier and more SE based than the electorate as a whole. I can't see them wanting anything approaching a levelling up agenda. Culture War and cuts yes. Culture War isn't blue collar necessarily.
Who would be against levelling up? On what basis? As an old fart of Conservative disposition in the Home Counties I would love to see successful levelling up.
Levelling up yes, as long as it does not mean levelling you down with higher tax rises on the South to pay for more spending on the redwall
By definition levelling up implies making the lower deciles better off. There is obviously a cost to that aka taxation. So long as it is levelling up to generate a better outcome and not levelling down I'm relaxed about it. Extra taxation isn't a deal breaker.
But you can't have levelling up without someone being levelled down. That's pure fantasy.
Things don't have to be a zero-sum game. Investments that (for instance) decrease the unemployment rate may cost initially, but the reduction in unemployment is a positive benefit to the area in a number of ways, and the wider economy as a whole.
The problem is that levelling up is really hard to do: if it wasn't, then it would have been done yonks ago. But at least these areas, so long forgotten by their Labour masters, are getting some attention. We're talking about the 'Red Wall', rather than just forgetting about them.
Black children are also now more than twice as likely to be growing up poor as white children, according to the Labour party research, which was based on government figures for households that have a “relative low income” – defined as being below 60% of the median, the standard definition for poverty.
No it absolutely isn't. It is a metric of an academic term for what is called relative poverty, that is a very different thing and which the originator of such a term has said wasn't meant to misused in this way as a catch all term for people who are living in actual poverty.
Another day, another Guardian article deliberately confusing poverty and inequality, and using misleading statistics to ignore the white working class children who have some of the worst educational outcomes of any group.
Ask the working classes of, to pick a random example, Rotherham, how that’s worked out for them over the years.
Levelling up Northern towns doesn’t need to mean levelling down the South East, it means to give opportunities to people in these communities to better themselves. It’s not something accomplished with large piles of public money, but rather with focus and encouragement of private investment and opportunities.
So the response to a system designed to deliver massive inequality that predominantly screws BAME people is "what about whitey"?
Yes, WWC kids do badly. The media propagandise against their own interests so that so many WWC parents think the schools are against them, thus helping their kids not get the education needed to escape and perpetuating the cycle. That in no way changes the reality that more black kids are in systematic poverty than white kids.
What are we going to do about it? Well to start with don't have this Tory government - remember that their MPs vote to cut funding to the schools where the WWC kids fail...
I am curious to see the governments response to fuel bills doubling/trebling over the coming weeks. There must be a political dimension to folks having to find up to 300 pounds extra per month.
It’s perhaps the biggest issue facing the government in the first half of the year.
By imposing caps, rather than letting the market do its thing, people are now going to blame government when the price rises, rather than greedy utilities and bad Mr Putin.
I would think that the Brexit-enabled dividend of dropping VAT of energy is a no-brainer before April.
It is hard to see Truss not making the final two and if she is there then she's in with a strong chance.
Why are you sure she will make the final two? Do you know what level of MP support she has?
From above, if say Sunak, Truss, Gove, Javid, Hunt and either Baker/Harper stood in a contest, which two would come through.
I don't know but my best guess would be Sunak and Hunt. Possibly Sunak and Baker/or Harper. And Gove had decent support in the 2019 (narrowly beaten by Hunt into second place). I'm far from convinced that Truss has the MPs' support.
My feel at the moment is the candidate from the pro-Brexit / Blue Collar / economically interventionist wing will make the final round. That grouping is clearly on manoeuvres (eg the letter to the Telegraph), know they have the numbers to get far (the near 100 MPs rebelling against Boris for a start) and have opinions that should appeal to many of the base.
What might be interesting are the shorts. Jeremy Hunt is a classic example of a bet where us sophisticated elites of PB.com project our own views onto the base. Truss is close by.
Do you think blue collar/interventionist has a significant following amongst the Tory members?
I think they will base their vote on who is the best placed leader to keep the Tories in power. I’m sure @HYUFD has a better view than me but I would imagine the base has moved right wards in recent years as many of the pro-EU, socially liberal types have become less comfortable.
From a betting standpoint for next Tory leader, I think the value bets are from that part of the party.
Yes. But the membership is overwhelmingly older, wealthier and more SE based than the electorate as a whole. I can't see them wanting anything approaching a levelling up agenda. Culture War and cuts yes. Culture War isn't blue collar necessarily.
Who would be against levelling up? On what basis? As an old fart of Conservative disposition in the Home Counties I would love to see successful levelling up.
Levelling up yes, as long as it does not mean levelling you down with higher tax rises on the South to pay for more spending on the redwall
By definition levelling up implies making the lower deciles better off. There is obviously a cost to that aka taxation. So long as it is levelling up to generate a better outcome and not levelling down I'm relaxed about it. Extra taxation isn't a deal breaker.
But you can't have levelling up without someone being levelled down. That's pure fantasy.
Of course you can.
That’s the fundamental difference between left and right.
Equality of opportunity and extra investment; more growth overall but the north gets richer faster (hence levelling up). That’s the right’s approach
The left would prefer equality of outcome, delivered through taxation and redistribution, which results in levelling down
Someone who is already wealthy would say that, whether it is true or not? Cf MRD.
I regret to inform you France is doing the "EU institutions need to speak French" thing again. Feels half-hearted (they want to encourage eurocrats and diplomats to take lessons) but they have not given up.
You’d have thought with the UK having left they’d be more relaxed about English being the lingua franca of the EU. Ireland and Malta are unlikely to disproportionately benefit from its use…
On the subject of languages, have we covered our Saudi loving, Polish born MPs £22, 000 on Polish language lessons?
I wonder about our PM's problems sometimes. He must have made excellent financial settlements for all his ex-wives.... I recall the story about his second one ..... and children, and be continuing with that support as necessary or requested. Otherwise, somewhere, there will be a disgruntled ex-wife, or partner. Or even offspring! I'm not entirely sure we've heard the last of Ms Arcuri, either. Although I suspect that revelations from that quarter would only be really damaging if his activities there were found to be co-incidental with the early days of the current Mrs J.
His problems all do appear to have either a financial or sexual aspect to them. I suspect that he’s pretty much skint after his last divorce, is not earning a lot of money by his own standards, and has no idea how he gets out of the situation.
It’s actually a reason to bet against him staying on too long as PM: at some point he’s going to really need the book advance and the speaking fees, and can’t keep hiding loans from old friends. Even Theresa May has managed to bank a couple of million as a speaker, since she stood down from the top job.
I’m surprised at this ‘even Theresa May’ gibe I keep seeing.
1) When giving speeches not on politics, all the evidence is she is witty, intelligent, well informed and quite capable of laughing at herself. The perfect after dinner speaker.
2) She is also a very powerful speaker when she puts her mind to it. Who could forget that time she roasted the police?
3) She’s an ex-PM who led through some very tough times and did in fact lay the groundwork for our departure from the EU, although Johnson negotiated a deal one stage back from hers and then shamelessly took credit. Why wouldn’t you want to hear from such a person?
4) She’s still an MP and has emerged as one of the more thoughtful and independently-minded Tories out there (not saying much).
Why wouldn’t you pay good money to hear from such a person?
I think the reason she came across so badly as PM was partly the very difficult situation she was in and partly appalling advice.
But Theresa May was awful! She failed to deliver Singapore-on-Thames Brexit and had to go.
p.s. as it happens I'm not really in favour of masking children. I find it absolutely bizarre that we're happy to let adults frolick around in a pub without any protection or restrictions whilst we're prepared to gag our children.
Child abuse.
they must know or strongly suspect that cotton or paper masks are useless against Omicron. Thus, no point applying them where they might do even more economic damage, but useful for virtue signalling where they won't.
