As I understand it Rachel Reeves is seeking a windfall tax on the oil industry which according to her will raise 1.2 billion
At the same time she wants to abolish the 5% vat on energy bills at a cost of 1.5 billion
Therefore, labour are proposing a small cut in the bills for the low paid and pensioners while handing a reduction to the wealthy and that the overall effect is at best a minor help to the cost of living crisis
She also wants to invest tens of billions in retro fitting homes and nuclear energy, but this will have no effect on this year or next years cost of living crisis
A windfall tax on the oil and gas industry will encourage energy companies to invest overseas rather than in the UK. Given we are far from energy self sufficient, this seems unwise.
The bizarre thing is that we apparently don't want them to spend their money here anyway, see the SG's approach to Carnbroe. That said, windfall taxes are capricious and damage commercial uncertainty. We really don't want to get the reputation of being prone to that sort of nonsense.
As I understand it Rachel Reeves is seeking a windfall tax on the oil industry which according to her will raise 1.2 billion
At the same time she wants to abolish the 5% vat on energy bills at a cost of 1.5 billion
Therefore, labour are proposing a small cut in the bills for the low paid and pensioners while handing a reduction to the wealthy and that the overall effect is at best a minor help to the cost of living crisis
She also wants to invest tens of billions in retro fitting homes and nuclear energy, but this will have no effect on this year or next years cost of living crisis
I think my Lib Dems should call for the windfall tax too actually Big G. In fact your Tories should steal it. My reasoning is, whilst energy prices cause consumer pain, those with it to sell are making lots of lovely dosh! So you take a bit from that windfall one end, to ease pain at other. What are you saying is wrong in that?
I’m even hopeful Saint Bart will agree with this one.
Absolutely not, I don't believe in general in redistribution and certainly not in examples like this.
If you take the profits companies make from them, then who is going to invest in the UK? When we need serious investments going forwards.
When the price of energy plunges nobody redistributes to pass more money to the companies so why do the opposite when the price surges?
I do agree with abolishing VAT on domestic energy to relieve the pressure on consumers across the nation. The tax is seriously regressive and while it won't be a cure-all it would be a step in the right direction.
Oh. So Pirates completely against any form of windfall distribution?
When companies and industries in trouble though we do help out? Throw taxpayer money at steel, fertiliser plants, at rich Japanese companies so they keep factories here, so it’s a quid pro qua thing?
With the cutting of any taxes, government also need to cut health waiting lists where people are in pain, if you were PM you would have to tax more these coming years to achieve aims like that as well, somehow, not just talk up being a tax cutting platform?
Indeed, I'm in favour of cut throat buccaneering competition not the state redistributing and choosing winners and losers.
I would view the waiting list caused by the pandemic (as opposed to day to day waiting lists) as part of the 'war effort' from the pandemic so would add the costs related to that to pandemic induced debt.
Okay. And pay the war debt off how? Presumably with lighter taxes over longer period?
London will be fascinating - there are one or two counter-intuitive trends which may yet ruin the planned narrative for the elections.
I don't think the Conservatives will do that badly - the doom of the London Conservatives has been prophesied on many occasions. This time I see a mixed bag - it's quite possible Labour will regain Wandsworth and perhaps Barnet and it'll be interesting to see how Hillingdon votes but in some of the inner London Labour strongholds I think we could see some surprisingly strong Conservative performances which may not translate into many seats.
I also think the Conservatives have some serious prospects of ending LD rule in Sutton and Kingston.
Labour will hope to gain Wandsworth and Barnet and make progress in Hillingdon but most of their fortresses are impregnable though I think there will be odd losses to Conservatives, Greens and LDs.
Havering is another borough where any Conservative losses might mean a change of administration.
As said, the LDs may be in trouble in Sutton and Kingston but will hope to survive there and start re-building in the rest of the capital.
The Greens have only 11 Councillors in the capital - they will be looking to build on that and possibly where they are challenging Labour in inner London might be their best chance of progress.
Good post.
I think the big success story in May’s elections will be the greens. They seem to be able to win everywhere at the moment. Is it young or new voters driving the Green election successes?
On the other side of the argument, I think HYUFD is right and Big G wrong because there is neither a standard balanced local election battleground nor obvious conclusion from results. If HYUFD says this years battleground doesn’t suit Libdems that is good enough for me.
It’s not actually libdems but Labour who seem to be making progress in national polls. The 35-40 lab Tory picture seems to have reversed since end October.
As well as unbalanced battle grounds each year, how results went last time seats were up can also make for an unbalanced picture where it’s too easy to conclude the wrong take out. To be fair to Boris Johnson under Corbyn Labour seemed to have a lot of poor local elections even when the battleground should have suited them, which means Tories are in for some tough defences in this group of years? So glib conclusion is results verdict on Johnson being rubbish, which is true because he had been found out now, but any leader would have found defending the same position tough, is that fair to say?
I’m actually convinced Johnson does not survive the next couple of weeks, let alone make it to May. It’s this wallpaper business very dangerous to him now. The Parliament standards lady says she won’t investigate. Labour squealing she should, Tories arguing it falls under Geet because it’s cabinet not MP matter.
I reckon it can go like this. Saying she won’t investigate is good news for Boris. But if she changes her mind, and finds against him, he’s in Paterson position facing suspension which is even more than vonk it instant resignation.
I may be the only person on PB seeing wallpaper for access bringing Boris down in next couple of weeks, but I don’t care, I think it can so easily happen like when country’s apparently sleep walk into war - the key question for those shaking your head at my post is to ask yourself, the Parliament sleaze lady who done for Paterson, not at moment investigating the Prime Minister, Why would she change her mind?
It seems the wallpaper issue is not going further but that partygate report is likely soon
I expect heads will role but not Boris, and as many commentators believe he is safe until post May elections
The other thing to consider with Boris is that few if any of his successors want the poison chalice just now
I do not bet but if I did I would put good money on him being there in June 22
The poison chalice argument is often made but is mistaken because the calm waters sought by would-be successors will help cement Boris in place. They need to strike while Boris is down and the country in turmoil. Only if the Prime Minister is voluntarily stepping down is there a case for letting the incumbent take the flak but then there is the danger he might change his mind, as Macmillan doubtless would have done.
Or Blair, who agreed to go in 2005, then 2006, and was finally dragged out kicking and screaming in 2007.
That of course worked out so well for Labour in 2010!
Labour to recommend devomax when Gordon Brown's report for Starmer concludes, with responsibility for policy in most areas except defence and foreign policy being given to Holyrood if Labour wins the next general election. Labour could also allow its parliamentary candidates to support Scottish independence on a personal conscience basis
This is either just a step towards full independence or a cynical attempt to buy SNP support for a minority Starmer govt.
I really don’t see the point of devomax. It won’t satisfy those who want Indy and it takes Scotland further from the union for those who value the union.
Devomax would mean that the Scottish Government would have to own their decisions and disasters. It would no longer be possible to say when things go wrong - that's Westminster's Fault were we.....
It will still be Westminster's fault. It was Westminster's fault for decades in Ireland, even after they'd become an independent Republic. And for Scotland Holyrood wouldn't have the power to make trade deals, or re-enter the single market, so there's a great big peg onto which, "It's Westminster's Fault" can be hung, regardless of the truth of the situation.
Do you have instances of the Irish saying "It's Westminster's Fault" post-independence? Other than blaming Britain for things that happened before that point, for example the Famine. Which is a perfectly legitimate view.
The main take from Irish-UK relations is the consistent dearth of trust and affection from Ireland (let’s not even start on the current HMG mob’s attitude to Ireland) for the UK establishment, diplomatic niceties aside. It makes the recurring trope of a greater UK reunification look even more remarkable, the new Unionist white hope of Beattie being the latest peddler of that strange notion.
Dame Nellie Melba, Gough Whitlam, Sir Les Patterson, Ned Kelly, Kylie, your boys failed to give our boys a helluva beating.
Indeed, we have avoided the 5-0 thrashing the Australians gave us in the 2013-14 and 2006-07 Ashes series therefore
I don't think its much to sing about but it is rather more satisfying than those occasions because this time so many Aussie commentators were convinced it was going to be a 5-0 white wash and were already crowing about it before the competition started.
Found Don’t Look Up a bit meh which seems a minority position. The parody of the POTUS and presidency seemed overly crude though I accept the previous incumbent has coarsened perceptions. I felt there was a fair bit of satirising of the US reaction to COVID as much as there was of our attitude to ecological disaster.
Yes, while Don't Look Up had its moments, the side plots were overlong, and it was far too US centred.
London will be fascinating - there are one or two counter-intuitive trends which may yet ruin the planned narrative for the elections.
I don't think the Conservatives will do that badly - the doom of the London Conservatives has been prophesied on many occasions. This time I see a mixed bag - it's quite possible Labour will regain Wandsworth and perhaps Barnet and it'll be interesting to see how Hillingdon votes but in some of the inner London Labour strongholds I think we could see some surprisingly strong Conservative performances which may not translate into many seats.
I also think the Conservatives have some serious prospects of ending LD rule in Sutton and Kingston.
Labour will hope to gain Wandsworth and Barnet and make progress in Hillingdon but most of their fortresses are impregnable though I think there will be odd losses to Conservatives, Greens and LDs.
Havering is another borough where any Conservative losses might mean a change of administration.
As said, the LDs may be in trouble in Sutton and Kingston but will hope to survive there and start re-building in the rest of the capital.
The Greens have only 11 Councillors in the capital - they will be looking to build on that and possibly where they are challenging Labour in inner London might be their best chance of progress.
Good post.
I think the big success story in May’s elections will be the greens. They seem to be able to win everywhere at the moment. Is it young or new voters driving the Green election successes?
On the other side of the argument, I think HYUFD is right and Big G wrong because there is neither a standard balanced local election battleground nor obvious conclusion from results. If HYUFD says this years battleground doesn’t suit Libdems that is good enough for me.
It’s not actually libdems but Labour who seem to be making progress in national polls. The 35-40 lab Tory picture seems to have reversed since end October.
As well as unbalanced battle grounds each year, how results went last time seats were up can also make for an unbalanced picture where it’s too easy to conclude the wrong take out. To be fair to Boris Johnson under Corbyn Labour seemed to have a lot of poor local elections even when the battleground should have suited them, which means Tories are in for some tough defences in this group of years? So glib conclusion is results verdict on Johnson being rubbish, which is true because he had been found out now, but any leader would have found defending the same position tough, is that fair to say?
I’m actually convinced Johnson does not survive the next couple of weeks, let alone make it to May. It’s this wallpaper business very dangerous to him now. The Parliament standards lady says she won’t investigate. Labour squealing she should, Tories arguing it falls under Geet because it’s cabinet not MP matter.
I reckon it can go like this. Saying she won’t investigate is good news for Boris. But if she changes her mind, and finds against him, he’s in Paterson position facing suspension which is even more than vonk it instant resignation.
I may be the only person on PB seeing wallpaper for access bringing Boris down in next couple of weeks, but I don’t care, I think it can so easily happen like when country’s apparently sleep walk into war - the key question for those shaking your head at my post is to ask yourself, the Parliament sleaze lady who done for Paterson, not at moment investigating the Prime Minister, Why would she change her mind?
It seems the wallpaper issue is not going further but that partygate report is likely soon
I expect heads will role but not Boris, and as many commentators believe he is safe until post May elections
The other thing to consider with Boris is that few if any of his successors want the poison chalice just now
I do not bet but if I did I would put good money on him being there in June 22
“ It seems the wallpaper issue is not going further but that partygate report is likely soon “
That touches right on my point Big G, wallpaper for access is going to go further and bring Johnson down very quickly now. You say it’s not going further because she says she is not going to investigate. Can you not think of two or 3 good reasons why she would change her mind?
I am not sure why you think she will change her mind as I just do not see any further mileage in it
I am far from convinced wallpapergate will be Boris's denouement
London will be fascinating - there are one or two counter-intuitive trends which may yet ruin the planned narrative for the elections.
I don't think the Conservatives will do that badly - the doom of the London Conservatives has been prophesied on many occasions. This time I see a mixed bag - it's quite possible Labour will regain Wandsworth and perhaps Barnet and it'll be interesting to see how Hillingdon votes but in some of the inner London Labour strongholds I think we could see some surprisingly strong Conservative performances which may not translate into many seats.
I also think the Conservatives have some serious prospects of ending LD rule in Sutton and Kingston.
Labour will hope to gain Wandsworth and Barnet and make progress in Hillingdon but most of their fortresses are impregnable though I think there will be odd losses to Conservatives, Greens and LDs.
Havering is another borough where any Conservative losses might mean a change of administration.
As said, the LDs may be in trouble in Sutton and Kingston but will hope to survive there and start re-building in the rest of the capital.
The Greens have only 11 Councillors in the capital - they will be looking to build on that and possibly where they are challenging Labour in inner London might be their best chance of progress.
Good post.
I think the big success story in May’s elections will be the greens. They seem to be able to win everywhere at the moment. Is it young or new voters driving the Green election successes?
On the other side of the argument, I think HYUFD is right and Big G wrong because there is neither a standard balanced local election battleground nor obvious conclusion from results. If HYUFD says this years battleground doesn’t suit Libdems that is good enough for me.
It’s not actually libdems but Labour who seem to be making progress in national polls. The 35-40 lab Tory picture seems to have reversed since end October.
As well as unbalanced battle grounds each year, how results went last time seats were up can also make for an unbalanced picture where it’s too easy to conclude the wrong take out. To be fair to Boris Johnson under Corbyn Labour seemed to have a lot of poor local elections even when the battleground should have suited them, which means Tories are in for some tough defences in this group of years? So glib conclusion is results verdict on Johnson being rubbish, which is true because he had been found out now, but any leader would have found defending the same position tough, is that fair to say?
I’m actually convinced Johnson does not survive the next couple of weeks, let alone make it to May. It’s this wallpaper business very dangerous to him now. The Parliament standards lady says she won’t investigate. Labour squealing she should, Tories arguing it falls under Geet because it’s cabinet not MP matter.
I reckon it can go like this. Saying she won’t investigate is good news for Boris. But if she changes her mind, and finds against him, he’s in Paterson position facing suspension which is even more than vonk it instant resignation.
I may be the only person on PB seeing wallpaper for access bringing Boris down in next couple of weeks, but I don’t care, I think it can so easily happen like when country’s apparently sleep walk into war - the key question for those shaking your head at my post is to ask yourself, the Parliament sleaze lady who done for Paterson, not at moment investigating the Prime Minister, Why would she change her mind?
It seems the wallpaper issue is not going further but that partygate report is likely soon
I expect heads will role but not Boris, and as many commentators believe he is safe until post May elections
The other thing to consider with Boris is that few if any of his successors want the poison chalice just now
I do not bet but if I did I would put good money on him being there in June 22
The poison chalice argument is often made but is mistaken because the calm waters sought by would-be successors will help cement Boris in place. They need to strike while Boris is down and the country in turmoil. Only if the Prime Minister is voluntarily stepping down is there a case for letting the incumbent take the flak but then there is the danger he might change his mind, as Macmillan doubtless would have done.
Or Blair, who agreed to go in 2005, then 2006, and was finally dragged out kicking and screaming in 2007.
Absolutely agree with you both. From Rishi to Cummings and around to JRM they know this. It’s like watching a House Of Cards series play out in real time, hollow out and bring down a PM who just won a landslide victory.
As I understand it Rachel Reeves is seeking a windfall tax on the oil industry which according to her will raise 1.2 billion
At the same time she wants to abolish the 5% vat on energy bills at a cost of 1.5 billion
Therefore, labour are proposing a small cut in the bills for the low paid and pensioners while handing a reduction to the wealthy and that the overall effect is at best a minor help to the cost of living crisis
She also wants to invest tens of billions in retro fitting homes and nuclear energy, but this will have no effect on this year or next years cost of living crisis
I think my Lib Dems should call for the windfall tax too actually Big G. In fact your Tories should steal it. My reasoning is, whilst energy prices cause consumer pain, those with it to sell are making lots of lovely dosh! So you take a bit from that windfall one end, to ease pain at other. What are you saying is wrong in that?
I’m even hopeful Saint Bart will agree with this one.
Absolutely not, I don't believe in general in redistribution and certainly not in examples like this.
If you take the profits companies make from them, then who is going to invest in the UK? When we need serious investments going forwards.
When the price of energy plunges nobody redistributes to pass more money to the companies so why do the opposite when the price surges?
I do agree with abolishing VAT on domestic energy to relieve the pressure on consumers across the nation. The tax is seriously regressive and while it won't be a cure-all it would be a step in the right direction.
Oh. So Pirates completely against any form of windfall distribution?
When companies and industries in trouble though we do help out? Throw taxpayer money at steel, fertiliser plants, at rich Japanese companies so they keep factories here, so it’s a quid pro qua thing?
With the cutting of any taxes, government also need to cut health waiting lists where people are in pain, if you were PM you would have to tax more these coming years to achieve aims like that as well, somehow, not just talk up being a tax cutting platform?
Indeed, I'm in favour of cut throat buccaneering competition not the state redistributing and choosing winners and losers.
I would view the waiting list caused by the pandemic (as opposed to day to day waiting lists) as part of the 'war effort' from the pandemic so would add the costs related to that to pandemic induced debt.
Okay. And pay the war debt off how? Presumably with lighter taxes over longer period?
London will be fascinating - there are one or two counter-intuitive trends which may yet ruin the planned narrative for the elections.
I don't think the Conservatives will do that badly - the doom of the London Conservatives has been prophesied on many occasions. This time I see a mixed bag - it's quite possible Labour will regain Wandsworth and perhaps Barnet and it'll be interesting to see how Hillingdon votes but in some of the inner London Labour strongholds I think we could see some surprisingly strong Conservative performances which may not translate into many seats.
I also think the Conservatives have some serious prospects of ending LD rule in Sutton and Kingston.
Labour will hope to gain Wandsworth and Barnet and make progress in Hillingdon but most of their fortresses are impregnable though I think there will be odd losses to Conservatives, Greens and LDs.
Havering is another borough where any Conservative losses might mean a change of administration.
As said, the LDs may be in trouble in Sutton and Kingston but will hope to survive there and start re-building in the rest of the capital.
The Greens have only 11 Councillors in the capital - they will be looking to build on that and possibly where they are challenging Labour in inner London might be their best chance of progress.
Good post.
I think the big success story in May’s elections will be the greens. They seem to be able to win everywhere at the moment. Is it young or new voters driving the Green election successes?
On the other side of the argument, I think HYUFD is right and Big G wrong because there is neither a standard balanced local election battleground nor obvious conclusion from results. If HYUFD says this years battleground doesn’t suit Libdems that is good enough for me.
It’s not actually libdems but Labour who seem to be making progress in national polls. The 35-40 lab Tory picture seems to have reversed since end October.
As well as unbalanced battle grounds each year, how results went last time seats were up can also make for an unbalanced picture where it’s too easy to conclude the wrong take out. To be fair to Boris Johnson under Corbyn Labour seemed to have a lot of poor local elections even when the battleground should have suited them, which means Tories are in for some tough defences in this group of years? So glib conclusion is results verdict on Johnson being rubbish, which is true because he had been found out now, but any leader would have found defending the same position tough, is that fair to say?
I’m actually convinced Johnson does not survive the next couple of weeks, let alone make it to May. It’s this wallpaper business very dangerous to him now. The Parliament standards lady says she won’t investigate. Labour squealing she should, Tories arguing it falls under Geet because it’s cabinet not MP matter.
I reckon it can go like this. Saying she won’t investigate is good news for Boris. But if she changes her mind, and finds against him, he’s in Paterson position facing suspension which is even more than vonk it instant resignation.
I may be the only person on PB seeing wallpaper for access bringing Boris down in next couple of weeks, but I don’t care, I think it can so easily happen like when country’s apparently sleep walk into war - the key question for those shaking your head at my post is to ask yourself, the Parliament sleaze lady who done for Paterson, not at moment investigating the Prime Minister, Why would she change her mind?
It seems the wallpaper issue is not going further but that partygate report is likely soon
I expect heads will role but not Boris, and as many commentators believe he is safe until post May elections
The other thing to consider with Boris is that few if any of his successors want the poison chalice just now
I do not bet but if I did I would put good money on him being there in June 22
“ It seems the wallpaper issue is not going further but that partygate report is likely soon “
That touches right on my point Big G, wallpaper for access is going to go further and bring Johnson down very quickly now. You say it’s not going further because she says she is not going to investigate. Can you not think of two or 3 good reasons why she would change her mind?
I am not sure why you think she will change her mind as I just do not see any further mileage in it
I am far from convinced wallpapergate will be Boris's denouement
No, wallpapergate is not going to be the coup de grace, just part of the stench of corruption that follows this government of chancers around.
London will be fascinating - there are one or two counter-intuitive trends which may yet ruin the planned narrative for the elections.
I don't think the Conservatives will do that badly - the doom of the London Conservatives has been prophesied on many occasions. This time I see a mixed bag - it's quite possible Labour will regain Wandsworth and perhaps Barnet and it'll be interesting to see how Hillingdon votes but in some of the inner London Labour strongholds I think we could see some surprisingly strong Conservative performances which may not translate into many seats.
I also think the Conservatives have some serious prospects of ending LD rule in Sutton and Kingston.
Labour will hope to gain Wandsworth and Barnet and make progress in Hillingdon but most of their fortresses are impregnable though I think there will be odd losses to Conservatives, Greens and LDs.
Havering is another borough where any Conservative losses might mean a change of administration.
As said, the LDs may be in trouble in Sutton and Kingston but will hope to survive there and start re-building in the rest of the capital.
The Greens have only 11 Councillors in the capital - they will be looking to build on that and possibly where they are challenging Labour in inner London might be their best chance of progress.
Good post.
I think the big success story in May’s elections will be the greens. They seem to be able to win everywhere at the moment. Is it young or new voters driving the Green election successes?
On the other side of the argument, I think HYUFD is right and Big G wrong because there is neither a standard balanced local election battleground nor obvious conclusion from results. If HYUFD says this years battleground doesn’t suit Libdems that is good enough for me.