I don't disagree with anything in your post except your repeated denigration of the use of cotton or paper masks. We went through all of this at the beginning of covid and unless you are a scientist and can prove your point (which you won't be able to) it's obviously preferable to wear a less-than-perfect mask than not wear one at all. So pack it in please.
The rest of your post is good though. It is, as you say, basically about money and virtue signalling.
I think we'll have to agree to differ politely on the low quality masks.
It's not heresy to suggest that simple masks and some other basic interventions that could've been of useful effect against earlier strains of this virus might no longer be so against the vastly more transmissible Omicron. There are simply too many other jurisdictions that have more restrictions, yet have started suffering as badly or worse than England since Omicron got stuck into them, for it to be a coincidence.
An intervention that no longer achieves anything useful is worse than no intervention at all.
It is particularly disingenuous and downright dangerous of the right-wing boneheads to be hiding behind the lack of covid data from c. 21st Dec to 06th Jan in order to promote their freedom-at-all-costs agenda.
We do NOT yet know how this is going to pan out. Prudence would have been to have additional restrictions in place until we see how the tree shakes.
Crowing about 'success' of a policy based on a paucity of data is disingenuous (at best).
We can see from the NHS how it is panning out. Building emergency overflow hospital facilities in your car park isn't something you do because you are sure there is no risk to being swamped. Yet people post that there's definitely no risk of being swamped to back to Costa everyone.
I am curious to see the governments response to fuel bills doubling/trebling over the coming weeks. There must be a political dimension to folks having to find up to 300 pounds extra per month.
It’s perhaps the biggest issue facing the government in the first half of the year.
By imposing caps, rather than letting the market do its thing, people are now going to blame government when the price rises, rather than greedy utilities and bad Mr Putin.
I would think that the Brexit-enabled dividend of dropping VAT of energy is a no-brainer before April.
Cutting vat will cut bills by 5%, if they’ve risen by 200-300% that will not be seen as an adequate response.
Deepti Gurdasani @dgurdasani1 · 2h This is wrong. The only way to avoid lockdowns is mitigating spread. And focused protection doesn't work- because it's impossible and unethical to isolate an entire group of people in society.
====
Erm, but it is ok and possible to isolate an entire society via lockdowns and curfews?
Or perhaps just everyone who can work from home with a decent house and garden and a salary from uni while the others trot up and down the drive delivering the foods and goods and keeping wifi running?
This is exactly the point. The advocates of lockdowns are almost always middle class professionals with spacious houses, nice gardens and the ability to make the best of the restrictions by working from home. For millions of people living in cramped accommodation with no access to green spaces and limited resources lockdown is utter hell.
Speaking from my 2-room rented cottage, nah - and among colleagues the strongest advocates of lockdown have been young people who felt they had a whole life to enjoy which they didn't want to put at risk - older people have arguably less to lose, though were at higher actual risk with Delta. Less anecdotally, polling has shown support for tougher measures across almost all demographic groups (though I think that's easing now). The stereotype that you suggests as "almost always" true is as much a straw man as the cackling capitalist or the raving anarchist - such people exist, but are far rarer than is supposed.
I think the whole thing is much less political or class-based than many here assume. Most people aren't sure what to think, and tend to err on the safe side - it's just normal human behaviour. Now that Omicron is turning out milder, they're gradually relaxing.
Measured and balanced - your style of posting will never catch on. My anecdata would be that young people are generally supportive, but relaxed about the risk to themselves -> worried about giving it to their parents/older relatives & also worried about missing out on XYZ thing later because of isolation.
Older people I've found have a greater variety. One of my mum's friends hasn't seen anyone indoors for almost 2 years, except his grandson, once (and he got a chest infection from him). Others are going about their lives normally, signing up for concerts and eating out at restaurants.
I regret to inform you France is doing the "EU institutions need to speak French" thing again. Feels half-hearted (they want to encourage eurocrats and diplomats to take lessons) but they have not given up.
You’d have thought with the UK having left they’d be more relaxed about English being the lingua franca of the EU. Ireland and Malta are unlikely to disproportionately benefit from its use…
On the subject of languages, have we covered our Saudi loving, Polish born MPs £22, 000 on Polish language lessons?
"The American polity is cracked, and might collapse. Canada must prepare The U.S. is becoming increasingly ungovernable, and some experts believe it could descend into civil war. What should Canada do then? Thomas Homer-Dixon"
p.s. as it happens I'm not really in favour of masking children. I find it absolutely bizarre that we're happy to let adults frolick around in a pub without any protection or restrictions whilst we're prepared to gag our children.
Child abuse.
Finally, something we agree on
It's worse for me from a purely personal point of view because I have hearing loss and rely on lip reading, particularly if there is any background noise (so it's really lucky adolescents are so polite and thoughtful and never talk across others). So this buggers me sideways.
I'd object less if I thought it was doing any good, but it clearly isn't or Scotland would have a far lower case rate than we do.
Note: the seven day case rates for the UK are now updated on the dashboard as far as December 28th. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have all now surpassed England and their rates are also climbing much more rapidly.
If additional mild to moderate restrictions work then why is this?
Hang on. Your lack of any restrictions in England to provoke the laughably described "exit wave" was supposed to ensure that when the next wave came that you would already have lovely antibodies and thus prevent the exponential growth curve elsewhere.
As pox took off vertically first in Europe various PB virologists were practically gloating - 'see, look at those idiots who had restrictions and look at us'. And yet here we are with the same exponential curve as everyone else frantically boosting and building overflow hospitals in carparks.
Morning all! Have been enjoying the darts, some brilliant matches at the world championships. Its obvious that the crowd have been getting lairy for the past few days but I hadn't realised just how bad - some of the time they have been pretty hushed.
Turns out that Sky have been muting the crowd due to endless have been chanting "you're a sheep shagging bastard" at the Welsh and "stand up if you hate Scotland" during the all-Scotland Wright - Anderson semi.
If *that* crowd are also singing - endlessly - "stand up if you hate Boris" then he really is in trouble.
Darts fans have been singing worse than that about our glorious leader.
Have they been singing about the russian violinist?
It is hard to see Truss not making the final two and if she is there then she's in with a strong chance.
Why are you sure she will make the final two? Do you know what level of MP support she has?
From above, if say Sunak, Truss, Gove, Javid, Hunt and either Baker/Harper stood in a contest, which two would come through.
I don't know but my best guess would be Sunak and Hunt. Possibly Sunak and Baker/or Harper. And Gove had decent support in the 2019 (narrowly beaten by Hunt into second place). I'm far from convinced that Truss has the MPs' support.
My feel at the moment is the candidate from the pro-Brexit / Blue Collar / economically interventionist wing will make the final round. That grouping is clearly on manoeuvres (eg the letter to the Telegraph), know they have the numbers to get far (the near 100 MPs rebelling against Boris for a start) and have opinions that should appeal to many of the base.
What might be interesting are the shorts. Jeremy Hunt is a classic example of a bet where us sophisticated elites of PB.com project our own views onto the base. Truss is close by.
Do you think blue collar/interventionist has a significant following amongst the Tory members?
I think they will base their vote on who is the best placed leader to keep the Tories in power. I’m sure @HYUFD has a better view than me but I would imagine the base has moved right wards in recent years as many of the pro-EU, socially liberal types have become less comfortable.
From a betting standpoint for next Tory leader, I think the value bets are from that part of the party.
Yes. But the membership is overwhelmingly older, wealthier and more SE based than the electorate as a whole. I can't see them wanting anything approaching a levelling up agenda. Culture War and cuts yes. Culture War isn't blue collar necessarily.
Who would be against levelling up? On what basis? As an old fart of Conservative disposition in the Home Counties I would love to see successful levelling up.