It’s not actually libdems but Labour who seem to be making progress in national polls. The 35-40 lab Tory picture seems to have reversed since end October.
As well as unbalanced battle grounds each year, how results went last time seats were up can also make for an unbalanced picture where it’s too easy to conclude the wrong take out. To be fair to Boris Johnson under Corbyn Labour seemed to have a lot of poor local elections even when the battleground should have suited them, which means Tories are in for some tough defences in this group of years? So glib conclusion is results verdict on Johnson being rubbish, which is true because he had been found out now, but any leader would have found defending the same position tough, is that fair to say?
I’m actually convinced Johnson does not survive the next couple of weeks, let alone make it to May. It’s this wallpaper business very dangerous to him now. The Parliament standards lady says she won’t investigate. Labour squealing she should, Tories arguing it falls under Geet because it’s cabinet not MP matter.
I reckon it can go like this. Saying she won’t investigate is good news for Boris. But if she changes her mind, and finds against him, he’s in Paterson position facing suspension which is even more than vonk it instant resignation.
I may be the only person on PB seeing wallpaper for access bringing Boris down in next couple of weeks, but I don’t care, I think it can so easily happen like when country’s apparently sleep walk into war - the key question for those shaking your head at my post is to ask yourself, the Parliament sleaze lady who done for Paterson, not at moment investigating the Prime Minister, Why would she change her mind?
Well, if your forecast is right, you'll earn fantastic PB bragging points.
Found Don’t Look Up a bit meh which seems a minority position. The parody of the POTUS and presidency seemed overly crude though I accept the previous incumbent has coarsened perceptions. I felt there was a fair bit of satirising of the US reaction to COVID as much as there was of our attitude to ecological disaster.
Read a concise review from @Nigelb - "self-indulgent garbage" - so you're not alone. I had it scheduled for last night (wife out and not her thing) but instead got sucked into a tumble about Trump with 'MrEd" which wasn't the greatest of decisions.
Or maybe it was if the film is mediocre. Don't know about you but I particularly struggle to persevere with a comedy if it's not landing. There's something awkward about jokes misfiring. You just want it to either work or stop.
So anyway, I probably won't bother now. Lots of other things I want to watch.
London will be fascinating - there are one or two counter-intuitive trends which may yet ruin the planned narrative for the elections.
I don't think the Conservatives will do that badly - the doom of the London Conservatives has been prophesied on many occasions. This time I see a mixed bag - it's quite possible Labour will regain Wandsworth and perhaps Barnet and it'll be interesting to see how Hillingdon votes but in some of the inner London Labour strongholds I think we could see some surprisingly strong Conservative performances which may not translate into many seats.
I also think the Conservatives have some serious prospects of ending LD rule in Sutton and Kingston.
Labour will hope to gain Wandsworth and Barnet and make progress in Hillingdon but most of their fortresses are impregnable though I think there will be odd losses to Conservatives, Greens and LDs.
Havering is another borough where any Conservative losses might mean a change of administration.
As said, the LDs may be in trouble in Sutton and Kingston but will hope to survive there and start re-building in the rest of the capital.
The Greens have only 11 Councillors in the capital - they will be looking to build on that and possibly where they are challenging Labour in inner London might be their best chance of progress.
Good post.
I think the big success story in May’s elections will be the greens. They seem to be able to win everywhere at the moment. Is it young or new voters driving the Green election successes?
On the other side of the argument, I think HYUFD is right and Big G wrong because there is neither a standard balanced local election battleground nor obvious conclusion from results. If HYUFD says this years battleground doesn’t suit Libdems that is good enough for me.
It’s not actually libdems but Labour who seem to be making progress in national polls. The 35-40 lab Tory picture seems to have reversed since end October.
As well as unbalanced battle grounds each year, how results went last time seats were up can also make for an unbalanced picture where it’s too easy to conclude the wrong take out. To be fair to Boris Johnson under Corbyn Labour seemed to have a lot of poor local elections even when the battleground should have suited them, which means Tories are in for some tough defences in this group of years? So glib conclusion is results verdict on Johnson being rubbish, which is true because he had been found out now, but any leader would have found defending the same position tough, is that fair to say?
I’m actually convinced Johnson does not survive the next couple of weeks, let alone make it to May. It’s this wallpaper business very dangerous to him now. The Parliament standards lady says she won’t investigate. Labour squealing she should, Tories arguing it falls under Geet because it’s cabinet not MP matter.
I reckon it can go like this. Saying she won’t investigate is good news for Boris. But if she changes her mind, and finds against him, he’s in Paterson position facing suspension which is even more than vonk it instant resignation.
I may be the only person on PB seeing wallpaper for access bringing Boris down in next couple of weeks, but I don’t care, I think it can so easily happen like when country’s apparently sleep walk into war - the key question for those shaking your head at my post is to ask yourself, the Parliament sleaze lady who done for Paterson, not at moment investigating the Prime Minister, Why would she change her mind?
It seems the wallpaper issue is not going further but that partygate report is likely soon
I expect heads will role but not Boris, and as many commentators believe he is safe until post May elections
The other thing to consider with Boris is that few if any of his successors want the poison chalice just now
I do not bet but if I did I would put good money on him being there in June 22
“ It seems the wallpaper issue is not going further but that partygate report is likely soon “
That touches right on my point Big G, wallpaper for access is going to go further and bring Johnson down very quickly now. You say it’s not going further because she says she is not going to investigate. Can you not think of two or 3 good reasons why she would change her mind?
horse's head in the bed? Envelope full of crisp tenners?
London will be fascinating - there are one or two counter-intuitive trends which may yet ruin the planned narrative for the elections.
I don't think the Conservatives will do that badly - the doom of the London Conservatives has been prophesied on many occasions. This time I see a mixed bag - it's quite possible Labour will regain Wandsworth and perhaps Barnet and it'll be interesting to see how Hillingdon votes but in some of the inner London Labour strongholds I think we could see some surprisingly strong Conservative performances which may not translate into many seats.
I also think the Conservatives have some serious prospects of ending LD rule in Sutton and Kingston.
Labour will hope to gain Wandsworth and Barnet and make progress in Hillingdon but most of their fortresses are impregnable though I think there will be odd losses to Conservatives, Greens and LDs.
Havering is another borough where any Conservative losses might mean a change of administration.
As said, the LDs may be in trouble in Sutton and Kingston but will hope to survive there and start re-building in the rest of the capital.
The Greens have only 11 Councillors in the capital - they will be looking to build on that and possibly where they are challenging Labour in inner London might be their best chance of progress.
Good post.
I think the big success story in May’s elections will be the greens. They seem to be able to win everywhere at the moment. Is it young or new voters driving the Green election successes?
On the other side of the argument, I think HYUFD is right and Big G wrong because there is neither a standard balanced local election battleground nor obvious conclusion from results. If HYUFD says this years battleground doesn’t suit Libdems that is good enough for me.
It’s not actually libdems but Labour who seem to be making progress in national polls. The 35-40 lab Tory picture seems to have reversed since end October.
As well as unbalanced battle grounds each year, how results went last time seats were up can also make for an unbalanced picture where it’s too easy to conclude the wrong take out. To be fair to Boris Johnson under Corbyn Labour seemed to have a lot of poor local elections even when the battleground should have suited them, which means Tories are in for some tough defences in this group of years? So glib conclusion is results verdict on Johnson being rubbish, which is true because he had been found out now, but any leader would have found defending the same position tough, is that fair to say?
I’m actually convinced Johnson does not survive the next couple of weeks, let alone make it to May. It’s this wallpaper business very dangerous to him now. The Parliament standards lady says she won’t investigate. Labour squealing she should, Tories arguing it falls under Geet because it’s cabinet not MP matter.
I reckon it can go like this. Saying she won’t investigate is good news for Boris. But if she changes her mind, and finds against him, he’s in Paterson position facing suspension which is even more than vonk it instant resignation.
I may be the only person on PB seeing wallpaper for access bringing Boris down in next couple of weeks, but I don’t care, I think it can so easily happen like when country’s apparently sleep walk into war - the key question for those shaking your head at my post is to ask yourself, the Parliament sleaze lady who done for Paterson, not at moment investigating the Prime Minister, Why would she change her mind?
It seems the wallpaper issue is not going further but that partygate report is likely soon
I expect heads will role but not Boris, and as many commentators believe he is safe until post May elections
The other thing to consider with Boris is that few if any of his successors want the poison chalice just now
I do not bet but if I did I would put good money on him being there in June 22
“ It seems the wallpaper issue is not going further but that partygate report is likely soon “
That touches right on my point Big G, wallpaper for access is going to go further and bring Johnson down very quickly now. You say it’s not going further because she says she is not going to investigate. Can you not think of two or 3 good reasons why she would change her mind?
I am not sure why you think she will change her mind as I just do not see any further mileage in it
I am far from convinced wallpapergate will be Boris's denouement
Firstly she could agree with Labour, that it is under her remit? Why wouldn’t it be? Would she not have investigated Paterson just because he was PM? Secondly, more could emerge. A week ago it was just questions about funding for curtains, now it’s curtains for access. Thirdly, it only really kicked off again after Geet’s no further mileage in it when EC published what they found Geet claimed, despite his access he didn’t know, so what does she find if she starts investigating.
Do you see what I mean? I know how sharp you are on here, you could have answered in this way?
Labour to recommend devomax when Gordon Brown's report for Starmer concludes, with responsibility for policy in most areas except defence and foreign policy being given to Holyrood if Labour wins the next general election. Labour could also allow its parliamentary candidates to support Scottish independence on a personal conscience basis
This is either just a step towards full independence or a cynical attempt to buy SNP support for a minority Starmer govt.
I really don’t see the point of devomax. It won’t satisfy those who want Indy and it takes Scotland further from the union for those who value the union.
Devomax would mean that the Scottish Government would have to own their decisions and disasters. It would no longer be possible to say when things go wrong - that's Westminster's Fault were we.....
It will still be Westminster's fault. It was Westminster's fault for decades in Ireland, even after they'd become an independent Republic. And for Scotland Holyrood wouldn't have the power to make trade deals, or re-enter the single market, so there's a great big peg onto which, "It's Westminster's Fault" can be hung, regardless of the truth of the situation.
Do you have instances of the Irish saying "It's Westminster's Fault" post-independence? Other than blaming Britain for things that happened before that point, for example the Famine. Which is a perfectly legitimate view.
The main take from Irish-UK relations is the consistent dearth of trust and affection from Ireland (let’s not even start on the current HMG mob’s attitude to Ireland) for the UK establishment, diplomatic niceties aside. It makes the recurring trope of a greater UK reunification look even more remarkable, the new Unionist white hope of Beattie being the latest peddler of that strange notion.
Though Brexit has brought bumper dividends to the Irish Customs:
Labour to recommend devomax when Gordon Brown's report for Starmer concludes, with responsibility for policy in most areas except defence and foreign policy being given to Holyrood if Labour wins the next general election. Labour could also allow its parliamentary candidates to support Scottish independence on a personal conscience basis
This is either just a step towards full independence or a cynical attempt to buy SNP support for a minority Starmer govt.
I really don’t see the point of devomax. It won’t satisfy those who want Indy and it takes Scotland further from the union for those who value the union.
It's attempt to win over pro-indy voters, in an attempt to get a Labour majority. Starmer doesn't need to a formal deal with the SNP providing Labour (or Labour + Lib Dems) have more MPs than the Conservatives.
He might still be screwed on ruling, though, where the SNP abstain on non-Scottish matters. I personally think a minority Labour government dependent on a rainbow coalition with a large minority Tory presence is going to be hellish for Starmer. The SNP's single agenda is going to be as poisonous as possible - to get to the point where the rUK says "well just fuck off then...." and get their next referendum to deliver it. Not their problem if Westminster grinds to a halt....
London will be fascinating - there are one or two counter-intuitive trends which may yet ruin the planned narrative for the elections.
I don't think the Conservatives will do that badly - the doom of the London Conservatives has been prophesied on many occasions. This time I see a mixed bag - it's quite possible Labour will regain Wandsworth and perhaps Barnet and it'll be interesting to see how Hillingdon votes but in some of the inner London Labour strongholds I think we could see some surprisingly strong Conservative performances which may not translate into many seats.
I also think the Conservatives have some serious prospects of ending LD rule in Sutton and Kingston.
Labour will hope to gain Wandsworth and Barnet and make progress in Hillingdon but most of their fortresses are impregnable though I think there will be odd losses to Conservatives, Greens and LDs.
Havering is another borough where any Conservative losses might mean a change of administration.
As said, the LDs may be in trouble in Sutton and Kingston but will hope to survive there and start re-building in the rest of the capital.
The Greens have only 11 Councillors in the capital - they will be looking to build on that and possibly where they are challenging Labour in inner London might be their best chance of progress.
Good post.
I think the big success story in May’s elections will be the greens. They seem to be able to win everywhere at the moment. Is it young or new voters driving the Green election successes?
On the other side of the argument, I think HYUFD is right and Big G wrong because there is neither a standard balanced local election battleground nor obvious conclusion from results. If HYUFD says this years battleground doesn’t suit Libdems that is good enough for me.
It’s not actually libdems but Labour who seem to be making progress in national polls. The 35-40 lab Tory picture seems to have reversed since end October.
As well as unbalanced battle grounds each year, how results went last time seats were up can also make for an unbalanced picture where it’s too easy to conclude the wrong take out. To be fair to Boris Johnson under Corbyn Labour seemed to have a lot of poor local elections even when the battleground should have suited them, which means Tories are in for some tough defences in this group of years? So glib conclusion is results verdict on Johnson being rubbish, which is true because he had been found out now, but any leader would have found defending the same position tough, is that fair to say?
I’m actually convinced Johnson does not survive the next couple of weeks, let alone make it to May. It’s this wallpaper business very dangerous to him now. The Parliament standards lady says she won’t investigate. Labour squealing she should, Tories arguing it falls under Geet because it’s cabinet not MP matter.
I reckon it can go like this. Saying she won’t investigate is good news for Boris. But if she changes her mind, and finds against him, he’s in Paterson position facing suspension which is even more than vonk it instant resignation.
I may be the only person on PB seeing wallpaper for access bringing Boris down in next couple of weeks, but I don’t care, I think it can so easily happen like when country’s apparently sleep walk into war - the key question for those shaking your head at my post is to ask yourself, the Parliament sleaze lady who done for Paterson, not at moment investigating the Prime Minister, Why would she change her mind?
It seems the wallpaper issue is not going further but that partygate report is likely soon
I expect heads will role but not Boris, and as many commentators believe he is safe until post May elections
The other thing to consider with Boris is that few if any of his successors want the poison chalice just now
I do not bet but if I did I would put good money on him being there in June 22
“ It seems the wallpaper issue is not going further but that partygate report is likely soon “
That touches right on my point Big G, wallpaper for access is going to go further and bring Johnson down very quickly now. You say it’s not going further because she says she is not going to investigate. Can you not think of two or 3 good reasons why she would change her mind?
horse's head in the bed? Envelope full of crisp tenners?
Found Don’t Look Up a bit meh which seems a minority position. The parody of the POTUS and presidency seemed overly crude though I accept the previous incumbent has coarsened perceptions. I felt there was a fair bit of satirising of the US reaction to COVID as much as there was of our attitude to ecological disaster.
Read a concise review from @Nigelb - "self-indulgent garbage" - so you're not alone. I had it scheduled for last night (wife out and not her thing) but instead got sucked into a tumble about Trump with 'MrEd" which wasn't the greatest of decisions.
Or maybe it was if the film is mediocre. Don't know about you but I particularly struggle to persevere with a comedy if it's not landing. There's something awkward about jokes misfiring. You just want it to either work or stop.
So anyway, I probably won't bother now. Lots of other things I want to watch.
It’s quite an enjoyable film if you just forget the message. It’s not as good as Adam McKay’s other efforts which are two of my favourite recent-ish films - Vice and The Big Short. I like the breaking of the fourth wall in his films - don’t want it in every film but these two films do it very well.
Weirdly Vice made me really like Cheney which I don’t think was the intention…!!
Scotland’s largest parents’ organisation is calling for the SNP government to withdraw its schools’ health and wellbeing census, which has attracted opprobrium for asking 14-year-olds about their experience of anal sex.
The controversial poll has united rightwing pro-family campaigners and progressive children’s rights advocates, with both groups fearing it may end up causing harm to the young people it intends to help.
2/2 The argument that the jury has to weigh up the rights and wrongs of the rights of freedom of expression against the damage caused and determine whether it was proportionate is slightly more problematic. It might be used to deal with trespass, for example but as the secret Barrister acknowledges, these rights are not absolute and a State is entitled to rule that criminal damage is a crime without breaching the right of freedom of expression.
I also agree that those who did not hear the evidence or indeed the arguments should be cautious in their judgment. What seems to me to have happened in this case, however, is that a jury has been presented with a series of legal arguments which are matters for the judge, not for them. It is the job of the Judge to give directions to the jury on the law and the jury have to follow them, even if they disagree. The jury are there as masters of the facts and have to apply the law, as they are directed, to the facts as they find them. If I was looking for fault in this result I would be looking very carefully at the Judge's charge to the Jury and whether he simply allowed them to be bamboozled by legal arguments that he should have resolved. The key facts that the jury should have been directed to determine were:
1. Were the accused correctly identified as at least some of those responsible. I do not understand this to be disputed. 2. Was the crime libelled committed, that is was there in fact criminal damage to the statue? That would be a question of fact and the answer is self evident. They should have been directed that what happened to the statue was criminal damage. 3. Were the answers to 1 and 2 established beyond a reasonable doubt, discharging the onus on the Crown?
I am a big fan of the jury system and have rarely had a jury decision that I disagreed with, let alone could not see how they got there. For the system to work, however, the role of each part of the system has to be clear and operate effectively. That did not happen in this case but the fault, if there is any, more likely lies with the Judge rather than the jury.
I think the key takeaway of the Colston 4 verdict is that creating excessively harsh punishments for iconoclasm or similar activity is likely to backfire. If punishments are unreasonable then juries will refuse to convict.
Yes, that's the lesson here. Had the sentence been a few hundred hours of community service and no jail time it's likely the jury would have convicted them. 5 years in jail just doesn't seem proportionate to the crime.
ALthough we should note it was escalated to that level of possible punishment at their request. A magistrate would probably have given them the CS and a fine.
Am I correct in thinking several pleaded guilty at magistrates and received exactly that? Sure I read it, but now can't find any evidence.
That’s interesting, I was wondering why it was just these four being prosecuted.
Found it! Five of the nine pleaded guilty and were offered restorative justice. Interesting snippet. Only one arrest. The other eight voluntarily came forward.
London will be fascinating - there are one or two counter-intuitive trends which may yet ruin the planned narrative for the elections.
I don't think the Conservatives will do that badly - the doom of the London Conservatives has been prophesied on many occasions. This time I see a mixed bag - it's quite possible Labour will regain Wandsworth and perhaps Barnet and it'll be interesting to see how Hillingdon votes but in some of the inner London Labour strongholds I think we could see some surprisingly strong Conservative performances which may not translate into many seats.
I also think the Conservatives have some serious prospects of ending LD rule in Sutton and Kingston.
Labour will hope to gain Wandsworth and Barnet and make progress in Hillingdon but most of their fortresses are impregnable though I think there will be odd losses to Conservatives, Greens and LDs.
Havering is another borough where any Conservative losses might mean a change of administration.
As said, the LDs may be in trouble in Sutton and Kingston but will hope to survive there and start re-building in the rest of the capital.
The Greens have only 11 Councillors in the capital - they will be looking to build on that and possibly where they are challenging Labour in inner London might be their best chance of progress.
Good post.
I think the big success story in May’s elections will be the greens. They seem to be able to win everywhere at the moment. Is it young or new voters driving the Green election successes?
On the other side of the argument, I think HYUFD is right and Big G wrong because there is neither a standard balanced local election battleground nor obvious conclusion from results. If HYUFD says this years battleground doesn’t suit Libdems that is good enough for me.
It’s not actually libdems but Labour who seem to be making progress in national polls. The 35-40 lab Tory picture seems to have reversed since end October.
As well as unbalanced battle grounds each year, how results went last time seats were up can also make for an unbalanced picture where it’s too easy to conclude the wrong take out. To be fair to Boris Johnson under Corbyn Labour seemed to have a lot of poor local elections even when the battleground should have suited them, which means Tories are in for some tough defences in this group of years? So glib conclusion is results verdict on Johnson being rubbish, which is true because he had been found out now, but any leader would have found defending the same position tough, is that fair to say?
I’m actually convinced Johnson does not survive the next couple of weeks, let alone make it to May. It’s this wallpaper business very dangerous to him now. The Parliament standards lady says she won’t investigate. Labour squealing she should, Tories arguing it falls under Geet because it’s cabinet not MP matter.
I reckon it can go like this. Saying she won’t investigate is good news for Boris. But if she changes her mind, and finds against him, he’s in Paterson position facing suspension which is even more than vonk it instant resignation.
I may be the only person on PB seeing wallpaper for access bringing Boris down in next couple of weeks, but I don’t care, I think it can so easily happen like when country’s apparently sleep walk into war - the key question for those shaking your head at my post is to ask yourself, the Parliament sleaze lady who done for Paterson, not at moment investigating the Prime Minister, Why would she change her mind?
It seems the wallpaper issue is not going further but that partygate report is likely soon
I expect heads will role but not Boris, and as many commentators believe he is safe until post May elections
The other thing to consider with Boris is that few if any of his successors want the poison chalice just now
I do not bet but if I did I would put good money on him being there in June 22
“ It seems the wallpaper issue is not going further but that partygate report is likely soon “
That touches right on my point Big G, wallpaper for access is going to go further and bring Johnson down very quickly now. You say it’s not going further because she says she is not going to investigate. Can you not think of two or 3 good reasons why she would change her mind?