Levelling up yes, as long as it does not mean levelling you down with higher tax rises on the South to pay for more spending on the redwall
By definition levelling up implies making the lower deciles better off. There is obviously a cost to that aka taxation. So long as it is levelling up to generate a better outcome and not levelling down I'm relaxed about it. Extra taxation isn't a deal breaker.
But you can't have levelling up without someone being levelled down. That's pure fantasy.
Things don't have to be a zero-sum game. Investments that (for instance) decrease the unemployment rate may cost initially, but the reduction in unemployment is a positive benefit to the area in a number of ways, and the wider economy as a whole.
The problem is that levelling up is really hard to do: if it wasn't, then it would have been done yonks ago. But at least these areas, so long forgotten by their Labour masters, are getting some attention. We're talking about the 'Red Wall', rather than just forgetting about them.
Yes, but redistribution implies tinkering with the market, thereby in right wing thinking making it less efficient. After all, if the market was going to level up on its own then it wouldn't be nessecary.
Now there are different government interventions, from outright subsidy to various regions or industries, to tax breaks that come to the same thing, but they all interfere in the free market.
Redistribution is intrinsically anti-market. For some of us that isn't really an issue, as a core part of Social Democrat philosophy is that capitalism is good, but needs mitigating for the social good of the country. It is right wing ideologues like Thatcher who have a problem with it. The Levelling up agenda is a fundamental repudiation of Thatcherism.
I wonder about our PM's problems sometimes. He must have made excellent financial settlements for all his ex-wives.... I recall the story about his second one ..... and children, and be continuing with that support as necessary or requested. Otherwise, somewhere, there will be a disgruntled ex-wife, or partner. Or even offspring! I'm not entirely sure we've heard the last of Ms Arcuri, either. Although I suspect that revelations from that quarter would only be really damaging if his activities there were found to be co-incidental with the early days of the current Mrs J.
His problems all do appear to have either a financial or sexual aspect to them. I suspect that he’s pretty much skint after his last divorce, is not earning a lot of money by his own standards, and has no idea how he gets out of the situation.
It’s actually a reason to bet against him staying on too long as PM: at some point he’s going to really need the book advance and the speaking fees, and can’t keep hiding loans from old friends. Even Theresa May has managed to bank a couple of million as a speaker, since she stood down from the top job.
I’m surprised at this ‘even Theresa May’ gibe I keep seeing.
1) When giving speeches not on politics, all the evidence is she is witty, intelligent, well informed and quite capable of laughing at herself. The perfect after dinner speaker.
2) She is also a very powerful speaker when she puts her mind to it. Who could forget that time she roasted the police?
3) She’s an ex-PM who led through some very tough times and did in fact lay the groundwork for our departure from the EU, although Johnson negotiated a deal one stage back from hers and then shamelessly took credit. Why wouldn’t you want to hear from such a person?
4) She’s still an MP and has emerged as one of the more thoughtful and independently-minded Tories out there (not saying much).
Why wouldn’t you pay good money to hear from such a person?
I think the reason she came across so badly as PM was partly the very difficult situation she was in and partly appalling advice.
It may be Boris has shat the bed so badly he's not worth as much as May on the lecture circuit. Joke's not funny any more to anyone. Who wants to pay for more peppa pig speeches?
We've previously mentioned the problem of British firms being sold off. The Telegraph, and possibly the government, are catching up.
US investors launched an unprecedented raid on British technology companies last year, according to figures compiled ahead of the biggest overhaul of foreign takeovers for two decades.
Though just taking the power to review foreign takeovers is not enough. There is an urgent need to review funding of startups so that our entrepreneurs do not need to run to American venture capitalists and hedge funds. This used to be what banks were for before they all turned to proprietary trading.
"The American polity is cracked, and might collapse. Canada must prepare The U.S. is becoming increasingly ungovernable, and some experts believe it could descend into civil war. What should Canada do then? Thomas Homer-Dixon"
I regret to inform you France is doing the "EU institutions need to speak French" thing again. Feels half-hearted (they want to encourage eurocrats and diplomats to take lessons) but they have not given up.
You’d have thought with the UK having left they’d be more relaxed about English being the lingua franca of the EU. Ireland and Malta are unlikely to disproportionately benefit from its use…
On the subject of languages, have we covered our Saudi loving, Polish born MPs £22, 000 on Polish language lessons?
If you pay the teacher 50 quid an hour, then that's 160 hours in a year, or about 3 per week. That's just about plausible, although obviously poor value for money.
I am curious to see the governments response to fuel bills doubling/trebling over the coming weeks. There must be a political dimension to folks having to find up to 300 pounds extra per month.
It’s perhaps the biggest issue facing the government in the first half of the year.
By imposing caps, rather than letting the market do its thing, people are now going to blame government when the price rises, rather than greedy utilities and bad Mr Putin.
I would think that the Brexit-enabled dividend of dropping VAT of energy is a no-brainer before April.
Cutting vat will cut bills by 5%, if they’ve risen by 200-300% that will not be seen as an adequate response.
Not ideal conditions for a Tory revival.
Oh, it will indeed be a drop in the ocean, but at least it’s an acknowledgement towards the problem.
The biggest mistake was imposing the price cap in the first place.
I regret to inform you France is doing the "EU institutions need to speak French" thing again. Feels half-hearted (they want to encourage eurocrats and diplomats to take lessons) but they have not given up.
You’d have thought with the UK having left they’d be more relaxed about English being the lingua franca of the EU. Ireland and Malta are unlikely to disproportionately benefit from its use…
It's probably irrelevant. A lot of my students use the HelloTalk app to find language exchange study partners. Over the last 3-4 years the number of people on it studying English (and French) has dropped dramatically. Chinese and Korean are the most popular languages now. Brush up on your SVO and topic prominence.
I regret to inform you France is doing the "EU institutions need to speak French" thing again. Feels half-hearted (they want to encourage eurocrats and diplomats to take lessons) but they have not given up.
You’d have thought with the UK having left they’d be more relaxed about English being the lingua franca of the EU. Ireland and Malta are unlikely to disproportionately benefit from its use…
On the subject of languages, have we covered our Saudi loving, Polish born MPs £22, 000 on Polish language lessons?
If you pay the teacher 50 quid an hour, then that's 160 hours in a year, or about 3 per week. That's just about plausible, although obviously poor value for money.
In my experience it's not usual for tutors to charge £50 an hour. £30 would be more like it, although @Dura_Ace would know more about the rate for languages (obviously)!
It is hard to see Truss not making the final two and if she is there then she's in with a strong chance.
Why are you sure she will make the final two? Do you know what level of MP support she has?
From above, if say Sunak, Truss, Gove, Javid, Hunt and either Baker/Harper stood in a contest, which two would come through.
I don't know but my best guess would be Sunak and Hunt. Possibly Sunak and Baker/or Harper. And Gove had decent support in the 2019 (narrowly beaten by Hunt into second place). I'm far from convinced that Truss has the MPs' support.
My feel at the moment is the candidate from the pro-Brexit / Blue Collar / economically interventionist wing will make the final round. That grouping is clearly on manoeuvres (eg the letter to the Telegraph), know they have the numbers to get far (the near 100 MPs rebelling against Boris for a start) and have opinions that should appeal to many of the base.
What might be interesting are the shorts. Jeremy Hunt is a classic example of a bet where us sophisticated elites of PB.com project our own views onto the base. Truss is close by.
Do you think blue collar/interventionist has a significant following amongst the Tory members?
I think they will base their vote on who is the best placed leader to keep the Tories in power. I’m sure @HYUFD has a better view than me but I would imagine the base has moved right wards in recent years as many of the pro-EU, socially liberal types have become less comfortable.
From a betting standpoint for next Tory leader, I think the value bets are from that part of the party.