I am not sure why you think she will change her mind as I just do not see any further mileage in it
I am far from convinced wallpapergate will be Boris's denouement
Firstly she could agree with Labour, that it is under her remit? Why wouldn’t it be? Would she not have investigated Paterson just because he was PM? Secondly, more could emerge. A week ago it was just questions about funding for curtains, now it’s curtains for access. Thirdly, it only really kicked off again after Geet’s no further mileage in it when EC published what they found Geet claimed, despite his access he didn’t know, so what does she find if she starts investigating.
Do you see what I mean? I know how sharp you are on here, you could have answered in this way?
Not sure about being sharp but I really do not see it
As I understand it Rachel Reeves is seeking a windfall tax on the oil industry which according to her will raise 1.2 billion
At the same time she wants to abolish the 5% vat on energy bills at a cost of 1.5 billion
Therefore, labour are proposing a small cut in the bills for the low paid and pensioners while handing a reduction to the wealthy and that the overall effect is at best a minor help to the cost of living crisis
She also wants to invest tens of billions in retro fitting homes and nuclear energy, but this will have no effect on this year or next years cost of living crisis
A windfall tax on the oil and gas industry will encourage energy companies to invest overseas rather than in the UK. Given we are far from energy self sufficient, this seems unwise.
The bizarre thing is that we apparently don't want them to spend their money here anyway, see the SG's approach to Carnbroe. That said, windfall taxes are capricious and damage commercial uncertainty. We really don't want to get the reputation of being prone to that sort of nonsense.
Scotland’s largest parents’ organisation is calling for the SNP government to withdraw its schools’ health and wellbeing census, which has attracted opprobrium for asking 14-year-olds about their experience of anal sex.
The controversial poll has united rightwing pro-family campaigners and progressive children’s rights advocates, with both groups fearing it may end up causing harm to the young people it intends to help.
Found Don’t Look Up a bit meh which seems a minority position. The parody of the POTUS and presidency seemed overly crude though I accept the previous incumbent has coarsened perceptions. I felt there was a fair bit of satirising of the US reaction to COVID as much as there was of our attitude to ecological disaster.
Yes, while Don't Look Up had its moments, the side plots were overlong, and it was far too US centred.
Yep. I didn’t really understand Leon’s cry of pain about the second half of the film being a patronising skewering of rednecks and Trump voters. AfaIcs the hot polloi realised they were being lied to and started throwing stuff at the rsoles. The only real moron seemed to be the meathead played by Ron Perlman. I found Cate Blanchett in full breaking news warpaint strangely arousing. TMI I’m sure.
Labour to recommend devomax when Gordon Brown's report for Starmer concludes, with responsibility for policy in most areas except defence and foreign policy being given to Holyrood if Labour wins the next general election. Labour could also allow its parliamentary candidates to support Scottish independence on a personal conscience basis
This is either just a step towards full independence or a cynical attempt to buy SNP support for a minority Starmer govt.
I really don’t see the point of devomax. It won’t satisfy those who want Indy and it takes Scotland further from the union for those who value the union.
It's attempt to win over pro-indy voters, in an attempt to get a Labour majority. Starmer doesn't need to a formal deal with the SNP providing Labour (or Labour + Lib Dems) have more MPs than the Conservatives.
He might still be screwed on ruling, though, where the SNP abstain on non-Scottish matters. I personally think a minority Labour government dependent on a rainbow coalition with a large minority Tory presence is going to be hellish for Starmer. The SNP's single agenda is going to be as poisonous as possible - to get to the point where the rUK says "well just fuck off then...." and get their next referendum to deliver it. Not their problem if Westminster grinds to a halt....
If the Tories have most seats but Labour + SNP have more seats than the Tories and DUP then yes Starmer would likely end up PM but with indyref2 the price demanded by the SNP. However the SNP would abstain on England only legislation, giving the Tories still a majority in England.
For the first time therefore all 4 home nations would effectively have different parties in control of their own domestic policy, the Tories in England, Labour in Wales, the SNP in Scotland and the DUP and SF in NI while under a UK Labour PM trying to hold it all together
Found Don’t Look Up a bit meh which seems a minority position. The parody of the POTUS and presidency seemed overly crude though I accept the previous incumbent has coarsened perceptions. I felt there was a fair bit of satirising of the US reaction to COVID as much as there was of our attitude to ecological disaster.
Read a concise review from @Nigelb - "self-indulgent garbage" - so you're not alone. I had it scheduled for last night (wife out and not her thing) but instead got sucked into a tumble about Trump with 'MrEd" which wasn't the greatest of decisions.
Or maybe it was if the film is mediocre. Don't know about you but I particularly struggle to persevere with a comedy if it's not landing. There's something awkward about jokes misfiring. You just want it to either work or stop.
So anyway, I probably won't bother now. Lots of other things I want to watch.
It’s quite an enjoyable film if you just forget the message. It’s not as good as Adam McKay’s other efforts which are two of my favourite recent-ish films - Vice and The Big Short. I like the breaking of the fourth wall in his films - don’t want it in every film but these two films do it very well.
Weirdly Vice made me really like Cheney which I don’t think was the intention…!!
I agree that both The Big Short and Vice were excellent, especially the former. Vice, I think, is a good example of what was missing in Don't look up. He was humanised and given a position, just as the opposition were in the better episodes of West Wing. Don't look up was way more one sided and less nuanced and was the weaker for that.
London will be fascinating - there are one or two counter-intuitive trends which may yet ruin the planned narrative for the elections.
I don't think the Conservatives will do that badly - the doom of the London Conservatives has been prophesied on many occasions. This time I see a mixed bag - it's quite possible Labour will regain Wandsworth and perhaps Barnet and it'll be interesting to see how Hillingdon votes but in some of the inner London Labour strongholds I think we could see some surprisingly strong Conservative performances which may not translate into many seats.
I also think the Conservatives have some serious prospects of ending LD rule in Sutton and Kingston.
Labour will hope to gain Wandsworth and Barnet and make progress in Hillingdon but most of their fortresses are impregnable though I think there will be odd losses to Conservatives, Greens and LDs.
Havering is another borough where any Conservative losses might mean a change of administration.
As said, the LDs may be in trouble in Sutton and Kingston but will hope to survive there and start re-building in the rest of the capital.
The Greens have only 11 Councillors in the capital - they will be looking to build on that and possibly where they are challenging Labour in inner London might be their best chance of progress.
Good post.
I think the big success story in May’s elections will be the greens. They seem to be able to win everywhere at the moment. Is it young or new voters driving the Green election successes?
On the other side of the argument, I think HYUFD is right and Big G wrong because there is neither a standard balanced local election battleground nor obvious conclusion from results. If HYUFD says this years battleground doesn’t suit Libdems that is good enough for me.
It’s not actually libdems but Labour who seem to be making progress in national polls. The 35-40 lab Tory picture seems to have reversed since end October.
As well as unbalanced battle grounds each year, how results went last time seats were up can also make for an unbalanced picture where it’s too easy to conclude the wrong take out. To be fair to Boris Johnson under Corbyn Labour seemed to have a lot of poor local elections even when the battleground should have suited them, which means Tories are in for some tough defences in this group of years? So glib conclusion is results verdict on Johnson being rubbish, which is true because he had been found out now, but any leader would have found defending the same position tough, is that fair to say?
I’m actually convinced Johnson does not survive the next couple of weeks, let alone make it to May. It’s this wallpaper business very dangerous to him now. The Parliament standards lady says she won’t investigate. Labour squealing she should, Tories arguing it falls under Geet because it’s cabinet not MP matter.
I reckon it can go like this. Saying she won’t investigate is good news for Boris. But if she changes her mind, and finds against him, he’s in Paterson position facing suspension which is even more than vonk it instant resignation.
I may be the only person on PB seeing wallpaper for access bringing Boris down in next couple of weeks, but I don’t care, I think it can so easily happen like when country’s apparently sleep walk into war - the key question for those shaking your head at my post is to ask yourself, the Parliament sleaze lady who done for Paterson, not at moment investigating the Prime Minister, Why would she change her mind?
It seems the wallpaper issue is not going further but that partygate report is likely soon
I expect heads will role but not Boris, and as many commentators believe he is safe until post May elections
The other thing to consider with Boris is that few if any of his successors want the poison chalice just now
I do not bet but if I did I would put good money on him being there in June 22
The poison chalice argument is often made but is mistaken because the calm waters sought by would-be successors will help cement Boris in place. They need to strike while Boris is down and the country in turmoil. Only if the Prime Minister is voluntarily stepping down is there a case for letting the incumbent take the flak but then there is the danger he might change his mind, as Macmillan doubtless would have done.
Or Blair, who agreed to go in 2005, then 2006, and was finally dragged out kicking and screaming in 2007.
Absolutely agree with you both. From Rishi to Cummings and around to JRM they know this. It’s like watching a House Of Cards series play out in real time, hollow out and bring down a PM who just won a landslide victory.
Not to be an awful pedant, but... The plot against Collingwood was launched because of his "disappointing" majority of only 30. Which somewhat dates the book tbh.
Labour to recommend devomax when Gordon Brown's report for Starmer concludes, with responsibility for policy in most areas except defence and foreign policy being given to Holyrood if Labour wins the next general election. Labour could also allow its parliamentary candidates to support Scottish independence on a personal conscience basis
This is either just a step towards full independence or a cynical attempt to buy SNP support for a minority Starmer govt.
I really don’t see the point of devomax. It won’t satisfy those who want Indy and it takes Scotland further from the union for those who value the union.
It's attempt to win over pro-indy voters, in an attempt to get a Labour majority. Starmer doesn't need to a formal deal with the SNP providing Labour (or Labour + Lib Dems) have more MPs than the Conservatives.
It is the misguided witterings of a London numpty who knows F all about Scotland. He could not run a bath.
It’s incredibly short sighted, if it is the aim, and helps the cause of unionism how exactly if it is seen as a cynical attempt to neuter demands for Indy. I think you’re right, it is down to a lack of knowledge on Starmers behalf on Scotland and labour have a track record of being largely wrong on how to keep the union together.
Scotland’s largest parents’ organisation is calling for the SNP government to withdraw its schools’ health and wellbeing census, which has attracted opprobrium for asking 14-year-olds about their experience of anal sex.
The controversial poll has united rightwing pro-family campaigners and progressive children’s rights advocates, with both groups fearing it may end up causing harm to the young people it intends to help.
Just another wheeze of the queer theory bunch running the country, it was obviously blessed by Sturgeon and unlikely she will accept questioning of her omnipotence, Swinney will be out trying to say it is great shortly.
Scotland’s largest parents’ organisation is calling for the SNP government to withdraw its schools’ health and wellbeing census, which has attracted opprobrium for asking 14-year-olds about their experience of anal sex.
The controversial poll has united rightwing pro-family campaigners and progressive children’s rights advocates, with both groups fearing it may end up causing harm to the young people it intends to help.
As I understand it Rachel Reeves is seeking a windfall tax on the oil industry which according to her will raise 1.2 billion
At the same time she wants to abolish the 5% vat on energy bills at a cost of 1.5 billion
Therefore, labour are proposing a small cut in the bills for the low paid and pensioners while handing a reduction to the wealthy and that the overall effect is at best a minor help to the cost of living crisis
She also wants to invest tens of billions in retro fitting homes and nuclear energy, but this will have no effect on this year or next years cost of living crisis
A windfall tax on the oil and gas industry will encourage energy companies to invest overseas rather than in the UK. Given we are far from energy self sufficient, this seems unwise.
But doesn't Labour oppose investment in oil and gas in the UK anyway ?
London will be fascinating - there are one or two counter-intuitive trends which may yet ruin the planned narrative for the elections.
I don't think the Conservatives will do that badly - the doom of the London Conservatives has been prophesied on many occasions. This time I see a mixed bag - it's quite possible Labour will regain Wandsworth and perhaps Barnet and it'll be interesting to see how Hillingdon votes but in some of the inner London Labour strongholds I think we could see some surprisingly strong Conservative performances which may not translate into many seats.
I also think the Conservatives have some serious prospects of ending LD rule in Sutton and Kingston.
Labour will hope to gain Wandsworth and Barnet and make progress in Hillingdon but most of their fortresses are impregnable though I think there will be odd losses to Conservatives, Greens and LDs.
Havering is another borough where any Conservative losses might mean a change of administration.
As said, the LDs may be in trouble in Sutton and Kingston but will hope to survive there and start re-building in the rest of the capital.
The Greens have only 11 Councillors in the capital - they will be looking to build on that and possibly where they are challenging Labour in inner London might be their best chance of progress.
Good post.
I think the big success story in May’s elections will be the greens. They seem to be able to win everywhere at the moment. Is it young or new voters driving the Green election successes?
On the other side of the argument, I think HYUFD is right and Big G wrong because there is neither a standard balanced local election battleground nor obvious conclusion from results. If HYUFD says this years battleground doesn’t suit Libdems that is good enough for me.
It’s not actually libdems but Labour who seem to be making progress in national polls. The 35-40 lab Tory picture seems to have reversed since end October.
As well as unbalanced battle grounds each year, how results went last time seats were up can also make for an unbalanced picture where it’s too easy to conclude the wrong take out. To be fair to Boris Johnson under Corbyn Labour seemed to have a lot of poor local elections even when the battleground should have suited them, which means Tories are in for some tough defences in this group of years? So glib conclusion is results verdict on Johnson being rubbish, which is true because he had been found out now, but any leader would have found defending the same position tough, is that fair to say?
I’m actually convinced Johnson does not survive the next couple of weeks, let alone make it to May. It’s this wallpaper business very dangerous to him now. The Parliament standards lady says she won’t investigate. Labour squealing she should, Tories arguing it falls under Geet because it’s cabinet not MP matter.
I reckon it can go like this. Saying she won’t investigate is good news for Boris. But if she changes her mind, and finds against him, he’s in Paterson position facing suspension which is even more than vonk it instant resignation.
I may be the only person on PB seeing wallpaper for access bringing Boris down in next couple of weeks, but I don’t care, I think it can so easily happen like when country’s apparently sleep walk into war - the key question for those shaking your head at my post is to ask yourself, the Parliament sleaze lady who done for Paterson, not at moment investigating the Prime Minister, Why would she change her mind?
Well, if your forecast is right, you'll earn fantastic PB bragging points.
I’m not seeking bragging points. I’m more worried I have zero credibility for getting wrong what looks obvious. I just find it odd no one sees a PM tottering on brink after his own side put so much work in hollowing him out as I see it.
Maybe I hsvn’t been around for many “falls” or turning points, do they tend to happen quickly and unexpectedly catching people out, or are they not all slow and painful as this ruin of Johnson?
I am thinking on basis he will be talked up, and even make Boris great again initiative, to the point they can vote against him in secret, then he will be fortnight ago chip wrapper.
Labour to recommend devomax when Gordon Brown's report for Starmer concludes, with responsibility for policy in most areas except defence and foreign policy being given to Holyrood if Labour wins the next general election. Labour could also allow its parliamentary candidates to support Scottish independence on a personal conscience basis
This is either just a step towards full independence or a cynical attempt to buy SNP support for a minority Starmer govt.
I really don’t see the point of devomax. It won’t satisfy those who want Indy and it takes Scotland further from the union for those who value the union.
It's attempt to win over pro-indy voters, in an attempt to get a Labour majority. Starmer doesn't need to a formal deal with the SNP providing Labour (or Labour + Lib Dems) have more MPs than the Conservatives.
He might still be screwed on ruling, though, where the SNP abstain on non-Scottish matters. I personally think a minority Labour government dependent on a rainbow coalition with a large minority Tory presence is going to be hellish for Starmer. The SNP's single agenda is going to be as poisonous as possible - to get to the point where the rUK says "well just fuck off then...." and get their next referendum to deliver it. Not their problem if Westminster grinds to a halt....
If Labour has more MPs than the Conservatives the SNP abstaining on English legislation wouldn't screw him on ruling. If they don't, then the SNP might be willing to support on him on getting English legislation through the Commons... but they'd want major policy concessions (i.e. scrapping Trident) which would go down like a cup of cold sick with the electorate south of the border. I honestly don't know what Labour does in that situation.
2/2 The argument that the jury has to weigh up the rights and wrongs of the rights of freedom of expression against the damage caused and determine whether it was proportionate is slightly more problematic. It might be used to deal with trespass, for example but as the secret Barrister acknowledges, these rights are not absolute and a State is entitled to rule that criminal damage is a crime without breaching the right of freedom of expression.
I also agree that those who did not hear the evidence or indeed the arguments should be cautious in their judgment. What seems to me to have happened in this case, however, is that a jury has been presented with a series of legal arguments which are matters for the judge, not for them. It is the job of the Judge to give directions to the jury on the law and the jury have to follow them, even if they disagree. The jury are there as masters of the facts and have to apply the law, as they are directed, to the facts as they find them. If I was looking for fault in this result I would be looking very carefully at the Judge's charge to the Jury and whether he simply allowed them to be bamboozled by legal arguments that he should have resolved. The key facts that the jury should have been directed to determine were:
1. Were the accused correctly identified as at least some of those responsible. I do not understand this to be disputed. 2. Was the crime libelled committed, that is was there in fact criminal damage to the statue? That would be a question of fact and the answer is self evident. They should have been directed that what happened to the statue was criminal damage. 3. Were the answers to 1 and 2 established beyond a reasonable doubt, discharging the onus on the Crown?
I am a big fan of the jury system and have rarely had a jury decision that I disagreed with, let alone could not see how they got there. For the system to work, however, the role of each part of the system has to be clear and operate effectively. That did not happen in this case but the fault, if there is any, more likely lies with the Judge rather than the jury.
I think the key takeaway of the Colston 4 verdict is that creating excessively harsh punishments for iconoclasm or similar activity is likely to backfire. If punishments are unreasonable then juries will refuse to convict.
Yes, that's the lesson here. Had the sentence been a few hundred hours of community service and no jail time it's likely the jury would have convicted them. 5 years in jail just doesn't seem proportionate to the crime.
ALthough we should note it was escalated to that level of possible punishment at their request. A magistrate would probably have given them the CS and a fine.
Am I correct in thinking several pleaded guilty at magistrates and received exactly that? Sure I read it, but now can't find any evidence.
That’s interesting, I was wondering why it was just these four being prosecuted.
Found it! Five of the nine pleaded guilty and were offered restorative justice. Interesting snippet. Only one arrest. The other eight voluntarily came forward.
Scotland’s largest parents’ organisation is calling for the SNP government to withdraw its schools’ health and wellbeing census, which has attracted opprobrium for asking 14-year-olds about their experience of anal sex.
The controversial poll has united rightwing pro-family campaigners and progressive children’s rights advocates, with both groups fearing it may end up causing harm to the young people it intends to help.
London will be fascinating - there are one or two counter-intuitive trends which may yet ruin the planned narrative for the elections.
I don't think the Conservatives will do that badly - the doom of the London Conservatives has been prophesied on many occasions. This time I see a mixed bag - it's quite possible Labour will regain Wandsworth and perhaps Barnet and it'll be interesting to see how Hillingdon votes but in some of the inner London Labour strongholds I think we could see some surprisingly strong Conservative performances which may not translate into many seats.
I also think the Conservatives have some serious prospects of ending LD rule in Sutton and Kingston.
Labour will hope to gain Wandsworth and Barnet and make progress in Hillingdon but most of their fortresses are impregnable though I think there will be odd losses to Conservatives, Greens and LDs.
Havering is another borough where any Conservative losses might mean a change of administration.
As said, the LDs may be in trouble in Sutton and Kingston but will hope to survive there and start re-building in the rest of the capital.
The Greens have only 11 Councillors in the capital - they will be looking to build on that and possibly where they are challenging Labour in inner London might be their best chance of progress.
Good post.
I think the big success story in May’s elections will be the greens. They seem to be able to win everywhere at the moment. Is it young or new voters driving the Green election successes?
On the other side of the argument, I think HYUFD is right and Big G wrong because there is neither a standard balanced local election battleground nor obvious conclusion from results. If HYUFD says this years battleground doesn’t suit Libdems that is good enough for me.
It’s not actually libdems but Labour who seem to be making progress in national polls. The 35-40 lab Tory picture seems to have reversed since end October.
As well as unbalanced battle grounds each year, how results went last time seats were up can also make for an unbalanced picture where it’s too easy to conclude the wrong take out. To be fair to Boris Johnson under Corbyn Labour seemed to have a lot of poor local elections even when the battleground should have suited them, which means Tories are in for some tough defences in this group of years? So glib conclusion is results verdict on Johnson being rubbish, which is true because he had been found out now, but any leader would have found defending the same position tough, is that fair to say?
I’m actually convinced Johnson does not survive the next couple of weeks, let alone make it to May. It’s this wallpaper business very dangerous to him now. The Parliament standards lady says she won’t investigate. Labour squealing she should, Tories arguing it falls under Geet because it’s cabinet not MP matter.
I reckon it can go like this. Saying she won’t investigate is good news for Boris. But if she changes her mind, and finds against him, he’s in Paterson position facing suspension which is even more than vonk it instant resignation.
I may be the only person on PB seeing wallpaper for access bringing Boris down in next couple of weeks, but I don’t care, I think it can so easily happen like when country’s apparently sleep walk into war - the key question for those shaking your head at my post is to ask yourself, the Parliament sleaze lady who done for Paterson, not at moment investigating the Prime Minister, Why would she change her mind?
Well, if your forecast is right, you'll earn fantastic PB bragging points.
I’m not seeking bragging points. I’m more worried I have zero credibility for getting wrong what looks obvious. I just find it odd no one sees a PM tottering on brink after his own side put so much work in hollowing him out as I see it.
Maybe I hsvn’t been around for many “falls” or turning points, do they tend to happen quickly and unexpectedly catching people out, or are they not all slow and painful as this ruin of Johnson?
I am thinking on basis he will be talked up, and even make Boris great again initiative, to the point they can vote against him in secret, then he will be fortnight ago chip wrapper.
Have I really got it wrong?
As has been said if you are right you will have PB bragging rights indefinitely
London will be fascinating - there are one or two counter-intuitive trends which may yet ruin the planned narrative for the elections.
I don't think the Conservatives will do that badly - the doom of the London Conservatives has been prophesied on many occasions. This time I see a mixed bag - it's quite possible Labour will regain Wandsworth and perhaps Barnet and it'll be interesting to see how Hillingdon votes but in some of the inner London Labour strongholds I think we could see some surprisingly strong Conservative performances which may not translate into many seats.
I also think the Conservatives have some serious prospects of ending LD rule in Sutton and Kingston.
Labour will hope to gain Wandsworth and Barnet and make progress in Hillingdon but most of their fortresses are impregnable though I think there will be odd losses to Conservatives, Greens and LDs.
Havering is another borough where any Conservative losses might mean a change of administration.
As said, the LDs may be in trouble in Sutton and Kingston but will hope to survive there and start re-building in the rest of the capital.
The Greens have only 11 Councillors in the capital - they will be looking to build on that and possibly where they are challenging Labour in inner London might be their best chance of progress.
Good post.
I think the big success story in May’s elections will be the greens. They seem to be able to win everywhere at the moment. Is it young or new voters driving the Green election successes?
On the other side of the argument, I think HYUFD is right and Big G wrong because there is neither a standard balanced local election battleground nor obvious conclusion from results. If HYUFD says this years battleground doesn’t suit Libdems that is good enough for me.
It’s not actually libdems but Labour who seem to be making progress in national polls. The 35-40 lab Tory picture seems to have reversed since end October.
As well as unbalanced battle grounds each year, how results went last time seats were up can also make for an unbalanced picture where it’s too easy to conclude the wrong take out. To be fair to Boris Johnson under Corbyn Labour seemed to have a lot of poor local elections even when the battleground should have suited them, which means Tories are in for some tough defences in this group of years? So glib conclusion is results verdict on Johnson being rubbish, which is true because he had been found out now, but any leader would have found defending the same position tough, is that fair to say?
I’m actually convinced Johnson does not survive the next couple of weeks, let alone make it to May. It’s this wallpaper business very dangerous to him now. The Parliament standards lady says she won’t investigate. Labour squealing she should, Tories arguing it falls under Geet because it’s cabinet not MP matter.
I reckon it can go like this. Saying she won’t investigate is good news for Boris. But if she changes her mind, and finds against him, he’s in Paterson position facing suspension which is even more than vonk it instant resignation.
I may be the only person on PB seeing wallpaper for access bringing Boris down in next couple of weeks, but I don’t care, I think it can so easily happen like when country’s apparently sleep walk into war - the key question for those shaking your head at my post is to ask yourself, the Parliament sleaze lady who done for Paterson, not at moment investigating the Prime Minister, Why would she change her mind?
Well, if your forecast is right, you'll earn fantastic PB bragging points.
I’m not seeking bragging points. I’m more worried I have zero credibility for getting wrong what looks obvious. I just find it odd no one sees a PM tottering on brink after his own side put so much work in hollowing him out as I see it.
Maybe I hsvn’t been around for many “falls” or turning points, do they tend to happen quickly and unexpectedly catching people out, or are they not all slow and painful as this ruin of Johnson?
I am thinking on basis he will be talked up, and even make Boris great again initiative, to the point they can vote against him in secret, then he will be fortnight ago chip wrapper.
Have I really got it wrong?
The one flaw is it is the Tories you are talking about, if they are still managing to fill their pockets, enhance their chums/families bankbooks then they will be perfectly happy. Only if it looks like the gravy train will hit the buffers will they go against Bozo. At present given how ineffectual Starmer is they have little to worry about. They will just continue fighting like ferrets in a sack to get the biggest share of the loot they can.
Labour to recommend devomax when Gordon Brown's report for Starmer concludes, with responsibility for policy in most areas except defence and foreign policy being given to Holyrood if Labour wins the next general election. Labour could also allow its parliamentary candidates to support Scottish independence on a personal conscience basis
This is either just a step towards full independence or a cynical attempt to buy SNP support for a minority Starmer govt.
I really don’t see the point of devomax. It won’t satisfy those who want Indy and it takes Scotland further from the union for those who value the union.
It's attempt to win over pro-indy voters, in an attempt to get a Labour majority. Starmer doesn't need to a formal deal with the SNP providing Labour (or Labour + Lib Dems) have more MPs than the Conservatives.
He might still be screwed on ruling, though, where the SNP abstain on non-Scottish matters. I personally think a minority Labour government dependent on a rainbow coalition with a large minority Tory presence is going to be hellish for Starmer. The SNP's single agenda is going to be as poisonous as possible - to get to the point where the rUK says "well just fuck off then...." and get their next referendum to deliver it. Not their problem if Westminster grinds to a halt....
If Labour has more MPs than the Conservatives the SNP abstaining on English legislation wouldn't screw him on ruling. If they don't, then the SNP might be willing to support on him on getting English legislation through the Commons... but they'd want major policy concessions (i.e. scrapping Trident) which would go down like a cup of cold sick with the electorate south of the border. I honestly don't know what Labour does in that situation.
As I understand it Rachel Reeves is seeking a windfall tax on the oil industry which according to her will raise 1.2 billion
At the same time she wants to abolish the 5% vat on energy bills at a cost of 1.5 billion
Therefore, labour are proposing a small cut in the bills for the low paid and pensioners while handing a reduction to the wealthy and that the overall effect is at best a minor help to the cost of living crisis
She also wants to invest tens of billions in retro fitting homes and nuclear energy, but this will have no effect on this year or next years cost of living crisis
A windfall tax on the oil and gas industry will encourage energy companies to invest overseas rather than in the UK. Given we are far from energy self sufficient, this seems unwise.
But doesn't Labour oppose investment in oil and gas in the UK anyway ?
When did they get off the fence on anything, they support everything and nothing.
London will be fascinating - there are one or two counter-intuitive trends which may yet ruin the planned narrative for the elections.
I don't think the Conservatives will do that badly - the doom of the London Conservatives has been prophesied on many occasions. This time I see a mixed bag - it's quite possible Labour will regain Wandsworth and perhaps Barnet and it'll be interesting to see how Hillingdon votes but in some of the inner London Labour strongholds I think we could see some surprisingly strong Conservative performances which may not translate into many seats.
I also think the Conservatives have some serious prospects of ending LD rule in Sutton and Kingston.
Labour will hope to gain Wandsworth and Barnet and make progress in Hillingdon but most of their fortresses are impregnable though I think there will be odd losses to Conservatives, Greens and LDs.
Havering is another borough where any Conservative losses might mean a change of administration.
As said, the LDs may be in trouble in Sutton and Kingston but will hope to survive there and start re-building in the rest of the capital.
The Greens have only 11 Councillors in the capital - they will be looking to build on that and possibly where they are challenging Labour in inner London might be their best chance of progress.
Good post.
I think the big success story in May’s elections will be the greens. They seem to be able to win everywhere at the moment. Is it young or new voters driving the Green election successes?
On the other side of the argument, I think HYUFD is right and Big G wrong because there is neither a standard balanced local election battleground nor obvious conclusion from results. If HYUFD says this years battleground doesn’t suit Libdems that is good enough for me.
It’s not actually libdems but Labour who seem to be making progress in national polls. The 35-40 lab Tory picture seems to have reversed since end October.
As well as unbalanced battle grounds each year, how results went last time seats were up can also make for an unbalanced picture where it’s too easy to conclude the wrong take out. To be fair to Boris Johnson under Corbyn Labour seemed to have a lot of poor local elections even when the battleground should have suited them, which means Tories are in for some tough defences in this group of years? So glib conclusion is results verdict on Johnson being rubbish, which is true because he had been found out now, but any leader would have found defending the same position tough, is that fair to say?
I’m actually convinced Johnson does not survive the next couple of weeks, let alone make it to May. It’s this wallpaper business very dangerous to him now. The Parliament standards lady says she won’t investigate. Labour squealing she should, Tories arguing it falls under Geet because it’s cabinet not MP matter.
I reckon it can go like this. Saying she won’t investigate is good news for Boris. But if she changes her mind, and finds against him, he’s in Paterson position facing suspension which is even more than vonk it instant resignation.
I may be the only person on PB seeing wallpaper for access bringing Boris down in next couple of weeks, but I don’t care, I think it can so easily happen like when country’s apparently sleep walk into war - the key question for those shaking your head at my post is to ask yourself, the Parliament sleaze lady who done for Paterson, not at moment investigating the Prime Minister, Why would she change her mind?
Well, if your forecast is right, you'll earn fantastic PB bragging points.
I’m not seeking bragging points. I’m more worried I have zero credibility for getting wrong what looks obvious. I just find it odd no one sees a PM tottering on brink after his own side put so much work in hollowing him out as I see it.
Maybe I hsvn’t been around for many “falls” or turning points, do they tend to happen quickly and unexpectedly catching people out, or are they not all slow and painful as this ruin of Johnson?
I am thinking on basis he will be talked up, and even make Boris great again initiative, to the point they can vote against him in secret, then he will be fortnight ago chip wrapper.
Have I really got it wrong?
Maybe you haven't. But talk is cheap. Money talks on here and I'll lay some down -
£50 from me to site funds if the Muscly Magnificence is not PM on 1st Feb 2022.
If he is, you write me a short poem with the phrase "wonder horse" in it.
As I understand it Rachel Reeves is seeking a windfall tax on the oil industry which according to her will raise 1.2 billion
At the same time she wants to abolish the 5% vat on energy bills at a cost of 1.5 billion
Therefore, labour are proposing a small cut in the bills for the low paid and pensioners while handing a reduction to the wealthy and that the overall effect is at best a minor help to the cost of living crisis
She also wants to invest tens of billions in retro fitting homes and nuclear energy, but this will have no effect on this year or next years cost of living crisis
I think my Lib Dems should call for the windfall tax too actually Big G. In fact your Tories should steal it. My reasoning is, whilst energy prices cause consumer pain, those with it to sell are making lots of lovely dosh! So you take a bit from that windfall one end, to ease pain at other. What are you saying is wrong in that?
I’m even hopeful Saint Bart will agree with this one.
Absolutely not, I don't believe in general in redistribution and certainly not in examples like this.
If you take the profits companies make from them, then who is going to invest in the UK? When we need serious investments going forwards.
When the price of energy plunges nobody redistributes to pass more money to the companies so why do the opposite when the price surges?
I do agree with abolishing VAT on domestic energy to relieve the pressure on consumers across the nation. The tax is seriously regressive and while it won't be a cure-all it would be a step in the right direction.
Oh. So Pirates completely against any form of windfall distribution?
When companies and industries in trouble though we do help out? Throw taxpayer money at steel, fertiliser plants, at rich Japanese companies so they keep factories here, so it’s a quid pro qua thing?
With the cutting of any taxes, government also need to cut health waiting lists where people are in pain, if you were PM you would have to tax more these coming years to achieve aims like that as well, somehow, not just talk up being a tax cutting platform?
Indeed, I'm in favour of cut throat buccaneering competition not the state redistributing and choosing winners and losers.
I would view the waiting list caused by the pandemic (as opposed to day to day waiting lists) as part of the 'war effort' from the pandemic so would add the costs related to that to pandemic induced debt.
Okay. And pay the war debt off how? Presumably with lighter taxes over longer period?
Exactly.
So you are a high debt low tax person admitting there will be massive largely untouchable public spending in the next 5 years or so? It’s currently debt about 100% GDP - where wouldn’t you take it to before introducing new national assurance bills, 130? 140?
Labour to recommend devomax when Gordon Brown's report for Starmer concludes, with responsibility for policy in most areas except defence and foreign policy being given to Holyrood if Labour wins the next general election. Labour could also allow its parliamentary candidates to support Scottish independence on a personal conscience basis
This is either just a step towards full independence or a cynical attempt to buy SNP support for a minority Starmer govt.
I really don’t see the point of devomax. It won’t satisfy those who want Indy and it takes Scotland further from the union for those who value the union.
It's attempt to win over pro-indy voters, in an attempt to get a Labour majority. Starmer doesn't need to a formal deal with the SNP providing Labour (or Labour + Lib Dems) have more MPs than the Conservatives.
He might still be screwed on ruling, though, where the SNP abstain on non-Scottish matters. I personally think a minority Labour government dependent on a rainbow coalition with a large minority Tory presence is going to be hellish for Starmer. The SNP's single agenda is going to be as poisonous as possible - to get to the point where the rUK says "well just fuck off then...." and get their next referendum to deliver it. Not their problem if Westminster grinds to a halt....
If Labour has more MPs than the Conservatives the SNP abstaining on English legislation wouldn't screw him on ruling. If they don't, then the SNP might be willing to support on him on getting English legislation through the Commons... but they'd want major policy concessions (i.e. scrapping Trident) which would go down like a cup of cold sick with the electorate south of the border. I honestly don't know what Labour does in that situation.
Call another election PDQ.
Yeah. That seems the obvious no brainer rather than some of the torturous scenarios painted. And remember. This time they'd be facing a defeated Tory Party who'd have probably gone through a difficult leadership election. Against a fresh, incumbent PM.
Found Don’t Look Up a bit meh which seems a minority position. The parody of the POTUS and presidency seemed overly crude though I accept the previous incumbent has coarsened perceptions. I felt there was a fair bit of satirising of the US reaction to COVID as much as there was of our attitude to ecological disaster.
Read a concise review from @Nigelb - "self-indulgent garbage" - so you're not alone. I had it scheduled for last night (wife out and not her thing) but instead got sucked into a tumble about Trump with 'MrEd" which wasn't the greatest of decisions.
Or maybe it was if the film is mediocre. Don't know about you but I particularly struggle to persevere with a comedy if it's not landing. There's something awkward about jokes misfiring. You just want it to either work or stop.
So anyway, I probably won't bother now. Lots of other things I want to watch.
It’s quite an enjoyable film if you just forget the message. It’s not as good as Adam McKay’s other efforts which are two of my favourite recent-ish films - Vice and The Big Short. I like the breaking of the fourth wall in his films - don’t want it in every film but these two films do it very well.
Weirdly Vice made me really like Cheney which I don’t think was the intention…!!
I agree that both The Big Short and Vice were excellent, especially the former. Vice, I think, is a good example of what was missing in Don't look up. He was humanised and given a position, just as the opposition were in the better episodes of West Wing. Don't look up was way more one sided and less nuanced and was the weaker for that.
TBS was great, yes. I'd devoured the book, also great, and wouldn't have thought it filmable but they found a way to do it.
Labour to recommend devomax when Gordon Brown's report for Starmer concludes, with responsibility for policy in most areas except defence and foreign policy being given to Holyrood if Labour wins the next general election. Labour could also allow its parliamentary candidates to support Scottish independence on a personal conscience basis
This is either just a step towards full independence or a cynical attempt to buy SNP support for a minority Starmer govt.
I really don’t see the point of devomax. It won’t satisfy those who want Indy and it takes Scotland further from the union for those who value the union.
It's attempt to win over pro-indy voters, in an attempt to get a Labour majority. Starmer doesn't need to a formal deal with the SNP providing Labour (or Labour + Lib Dems) have more MPs than the Conservatives.
He might still be screwed on ruling, though, where the SNP abstain on non-Scottish matters. I personally think a minority Labour government dependent on a rainbow coalition with a large minority Tory presence is going to be hellish for Starmer. The SNP's single agenda is going to be as poisonous as possible - to get to the point where the rUK says "well just fuck off then...." and get their next referendum to deliver it. Not their problem if Westminster grinds to a halt....
If Labour has more MPs than the Conservatives the SNP abstaining on English legislation wouldn't screw him on ruling. If they don't, then the SNP might be willing to support on him on getting English legislation through the Commons... but they'd want major policy concessions (i.e. scrapping Trident) which would go down like a cup of cold sick with the electorate south of the border. I honestly don't know what Labour does in that situation.
Their leverage however is not all it might be. If the SNP turned out a Labour government they would be supporting a Tory one. That is not a scenario that ends well for them. Just ask the Liberals in 1924.
London will be fascinating - there are one or two counter-intuitive trends which may yet ruin the planned narrative for the elections.
I don't think the Conservatives will do that badly - the doom of the London Conservatives has been prophesied on many occasions. This time I see a mixed bag - it's quite possible Labour will regain Wandsworth and perhaps Barnet and it'll be interesting to see how Hillingdon votes but in some of the inner London Labour strongholds I think we could see some surprisingly strong Conservative performances which may not translate into many seats.
I also think the Conservatives have some serious prospects of ending LD rule in Sutton and Kingston.
Labour will hope to gain Wandsworth and Barnet and make progress in Hillingdon but most of their fortresses are impregnable though I think there will be odd losses to Conservatives, Greens and LDs.
Havering is another borough where any Conservative losses might mean a change of administration.
As said, the LDs may be in trouble in Sutton and Kingston but will hope to survive there and start re-building in the rest of the capital.
The Greens have only 11 Councillors in the capital - they will be looking to build on that and possibly where they are challenging Labour in inner London might be their best chance of progress.
Good post.
I think the big success story in May’s elections will be the greens. They seem to be able to win everywhere at the moment. Is it young or new voters driving the Green election successes?
On the other side of the argument, I think HYUFD is right and Big G wrong because there is neither a standard balanced local election battleground nor obvious conclusion from results. If HYUFD says this years battleground doesn’t suit Libdems that is good enough for me.
It’s not actually libdems but Labour who seem to be making progress in national polls. The 35-40 lab Tory picture seems to have reversed since end October.
As well as unbalanced battle grounds each year, how results went last time seats were up can also make for an unbalanced picture where it’s too easy to conclude the wrong take out. To be fair to Boris Johnson under Corbyn Labour seemed to have a lot of poor local elections even when the battleground should have suited them, which means Tories are in for some tough defences in this group of years? So glib conclusion is results verdict on Johnson being rubbish, which is true because he had been found out now, but any leader would have found defending the same position tough, is that fair to say?
I’m actually convinced Johnson does not survive the next couple of weeks, let alone make it to May. It’s this wallpaper business very dangerous to him now. The Parliament standards lady says she won’t investigate. Labour squealing she should, Tories arguing it falls under Geet because it’s cabinet not MP matter.
I reckon it can go like this. Saying she won’t investigate is good news for Boris. But if she changes her mind, and finds against him, he’s in Paterson position facing suspension which is even more than vonk it instant resignation.
I may be the only person on PB seeing wallpaper for access bringing Boris down in next couple of weeks, but I don’t care, I think it can so easily happen like when country’s apparently sleep walk into war - the key question for those shaking your head at my post is to ask yourself, the Parliament sleaze lady who done for Paterson, not at moment investigating the Prime Minister, Why would she change her mind?
Well, if your forecast is right, you'll earn fantastic PB bragging points.
I’m not seeking bragging points. I’m more worried I have zero credibility for getting wrong what looks obvious. I just find it odd no one sees a PM tottering on brink after his own side put so much work in hollowing him out as I see it.
Maybe I hsvn’t been around for many “falls” or turning points, do they tend to happen quickly and unexpectedly catching people out, or are they not all slow and painful as this ruin of Johnson?
I am thinking on basis he will be talked up, and even make Boris great again initiative, to the point they can vote against him in secret, then he will be fortnight ago chip wrapper.
Have I really got it wrong?
Maybe you haven't. But talk is cheap. Money talks on here and I'll lay some down -
£50 from me to site funds if the Muscly Magnificence is not PM on 1st Feb 2022.
If he is, you write me a short poem with the phrase "wonder horse" in it.
Not accepting that. It’s still going to take a bit longer than 1st Feb for Boris to be removed from No. 10 (and for someone to eye up the wallpaper and fancy a change to their style) even in my it’s very close now scenario. I did think of offering out a bet, it would be my 50 against your 50 not a poem, but I just feared there would be too many takers to be honest.
I’m still not sure I’m right and everyone else on PB from right to left not right. But his own side have put so much effort into removing him asap, why would they want to wait till May and later now? Football club jobs come up not cause you waited for it to go well, but vacancy because their is new voice needed and work to do. Same with any business. Why would politics be different?
Am tempted to grab a couple of weeks in the sun, and the options worldwide are fast diminishing. Dubai is still open
But I've only been once for a weekend so I don't know it at all. Does it have a district where you can find nice hotels in proper city streets with bars and restaurants and life? I don't want to have to walk out of my hotel and find myself in a car park by a freeway and I have to get Ubers to the nearest bar
Found Don’t Look Up a bit meh which seems a minority position. The parody of the POTUS and presidency seemed overly crude though I accept the previous incumbent has coarsened perceptions. I felt there was a fair bit of satirising of the US reaction to COVID as much as there was of our attitude to ecological disaster.
I enjoyed DLU though felt it should have been more disparaging to right wing shits.
The only thing that marred it for me was that every time I saw the Mark Rylance/Peter Thiel character I was struck by his resemblance to Mike Smash.
2/2 The argument that the jury has to weigh up the rights and wrongs of the rights of freedom of expression against the damage caused and determine whether it was proportionate is slightly more problematic. It might be used to deal with trespass, for example but as the secret Barrister acknowledges, these rights are not absolute and a State is entitled to rule that criminal damage is a crime without breaching the right of freedom of expression.
I also agree that those who did not hear the evidence or indeed the arguments should be cautious in their judgment. What seems to me to have happened in this case, however, is that a jury has been presented with a series of legal arguments which are matters for the judge, not for them. It is the job of the Judge to give directions to the jury on the law and the jury have to follow them, even if they disagree. The jury are there as masters of the facts and have to apply the law, as they are directed, to the facts as they find them. If I was looking for fault in this result I would be looking very carefully at the Judge's charge to the Jury and whether he simply allowed them to be bamboozled by legal arguments that he should have resolved. The key facts that the jury should have been directed to determine were:
1. Were the accused correctly identified as at least some of those responsible. I do not understand this to be disputed. 2. Was the crime libelled committed, that is was there in fact criminal damage to the statue? That would be a question of fact and the answer is self evident. They should have been directed that what happened to the statue was criminal damage. 3. Were the answers to 1 and 2 established beyond a reasonable doubt, discharging the onus on the Crown?
I am a big fan of the jury system and have rarely had a jury decision that I disagreed with, let alone could not see how they got there. For the system to work, however, the role of each part of the system has to be clear and operate effectively. That did not happen in this case but the fault, if there is any, more likely lies with the Judge rather than the jury.