Yes. But the membership is overwhelmingly older, wealthier and more SE based than the electorate as a whole. I can't see them wanting anything approaching a levelling up agenda. Culture War and cuts yes. Culture War isn't blue collar necessarily.
Who would be against levelling up? On what basis? As an old fart of Conservative disposition in the Home Counties I would love to see successful levelling up.
Levelling up yes, as long as it does not mean levelling you down with higher tax rises on the South to pay for more spending on the redwall
By definition levelling up implies making the lower deciles better off. There is obviously a cost to that aka taxation. So long as it is levelling up to generate a better outcome and not levelling down I'm relaxed about it. Extra taxation isn't a deal breaker.
But you can't have levelling up without someone being levelled down. That's pure fantasy.
Things don't have to be a zero-sum game. Investments that (for instance) decrease the unemployment rate may cost initially, but the reduction in unemployment is a positive benefit to the area in a number of ways, and the wider economy as a whole.
The problem is that levelling up is really hard to do: if it wasn't, then it would have been done yonks ago. But at least these areas, so long forgotten by their Labour masters, are getting some attention. We're talking about the 'Red Wall', rather than just forgetting about them.
40 years into the post-industrial age most investment seems very hard to do. We're still brilliant inventors, researchers, creators. But awful at the long-term investment and long-term ownership bits. People are rightly now looking at the amount of tax the government is taking and wondering what its being spent on when we have inferior infrastructure and services compared to many of our neighbours.
Frankly we need to follow the money. Start with the NHS - how are we pumping record amounts into the system yet see front line services starved of money in a crisis? The PPE contracts are the gimme - don't just look at oceans of money disappearing into back pockets on these contracts. Understand that is the set up in general. Then expand from healthcare to so many other things and start to understand the problem.
Profit is good - from industry. Much less so from services. But it needs to be reinvested for future growth and so often it isn't. I have no idea how we turn that around when the people owning the trousers who the cash is disappearing into are the ones largely in control.
I wonder about our PM's problems sometimes. He must have made excellent financial settlements for all his ex-wives.... I recall the story about his second one ..... and children, and be continuing with that support as necessary or requested. Otherwise, somewhere, there will be a disgruntled ex-wife, or partner. Or even offspring! I'm not entirely sure we've heard the last of Ms Arcuri, either. Although I suspect that revelations from that quarter would only be really damaging if his activities there were found to be co-incidental with the early days of the current Mrs J.
His problems all do appear to have either a financial or sexual aspect to them. I suspect that he’s pretty much skint after his last divorce, is not earning a lot of money by his own standards, and has no idea how he gets out of the situation.
It’s actually a reason to bet against him staying on too long as PM: at some point he’s going to really need the book advance and the speaking fees, and can’t keep hiding loans from old friends. Even Theresa May has managed to bank a couple of million as a speaker, since she stood down from the top job.
I’m surprised at this ‘even Theresa May’ gibe I keep seeing.
1) When giving speeches not on politics, all the evidence is she is witty, intelligent, well informed and quite capable of laughing at herself. The perfect after dinner speaker.
2) She is also a very powerful speaker when she puts her mind to it. Who could forget that time she roasted the police?
3) She’s an ex-PM who led through some very tough times and did in fact lay the groundwork for our departure from the EU, although Johnson negotiated a deal one stage back from hers and then shamelessly took credit. Why wouldn’t you want to hear from such a person?
4) She’s still an MP and has emerged as one of the more thoughtful and independently-minded Tories out there (not saying much).
Why wouldn’t you pay good money to hear from such a person?
I think the reason she came across so badly as PM was partly the very difficult situation she was in and partly appalling advice.
It may be Boris has shat the bed so badly he's not worth as much as May on the lecture circuit. Joke's not funny any more to anyone. Who wants to pay for more peppa pig speeches?
Morning all! Have been enjoying the darts, some brilliant matches at the world championships. Its obvious that the crowd have been getting lairy for the past few days but I hadn't realised just how bad - some of the time they have been pretty hushed.
Turns out that Sky have been muting the crowd due to endless have been chanting "you're a sheep shagging bastard" at the Welsh and "stand up if you hate Scotland" during the all-Scotland Wright - Anderson semi.
If *that* crowd are also singing - endlessly - "stand up if you hate Boris" then he really is in trouble.
Darts fans have been singing worse than that about our glorious leader.
Have they been singing about the russian violinist?
Darts fans would never break a superinjunction, were there to be a superinjunction. They have compared Boris to part of a Russian violinist's anatomy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4-IIi7lpfA (nsfw)
Yes, but redistribution implies tinkering with the market, thereby in right wing thinking making it less efficient. After all, if the market was going to level up on its own then it wouldn't be nessecary.
The Levelling up agenda is a fundamental repudiation of Thatcherism.
Hadn't thought about it this way, but think you're right. Wasn't there some quote from one of her Ministers about everyone from the North should just move and we should abandon the North as a wasteland or something?
On topic, recency bias. All the stuff is now, literally, very last year, and people vaguely feel he will put it all behind him and make a fresh start. No chance. He is toast this year.
"The American polity is cracked, and might collapse. Canada must prepare The U.S. is becoming increasingly ungovernable, and some experts believe it could descend into civil war. What should Canada do then? Thomas Homer-Dixon"
Morning all! Have been enjoying the darts, some brilliant matches at the world championships. Its obvious that the crowd have been getting lairy for the past few days but I hadn't realised just how bad - some of the time they have been pretty hushed.
Turns out that Sky have been muting the crowd due to endless have been chanting "you're a sheep shagging bastard" at the Welsh and "stand up if you hate Scotland" during the all-Scotland Wright - Anderson semi.
If *that* crowd are also singing - endlessly - "stand up if you hate Boris" then he really is in trouble.
Yes, but redistribution implies tinkering with the market, thereby in right wing thinking making it less efficient. After all, if the market was going to level up on its own then it wouldn't be nessecary.
The Levelling up agenda is a fundamental repudiation of Thatcherism.
Hadn't thought about it this way, but think you're right. Wasn't there some quote from one of her Ministers about everyone from the North should just move and we should abandon the North as a wasteland or something?
Although in the 1930s the National government did seriously consider destroying Merthyr Tydfil and moving all its population out on the grounds it was too far gone to recover.
This guy is claiming that every smart meter will have to be upgraded as they are turning off 2G network.
PBers - is this bollx? I am particularly interested as I have been bombarded with voice mails the last month from my supplier with messages about getting a smart meter.
Deepti Gurdasani @dgurdasani1 · 2h This is wrong. The only way to avoid lockdowns is mitigating spread. And focused protection doesn't work- because it's impossible and unethical to isolate an entire group of people in society.
====
Erm, but it is ok and possible to isolate an entire society via lockdowns and curfews?
Or perhaps just everyone who can work from home with a decent house and garden and a salary from uni while the others trot up and down the drive delivering the foods and goods and keeping wifi running?
This is exactly the point. The advocates of lockdowns are almost always middle class professionals with spacious houses, nice gardens and the ability to make the best of the restrictions by working from home. For millions of people living in cramped accommodation with no access to green spaces and limited resources lockdown is utter hell.
Speaking from my 2-room rented cottage, nah - and among colleagues the strongest advocates of lockdown have been young people who felt they had a whole life to enjoy which they didn't want to put at risk - older people have arguably less to lose, though were at higher actual risk with Delta. Less anecdotally, polling has shown support for tougher measures across almost all demographic groups (though I think that's easing now). The stereotype that you suggests as "almost always" true is as much a straw man as the cackling capitalist or the raving anarchist - such people exist, but are far rarer than is supposed.
I think the whole thing is much less political or class-based than many here assume. Most people aren't sure what to think, and tend to err on the safe side - it's just normal human behaviour. Now that Omicron is turning out milder, they're gradually relaxing.
Yes, I missed this overnight. If you look at the polling on measures support/opposition for increased measures cuts across existing left/right and leave/remain faultlines in British politics. The caricatures are from trying to shoe horn it on opponents that we already have.
Incidentally there is another strawman too in that on here there have been very few calls by anyone for lockdown, which is itself a much misused term.
"The American polity is cracked, and might collapse. Canada must prepare The U.S. is becoming increasingly ungovernable, and some experts believe it could descend into civil war. What should Canada do then? Thomas Homer-Dixon"
It is hard to see Truss not making the final two and if she is there then she's in with a strong chance.
Why are you sure she will make the final two? Do you know what level of MP support she has?
From above, if say Sunak, Truss, Gove, Javid, Hunt and either Baker/Harper stood in a contest, which two would come through.
I don't know but my best guess would be Sunak and Hunt. Possibly Sunak and Baker/or Harper. And Gove had decent support in the 2019 (narrowly beaten by Hunt into second place). I'm far from convinced that Truss has the MPs' support.
My feel at the moment is the candidate from the pro-Brexit / Blue Collar / economically interventionist wing will make the final round. That grouping is clearly on manoeuvres (eg the letter to the Telegraph), know they have the numbers to get far (the near 100 MPs rebelling against Boris for a start) and have opinions that should appeal to many of the base.
What might be interesting are the shorts. Jeremy Hunt is a classic example of a bet where us sophisticated elites of PB.com project our own views onto the base. Truss is close by.
Do you think blue collar/interventionist has a significant following amongst the Tory members?
I think they will base their vote on who is the best placed leader to keep the Tories in power. I’m sure @HYUFD has a better view than me but I would imagine the base has moved right wards in recent years as many of the pro-EU, socially liberal types have become less comfortable.
From a betting standpoint for next Tory leader, I think the value bets are from that part of the party.
Yes. But the membership is overwhelmingly older, wealthier and more SE based than the electorate as a whole. I can't see them wanting anything approaching a levelling up agenda. Culture War and cuts yes. Culture War isn't blue collar necessarily.
Who would be against levelling up? On what basis? As an old fart of Conservative disposition in the Home Counties I would love to see successful levelling up.
Levelling up yes, as long as it does not mean levelling you down with higher tax rises on the South to pay for more spending on the redwall
By definition levelling up implies making the lower deciles better off. There is obviously a cost to that aka taxation. So long as it is levelling up to generate a better outcome and not levelling down I'm relaxed about it. Extra taxation isn't a deal breaker.
But you can't have levelling up without someone being levelled down. That's pure fantasy.
Of course you can.
That’s the fundamental difference between left and right.
Equality of opportunity and extra investment; more growth overall but the north gets richer faster (hence levelling up). That’s the right’s approach
The left would prefer equality of outcome, delivered through taxation and redistribution, which results in levelling down
Someone who is already wealthy would say that, whether it is true or not? Cf MRD.
We've previously mentioned the problem of British firms being sold off. The Telegraph, and possibly the government, are catching up.
US investors launched an unprecedented raid on British technology companies last year, according to figures compiled ahead of the biggest overhaul of foreign takeovers for two decades.
Though just taking the power to review foreign takeovers is not enough. There is an urgent need to review funding of startups so that our entrepreneurs do not need to run to American venture capitalists and hedge funds. This used to be what banks were for before they all turned to proprietary trading.
As I just posted we have a serious structural problem as a nation - short term profit outweighs long-term revenue. Why have a country where you do the long term thing involving years of graft when someone else eventually takes the credit for your work? Instead simply employ middlemen to sell it now for a profit and don't worry about what happens after that because Kerching.
As for the banks, you don't say. As so many of us starting businesses last year found out, opening a bank account was practically impossible. Both my consultancy business and my big client's UK business have to use online "banks" - the high street banks either had a "no new applicants" policy or hoops so ludicrous that jumping through them - and waiting 12 weeks for feedback to progress to the next hoop - as to make it impossible.
On topic, recency bias. All the stuff is now, literally, very last year, and people vaguely feel he will put it all behind him and make a fresh start. No chance. He is toast this year.
He was toast last year. He just hasn't left office yet.
I regret to inform you France is doing the "EU institutions need to speak French" thing again. Feels half-hearted (they want to encourage eurocrats and diplomats to take lessons) but they have not given up.
You’d have thought with the UK having left they’d be more relaxed about English being the lingua franca of the EU. Ireland and Malta are unlikely to disproportionately benefit from its use…
On the subject of languages, have we covered our Saudi loving, Polish born MPs £22, 000 on Polish language lessons?
If you pay the teacher 50 quid an hour, then that's 160 hours in a year, or about 3 per week. That's just about plausible, although obviously poor value for money.
In my experience it's not usual for tutors to charge £50 an hour. £30 would be more like it, although @Dura_Ace would know more about the rate for languages (obviously)!
I normally charge £35-45 for French and £50+ for Russian but I'm pretty picky who I take on as I am not really doing it for the money. That's for A level students or preparing students for the European Commission language test. You can double (French) or triple (Russian) that for the much rarer corporate clients who don't tend to be price sensitive because they are not spending their own money.
Polish would be very cheap in the UK as we've got a huge number of native Polish speakers and quite a few qualified teachers.
I am curious to see the governments response to fuel bills doubling/trebling over the coming weeks. There must be a political dimension to folks having to find up to 300 pounds extra per month.
It’s perhaps the biggest issue facing the government in the first half of the year.
By imposing caps, rather than letting the market do its thing, people are now going to blame government when the price rises, rather than greedy utilities and bad Mr Putin.
I would think that the Brexit-enabled dividend of dropping VAT of energy is a no-brainer before April.
Cutting vat will cut bills by 5%, if they’ve risen by 200-300% that will not be seen as an adequate response.
Not ideal conditions for a Tory revival.
Oh, it will indeed be a drop in the ocean, but at least it’s an acknowledgement towards the problem.
The biggest mistake was imposing the price cap in the first place.
So wind the clock back and look at why the price cap was even considered - the perfect storm of endlessly rising bills and endlessly rising profits. The companies wouldn't behave so the regulated market intervened.
I regret to inform you France is doing the "EU institutions need to speak French" thing again. Feels half-hearted (they want to encourage eurocrats and diplomats to take lessons) but they have not given up.
You’d have thought with the UK having left they’d be more relaxed about English being the lingua franca of the EU. Ireland and Malta are unlikely to disproportionately benefit from its use…
On the subject of languages, have we covered our Saudi loving, Polish born MPs £22, 000 on Polish language lessons?
If you pay the teacher 50 quid an hour, then that's 160 hours in a year, or about 3 per week. That's just about plausible, although obviously poor value for money.
In my experience it's not usual for tutors to charge £50 an hour. £30 would be more like it, although @Dura_Ace would know more about the rate for languages (obviously)!
If £30 is the normal rate, then I can well believe a Tory MP spending taxpayer money on himself could go to £50. Where it will get dicey is if it turns out his Polish tutor is a 23 year old supermodel.
I had a friend actually who taught Romanian for extra cash to bankers looking to impress their Romanian wives/girlfriends. Very lucrative apparently.
It is hard to see Truss not making the final two and if she is there then she's in with a strong chance.
Why are you sure she will make the final two? Do you know what level of MP support she has?
From above, if say Sunak, Truss, Gove, Javid, Hunt and either Baker/Harper stood in a contest, which two would come through.
I don't know but my best guess would be Sunak and Hunt. Possibly Sunak and Baker/or Harper. And Gove had decent support in the 2019 (narrowly beaten by Hunt into second place). I'm far from convinced that Truss has the MPs' support.
My feel at the moment is the candidate from the pro-Brexit / Blue Collar / economically interventionist wing will make the final round. That grouping is clearly on manoeuvres (eg the letter to the Telegraph), know they have the numbers to get far (the near 100 MPs rebelling against Boris for a start) and have opinions that should appeal to many of the base.