I think the key takeaway of the Colston 4 verdict is that creating excessively harsh punishments for iconoclasm or similar activity is likely to backfire. If punishments are unreasonable then juries will refuse to convict.
Yes, that's the lesson here. Had the sentence been a few hundred hours of community service and no jail time it's likely the jury would have convicted them. 5 years in jail just doesn't seem proportionate to the crime.
ALthough we should note it was escalated to that level of possible punishment at their request. A magistrate would probably have given them the CS and a fine.
Am I correct in thinking several pleaded guilty at magistrates and received exactly that? Sure I read it, but now can't find any evidence.
That’s interesting, I was wondering why it was just these four being prosecuted.
Found it! Five of the nine pleaded guilty and were offered restorative justice. Interesting snippet. Only one arrest. The other eight voluntarily came forward.
Am tempted to grab a couple of weeks in the sun, and the options worldwide are fast diminishing. Dubai is still open
But I've only been once for a weekend so I don't know it at all. Does it have a district where you can find nice hotels in proper city streets with bars and restaurants and life? I don't want to have to walk out of my hotel and find myself in a car park by a freeway and I have to get Ubers to the nearest bar
I don't care if it is by the sea or not...
Watch Dubai - Playground of the Rich on BBC at 9pm tomorrow (following on from the Monaco programme in a similar vein)
As I understand it Rachel Reeves is seeking a windfall tax on the oil industry which according to her will raise 1.2 billion
At the same time she wants to abolish the 5% vat on energy bills at a cost of 1.5 billion
Therefore, labour are proposing a small cut in the bills for the low paid and pensioners while handing a reduction to the wealthy and that the overall effect is at best a minor help to the cost of living crisis
She also wants to invest tens of billions in retro fitting homes and nuclear energy, but this will have no effect on this year or next years cost of living crisis
I think my Lib Dems should call for the windfall tax too actually Big G. In fact your Tories should steal it. My reasoning is, whilst energy prices cause consumer pain, those with it to sell are making lots of lovely dosh! So you take a bit from that windfall one end, to ease pain at other. What are you saying is wrong in that?
I’m even hopeful Saint Bart will agree with this one.
Absolutely not, I don't believe in general in redistribution and certainly not in examples like this.
If you take the profits companies make from them, then who is going to invest in the UK? When we need serious investments going forwards.
When the price of energy plunges nobody redistributes to pass more money to the companies so why do the opposite when the price surges?
I do agree with abolishing VAT on domestic energy to relieve the pressure on consumers across the nation. The tax is seriously regressive and while it won't be a cure-all it would be a step in the right direction.
Oh. So Pirates completely against any form of windfall distribution?
When companies and industries in trouble though we do help out? Throw taxpayer money at steel, fertiliser plants, at rich Japanese companies so they keep factories here, so it’s a quid pro qua thing?
With the cutting of any taxes, government also need to cut health waiting lists where people are in pain, if you were PM you would have to tax more these coming years to achieve aims like that as well, somehow, not just talk up being a tax cutting platform?
Indeed, I'm in favour of cut throat buccaneering competition not the state redistributing and choosing winners and losers.
I would view the waiting list caused by the pandemic (as opposed to day to day waiting lists) as part of the 'war effort' from the pandemic so would add the costs related to that to pandemic induced debt.
Okay. And pay the war debt off how? Presumably with lighter taxes over longer period?
Exactly.
So you are a high debt low tax person admitting there will be massive largely untouchable public spending in the next 5 years or so? It’s currently debt about 100% GDP - where wouldn’t you take it to before introducing new national assurance bills, 130? 140?
No I prefer low debt in normal circumstances but the pandemic has been a once in a century war like effort and that needs to be dealt with accordingly.
Day to day spending shouldn't be borrowed. But pandemic expenditure should be. Clearing the backlog should be borrowed as related to the pandemic while ongoing expenditure shouldn't be.
Tw@tter seems to be having a meltdown about any suggestion of removing free LFT and learning to live with covid.....its all back to Boris killing everybody off stuck.
Labour to recommend devomax when Gordon Brown's report for Starmer concludes, with responsibility for policy in most areas except defence and foreign policy being given to Holyrood if Labour wins the next general election. Labour could also allow its parliamentary candidates to support Scottish independence on a personal conscience basis
This is either just a step towards full independence or a cynical attempt to buy SNP support for a minority Starmer govt.
I really don’t see the point of devomax. It won’t satisfy those who want Indy and it takes Scotland further from the union for those who value the union.
It's attempt to win over pro-indy voters, in an attempt to get a Labour majority. Starmer doesn't need to a formal deal with the SNP providing Labour (or Labour + Lib Dems) have more MPs than the Conservatives.
He might still be screwed on ruling, though, where the SNP abstain on non-Scottish matters. I personally think a minority Labour government dependent on a rainbow coalition with a large minority Tory presence is going to be hellish for Starmer. The SNP's single agenda is going to be as poisonous as possible - to get to the point where the rUK says "well just fuck off then...." and get their next referendum to deliver it. Not their problem if Westminster grinds to a halt....
If Labour has more MPs than the Conservatives the SNP abstaining on English legislation wouldn't screw him on ruling. If they don't, then the SNP might be willing to support on him on getting English legislation through the Commons... but they'd want major policy concessions (i.e. scrapping Trident) which would go down like a cup of cold sick with the electorate south of the border. I honestly don't know what Labour does in that situation.
Their leverage however is not all it might be. If the SNP turned out a Labour government they would be supporting a Tory one. That is not a scenario that ends well for them. Just ask the Liberals in 1924.
The SNP would make Starmer UK PM in such a scenario, they would just abstain on England only legislation, so if the Tories still had a majority in England we would finally get an English Parliament in all but name
Labour to recommend devomax when Gordon Brown's report for Starmer concludes, with responsibility for policy in most areas except defence and foreign policy being given to Holyrood if Labour wins the next general election. Labour could also allow its parliamentary candidates to support Scottish independence on a personal conscience basis
This is either just a step towards full independence or a cynical attempt to buy SNP support for a minority Starmer govt.
I really don’t see the point of devomax. It won’t satisfy those who want Indy and it takes Scotland further from the union for those who value the union.
It's attempt to win over pro-indy voters, in an attempt to get a Labour majority. Starmer doesn't need to a formal deal with the SNP providing Labour (or Labour + Lib Dems) have more MPs than the Conservatives.
He might still be screwed on ruling, though, where the SNP abstain on non-Scottish matters. I personally think a minority Labour government dependent on a rainbow coalition with a large minority Tory presence is going to be hellish for Starmer. The SNP's single agenda is going to be as poisonous as possible - to get to the point where the rUK says "well just fuck off then...." and get their next referendum to deliver it. Not their problem if Westminster grinds to a halt....
If Labour has more MPs than the Conservatives the SNP abstaining on English legislation wouldn't screw him on ruling. If they don't, then the SNP might be willing to support on him on getting English legislation through the Commons... but they'd want major policy concessions (i.e. scrapping Trident) which would go down like a cup of cold sick with the electorate south of the border. I honestly don't know what Labour does in that situation.
Their leverage however is not all it might be. If the SNP turned out a Labour government they would be supporting a Tory one. That is not a scenario that ends well for them. Just ask the Liberals in 1924.
Turfing a Labour government out or actively voting down Labour legislation? I agree, that doesn't end well for the SNP. Abstaining on non-Scottish issues, though, is another matter. Why would pro-indy voters get angry at the SNP abstaining on a Labour bill on the NHS in England, which as a result gets defeated in the Commons?
London will be fascinating - there are one or two counter-intuitive trends which may yet ruin the planned narrative for the elections.
I don't think the Conservatives will do that badly - the doom of the London Conservatives has been prophesied on many occasions. This time I see a mixed bag - it's quite possible Labour will regain Wandsworth and perhaps Barnet and it'll be interesting to see how Hillingdon votes but in some of the inner London Labour strongholds I think we could see some surprisingly strong Conservative performances which may not translate into many seats.
I also think the Conservatives have some serious prospects of ending LD rule in Sutton and Kingston.
Labour will hope to gain Wandsworth and Barnet and make progress in Hillingdon but most of their fortresses are impregnable though I think there will be odd losses to Conservatives, Greens and LDs.
Havering is another borough where any Conservative losses might mean a change of administration.
As said, the LDs may be in trouble in Sutton and Kingston but will hope to survive there and start re-building in the rest of the capital.
The Greens have only 11 Councillors in the capital - they will be looking to build on that and possibly where they are challenging Labour in inner London might be their best chance of progress.
Good post.
I think the big success story in May’s elections will be the greens. They seem to be able to win everywhere at the moment. Is it young or new voters driving the Green election successes?
On the other side of the argument, I think HYUFD is right and Big G wrong because there is neither a standard balanced local election battleground nor obvious conclusion from results. If HYUFD says this years battleground doesn’t suit Libdems that is good enough for me.
It’s not actually libdems but Labour who seem to be making progress in national polls. The 35-40 lab Tory picture seems to have reversed since end October.
As well as unbalanced battle grounds each year, how results went last time seats were up can also make for an unbalanced picture where it’s too easy to conclude the wrong take out. To be fair to Boris Johnson under Corbyn Labour seemed to have a lot of poor local elections even when the battleground should have suited them, which means Tories are in for some tough defences in this group of years? So glib conclusion is results verdict on Johnson being rubbish, which is true because he had been found out now, but any leader would have found defending the same position tough, is that fair to say?
I’m actually convinced Johnson does not survive the next couple of weeks, let alone make it to May. It’s this wallpaper business very dangerous to him now. The Parliament standards lady says she won’t investigate. Labour squealing she should, Tories arguing it falls under Geet because it’s cabinet not MP matter.
I reckon it can go like this. Saying she won’t investigate is good news for Boris. But if she changes her mind, and finds against him, he’s in Paterson position facing suspension which is even more than vonk it instant resignation.
I may be the only person on PB seeing wallpaper for access bringing Boris down in next couple of weeks, but I don’t care, I think it can so easily happen like when country’s apparently sleep walk into war - the key question for those shaking your head at my post is to ask yourself, the Parliament sleaze lady who done for Paterson, not at moment investigating the Prime Minister, Why would she change her mind?
Well, if your forecast is right, you'll earn fantastic PB bragging points.
I’m not seeking bragging points. I’m more worried I have zero credibility for getting wrong what looks obvious. I just find it odd no one sees a PM tottering on brink after his own side put so much work in hollowing him out as I see it.
Maybe I hsvn’t been around for many “falls” or turning points, do they tend to happen quickly and unexpectedly catching people out, or are they not all slow and painful as this ruin of Johnson?
I am thinking on basis he will be talked up, and even make Boris great again initiative, to the point they can vote against him in secret, then he will be fortnight ago chip wrapper.
Have I really got it wrong?
Maybe you haven't. But talk is cheap. Money talks on here and I'll lay some down -
£50 from me to site funds if the Muscly Magnificence is not PM on 1st Feb 2022.
If he is, you write me a short poem with the phrase "wonder horse" in it.
Not accepting that. It’s still going to take a bit longer than 1st Feb for Boris to be removed from No. 10 (and for someone to eye up the wallpaper and fancy a change to their style) even in my it’s very close now scenario. I did think of offering out a bet, it would be my 50 against your 50 not a poem, but I just feared there would be too many takers to be honest.
I’m still not sure I’m right and everyone else on PB from right to left not right. But his own side have put so much effort into removing him asap, why would they want to wait till May and later now? Football club jobs come up not cause you waited for it to go well, but vacancy because their is new voice needed and work to do. Same with any business. Why would politics be different?
The answer to removing him remains entirely with his mps and at present they seem to be on board with him
Labour to recommend devomax when Gordon Brown's report for Starmer concludes, with responsibility for policy in most areas except defence and foreign policy being given to Holyrood if Labour wins the next general election. Labour could also allow its parliamentary candidates to support Scottish independence on a personal conscience basis
This is either just a step towards full independence or a cynical attempt to buy SNP support for a minority Starmer govt.
I really don’t see the point of devomax. It won’t satisfy those who want Indy and it takes Scotland further from the union for those who value the union.
It's attempt to win over pro-indy voters, in an attempt to get a Labour majority. Starmer doesn't need to a formal deal with the SNP providing Labour (or Labour + Lib Dems) have more MPs than the Conservatives.
He might still be screwed on ruling, though, where the SNP abstain on non-Scottish matters. I personally think a minority Labour government dependent on a rainbow coalition with a large minority Tory presence is going to be hellish for Starmer. The SNP's single agenda is going to be as poisonous as possible - to get to the point where the rUK says "well just fuck off then...." and get their next referendum to deliver it. Not their problem if Westminster grinds to a halt....
If Labour has more MPs than the Conservatives the SNP abstaining on English legislation wouldn't screw him on ruling. If they don't, then the SNP might be willing to support on him on getting English legislation through the Commons... but they'd want major policy concessions (i.e. scrapping Trident) which would go down like a cup of cold sick with the electorate south of the border. I honestly don't know what Labour does in that situation.
But is Trident really that popular in England?
Only 18% of respondents in England and Wales were strongly supportive in 2013. Probably even fewer now. It is an incredible waste of taxpayers money, leaving aside the moral horror.
Found Don’t Look Up a bit meh which seems a minority position. The parody of the POTUS and presidency seemed overly crude though I accept the previous incumbent has coarsened perceptions. I felt there was a fair bit of satirising of the US reaction to COVID as much as there was of our attitude to ecological disaster.
I enjoyed DLU though felt it should have been more disparaging to right wing shots.
The only thing that marred it for me was that every time I saw the Mark Rylance/Peter Thiel character I was struck by his resemblance to Mike Smash.
Rylance was probably more like Jobs or Bezos than Thiel. I've seen Jobs speak live and that's absolutely the inspiration for the public speaking part of it and the whole delusional part about space is Bezos or maybe Elon Musk, but probably closer to Bezos who has transformed into a Bond villain. Thiel is far too private to be the inspiration for that character.
Am tempted to grab a couple of weeks in the sun, and the options worldwide are fast diminishing. Dubai is still open
But I've only been once for a weekend so I don't know it at all. Does it have a district where you can find nice hotels in proper city streets with bars and restaurants and life? I don't want to have to walk out of my hotel and find myself in a car park by a freeway and I have to get Ubers to the nearest bar
I don't care if it is by the sea or not...
Watch Dubai - Playground of the Rich on BBC at 9pm tomorrow (following on from the Monaco programme in a similar vein)
London will be fascinating - there are one or two counter-intuitive trends which may yet ruin the planned narrative for the elections.
I don't think the Conservatives will do that badly - the doom of the London Conservatives has been prophesied on many occasions. This time I see a mixed bag - it's quite possible Labour will regain Wandsworth and perhaps Barnet and it'll be interesting to see how Hillingdon votes but in some of the inner London Labour strongholds I think we could see some surprisingly strong Conservative performances which may not translate into many seats.
I also think the Conservatives have some serious prospects of ending LD rule in Sutton and Kingston.
Labour will hope to gain Wandsworth and Barnet and make progress in Hillingdon but most of their fortresses are impregnable though I think there will be odd losses to Conservatives, Greens and LDs.
Havering is another borough where any Conservative losses might mean a change of administration.
As said, the LDs may be in trouble in Sutton and Kingston but will hope to survive there and start re-building in the rest of the capital.
The Greens have only 11 Councillors in the capital - they will be looking to build on that and possibly where they are challenging Labour in inner London might be their best chance of progress.
Good post.
I think the big success story in May’s elections will be the greens. They seem to be able to win everywhere at the moment. Is it young or new voters driving the Green election successes?
On the other side of the argument, I think HYUFD is right and Big G wrong because there is neither a standard balanced local election battleground nor obvious conclusion from results. If HYUFD says this years battleground doesn’t suit Libdems that is good enough for me.
It’s not actually libdems but Labour who seem to be making progress in national polls. The 35-40 lab Tory picture seems to have reversed since end October.
As well as unbalanced battle grounds each year, how results went last time seats were up can also make for an unbalanced picture where it’s too easy to conclude the wrong take out. To be fair to Boris Johnson under Corbyn Labour seemed to have a lot of poor local elections even when the battleground should have suited them, which means Tories are in for some tough defences in this group of years? So glib conclusion is results verdict on Johnson being rubbish, which is true because he had been found out now, but any leader would have found defending the same position tough, is that fair to say?
I’m actually convinced Johnson does not survive the next couple of weeks, let alone make it to May. It’s this wallpaper business very dangerous to him now. The Parliament standards lady says she won’t investigate. Labour squealing she should, Tories arguing it falls under Geet because it’s cabinet not MP matter.
I reckon it can go like this. Saying she won’t investigate is good news for Boris. But if she changes her mind, and finds against him, he’s in Paterson position facing suspension which is even more than vonk it instant resignation.
I may be the only person on PB seeing wallpaper for access bringing Boris down in next couple of weeks, but I don’t care, I think it can so easily happen like when country’s apparently sleep walk into war - the key question for those shaking your head at my post is to ask yourself, the Parliament sleaze lady who done for Paterson, not at moment investigating the Prime Minister, Why would she change her mind?
Well, if your forecast is right, you'll earn fantastic PB bragging points.
I’m not seeking bragging points. I’m more worried I have zero credibility for getting wrong what looks obvious. I just find it odd no one sees a PM tottering on brink after his own side put so much work in hollowing him out as I see it.
Maybe I hsvn’t been around for many “falls” or turning points, do they tend to happen quickly and unexpectedly catching people out, or are they not all slow and painful as this ruin of Johnson?
I am thinking on basis he will be talked up, and even make Boris great again initiative, to the point they can vote against him in secret, then he will be fortnight ago chip wrapper.
Have I really got it wrong?
As has been said if you are right you will have PB bragging rights indefinitely
I would still prefer to hear reasons why my understanding is wrong.
If the parliamentary sleaze lady investigates, that’s so easy to imagine a conveyor belt to suspension based on just cash for access we already know about? Who wants to see that happen asap?
In other words I see it is not the opposition but his own side who is hollowing out Boris Johnson to remove him? Not what Mirror or Guardian or ITN publishing, it’s who gave it to them?
It’s not just people around him they want sacked, they think they only get change of direction removing him?
They look at his policy and performance this year, his conference and CBI speeches and think him now a loser?
They want change to both less showbiz Number 10 and more straightforward economic direction they can sell on doorsteps in coming elections, including this May?
Labour to recommend devomax when Gordon Brown's report for Starmer concludes, with responsibility for policy in most areas except defence and foreign policy being given to Holyrood if Labour wins the next general election. Labour could also allow its parliamentary candidates to support Scottish independence on a personal conscience basis
This is either just a step towards full independence or a cynical attempt to buy SNP support for a minority Starmer govt.
I really don’t see the point of devomax. It won’t satisfy those who want Indy and it takes Scotland further from the union for those who value the union.
It's attempt to win over pro-indy voters, in an attempt to get a Labour majority. Starmer doesn't need to a formal deal with the SNP providing Labour (or Labour + Lib Dems) have more MPs than the Conservatives.
He might still be screwed on ruling, though, where the SNP abstain on non-Scottish matters. I personally think a minority Labour government dependent on a rainbow coalition with a large minority Tory presence is going to be hellish for Starmer. The SNP's single agenda is going to be as poisonous as possible - to get to the point where the rUK says "well just fuck off then...." and get their next referendum to deliver it. Not their problem if Westminster grinds to a halt....
If Labour has more MPs than the Conservatives the SNP abstaining on English legislation wouldn't screw him on ruling. If they don't, then the SNP might be willing to support on him on getting English legislation through the Commons... but they'd want major policy concessions (i.e. scrapping Trident) which would go down like a cup of cold sick with the electorate south of the border. I honestly don't know what Labour does in that situation.
Their leverage however is not all it might be. If the SNP turned out a Labour government they would be supporting a Tory one. That is not a scenario that ends well for them. Just ask the Liberals in 1924.
Turfing a Labour government out or actively voting down Labour legislation? I agree, that doesn't end well for the SNP. Abstaining on non-Scottish issues, though, is another matter. Why would pro-indy voters get angry at the SNP abstaining on a Labour bill on the NHS in England, which as a result gets defeated in the Commons?
Such bills frequently have knock on effects in Scotland, which is one reason why the SNP honour their 'no votes on English matters' more in the breach than in the observance.
Labour to recommend devomax when Gordon Brown's report for Starmer concludes, with responsibility for policy in most areas except defence and foreign policy being given to Holyrood if Labour wins the next general election. Labour could also allow its parliamentary candidates to support Scottish independence on a personal conscience basis
This is either just a step towards full independence or a cynical attempt to buy SNP support for a minority Starmer govt.
I really don’t see the point of devomax. It won’t satisfy those who want Indy and it takes Scotland further from the union for those who value the union.
It's attempt to win over pro-indy voters, in an attempt to get a Labour majority. Starmer doesn't need to a formal deal with the SNP providing Labour (or Labour + Lib Dems) have more MPs than the Conservatives.
He might still be screwed on ruling, though, where the SNP abstain on non-Scottish matters. I personally think a minority Labour government dependent on a rainbow coalition with a large minority Tory presence is going to be hellish for Starmer. The SNP's single agenda is going to be as poisonous as possible - to get to the point where the rUK says "well just fuck off then...." and get their next referendum to deliver it. Not their problem if Westminster grinds to a halt....
If Labour has more MPs than the Conservatives the SNP abstaining on English legislation wouldn't screw him on ruling. If they don't, then the SNP might be willing to support on him on getting English legislation through the Commons... but they'd want major policy concessions (i.e. scrapping Trident) which would go down like a cup of cold sick with the electorate south of the border. I honestly don't know what Labour does in that situation.
But is Trident really that popular in England?
Only 18% of respondents in England and Wales were strongly supportive in 2013. Probably even fewer now. It is an incredible waste of taxpayers money, leaving aside the moral horror.
Tw@tter seems to be having a meltdown about any suggestion of removing free LFT and learning to live with covid.....its all back to Boris killing everybody off stuck.
The problem is that the government until today has been saying LFT are necessary to do regularly. There's still this delusion (and we saw it last night) that people can avoid coming into contact with people who are positive for COVID.
Tw@tter seems to be having a meltdown about any suggestion of removing free LFT and learning to live with covid.....its all back to Boris killing everybody off stuck.
He is so lucky to have you. He doesn’t deserve you.
London will be fascinating - there are one or two counter-intuitive trends which may yet ruin the planned narrative for the elections.
I don't think the Conservatives will do that badly - the doom of the London Conservatives has been prophesied on many occasions. This time I see a mixed bag - it's quite possible Labour will regain Wandsworth and perhaps Barnet and it'll be interesting to see how Hillingdon votes but in some of the inner London Labour strongholds I think we could see some surprisingly strong Conservative performances which may not translate into many seats.
I also think the Conservatives have some serious prospects of ending LD rule in Sutton and Kingston.
Labour will hope to gain Wandsworth and Barnet and make progress in Hillingdon but most of their fortresses are impregnable though I think there will be odd losses to Conservatives, Greens and LDs.
Havering is another borough where any Conservative losses might mean a change of administration.
As said, the LDs may be in trouble in Sutton and Kingston but will hope to survive there and start re-building in the rest of the capital.
The Greens have only 11 Councillors in the capital - they will be looking to build on that and possibly where they are challenging Labour in inner London might be their best chance of progress.
Good post.
I think the big success story in May’s elections will be the greens. They seem to be able to win everywhere at the moment. Is it young or new voters driving the Green election successes?
On the other side of the argument, I think HYUFD is right and Big G wrong because there is neither a standard balanced local election battleground nor obvious conclusion from results. If HYUFD says this years battleground doesn’t suit Libdems that is good enough for me.
It’s not actually libdems but Labour who seem to be making progress in national polls. The 35-40 lab Tory picture seems to have reversed since end October.
As well as unbalanced battle grounds each year, how results went last time seats were up can also make for an unbalanced picture where it’s too easy to conclude the wrong take out. To be fair to Boris Johnson under Corbyn Labour seemed to have a lot of poor local elections even when the battleground should have suited them, which means Tories are in for some tough defences in this group of years? So glib conclusion is results verdict on Johnson being rubbish, which is true because he had been found out now, but any leader would have found defending the same position tough, is that fair to say?
I’m actually convinced Johnson does not survive the next couple of weeks, let alone make it to May. It’s this wallpaper business very dangerous to him now. The Parliament standards lady says she won’t investigate. Labour squealing she should, Tories arguing it falls under Geet because it’s cabinet not MP matter.
I reckon it can go like this. Saying she won’t investigate is good news for Boris. But if she changes her mind, and finds against him, he’s in Paterson position facing suspension which is even more than vonk it instant resignation.
I may be the only person on PB seeing wallpaper for access bringing Boris down in next couple of weeks, but I don’t care, I think it can so easily happen like when country’s apparently sleep walk into war - the key question for those shaking your head at my post is to ask yourself, the Parliament sleaze lady who done for Paterson, not at moment investigating the Prime Minister, Why would she change her mind?
Well, if your forecast is right, you'll earn fantastic PB bragging points.
I’m not seeking bragging points. I’m more worried I have zero credibility for getting wrong what looks obvious. I just find it odd no one sees a PM tottering on brink after his own side put so much work in hollowing him out as I see it.
Maybe I hsvn’t been around for many “falls” or turning points, do they tend to happen quickly and unexpectedly catching people out, or are they not all slow and painful as this ruin of Johnson?
I am thinking on basis he will be talked up, and even make Boris great again initiative, to the point they can vote against him in secret, then he will be fortnight ago chip wrapper.
Have I really got it wrong?
Maybe you haven't. But talk is cheap. Money talks on here and I'll lay some down -
£50 from me to site funds if the Muscly Magnificence is not PM on 1st Feb 2022.
If he is, you write me a short poem with the phrase "wonder horse" in it.
Not accepting that. It’s still going to take a bit longer than 1st Feb for Boris to be removed from No. 10 (and for someone to eye up the wallpaper and fancy a change to their style) even in my it’s very close now scenario. I did think of offering out a bet, it would be my 50 against your 50 not a poem, but I just feared there would be too many takers to be honest.
I’m still not sure I’m right and everyone else on PB from right to left not right. But his own side have put so much effort into removing him asap, why would they want to wait till May and later now? Football club jobs come up not cause you waited for it to go well, but vacancy because their is new voice needed and work to do. Same with any business. Why would politics be different?
Ah well, ok, if you're more saying he's going to be ousted this year and 'sooner rather than later' you're not alone at all on here. Indeed I was more alone when I said the opposite when all the shit was swirling pre-xmas - that he wasn't going anywhere and would be leading into the GE. I'd say opinion is split quite evenly on it now. Fyi it's about a 2/1 shot on betfair that he goes in 22.
Am tempted to grab a couple of weeks in the sun, and the options worldwide are fast diminishing. Dubai is still open
But I've only been once for a weekend so I don't know it at all. Does it have a district where you can find nice hotels in proper city streets with bars and restaurants and life? I don't want to have to walk out of my hotel and find myself in a car park by a freeway and I have to get Ubers to the nearest bar
I don't care if it is by the sea or not...
Watch Dubai - Playground of the Rich on BBC at 9pm tomorrow (following on from the Monaco programme in a similar vein)
Labour to recommend devomax when Gordon Brown's report for Starmer concludes, with responsibility for policy in most areas except defence and foreign policy being given to Holyrood if Labour wins the next general election. Labour could also allow its parliamentary candidates to support Scottish independence on a personal conscience basis
This is either just a step towards full independence or a cynical attempt to buy SNP support for a minority Starmer govt.
I really don’t see the point of devomax. It won’t satisfy those who want Indy and it takes Scotland further from the union for those who value the union.
It's attempt to win over pro-indy voters, in an attempt to get a Labour majority. Starmer doesn't need to a formal deal with the SNP providing Labour (or Labour + Lib Dems) have more MPs than the Conservatives.
He might still be screwed on ruling, though, where the SNP abstain on non-Scottish matters. I personally think a minority Labour government dependent on a rainbow coalition with a large minority Tory presence is going to be hellish for Starmer. The SNP's single agenda is going to be as poisonous as possible - to get to the point where the rUK says "well just fuck off then...." and get their next referendum to deliver it. Not their problem if Westminster grinds to a halt....
If Labour has more MPs than the Conservatives the SNP abstaining on English legislation wouldn't screw him on ruling. If they don't, then the SNP might be willing to support on him on getting English legislation through the Commons... but they'd want major policy concessions (i.e. scrapping Trident) which would go down like a cup of cold sick with the electorate south of the border. I honestly don't know what Labour does in that situation.
Their leverage however is not all it might be. If the SNP turned out a Labour government they would be supporting a Tory one. That is not a scenario that ends well for them. Just ask the Liberals in 1924.
Turfing a Labour government out or actively voting down Labour legislation? I agree, that doesn't end well for the SNP. Abstaining on non-Scottish issues, though, is another matter. Why would pro-indy voters get angry at the SNP abstaining on a Labour bill on the NHS in England, which as a result gets defeated in the Commons?
Because it would lead to a General Election in pretty short order?
Tw@tter seems to be having a meltdown about any suggestion of removing free LFT and learning to live with covid.....its all back to Boris killing everybody off stuck.
He is so lucky to have you. He doesn’t deserve you.
Who? Boris? I am no fan of Boris and never have been. 68k posts and you will struggle to find many positive posts I have made about him.
Am tempted to grab a couple of weeks in the sun, and the options worldwide are fast diminishing. Dubai is still open
But I've only been once for a weekend so I don't know it at all. Does it have a district where you can find nice hotels in proper city streets with bars and restaurants and life? I don't want to have to walk out of my hotel and find myself in a car park by a freeway and I have to get Ubers to the nearest bar
I don't care if it is by the sea or not...
Watch Dubai - Playground of the Rich on BBC at 9pm tomorrow (following on from the Monaco programme in a similar vein)
I wouldn't....its trash tv at its trashiest.
Well Dubai does attract plenty of the trashy rich
Mr Sandpit was very critical of that program though basically saying they have gone out and found the biggest dickheads they could find to produce a certain kind of show.
London will be fascinating - there are one or two counter-intuitive trends which may yet ruin the planned narrative for the elections.
I don't think the Conservatives will do that badly - the doom of the London Conservatives has been prophesied on many occasions. This time I see a mixed bag - it's quite possible Labour will regain Wandsworth and perhaps Barnet and it'll be interesting to see how Hillingdon votes but in some of the inner London Labour strongholds I think we could see some surprisingly strong Conservative performances which may not translate into many seats.
I also think the Conservatives have some serious prospects of ending LD rule in Sutton and Kingston.
Labour will hope to gain Wandsworth and Barnet and make progress in Hillingdon but most of their fortresses are impregnable though I think there will be odd losses to Conservatives, Greens and LDs.
Havering is another borough where any Conservative losses might mean a change of administration.
As said, the LDs may be in trouble in Sutton and Kingston but will hope to survive there and start re-building in the rest of the capital.
The Greens have only 11 Councillors in the capital - they will be looking to build on that and possibly where they are challenging Labour in inner London might be their best chance of progress.
Good post.
I think the big success story in May’s elections will be the greens. They seem to be able to win everywhere at the moment. Is it young or new voters driving the Green election successes?
On the other side of the argument, I think HYUFD is right and Big G wrong because there is neither a standard balanced local election battleground nor obvious conclusion from results. If HYUFD says this years battleground doesn’t suit Libdems that is good enough for me.
It’s not actually libdems but Labour who seem to be making progress in national polls. The 35-40 lab Tory picture seems to have reversed since end October.
As well as unbalanced battle grounds each year, how results went last time seats were up can also make for an unbalanced picture where it’s too easy to conclude the wrong take out. To be fair to Boris Johnson under Corbyn Labour seemed to have a lot of poor local elections even when the battleground should have suited them, which means Tories are in for some tough defences in this group of years? So glib conclusion is results verdict on Johnson being rubbish, which is true because he had been found out now, but any leader would have found defending the same position tough, is that fair to say?
I’m actually convinced Johnson does not survive the next couple of weeks, let alone make it to May. It’s this wallpaper business very dangerous to him now. The Parliament standards lady says she won’t investigate. Labour squealing she should, Tories arguing it falls under Geet because it’s cabinet not MP matter.
I reckon it can go like this. Saying she won’t investigate is good news for Boris. But if she changes her mind, and finds against him, he’s in Paterson position facing suspension which is even more than vonk it instant resignation.
I may be the only person on PB seeing wallpaper for access bringing Boris down in next couple of weeks, but I don’t care, I think it can so easily happen like when country’s apparently sleep walk into war - the key question for those shaking your head at my post is to ask yourself, the Parliament sleaze lady who done for Paterson, not at moment investigating the Prime Minister, Why would she change her mind?
Well, if your forecast is right, you'll earn fantastic PB bragging points.
I’m not seeking bragging points. I’m more worried I have zero credibility for getting wrong what looks obvious. I just find it odd no one sees a PM tottering on brink after his own side put so much work in hollowing him out as I see it.
Maybe I hsvn’t been around for many “falls” or turning points, do they tend to happen quickly and unexpectedly catching people out, or are they not all slow and painful as this ruin of Johnson?
I am thinking on basis he will be talked up, and even make Boris great again initiative, to the point they can vote against him in secret, then he will be fortnight ago chip wrapper.
Have I really got it wrong?
Maybe you haven't. But talk is cheap. Money talks on here and I'll lay some down -
£50 from me to site funds if the Muscly Magnificence is not PM on 1st Feb 2022.
If he is, you write me a short poem with the phrase "wonder horse" in it.
Not accepting that. It’s still going to take a bit longer than 1st Feb for Boris to be removed from No. 10 (and for someone to eye up the wallpaper and fancy a change to their style) even in my it’s very close now scenario. I did think of offering out a bet, it would be my 50 against your 50 not a poem, but I just feared there would be too many takers to be honest.
I’m still not sure I’m right and everyone else on PB from right to left not right. But his own side have put so much effort into removing him asap, why would they want to wait till May and later now? Football club jobs come up not cause you waited for it to go well, but vacancy because their is new voice needed and work to do. Same with any business. Why would politics be different?
The answer to removing him remains entirely with his mps and at present they seem to be on board with him
You say they are on board with him based on what? Surely ahead of a secret ballot he loses comprehensively he gets over 300 public votes of support from them and lots of PMQ support either side that vote?
If you look on YouTube at Margaret Thatchers “I’m enjoying this, I’m enjoying this” turn on the commons, all her MPs are right behind her and loving it. They’ve just sacked her! Or I might be wrong, that is a different time when she was more popular?
Tw@tter seems to be having a meltdown about any suggestion of removing free LFT and learning to live with covid.....its all back to Boris killing everybody off stuck.
really? mine is all sports stuff and wordle scores/how to block wordle scores
Am tempted to grab a couple of weeks in the sun, and the options worldwide are fast diminishing. Dubai is still open
But I've only been once for a weekend so I don't know it at all. Does it have a district where you can find nice hotels in proper city streets with bars and restaurants and life? I don't want to have to walk out of my hotel and find myself in a car park by a freeway and I have to get Ubers to the nearest bar
I don't care if it is by the sea or not...
Watch Dubai - Playground of the Rich on BBC at 9pm tomorrow (following on from the Monaco programme in a similar vein)
I wouldn't....its trash tv at its trashiest.
Well Dubai does attract plenty of the trashy rich
Mr Sandpit was very critical of that program though basically saying they have gone out and found the biggest dickheads they could find to produce a certain kind of show.
Maybe but to be honest Dubai makes Essex look like a centre of high culture! The only books on sale seem to be autobiographies and self help manuals by the Sheikh
Labour to recommend devomax when Gordon Brown's report for Starmer concludes, with responsibility for policy in most areas except defence and foreign policy being given to Holyrood if Labour wins the next general election. Labour could also allow its parliamentary candidates to support Scottish independence on a personal conscience basis
This is either just a step towards full independence or a cynical attempt to buy SNP support for a minority Starmer govt.
I really don’t see the point of devomax. It won’t satisfy those who want Indy and it takes Scotland further from the union for those who value the union.
It's attempt to win over pro-indy voters, in an attempt to get a Labour majority. Starmer doesn't need to a formal deal with the SNP providing Labour (or Labour + Lib Dems) have more MPs than the Conservatives.
He might still be screwed on ruling, though, where the SNP abstain on non-Scottish matters. I personally think a minority Labour government dependent on a rainbow coalition with a large minority Tory presence is going to be hellish for Starmer. The SNP's single agenda is going to be as poisonous as possible - to get to the point where the rUK says "well just fuck off then...." and get their next referendum to deliver it. Not their problem if Westminster grinds to a halt....
If Labour has more MPs than the Conservatives the SNP abstaining on English legislation wouldn't screw him on ruling. If they don't, then the SNP might be willing to support on him on getting English legislation through the Commons... but they'd want major policy concessions (i.e. scrapping Trident) which would go down like a cup of cold sick with the electorate south of the border. I honestly don't know what Labour does in that situation.
But is Trident really that popular in England?
Only 18% of respondents in England and Wales were strongly supportive in 2013. Probably even fewer now. It is an incredible waste of taxpayers money, leaving aside the moral horror.
Labour to recommend devomax when Gordon Brown's report for Starmer concludes, with responsibility for policy in most areas except defence and foreign policy being given to Holyrood if Labour wins the next general election. Labour could also allow its parliamentary candidates to support Scottish independence on a personal conscience basis
This is either just a step towards full independence or a cynical attempt to buy SNP support for a minority Starmer govt.
I really don’t see the point of devomax. It won’t satisfy those who want Indy and it takes Scotland further from the union for those who value the union.
It's attempt to win over pro-indy voters, in an attempt to get a Labour majority. Starmer doesn't need to a formal deal with the SNP providing Labour (or Labour + Lib Dems) have more MPs than the Conservatives.
He might still be screwed on ruling, though, where the SNP abstain on non-Scottish matters. I personally think a minority Labour government dependent on a rainbow coalition with a large minority Tory presence is going to be hellish for Starmer. The SNP's single agenda is going to be as poisonous as possible - to get to the point where the rUK says "well just fuck off then...." and get their next referendum to deliver it. Not their problem if Westminster grinds to a halt....
If Labour has more MPs than the Conservatives the SNP abstaining on English legislation wouldn't screw him on ruling. If they don't, then the SNP might be willing to support on him on getting English legislation through the Commons... but they'd want major policy concessions (i.e. scrapping Trident) which would go down like a cup of cold sick with the electorate south of the border. I honestly don't know what Labour does in that situation.
But is Trident really that popular in England?
Only 18% of respondents in England and Wales were strongly supportive in 2013. Probably even fewer now. It is an incredible waste of taxpayers money, leaving aside the moral horror.
No chance Starmer would ever bend on something like Trident. Putting aside all the (good) arguments against it, as PM your first duty is defence and you can't renege on that ultimate guarantee.
I don't see any kind of agreement between SNP and Labour. I don't think it's in anyone's interest - Sturgeon will just say they'll vote on stuff which they agree with and that's it. If that sinks a labour government then they can claim only independence keeps the Tories out.
Am tempted to grab a couple of weeks in the sun, and the options worldwide are fast diminishing. Dubai is still open
But I've only been once for a weekend so I don't know it at all. Does it have a district where you can find nice hotels in proper city streets with bars and restaurants and life? I don't want to have to walk out of my hotel and find myself in a car park by a freeway and I have to get Ubers to the nearest bar
I don't care if it is by the sea or not...
Watch Dubai - Playground of the Rich on BBC at 9pm tomorrow (following on from the Monaco programme in a similar vein)
I wouldn't....its trash tv at its trashiest.
Well Dubai does attract plenty of the trashy rich
Mr Sandpit was very critical of that program though basically saying they have gone out and found the biggest dickheads they could find to produce a certain kind of show.
Maybe but to be honest Dubai makes Essex look like a centre of high culture! The only books on sale seem to be autobiographies and self help manuals by the Sheikh
I would need paying to go there and not a pittance either.
Am tempted to grab a couple of weeks in the sun, and the options worldwide are fast diminishing. Dubai is still open
But I've only been once for a weekend so I don't know it at all. Does it have a district where you can find nice hotels in proper city streets with bars and restaurants and life? I don't want to have to walk out of my hotel and find myself in a car park by a freeway and I have to get Ubers to the nearest bar
I don't care if it is by the sea or not...
Watch Dubai - Playground of the Rich on BBC at 9pm tomorrow (following on from the Monaco programme in a similar vein)
I wouldn't....its trash tv at its trashiest.
Well Dubai does attract plenty of the trashy rich
Mr Sandpit was very critical of that program though basically saying they have gone out and found the biggest dickheads they could find to produce a certain kind of show.
Maybe but to be honest Dubai makes Essex look like a centre of high culture! The only books on sale seem to be autobiographies and self help manuals by the Sheikh
Its not somewhere I have any interest in visiting, but I think that caricature of Stokie woman as been typical of ex-pat community is what Mr Sandpit was referring to as nonsense.
Labour to recommend devomax when Gordon Brown's report for Starmer concludes, with responsibility for policy in most areas except defence and foreign policy being given to Holyrood if Labour wins the next general election. Labour could also allow its parliamentary candidates to support Scottish independence on a personal conscience basis
This is either just a step towards full independence or a cynical attempt to buy SNP support for a minority Starmer govt.
I really don’t see the point of devomax. It won’t satisfy those who want Indy and it takes Scotland further from the union for those who value the union.
It's attempt to win over pro-indy voters, in an attempt to get a Labour majority. Starmer doesn't need to a formal deal with the SNP providing Labour (or Labour + Lib Dems) have more MPs than the Conservatives.
He might still be screwed on ruling, though, where the SNP abstain on non-Scottish matters. I personally think a minority Labour government dependent on a rainbow coalition with a large minority Tory presence is going to be hellish for Starmer. The SNP's single agenda is going to be as poisonous as possible - to get to the point where the rUK says "well just fuck off then...." and get their next referendum to deliver it. Not their problem if Westminster grinds to a halt....
If Labour has more MPs than the Conservatives the SNP abstaining on English legislation wouldn't screw him on ruling. If they don't, then the SNP might be willing to support on him on getting English legislation through the Commons... but they'd want major policy concessions (i.e. scrapping Trident) which would go down like a cup of cold sick with the electorate south of the border. I honestly don't know what Labour does in that situation.
But is Trident really that popular in England?
Only 18% of respondents in England and Wales were strongly supportive in 2013. Probably even fewer now. It is an incredible waste of taxpayers money, leaving aside the moral horror.
43% of voters in England and Wales want to keep nuclear weapons on those numbers, only 36% opposed.
Hardly overwhelming support. Most English voters will go ‘meh’ when a government abolished them. Which is inevitable.
No English government (or UK government) would of course ever abolish them.
They are a requirement for our permanent UN security council seat membership and as long as Putin, Xi and Kim have them so will we. Scotland of course also benefits from the protection of the UK nuclear umbrella
London will be fascinating - there are one or two counter-intuitive trends which may yet ruin the planned narrative for the elections.
I don't think the Conservatives will do that badly - the doom of the London Conservatives has been prophesied on many occasions. This time I see a mixed bag - it's quite possible Labour will regain Wandsworth and perhaps Barnet and it'll be interesting to see how Hillingdon votes but in some of the inner London Labour strongholds I think we could see some surprisingly strong Conservative performances which may not translate into many seats.
I also think the Conservatives have some serious prospects of ending LD rule in Sutton and Kingston.
Labour will hope to gain Wandsworth and Barnet and make progress in Hillingdon but most of their fortresses are impregnable though I think there will be odd losses to Conservatives, Greens and LDs.
Havering is another borough where any Conservative losses might mean a change of administration.
As said, the LDs may be in trouble in Sutton and Kingston but will hope to survive there and start re-building in the rest of the capital.