What might be interesting are the shorts. Jeremy Hunt is a classic example of a bet where us sophisticated elites of PB.com project our own views onto the base. Truss is close by.
Do you think blue collar/interventionist has a significant following amongst the Tory members?
I think they will base their vote on who is the best placed leader to keep the Tories in power. I’m sure @HYUFD has a better view than me but I would imagine the base has moved right wards in recent years as many of the pro-EU, socially liberal types have become less comfortable.
From a betting standpoint for next Tory leader, I think the value bets are from that part of the party.
Yes. But the membership is overwhelmingly older, wealthier and more SE based than the electorate as a whole. I can't see them wanting anything approaching a levelling up agenda. Culture War and cuts yes. Culture War isn't blue collar necessarily.
Who would be against levelling up? On what basis? As an old fart of Conservative disposition in the Home Counties I would love to see successful levelling up.
Levelling up yes, as long as it does not mean levelling you down with higher tax rises on the South to pay for more spending on the redwall
By definition levelling up implies making the lower deciles better off. There is obviously a cost to that aka taxation. So long as it is levelling up to generate a better outcome and not levelling down I'm relaxed about it. Extra taxation isn't a deal breaker.
But you can't have levelling up without someone being levelled down. That's pure fantasy.
Of course you can.
That’s the fundamental difference between left and right.
Equality of opportunity and extra investment; more growth overall but the north gets richer faster (hence levelling up). That’s the right’s approach
The left would prefer equality of outcome, delivered through taxation and redistribution, which results in levelling down
Lazy.
The South is currently relatively much richer than the North. If you point the limited national resources at the North at the expense of the South (which is what is required), the South will relatively become poorer compared to the North.
This is just a fact of life. It doesn’t mean that the South doesn’t get objectively richer during the time, it just gets relatively poorer.
If the South doesn’t get relatively poorer, then its not true levelling up as the North/South divide remains.
One wonders (really?) what were Queen Victoria's views re: royal anointing.
She was famously Low Church, and would no doubt have NOT been amused by much if not most of HYUFD's theology.
That said, am quite sure that QV considered herself to have ascended the throne by express Divine Ordinance. And considering the genealogy that got her there, it's hard to argue against that view.
Since it's a BH today.
I think that QV would be comfortable with the anointing part of the service.
I have never found 'low church' people particularly object to anointing - if so we would have more examples of people who never became Bishops or Priests because of it. I think that 'low church' tends to be indifferent to the detail of dogma rather than offended by it, unless it is rammed down the throat by enthusiasts - one difference between low church and evangelical, who are traditionally *very* interested in "right believing". But anointing is also familiar in evengelical circles.
In the case of Queen Victoria / Low Church I would make three points:
1 - QV reformed aspects of the Coronation Ceremony on her own initiative by decree, and Anointing was not one of them. Though I am not clear whether this was done to aspects of the service itself.
2 - As I have it there are at least three types of anointing - anointing for service, anointing for burial, and anointing of the sick. As all are modelled in the Gospels and throughout the OT, I'd say that low church would be comfortable with it - without any need to consider more ritualistic traditions.
Personally, I expect that QV would be quite inspired by the model of Jesus being anointed for service. I think that the underlying symbolism of monarch as one serving is quite important, both for those in the role, and for those who are 'subjects'. Far better than a fabricated theology around "the people" or similar, which is more vulnerable to subversion imo.
3 - Less ritualistic traditions such as Methodists maintain the tradition of anointing. Anointing for service is also part of the Anglican Ordination service for priests and bishops.
Morning all! Have been enjoying the darts, some brilliant matches at the world championships. Its obvious that the crowd have been getting lairy for the past few days but I hadn't realised just how bad - some of the time they have been pretty hushed.
Turns out that Sky have been muting the crowd due to endless have been chanting "you're a sheep shagging bastard" at the Welsh and "stand up if you hate Scotland" during the all-Scotland Wright - Anderson semi.
If *that* crowd are also singing - endlessly - "stand up if you hate Boris" then he really is in trouble.
Yes Jim, we feel the love.
Hate to point out your hubris, but almost all political careers end in failure and disdain. Ask your former fave Handy Alex how life is. I do wave when I drive past his house...
I regret to inform you France is doing the "EU institutions need to speak French" thing again. Feels half-hearted (they want to encourage eurocrats and diplomats to take lessons) but they have not given up.
You’d have thought with the UK having left they’d be more relaxed about English being the lingua franca of the EU. Ireland and Malta are unlikely to disproportionately benefit from its use…
On the subject of languages, have we covered our Saudi loving, Polish born MPs £22, 000 on Polish language lessons?
If you pay the teacher 50 quid an hour, then that's 160 hours in a year, or about 3 per week. That's just about plausible, although obviously poor value for money.
In my experience it's not usual for tutors to charge £50 an hour. £30 would be more like it, although @Dura_Ace would know more about the rate for languages (obviously)!
If £30 is the normal rate, then I can well believe a Tory MP spending taxpayer money on himself could go to £50. Where it will get dicey is if it turns out his Polish tutor is a 23 year old supermodel.
I had a friend actually who taught Romanian for extra cash to bankers looking to impress their Romanian wives/girlfriends. Very lucrative apparently.
That's where the cunning linguist comes in
Based on Dura's reply I'm struggling to see how this works in terms of that figure. Perhaps he didn't haggle, but it should have been checked before it got to £22,000. Moreover, while he may have needed a few lessons to brush up (polish?) his Polish and get ready for using it, he shouldn't have needed that many if he speaks it fairly well.
I regret to inform you France is doing the "EU institutions need to speak French" thing again. Feels half-hearted (they want to encourage eurocrats and diplomats to take lessons) but they have not given up.
You’d have thought with the UK having left they’d be more relaxed about English being the lingua franca of the EU. Ireland and Malta are unlikely to disproportionately benefit from its use…
On the subject of languages, have we covered our Saudi loving, Polish born MPs £22, 000 on Polish language lessons?
If you pay the teacher 50 quid an hour, then that's 160 hours in a year, or about 3 per week. That's just about plausible, although obviously poor value for money.
I would like to see who got the money, and how they came to know the MP.
I regret to inform you France is doing the "EU institutions need to speak French" thing again. Feels half-hearted (they want to encourage eurocrats and diplomats to take lessons) but they have not given up.
You’d have thought with the UK having left they’d be more relaxed about English being the lingua franca of the EU. Ireland and Malta are unlikely to disproportionately benefit from its use…
On the subject of languages, have we covered our Saudi loving, Polish born MPs £22, 000 on Polish language lessons?
If you pay the teacher 50 quid an hour, then that's 160 hours in a year, or about 3 per week. That's just about plausible, although obviously poor value for money.
In my experience it's not usual for tutors to charge £50 an hour. £30 would be more like it, although @Dura_Ace would know more about the rate for languages (obviously)!
The issue with the MP is surely that he was born in Poland and has previously claimed to be fluent, rather than the precise detail of the cost? If he's a native speaker why does he need to spend anything on lessons?
Comments
Those “stretch voters” have dipped their toes in the Tory shark pool, and clearly didn’t enjoy getting their feet chomped off.
The Tories, like nearly all parties in trouble, will retreat from the centre ground and appeal to their base. Which simply exacerbates the problem.
The Guardian rather naughtily missed out a crucial word. But it doesn't get the same emotive response if you say grow up in poor households, rather than in poverty.
But the metric used, an estimated 14.3 million people are in "poverty" in the UK.
You can almost see the rusty cogs grinding into action.
Back to work with a bump this morning, after doing very little for the past fortnight. The big reconciliation of targets and budgets for the year ahead.
Thanks to @MikeSmithson and the team for this awesome site, and may everyone have a great 2022!
Everyone has been vaccinated, there doesn’t look to be an imminent collapse of the health system and we will just have to start living with it. It’s still going to be a tough couple of weeks for the NHS, with high levels of staff absence due to the virus, even though it looks like the corner is being turned. The key point will turn out to be the Fraser Nelson interrogation of the SAGE scientist, which got the Cabinet asking the right questions of their pandemic advisors.
Q2 looks horrible though, with the planned NI rise (which will surely be cancelled for employees), and energy prices the focus, illustrating the futility of price controls. It’s definitely become clear that opponents of the government, and the PM specifically, are hard at work collecting trivial stories they hope will eventually add up to something.
Assuming there’s not more gaffes coming up, and the PM gets a couple of good new advisors, he’s probably safe this year. The biggest problem, not that he realises it yet, is the wife. He would be much better off sending the family to live at Chequers, and not hang around Downing St getting in the way.
Ask the working classes of, to pick a random example, Rotherham, how that’s worked out for them over the years.
Levelling up Northern towns doesn’t need to mean levelling down the South East, it means to give opportunities to people in these communities to better themselves. It’s not something accomplished with large piles of public money, but rather with focus and encouragement of private investment and opportunities.
And the reason this is a value bet is that Boris is inept. He talks the talk for an election but as a governor of anything meaningful he is useless.
So he will continue to make repeated cock ups.
You have been warned.
Good morning everyone. Is there no end to the (quasi) celebratory days?
Mr S is making a big assumption, I suspect, in his last paragraph. Our PM clearly likes living with his latest family around him and the chance of him removing his wife as, effectively, senior advisor seems remote. And while she is a senior advisor, the chances of anyone else getting a word in seem unlikely.
It's different from the days of Cherie Blair, who at least had a career of her own, as did other PM's spouses.
Ms. Heathener, that's a marvellous impression of a stuck record you can do.
Most people here who offer opinions on betting and the like have got plenty of things wrong. I imagine it's easier to point at those than to recall your own fantastic array of betting insights.
Unsurprisingly, no-one else wants to be an actual senior advisor in that situation, and why would they?
Covid: English secondary pupils to be tested before starting term
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59854920
This was announced back in November.
Moreover, it isn’t accurate. They’re not to be tested *before* starting back, they are to be tested *on* starting back. Given the numbers to be tested that will have to go ahead as stated because there is no time to make changes (most schools starting back tomorrow).
I am very rapidly coming to the conclusion that every single member of the DfE is actively out to destroy education, rather than just being thick as mince. The whole thing is spinning to try and look as if they’re doing something to conceal the fact they have completely failed to take the only two measures that would work - smaller classes and air filters.
And yet the media aren’t even asking the basic questions about this.
I'm not entirely sure we've heard the last of Ms Arcuri, either. Although I suspect that revelations from that quarter would only be really damaging if his activities there were found to be co-incidental with the early days of the current Mrs J.
It’s actually a reason to bet against him staying on too long as PM: at some point he’s going to really need the book advance and the speaking fees, and can’t keep hiding loans from old friends. Even Theresa May has managed to bank a couple of million as a speaker, since she stood down from the top job.
He doesn't seem to notice (or care) about the 'fanatics' on his side of the argument...
In any event continual borrowing against expected income later is highly likely to end in tears.
1) When giving speeches not on politics, all the evidence is she is witty, intelligent, well informed and quite capable of laughing at herself. The perfect after dinner speaker.
2) She is also a very powerful speaker when she puts her mind to it. Who could forget that time she roasted the police?
3) She’s an ex-PM who led through some very tough times and did in fact lay the groundwork for our departure from the EU, although Johnson negotiated a deal one stage back from hers and then shamelessly took credit. Why wouldn’t you want to hear from such a person?
4) She’s still an MP and has emerged as one of the more thoughtful and independently-minded Tories out there (not saying much).
Why wouldn’t you pay good money to hear from such a person?
I think the reason she came across so badly as PM was partly the very difficult situation she was in and partly appalling advice.
The only possible wildcard is he gets tired of firing into that busted out twat and they split up. Then anything could happen.
As per yesterday's update, it's still a very long way behind us and other countries that did not lock down (albeit that the Netherlands does only a small fraction of the amount of testing that we do,) but Omicron does appear to be gradually overcoming the severe restrictions at this stage.
Leaky cotton or paper masks are almost certainly useless against Omicron and, therefore, constitute futile something-must-be-done-ism, but they are also highly visible and a nuisance, divisive imposition which therefore attracts a lot of media attention and argument. Ventilation is boring so nobody's interested in talking about it.
We do NOT yet know how this is going to pan out. Prudence would have been to have additional restrictions in place until we see how the tree shakes.
Crowing about 'success' of a policy based on a paucity of data is disingenuous (at best).
Child abuse.
Here is the press release:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/testing-measures-to-ensure-young-people-return-to-classrooms
And here is the key sentence:
All secondary schools have been asked to provide one on-site test for pupils ahead of their return to the classroom this term to help reduce the transmission of Covid-19.
Now, back in November we were told to provide testing *upon* their return to the classroom. That is, they return to school and we take them out of lessons to do a test. And we have planned and communicated with parents on that basis.
If they have to be tested *before* returning to the classroom that entire timetable is straight out of the window, because we can't test all of them before tomorrow(!) or even just tomorrow. It takes three days to do the physical tests.
So suddenly, are we supposed to tell parents who do not work from home - 90% given I work in an industrial area - that they have under 24 hours to find childcare and make arrangements to get their children to school for these tests?
Because if we do, that's a very serious matter. It needs much more notice than a badly worded press release written by a moron the day before.
And if we don't that press release is announcing something that's already been announced, months ago, but is describing it incorrectly. Which is worse than unnecessary as it will only cause confusion.
Either way the media should be asking very searching questions and they're not.
It's worse for me from a purely personal point of view because I have hearing loss and rely on lip reading, particularly if there is any background noise (so it's really lucky adolescents are so polite and thoughtful and never talk across others). So this buggers me sideways.
I'd object less if I thought it was doing any good, but it clearly isn't or Scotland would have a far lower case rate than we do.
They're like a swan trying to swim upside down - legs pumping furiously while stuck in the same place and slowly drowning to boot.
The Government has exempted hospitality businesses because they've been battered by cancellations anyway, and it wants to avoid doing them any more harm, because that might be expensive - either as a consequence of business failures, or the Treasury finally being compelled to dish out more financial support to avert them.
The Government has applied masks to schools because the children are a captive market - they can't choose not to go - and because it's a quick and easy way of signalling that they take Omicron seriously, without doing anything useful (or expensive) about it.
In short, they want to spend as little money as they can get away with, and they must know or strongly suspect that cotton or paper masks are useless against Omicron. Thus, no point applying them where they might do even more economic damage, but useful for virtue signalling where they won't.
But to be honest there are going to be so many positive tests I doubt if it will make much practical difference.
The rest of your post is good though. It is, as you say, basically about money and virtue signalling.
That’s the fundamental difference between left and right.
Equality of opportunity and extra investment; more growth overall but the north gets richer faster (hence levelling up). That’s the right’s approach
The left would prefer equality of outcome, delivered through taxation and redistribution, which results in levelling down
Turns out that Sky have been muting the crowd due to endless have been chanting "you're a sheep shagging bastard" at the Welsh and "stand up if you hate Scotland" during the all-Scotland Wright - Anderson semi.
If *that* crowd are also singing - endlessly - "stand up if you hate Boris" then he really is in trouble.