The Greens have only 11 Councillors in the capital - they will be looking to build on that and possibly where they are challenging Labour in inner London might be their best chance of progress.
Good post.
I think the big success story in May’s elections will be the greens. They seem to be able to win everywhere at the moment. Is it young or new voters driving the Green election successes?
On the other side of the argument, I think HYUFD is right and Big G wrong because there is neither a standard balanced local election battleground nor obvious conclusion from results. If HYUFD says this years battleground doesn’t suit Libdems that is good enough for me.
It’s not actually libdems but Labour who seem to be making progress in national polls. The 35-40 lab Tory picture seems to have reversed since end October.
As well as unbalanced battle grounds each year, how results went last time seats were up can also make for an unbalanced picture where it’s too easy to conclude the wrong take out. To be fair to Boris Johnson under Corbyn Labour seemed to have a lot of poor local elections even when the battleground should have suited them, which means Tories are in for some tough defences in this group of years? So glib conclusion is results verdict on Johnson being rubbish, which is true because he had been found out now, but any leader would have found defending the same position tough, is that fair to say?
I’m actually convinced Johnson does not survive the next couple of weeks, let alone make it to May. It’s this wallpaper business very dangerous to him now. The Parliament standards lady says she won’t investigate. Labour squealing she should, Tories arguing it falls under Geet because it’s cabinet not MP matter.
I reckon it can go like this. Saying she won’t investigate is good news for Boris. But if she changes her mind, and finds against him, he’s in Paterson position facing suspension which is even more than vonk it instant resignation.
I may be the only person on PB seeing wallpaper for access bringing Boris down in next couple of weeks, but I don’t care, I think it can so easily happen like when country’s apparently sleep walk into war - the key question for those shaking your head at my post is to ask yourself, the Parliament sleaze lady who done for Paterson, not at moment investigating the Prime Minister, Why would she change her mind?
Well, if your forecast is right, you'll earn fantastic PB bragging points.
I’m not seeking bragging points. I’m more worried I have zero credibility for getting wrong what looks obvious. I just find it odd no one sees a PM tottering on brink after his own side put so much work in hollowing him out as I see it.
Maybe I hsvn’t been around for many “falls” or turning points, do they tend to happen quickly and unexpectedly catching people out, or are they not all slow and painful as this ruin of Johnson?
I am thinking on basis he will be talked up, and even make Boris great again initiative, to the point they can vote against him in secret, then he will be fortnight ago chip wrapper.
Have I really got it wrong?
Maybe you haven't. But talk is cheap. Money talks on here and I'll lay some down -
£50 from me to site funds if the Muscly Magnificence is not PM on 1st Feb 2022.
If he is, you write me a short poem with the phrase "wonder horse" in it.
Not accepting that. It’s still going to take a bit longer than 1st Feb for Boris to be removed from No. 10 (and for someone to eye up the wallpaper and fancy a change to their style) even in my it’s very close now scenario. I did think of offering out a bet, it would be my 50 against your 50 not a poem, but I just feared there would be too many takers to be honest.
I’m still not sure I’m right and everyone else on PB from right to left not right. But his own side have put so much effort into removing him asap, why would they want to wait till May and later now? Football club jobs come up not cause you waited for it to go well, but vacancy because their is new voice needed and work to do. Same with any business. Why would politics be different?
Ah well, ok, if you're more saying he's going to be ousted this year and 'sooner rather than later' you're not alone at all on here. Indeed I was more alone when I said the opposite when all the shit was swirling pre-xmas - that he wasn't going anywhere and would be leading into the GE. I'd say opinion is split quite evenly on it now. Fyi it's about a 2/1 shot on betfair that he goes in 22.
Let’s put our 50 pound on the 2-1 gone in 2022. I’m very confident about that much.
Labour to recommend devomax when Gordon Brown's report for Starmer concludes, with responsibility for policy in most areas except defence and foreign policy being given to Holyrood if Labour wins the next general election. Labour could also allow its parliamentary candidates to support Scottish independence on a personal conscience basis
This is either just a step towards full independence or a cynical attempt to buy SNP support for a minority Starmer govt.
I really don’t see the point of devomax. It won’t satisfy those who want Indy and it takes Scotland further from the union for those who value the union.
It's attempt to win over pro-indy voters, in an attempt to get a Labour majority. Starmer doesn't need to a formal deal with the SNP providing Labour (or Labour + Lib Dems) have more MPs than the Conservatives.
He might still be screwed on ruling, though, where the SNP abstain on non-Scottish matters. I personally think a minority Labour government dependent on a rainbow coalition with a large minority Tory presence is going to be hellish for Starmer. The SNP's single agenda is going to be as poisonous as possible - to get to the point where the rUK says "well just fuck off then...." and get their next referendum to deliver it. Not their problem if Westminster grinds to a halt....
If Labour has more MPs than the Conservatives the SNP abstaining on English legislation wouldn't screw him on ruling. If they don't, then the SNP might be willing to support on him on getting English legislation through the Commons... but they'd want major policy concessions (i.e. scrapping Trident) which would go down like a cup of cold sick with the electorate south of the border. I honestly don't know what Labour does in that situation.
But is Trident really that popular in England?
Only 18% of respondents in England and Wales were strongly supportive in 2013. Probably even fewer now. It is an incredible waste of taxpayers money, leaving aside the moral horror.
43% of voters in England and Wales want to keep nuclear weapons on those numbers, only 36% opposed.
Hardly overwhelming support. Most English voters will go ‘meh’ when a government abolishes them. Which is inevitable.
Unilateral nuclear disarmament didn't exactly do Labour any favours as a policy when they last had it. There's a reason why Neil Kinnock chucked it in the bin following the 1987 GE.
Am tempted to grab a couple of weeks in the sun, and the options worldwide are fast diminishing. Dubai is still open
But I've only been once for a weekend so I don't know it at all. Does it have a district where you can find nice hotels in proper city streets with bars and restaurants and life? I don't want to have to walk out of my hotel and find myself in a car park by a freeway and I have to get Ubers to the nearest bar
I don't care if it is by the sea or not...
Watch Dubai - Playground of the Rich on BBC at 9pm tomorrow (following on from the Monaco programme in a similar vein)
I wouldn't....its trash tv at its trashiest.
Well Dubai does attract plenty of the trashy rich
Mr Sandpit was very critical of that program though basically saying they have gone out and found the biggest dickheads they could find to produce a certain kind of show.
Maybe but to be honest Dubai makes Essex look like a centre of high culture! The only books on sale seem to be autobiographies and self help manuals by the Sheikh
I would need paying to go there and not a pittance either.
Plus of course there are no secret police in Essex unlike Dubai
Am tempted to grab a couple of weeks in the sun, and the options worldwide are fast diminishing. Dubai is still open
But I've only been once for a weekend so I don't know it at all. Does it have a district where you can find nice hotels in proper city streets with bars and restaurants and life? I don't want to have to walk out of my hotel and find myself in a car park by a freeway and I have to get Ubers to the nearest bar
I don't care if it is by the sea or not...
Go to Muscat, Oman instead.
Dubai is in the same box as Las Vegas for me. Having said that we did have a very nice family holiday a bit away from the city, in Fujairah.
Am tempted to grab a couple of weeks in the sun, and the options worldwide are fast diminishing. Dubai is still open
But I've only been once for a weekend so I don't know it at all. Does it have a district where you can find nice hotels in proper city streets with bars and restaurants and life? I don't want to have to walk out of my hotel and find myself in a car park by a freeway and I have to get Ubers to the nearest bar
I don't care if it is by the sea or not...
Watch Dubai - Playground of the Rich on BBC at 9pm tomorrow (following on from the Monaco programme in a similar vein)
I wouldn't....its trash tv at its trashiest.
Well Dubai does attract plenty of the trashy rich
Mr Sandpit was very critical of that program though basically saying they have gone out and found the biggest dickheads they could find to produce a certain kind of show.
Maybe but to be honest Dubai makes Essex look like a centre of high culture! The only books on sale seem to be autobiographies and self help manuals by the Sheikh
I would need paying to go there and not a pittance either.
Look on the positive side, while all the knobheads go there on their holidays, it is less likely you might end up with them where you choose to holiday.....
Labour to recommend devomax when Gordon Brown's report for Starmer concludes, with responsibility for policy in most areas except defence and foreign policy being given to Holyrood if Labour wins the next general election. Labour could also allow its parliamentary candidates to support Scottish independence on a personal conscience basis
This is either just a step towards full independence or a cynical attempt to buy SNP support for a minority Starmer govt.
I really don’t see the point of devomax. It won’t satisfy those who want Indy and it takes Scotland further from the union for those who value the union.
It's attempt to win over pro-indy voters, in an attempt to get a Labour majority. Starmer doesn't need to a formal deal with the SNP providing Labour (or Labour + Lib Dems) have more MPs than the Conservatives.
He might still be screwed on ruling, though, where the SNP abstain on non-Scottish matters. I personally think a minority Labour government dependent on a rainbow coalition with a large minority Tory presence is going to be hellish for Starmer. The SNP's single agenda is going to be as poisonous as possible - to get to the point where the rUK says "well just fuck off then...." and get their next referendum to deliver it. Not their problem if Westminster grinds to a halt....
If Labour has more MPs than the Conservatives the SNP abstaining on English legislation wouldn't screw him on ruling. If they don't, then the SNP might be willing to support on him on getting English legislation through the Commons... but they'd want major policy concessions (i.e. scrapping Trident) which would go down like a cup of cold sick with the electorate south of the border. I honestly don't know what Labour does in that situation.
But is Trident really that popular in England?
Only 18% of respondents in England and Wales were strongly supportive in 2013. Probably even fewer now. It is an incredible waste of taxpayers money, leaving aside the moral horror.
43% of voters in England and Wales want to keep nuclear weapons on those numbers, only 36% opposed.
Hardly overwhelming support. Most English voters will go ‘meh’ when a government abolished them. Which is inevitable.
No English government (or UK government) would of course ever abolish them.
They are a requirement for our permanent UN security council seat membership and as long as Putin, Xi and Kim have them so will we. Scotland of course also benefits from the protection of the UK nuclear umbrella
That umbrella won't protect Glasgow in the event of an accident, being roughly downwind of Faslane.
Why didn't they stick them in Cromarty, or Scapa Flow?
Am tempted to grab a couple of weeks in the sun, and the options worldwide are fast diminishing. Dubai is still open
But I've only been once for a weekend so I don't know it at all. Does it have a district where you can find nice hotels in proper city streets with bars and restaurants and life? I don't want to have to walk out of my hotel and find myself in a car park by a freeway and I have to get Ubers to the nearest bar
I don't care if it is by the sea or not...
Go to Muscat, Oman instead.
Dubai is in the same box as Las Vegas for me. Having said that we did have a very nice family holiday a bit away from the city, in Fujairah.
I think the same crowd go to Ibiza in the summer and Las Vegas and Dubai in the winter
Labour to recommend devomax when Gordon Brown's report for Starmer concludes, with responsibility for policy in most areas except defence and foreign policy being given to Holyrood if Labour wins the next general election. Labour could also allow its parliamentary candidates to support Scottish independence on a personal conscience basis
This is either just a step towards full independence or a cynical attempt to buy SNP support for a minority Starmer govt.
I really don’t see the point of devomax. It won’t satisfy those who want Indy and it takes Scotland further from the union for those who value the union.
It's attempt to win over pro-indy voters, in an attempt to get a Labour majority. Starmer doesn't need to a formal deal with the SNP providing Labour (or Labour + Lib Dems) have more MPs than the Conservatives.
He might still be screwed on ruling, though, where the SNP abstain on non-Scottish matters. I personally think a minority Labour government dependent on a rainbow coalition with a large minority Tory presence is going to be hellish for Starmer. The SNP's single agenda is going to be as poisonous as possible - to get to the point where the rUK says "well just fuck off then...." and get their next referendum to deliver it. Not their problem if Westminster grinds to a halt....
If Labour has more MPs than the Conservatives the SNP abstaining on English legislation wouldn't screw him on ruling. If they don't, then the SNP might be willing to support on him on getting English legislation through the Commons... but they'd want major policy concessions (i.e. scrapping Trident) which would go down like a cup of cold sick with the electorate south of the border. I honestly don't know what Labour does in that situation.
But is Trident really that popular in England?
Only 18% of respondents in England and Wales were strongly supportive in 2013. Probably even fewer now. It is an incredible waste of taxpayers money, leaving aside the moral horror.
London will be fascinating - there are one or two counter-intuitive trends which may yet ruin the planned narrative for the elections.
I don't think the Conservatives will do that badly - the doom of the London Conservatives has been prophesied on many occasions. This time I see a mixed bag - it's quite possible Labour will regain Wandsworth and perhaps Barnet and it'll be interesting to see how Hillingdon votes but in some of the inner London Labour strongholds I think we could see some surprisingly strong Conservative performances which may not translate into many seats.
I also think the Conservatives have some serious prospects of ending LD rule in Sutton and Kingston.
Labour will hope to gain Wandsworth and Barnet and make progress in Hillingdon but most of their fortresses are impregnable though I think there will be odd losses to Conservatives, Greens and LDs.
Havering is another borough where any Conservative losses might mean a change of administration.
As said, the LDs may be in trouble in Sutton and Kingston but will hope to survive there and start re-building in the rest of the capital.
The Greens have only 11 Councillors in the capital - they will be looking to build on that and possibly where they are challenging Labour in inner London might be their best chance of progress.
Good post.
I think the big success story in May’s elections will be the greens. They seem to be able to win everywhere at the moment. Is it young or new voters driving the Green election successes?
On the other side of the argument, I think HYUFD is right and Big G wrong because there is neither a standard balanced local election battleground nor obvious conclusion from results. If HYUFD says this years battleground doesn’t suit Libdems that is good enough for me.
It’s not actually libdems but Labour who seem to be making progress in national polls. The 35-40 lab Tory picture seems to have reversed since end October.
As well as unbalanced battle grounds each year, how results went last time seats were up can also make for an unbalanced picture where it’s too easy to conclude the wrong take out. To be fair to Boris Johnson under Corbyn Labour seemed to have a lot of poor local elections even when the battleground should have suited them, which means Tories are in for some tough defences in this group of years? So glib conclusion is results verdict on Johnson being rubbish, which is true because he had been found out now, but any leader would have found defending the same position tough, is that fair to say?
I’m actually convinced Johnson does not survive the next couple of weeks, let alone make it to May. It’s this wallpaper business very dangerous to him now. The Parliament standards lady says she won’t investigate. Labour squealing she should, Tories arguing it falls under Geet because it’s cabinet not MP matter.
I reckon it can go like this. Saying she won’t investigate is good news for Boris. But if she changes her mind, and finds against him, he’s in Paterson position facing suspension which is even more than vonk it instant resignation.
I may be the only person on PB seeing wallpaper for access bringing Boris down in next couple of weeks, but I don’t care, I think it can so easily happen like when country’s apparently sleep walk into war - the key question for those shaking your head at my post is to ask yourself, the Parliament sleaze lady who done for Paterson, not at moment investigating the Prime Minister, Why would she change her mind?
Well, if your forecast is right, you'll earn fantastic PB bragging points.
I’m not seeking bragging points. I’m more worried I have zero credibility for getting wrong what looks obvious. I just find it odd no one sees a PM tottering on brink after his own side put so much work in hollowing him out as I see it.
Maybe I hsvn’t been around for many “falls” or turning points, do they tend to happen quickly and unexpectedly catching people out, or are they not all slow and painful as this ruin of Johnson?
I am thinking on basis he will be talked up, and even make Boris great again initiative, to the point they can vote against him in secret, then he will be fortnight ago chip wrapper.
Have I really got it wrong?
Maybe you haven't. But talk is cheap. Money talks on here and I'll lay some down -
£50 from me to site funds if the Muscly Magnificence is not PM on 1st Feb 2022.
If he is, you write me a short poem with the phrase "wonder horse" in it.
Not accepting that. It’s still going to take a bit longer than 1st Feb for Boris to be removed from No. 10 (and for someone to eye up the wallpaper and fancy a change to their style) even in my it’s very close now scenario. I did think of offering out a bet, it would be my 50 against your 50 not a poem, but I just feared there would be too many takers to be honest.
I’m still not sure I’m right and everyone else on PB from right to left not right. But his own side have put so much effort into removing him asap, why would they want to wait till May and later now? Football club jobs come up not cause you waited for it to go well, but vacancy because their is new voice needed and work to do. Same with any business. Why would politics be different?
Problem is, us old codgers have seen this pattern looooots of times before. The process always goes much slower than you’d imagine. Until it doesn’t. That’s the tricky bit.
The Cons definitely want rid of Johnson, but not yet. They need him as a fall-guy.
Am tempted to grab a couple of weeks in the sun, and the options worldwide are fast diminishing. Dubai is still open
But I've only been once for a weekend so I don't know it at all. Does it have a district where you can find nice hotels in proper city streets with bars and restaurants and life? I don't want to have to walk out of my hotel and find myself in a car park by a freeway and I have to get Ubers to the nearest bar
I don't care if it is by the sea or not...
Go to Muscat, Oman instead.
Dubai is in the same box as Las Vegas for me. Having said that we did have a very nice family holiday a bit away from the city, in Fujairah.
Why anybody would choose to holiday in Las Vegas is beyond me.
Labour to recommend devomax when Gordon Brown's report for Starmer concludes, with responsibility for policy in most areas except defence and foreign policy being given to Holyrood if Labour wins the next general election. Labour could also allow its parliamentary candidates to support Scottish independence on a personal conscience basis
This is either just a step towards full independence or a cynical attempt to buy SNP support for a minority Starmer govt.
I really don’t see the point of devomax. It won’t satisfy those who want Indy and it takes Scotland further from the union for those who value the union.
It's attempt to win over pro-indy voters, in an attempt to get a Labour majority. Starmer doesn't need to a formal deal with the SNP providing Labour (or Labour + Lib Dems) have more MPs than the Conservatives.
He might still be screwed on ruling, though, where the SNP abstain on non-Scottish matters. I personally think a minority Labour government dependent on a rainbow coalition with a large minority Tory presence is going to be hellish for Starmer. The SNP's single agenda is going to be as poisonous as possible - to get to the point where the rUK says "well just fuck off then...." and get their next referendum to deliver it. Not their problem if Westminster grinds to a halt....
If Labour has more MPs than the Conservatives the SNP abstaining on English legislation wouldn't screw him on ruling. If they don't, then the SNP might be willing to support on him on getting English legislation through the Commons... but they'd want major policy concessions (i.e. scrapping Trident) which would go down like a cup of cold sick with the electorate south of the border. I honestly don't know what Labour does in that situation.
But is Trident really that popular in England?
Only 18% of respondents in England and Wales were strongly supportive in 2013. Probably even fewer now. It is an incredible waste of taxpayers money, leaving aside the moral horror.
Because he is repetitive and a bit locked in place he gets criticism, but I do think Dan Hodges writes pretty well and sometimes can nail it on a core point.
If NHS really is the jewel in the crown, we have a patriotic duty to stop saying it can do no wrong...
This is the Great NHS Paradox. The Defenders of the NHS claim it is the jewel in the crown of our national services. They hold it up as an example of what it truly means to be great and to be British. Yet they tell us on an annual basis that it is falling apart and not fit for purpose...
It’s not our patriotic duty to cherish the NHS. It’s our duty to have an honest debate about how the NHS can cherish us
Really tricky situation now where a sizable minority of the population would really benefit from a concerted public information campaign to calm them down from 2 years of, frequently state orchestrated, fear.
Unfortunately some of those same people will react extremely negatively to any such attempt, so they're likely to be stuck on a war footing long after the armistice.
Am tempted to grab a couple of weeks in the sun, and the options worldwide are fast diminishing. Dubai is still open
But I've only been once for a weekend so I don't know it at all. Does it have a district where you can find nice hotels in proper city streets with bars and restaurants and life? I don't want to have to walk out of my hotel and find myself in a car park by a freeway and I have to get Ubers to the nearest bar
I don't care if it is by the sea or not...
Watch Dubai - Playground of the Rich on BBC at 9pm tomorrow (following on from the Monaco programme in a similar vein)
Am tempted to grab a couple of weeks in the sun, and the options worldwide are fast diminishing. Dubai is still open
But I've only been once for a weekend so I don't know it at all. Does it have a district where you can find nice hotels in proper city streets with bars and restaurants and life? I don't want to have to walk out of my hotel and find myself in a car park by a freeway and I have to get Ubers to the nearest bar
I don't care if it is by the sea or not...
Go to Muscat, Oman instead.
Dubai is in the same box as Las Vegas for me. Having said that we did have a very nice family holiday a bit away from the city, in Fujairah.
Why anybody would choose to holiday in Las Vegas is beyond me.
Incredibly cheap hotels, subsidised by gamblers
Also interesting art, some good restaurants, and the spectacular lights at night. And the glorious deserts all around..
That said I wouldn't stay more than a few days, the relentless commerciality grinds you down
Am tempted to grab a couple of weeks in the sun, and the options worldwide are fast diminishing. Dubai is still open
But I've only been once for a weekend so I don't know it at all. Does it have a district where you can find nice hotels in proper city streets with bars and restaurants and life? I don't want to have to walk out of my hotel and find myself in a car park by a freeway and I have to get Ubers to the nearest bar
I don't care if it is by the sea or not...
Go to Muscat, Oman instead.
Dubai is in the same box as Las Vegas for me. Having said that we did have a very nice family holiday a bit away from the city, in Fujairah.
Why anybody would choose to holiday in Las Vegas is beyond me.
Am tempted to grab a couple of weeks in the sun, and the options worldwide are fast diminishing. Dubai is still open
But I've only been once for a weekend so I don't know it at all. Does it have a district where you can find nice hotels in proper city streets with bars and restaurants and life? I don't want to have to walk out of my hotel and find myself in a car park by a freeway and I have to get Ubers to the nearest bar
I don't care if it is by the sea or not...
Go to Muscat, Oman instead.
Dubai is in the same box as Las Vegas for me. Having said that we did have a very nice family holiday a bit away from the city, in Fujairah.