If additional mild to moderate restrictions work then why is this?
https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n1663?s=09
But the system is now under centralised command and control. I don't know how good stocks are, but it seems much less of an issue than the first wave, when we were issued with masks 5 years out of date.
https://twitter.com/spignal/status/1477627639703736330?s=21
You’d have thought with the UK having left they’d be more relaxed about English being the lingua franca of the EU. Ireland and Malta are unlikely to disproportionately benefit from its use…
The problem is that levelling up is really hard to do: if it wasn't, then it would have been done yonks ago. But at least these areas, so long forgotten by their Labour masters, are getting some attention. We're talking about the 'Red Wall', rather than just forgetting about them.
Yes, WWC kids do badly. The media propagandise against their own interests so that so many WWC parents think the schools are against them, thus helping their kids not get the education needed to escape and perpetuating the cycle. That in no way changes the reality that more black kids are in systematic poverty than white kids.
What are we going to do about it? Well to start with don't have this Tory government - remember that their MPs vote to cut funding to the schools where the WWC kids fail...
By imposing caps, rather than letting the market do its thing, people are now going to blame government when the price rises, rather than greedy utilities and bad Mr Putin.
I would think that the Brexit-enabled dividend of dropping VAT of energy is a no-brainer before April.
https://twitter.com/marrtoffee/status/1477605291055362050?t=9hL1ZstYSH8Le4ag28tagw&s=19
I'd like to see the receipts for that.
It's not heresy to suggest that simple masks and some other basic interventions that could've been of useful effect against earlier strains of this virus might no longer be so against the vastly more transmissible Omicron. There are simply too many other jurisdictions that have more restrictions, yet have started suffering as badly or worse than England since Omicron got stuck into them, for it to be a coincidence.
An intervention that no longer achieves anything useful is worse than no intervention at all.
Not ideal conditions for a Tory revival.
My anecdata would be that young people are generally supportive, but relaxed about the risk to themselves -> worried about giving it to their parents/older relatives & also worried about missing out on XYZ thing later because of isolation.
Older people I've found have a greater variety. One of my mum's friends hasn't seen anyone indoors for almost 2 years, except his grandson, once (and he got a chest infection from him). Others are going about their lives normally, signing up for concerts and eating out at restaurants.
The U.S. is becoming increasingly ungovernable, and some experts believe it could descend into civil war. What should Canada do then?
Thomas Homer-Dixon"
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-the-american-polity-is-cracked-and-might-collapse-canada-must-prepare/
As pox took off vertically first in Europe various PB virologists were practically gloating - 'see, look at those idiots who had restrictions and look at us'. And yet here we are with the same exponential curve as everyone else frantically boosting and building overflow hospitals in carparks.
Going great in England isn't it?
Now there are different government interventions, from outright subsidy to various regions or industries, to tax breaks that come to the same thing, but they all interfere in the free market.
Redistribution is intrinsically anti-market. For some of us that isn't really an issue, as a core part of Social Democrat philosophy is that capitalism is good, but needs mitigating for the social good of the country. It is right wing ideologues like Thatcher who have a problem with it. The Levelling up agenda is a fundamental repudiation of Thatcherism.
US investors launched an unprecedented raid on British technology companies last year, according to figures compiled ahead of the biggest overhaul of foreign takeovers for two decades.
A total of 130 UK tech firms were acquired by American companies between January and mid-December 2021, data from start-up monitor Beauhurst shows - up from 87 the year before and above the previous record of 105 in 2018.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/01/02/us-investors-swoop-british-tech-start-ups-ahead-national-security/ (£££)
Though just taking the power to review foreign takeovers is not enough. There is an urgent need to review funding of startups so that our entrepreneurs do not need to run to American venture capitalists and hedge funds. This used to be what banks were for before they all turned to proprietary trading.
That's just about plausible, although obviously poor value for money.
The biggest mistake was imposing the price cap in the first place.
Frankly we need to follow the money. Start with the NHS - how are we pumping record amounts into the system yet see front line services starved of money in a crisis? The PPE contracts are the gimme - don't just look at oceans of money disappearing into back pockets on these contracts. Understand that is the set up in general. Then expand from healthcare to so many other things and start to understand the problem.
Profit is good - from industry. Much less so from services. But it needs to be reinvested for future growth and so often it isn't. I have no idea how we turn that around when the people owning the trousers who the cash is disappearing into are the ones largely in control.
https://youtu.be/yBIZVOggxLI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4-IIi7lpfA (nsfw)
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/jul/30/fracking-north-east-england-tory-peer
Although in the 1930s the National government did seriously consider destroying Merthyr Tydfil and moving all its population out on the grounds it was too far gone to recover.
PBers - is this bollx? I am particularly interested as I have been bombarded with voice mails the last month from my supplier with messages about getting a smart meter.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/01/03/careless-civil-servants-cause-chaos-smart-meters/
Incidentally there is another strawman too in that on here there have been very few calls by anyone for lockdown, which is itself a much misused term.
As for the banks, you don't say. As so many of us starting businesses last year found out, opening a bank account was practically impossible. Both my consultancy business and my big client's UK business have to use online "banks" - the high street banks either had a "no new applicants" policy or hoops so ludicrous that jumping through them - and waiting 12 weeks for feedback to progress to the next hoop - as to make it impossible.
Polish would be very cheap in the UK as we've got a huge number of native Polish speakers and quite a few qualified teachers.
Where it will get dicey is if it turns out his Polish tutor is a 23 year old supermodel.
I had a friend actually who taught Romanian for extra cash to bankers looking to impress their Romanian wives/girlfriends. Very lucrative apparently.
The South is currently relatively much richer than the North. If you point the limited national resources at the North at the expense of the South (which is what is required), the South will relatively become poorer compared to the North.
This is just a fact of life. It doesn’t mean that the South doesn’t get objectively richer during the time, it just gets relatively poorer.
If the South doesn’t get relatively poorer, then its not true levelling up as the North/South divide remains.
I think that QV would be comfortable with the anointing part of the service.
Do you have any indication that Queen Victoria was uncomfortable with it? Her personal diary of Coronation Day is here, and does not mention it afaics:
https://www.royal.uk/sites/default/files/media/victoria.pdf
I have never found 'low church' people particularly object to anointing - if so we would have more examples of people who never became Bishops or Priests because of it. I think that 'low church' tends to be indifferent to the detail of dogma rather than offended by it, unless it is rammed down the throat by enthusiasts - one difference between low church and evangelical, who are traditionally *very* interested in "right believing". But anointing is also familiar in evengelical circles.
In the case of Queen Victoria / Low Church I would make three points:
1 - QV reformed aspects of the Coronation Ceremony on her own initiative by decree, and Anointing was not one of them. Though I am not clear whether this was done to aspects of the service itself.
2 - As I have it there are at least three types of anointing - anointing for service, anointing for burial, and anointing of the sick. As all are modelled in the Gospels and throughout the OT, I'd say that low church would be comfortable with it - without any need to consider more ritualistic traditions.
Personally, I expect that QV would be quite inspired by the model of Jesus being anointed for service. I think that the underlying symbolism of monarch as one serving is quite important, both for those in the role, and for those who are 'subjects'. Far better than a fabricated theology around "the people" or similar, which is more vulnerable to subversion imo.
3 - Less ritualistic traditions such as Methodists maintain the tradition of anointing. Anointing for service is also part of the Anglican Ordination service for priests and bishops.
My view.
Based on Dura's reply I'm struggling to see how this works in terms of that figure. Perhaps he didn't haggle, but it should have been checked before it got to £22,000. Moreover, while he may have needed a few lessons to brush up (polish?) his Polish and get ready for using it, he shouldn't have needed that many if he speaks it fairly well.
I suspect this is going to end badly for him.
Options available to it:
1. Cutting VAT - not likely to be enough.
2. Energy Subsidies - likely too expensive and won’t solve anything long term.
3. Er…
What else can they do? Not a lot.