London will be fascinating - there are one or two counter-intuitive trends which may yet ruin the planned narrative for the elections.
I don't think the Conservatives will do that badly - the doom of the London Conservatives has been prophesied on many occasions. This time I see a mixed bag - it's quite possible Labour will regain Wandsworth and perhaps Barnet and it'll be interesting to see how Hillingdon votes but in some of the inner London Labour strongholds I think we could see some surprisingly strong Conservative performances which may not translate into many seats.
I also think the Conservatives have some serious prospects of ending LD rule in Sutton and Kingston.
Labour will hope to gain Wandsworth and Barnet and make progress in Hillingdon but most of their fortresses are impregnable though I think there will be odd losses to Conservatives, Greens and LDs.
Havering is another borough where any Conservative losses might mean a change of administration.
As said, the LDs may be in trouble in Sutton and Kingston but will hope to survive there and start re-building in the rest of the capital.
The Greens have only 11 Councillors in the capital - they will be looking to build on that and possibly where they are challenging Labour in inner London might be their best chance of progress.
Good post.
I think the big success story in May’s elections will be the greens. They seem to be able to win everywhere at the moment. Is it young or new voters driving the Green election successes?
On the other side of the argument, I think HYUFD is right and Big G wrong because there is neither a standard balanced local election battleground nor obvious conclusion from results. If HYUFD says this years battleground doesn’t suit Libdems that is good enough for me.
It’s not actually libdems but Labour who seem to be making progress in national polls. The 35-40 lab Tory picture seems to have reversed since end October.
As well as unbalanced battle grounds each year, how results went last time seats were up can also make for an unbalanced picture where it’s too easy to conclude the wrong take out. To be fair to Boris Johnson under Corbyn Labour seemed to have a lot of poor local elections even when the battleground should have suited them, which means Tories are in for some tough defences in this group of years? So glib conclusion is results verdict on Johnson being rubbish, which is true because he had been found out now, but any leader would have found defending the same position tough, is that fair to say?
I’m actually convinced Johnson does not survive the next couple of weeks, let alone make it to May. It’s this wallpaper business very dangerous to him now. The Parliament standards lady says she won’t investigate. Labour squealing she should, Tories arguing it falls under Geet because it’s cabinet not MP matter.
I reckon it can go like this. Saying she won’t investigate is good news for Boris. But if she changes her mind, and finds against him, he’s in Paterson position facing suspension which is even more than vonk it instant resignation.
I may be the only person on PB seeing wallpaper for access bringing Boris down in next couple of weeks, but I don’t care, I think it can so easily happen like when country’s apparently sleep walk into war - the key question for those shaking your head at my post is to ask yourself, the Parliament sleaze lady who done for Paterson, not at moment investigating the Prime Minister, Why would she change her mind?
Well, if your forecast is right, you'll earn fantastic PB bragging points.
I’m not seeking bragging points. I’m more worried I have zero credibility for getting wrong what looks obvious. I just find it odd no one sees a PM tottering on brink after his own side put so much work in hollowing him out as I see it.
Maybe I hsvn’t been around for many “falls” or turning points, do they tend to happen quickly and unexpectedly catching people out, or are they not all slow and painful as this ruin of Johnson?
I am thinking on basis he will be talked up, and even make Boris great again initiative, to the point they can vote against him in secret, then he will be fortnight ago chip wrapper.
Have I really got it wrong?
Maybe you haven't. But talk is cheap. Money talks on here and I'll lay some down -
£50 from me to site funds if the Muscly Magnificence is not PM on 1st Feb 2022.
If he is, you write me a short poem with the phrase "wonder horse" in it.
Not accepting that. It’s still going to take a bit longer than 1st Feb for Boris to be removed from No. 10 (and for someone to eye up the wallpaper and fancy a change to their style) even in my it’s very close now scenario. I did think of offering out a bet, it would be my 50 against your 50 not a poem, but I just feared there would be too many takers to be honest.
I’m still not sure I’m right and everyone else on PB from right to left not right. But his own side have put so much effort into removing him asap, why would they want to wait till May and later now? Football club jobs come up not cause you waited for it to go well, but vacancy because their is new voice needed and work to do. Same with any business. Why would politics be different?
The answer to removing him remains entirely with his mps and at present they seem to be on board with him
You say they are on board with him based on what? Surely ahead of a secret ballot he loses comprehensively he gets over 300 public votes of support from them and lots of PMQ support either side that vote?
If you look on YouTube at Margaret Thatchers “I’m enjoying this, I’m enjoying this” turn on the commons, all her MPs are right behind her and loving it. They’ve just sacked her! Or I might be wrong, that is a different time when she was more popular?
At the moment, it looks like there are lots of people who think "X would be better than Boris", and at some level they're right. But with different X's. We haven't reached the point of "Anyone would be better than Boris", which is when Boris really needs to worry.
As long as he can play the pretenders off against each other, he's fine.
London will be fascinating - there are one or two counter-intuitive trends which may yet ruin the planned narrative for the elections.
I don't think the Conservatives will do that badly - the doom of the London Conservatives has been prophesied on many occasions. This time I see a mixed bag - it's quite possible Labour will regain Wandsworth and perhaps Barnet and it'll be interesting to see how Hillingdon votes but in some of the inner London Labour strongholds I think we could see some surprisingly strong Conservative performances which may not translate into many seats.
I also think the Conservatives have some serious prospects of ending LD rule in Sutton and Kingston.
Labour will hope to gain Wandsworth and Barnet and make progress in Hillingdon but most of their fortresses are impregnable though I think there will be odd losses to Conservatives, Greens and LDs.
Havering is another borough where any Conservative losses might mean a change of administration.
As said, the LDs may be in trouble in Sutton and Kingston but will hope to survive there and start re-building in the rest of the capital.
The Greens have only 11 Councillors in the capital - they will be looking to build on that and possibly where they are challenging Labour in inner London might be their best chance of progress.
Good post.
I think the big success story in May’s elections will be the greens. They seem to be able to win everywhere at the moment. Is it young or new voters driving the Green election successes?
On the other side of the argument, I think HYUFD is right and Big G wrong because there is neither a standard balanced local election battleground nor obvious conclusion from results. If HYUFD says this years battleground doesn’t suit Libdems that is good enough for me.
It’s not actually libdems but Labour who seem to be making progress in national polls. The 35-40 lab Tory picture seems to have reversed since end October.
As well as unbalanced battle grounds each year, how results went last time seats were up can also make for an unbalanced picture where it’s too easy to conclude the wrong take out. To be fair to Boris Johnson under Corbyn Labour seemed to have a lot of poor local elections even when the battleground should have suited them, which means Tories are in for some tough defences in this group of years? So glib conclusion is results verdict on Johnson being rubbish, which is true because he had been found out now, but any leader would have found defending the same position tough, is that fair to say?
I’m actually convinced Johnson does not survive the next couple of weeks, let alone make it to May. It’s this wallpaper business very dangerous to him now. The Parliament standards lady says she won’t investigate. Labour squealing she should, Tories arguing it falls under Geet because it’s cabinet not MP matter.
I reckon it can go like this. Saying she won’t investigate is good news for Boris. But if she changes her mind, and finds against him, he’s in Paterson position facing suspension which is even more than vonk it instant resignation.
I may be the only person on PB seeing wallpaper for access bringing Boris down in next couple of weeks, but I don’t care, I think it can so easily happen like when country’s apparently sleep walk into war - the key question for those shaking your head at my post is to ask yourself, the Parliament sleaze lady who done for Paterson, not at moment investigating the Prime Minister, Why would she change her mind?
Well, if your forecast is right, you'll earn fantastic PB bragging points.
I’m not seeking bragging points. I’m more worried I have zero credibility for getting wrong what looks obvious. I just find it odd no one sees a PM tottering on brink after his own side put so much work in hollowing him out as I see it.
Maybe I hsvn’t been around for many “falls” or turning points, do they tend to happen quickly and unexpectedly catching people out, or are they not all slow and painful as this ruin of Johnson?
I am thinking on basis he will be talked up, and even make Boris great again initiative, to the point they can vote against him in secret, then he will be fortnight ago chip wrapper.
Have I really got it wrong?
Maybe you haven't. But talk is cheap. Money talks on here and I'll lay some down -
£50 from me to site funds if the Muscly Magnificence is not PM on 1st Feb 2022.
If he is, you write me a short poem with the phrase "wonder horse" in it.
Not accepting that. It’s still going to take a bit longer than 1st Feb for Boris to be removed from No. 10 (and for someone to eye up the wallpaper and fancy a change to their style) even in my it’s very close now scenario. I did think of offering out a bet, it would be my 50 against your 50 not a poem, but I just feared there would be too many takers to be honest.
I’m still not sure I’m right and everyone else on PB from right to left not right. But his own side have put so much effort into removing him asap, why would they want to wait till May and later now? Football club jobs come up not cause you waited for it to go well, but vacancy because their is new voice needed and work to do. Same with any business. Why would politics be different?
Ah well, ok, if you're more saying he's going to be ousted this year and 'sooner rather than later' you're not alone at all on here. Indeed I was more alone when I said the opposite when all the shit was swirling pre-xmas - that he wasn't going anywhere and would be leading into the GE. I'd say opinion is split quite evenly on it now. Fyi it's about a 2/1 shot on betfair that he goes in 22.
Let’s put our 50 pound on the 2-1 gone in 2022. I’m very confident about that much.
Makes sense - you can maybe get slightly better since it's 3 vs 3.3 on the exchange. Do you have an account on there?
Good luck with it too. I really hope you win, believe me. Love to see the back of him.
As I understand it Rachel Reeves is seeking a windfall tax on the oil industry which according to her will raise 1.2 billion
At the same time she wants to abolish the 5% vat on energy bills at a cost of 1.5 billion
Therefore, labour are proposing a small cut in the bills for the low paid and pensioners while handing a reduction to the wealthy and that the overall effect is at best a minor help to the cost of living crisis
She also wants to invest tens of billions in retro fitting homes and nuclear energy, but this will have no effect on this year or next years cost of living crisis
I think my Lib Dems should call for the windfall tax too actually Big G. In fact your Tories should steal it. My reasoning is, whilst energy prices cause consumer pain, those with it to sell are making lots of lovely dosh! So you take a bit from that windfall one end, to ease pain at other. What are you saying is wrong in that?
I’m even hopeful Saint Bart will agree with this one.
Absolutely not, I don't believe in general in redistribution and certainly not in examples like this.
If you take the profits companies make from them, then who is going to invest in the UK? When we need serious investments going forwards.
When the price of energy plunges nobody redistributes to pass more money to the companies so why do the opposite when the price surges?
I do agree with abolishing VAT on domestic energy to relieve the pressure on consumers across the nation. The tax is seriously regressive and while it won't be a cure-all it would be a step in the right direction.
Oh. So Pirates completely against any form of windfall distribution?
When companies and industries in trouble though we do help out? Throw taxpayer money at steel, fertiliser plants, at rich Japanese companies so they keep factories here, so it’s a quid pro qua thing?
With the cutting of any taxes, government also need to cut health waiting lists where people are in pain, if you were PM you would have to tax more these coming years to achieve aims like that as well, somehow, not just talk up being a tax cutting platform?
Indeed, I'm in favour of cut throat buccaneering competition not the state redistributing and choosing winners and losers.
I would view the waiting list caused by the pandemic (as opposed to day to day waiting lists) as part of the 'war effort' from the pandemic so would add the costs related to that to pandemic induced debt.
Okay. And pay the war debt off how? Presumably with lighter taxes over longer period?
Exactly.
So you are a high debt low tax person admitting there will be massive largely untouchable public spending in the next 5 years or so? It’s currently debt about 100% GDP - where wouldn’t you take it to before introducing new national assurance bills, 130? 140?
No I prefer low debt in normal circumstances but the pandemic has been a once in a century war like effort and that needs to be dealt with accordingly.
Day to day spending shouldn't be borrowed. But pandemic expenditure should be. Clearing the backlog should be borrowed as related to the pandemic while ongoing expenditure shouldn't be.
But in practice isn’t ongoing state provision, NHS £160B a year and climbing (cost of functioning care not even properly accounted for as it’s not functioning) intrinsically linked with the covid war debt? What is spending on one, borrowing for the other?
You wouldn’t like to see debt much above 100% GDP? The reason I press that question is important is regardless what your low tax policy platform is, or your buccaneering spirit, once you set that % marker not to go above that becomes the point you, Bart PM have to start taxing. And if you want to remain in office, tax, tax cut, right times in political cycle?
Am tempted to grab a couple of weeks in the sun, and the options worldwide are fast diminishing. Dubai is still open
But I've only been once for a weekend so I don't know it at all. Does it have a district where you can find nice hotels in proper city streets with bars and restaurants and life? I don't want to have to walk out of my hotel and find myself in a car park by a freeway and I have to get Ubers to the nearest bar
I don't care if it is by the sea or not...
Go to Muscat, Oman instead.
Dubai is in the same box as Las Vegas for me. Having said that we did have a very nice family holiday a bit away from the city, in Fujairah.
Why anybody would choose to holiday in Las Vegas is beyond me.
It’s worth going once.
It does what it does very well.
In my previous life as a professional gambler, I have been many times....I hated every second and everything about it, but it was work.
The supposed upsides of great restaurants, I can get elsewhere. The shows, e.g Cirque du Soleil, which I like a lot, again available elsewhere.
Labour to recommend devomax when Gordon Brown's report for Starmer concludes, with responsibility for policy in most areas except defence and foreign policy being given to Holyrood if Labour wins the next general election. Labour could also allow its parliamentary candidates to support Scottish independence on a personal conscience basis
This is either just a step towards full independence or a cynical attempt to buy SNP support for a minority Starmer govt.
I really don’t see the point of devomax. It won’t satisfy those who want Indy and it takes Scotland further from the union for those who value the union.
It's attempt to win over pro-indy voters, in an attempt to get a Labour majority. Starmer doesn't need to a formal deal with the SNP providing Labour (or Labour + Lib Dems) have more MPs than the Conservatives.
He might still be screwed on ruling, though, where the SNP abstain on non-Scottish matters. I personally think a minority Labour government dependent on a rainbow coalition with a large minority Tory presence is going to be hellish for Starmer. The SNP's single agenda is going to be as poisonous as possible - to get to the point where the rUK says "well just fuck off then...." and get their next referendum to deliver it. Not their problem if Westminster grinds to a halt....
If Labour has more MPs than the Conservatives the SNP abstaining on English legislation wouldn't screw him on ruling. If they don't, then the SNP might be willing to support on him on getting English legislation through the Commons... but they'd want major policy concessions (i.e. scrapping Trident) which would go down like a cup of cold sick with the electorate south of the border. I honestly don't know what Labour does in that situation.
But is Trident really that popular in England?
Only 18% of respondents in England and Wales were strongly supportive in 2013. Probably even fewer now. It is an incredible waste of taxpayers money, leaving aside the moral horror.
43% of voters in England and Wales want to keep nuclear weapons on those numbers, only 36% opposed.
Hardly overwhelming support. Most English voters will go ‘meh’ when a government abolishes them. Which is inevitable.
Unilateral nuclear disarmament didn't exactly do Labour any favours as a policy when they last had it. There's a reason why Neil Kinnock chucked it in the bin following the 1987 GE.
That was a choice. When they are abolished it will be because they have no option.
Comments
I am far from convinced wallpapergate will be Boris's denouement
Or maybe it was if the film is mediocre. Don't know about you but I particularly struggle to persevere with a comedy if it's not landing. There's something awkward about jokes misfiring. You just want it to either work or stop.
So anyway, I probably won't bother now. Lots of other things I want to watch.
frankly no, I can't.
Do you see what I mean? I know how sharp you are on here, you could have answered in this way?
https://twitter.com/Jim_Cornelius/status/1479477117763133445?t=QjXEZ4y6AEJJXEJUbx3kWg&s=19
Weirdly Vice made me really like Cheney which I don’t think was the intention…!!
The controversial poll has united rightwing pro-family campaigners and progressive children’s rights advocates, with both groups fearing it may end up causing harm to the young people it intends to help.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jan/09/nicola-sturgeon-urged-to-scrap-census-asking-teenagers-about-anal-sex
Five of the nine pleaded guilty and were offered restorative justice.
Interesting snippet. Only one arrest. The other eight voluntarily came forward.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-54191039.amp
I found Cate Blanchett in full breaking news warpaint strangely arousing. TMI I’m sure.
For the first time therefore all 4 home nations would effectively have different parties in control of their own domestic policy, the Tories in England, Labour in Wales, the SNP in Scotland and the DUP and SF in NI while under a UK Labour PM trying to hold it all together
The plot against Collingwood was launched because of his "disappointing" majority of only 30.
Which somewhat dates the book tbh.
https://legalhackette.com/2022/01/09/r-v-milo-ponsford-sage-willoughby-rhian-graham-jake-skuse/
Maybe I hsvn’t been around for many “falls” or turning points, do they tend to happen quickly and unexpectedly catching people out, or are they not all slow and painful as this ruin of Johnson?
I am thinking on basis he will be talked up, and even make Boris great again initiative, to the point they can vote against him in secret, then he will be fortnight ago chip wrapper.
Have I really got it wrong?
If they don't, then the SNP might be willing to support on him on getting English legislation through the Commons... but they'd want major policy concessions (i.e. scrapping Trident) which would go down like a cup of cold sick with the electorate south of the border. I honestly don't know what Labour does in that situation.
Does that mean they had to mend the statue?
£50 from me to site funds if the Muscly Magnificence is not PM on 1st Feb 2022.
If he is, you write me a short poem with the phrase "wonder horse" in it.
And remember. This time they'd be facing a defeated Tory Party who'd have probably gone through a difficult leadership election.
Against a fresh, incumbent PM.
I’m still not sure I’m right and everyone else on PB from right to left not right. But his own side have put so much effort into removing him asap, why would they want to wait till May and later now? Football club jobs come up not cause you waited for it to go well, but vacancy because their is new voice needed and work to do. Same with any business. Why would politics be different?
Am tempted to grab a couple of weeks in the sun, and the options worldwide are fast diminishing. Dubai is still open
But I've only been once for a weekend so I don't know it at all. Does it have a district where you can find nice hotels in proper city streets with bars and restaurants and life? I don't want to have to walk out of my hotel and find myself in a car park by a freeway and I have to get Ubers to the nearest bar
I don't care if it is by the sea or not...
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jan/09/pm-boris-johnson-low-taxes-next-election-david-frost
The only thing that marred it for me was that every time I saw the Mark Rylance/Peter Thiel character I was struck by his resemblance to Mike Smash.
Day to day spending shouldn't be borrowed. But pandemic expenditure should be. Clearing the backlog should be borrowed as related to the pandemic while ongoing expenditure shouldn't be.
Abstaining on non-Scottish issues, though, is another matter. Why would pro-indy voters get angry at the SNP abstaining on a Labour bill on the NHS in England, which as a result gets defeated in the Commons?
How does that help? Other than give Putin a competitive advantage.
Only 18% of respondents in England and Wales were strongly supportive in 2013. Probably even fewer now. It is an incredible waste of taxpayers money, leaving aside the moral horror.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/310697/britains-nuclear-weapons-attitudes-in-great-britain/
If the parliamentary sleaze lady investigates, that’s so easy to imagine a conveyor belt to suspension based on just cash for access we already know about? Who wants to see that happen asap?
In other words I see it is not the opposition but his own side who is hollowing out Boris Johnson to remove him? Not what Mirror or Guardian or ITN publishing, it’s who gave it to them?
It’s not just people around him they want sacked, they think they only get change of direction removing him?
They look at his policy and performance this year, his conference and CBI speeches and think him now a loser?
They want change to both less showbiz Number 10 and more straightforward economic direction they can sell on doorsteps in coming elections, including this May?
Are even Ant and Dec ahead of PB.com on this one?
If you look on YouTube at Margaret Thatchers “I’m enjoying this, I’m enjoying this” turn on the commons, all her MPs are right behind her and loving it. They’ve just sacked her! Or I might be wrong, that is a different time when she was more popular?
I don't see any kind of agreement between SNP and Labour. I don't think it's in anyone's interest - Sturgeon will just say they'll vote on stuff which they agree with and that's it. If that sinks a labour government then they can claim only independence keeps the Tories out.
They are a requirement for our permanent UN security council seat membership and as long as Putin, Xi and Kim have them so will we. Scotland of course also benefits from the protection of the UK nuclear umbrella
Dubai is in the same box as Las Vegas for me. Having said that we did have a very nice family holiday a bit away from the city, in Fujairah.
Why didn't they stick them in Cromarty, or Scapa Flow?
The Cons definitely want rid of Johnson, but not yet. They need him as a fall-guy.
If NHS really is the jewel in the crown, we have a patriotic duty to stop saying it can do no wrong...
This is the Great NHS Paradox. The Defenders of the NHS claim it is the jewel in the crown of our national services. They hold it up as an example of what it truly means to be great and to be British. Yet they tell us on an annual basis that it is falling apart and not fit for purpose...
It’s not our patriotic duty to cherish the NHS. It’s our duty to have an honest debate about how the NHS can cherish us
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-10382123/DAN-HODGES-patriotic-duty-stop-saying-NHS-no-wrong.html
Unfortunately some of those same people will react extremely negatively to any such attempt, so they're likely to be stuck on a war footing long after the armistice.
Also interesting art, some good restaurants, and the spectacular lights at night. And the glorious deserts all around..
That said I wouldn't stay more than a few days, the relentless commerciality grinds you down
It does what it does very well.
As long as he can play the pretenders off against each other, he's fine.
Good luck with it too. I really hope you win, believe me. Love to see the back of him.
You wouldn’t like to see debt much above 100% GDP? The reason I press that question is important is regardless what your low tax policy platform is, or your buccaneering spirit, once you set that % marker not to go above that becomes the point you, Bart PM have to start taxing. And if you want to remain in office, tax, tax cut, right times in political cycle?
The supposed upsides of great restaurants, I can get elsewhere. The shows, e.g Cirque du Soleil, which I like a lot, again available elsewhere.