Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

YouGov CON members’ poll adds to the pressure on Johnson – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited January 9 in General
imageYouGov CON members’ poll adds to the pressure on Johnson – politicalbetting.com

In looking at the above splits remember this was carried out amongst the group that you would expect to be most loyal to Johnson. If there is such division amongst CON members what do the wider pool of CON voters think?

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 92,645
    edited January 9
    54% of Conservative members wanting to keep Johnson in post however does not add to the pressure on him
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 92,645
    Corbyn may set up his own party if Labour do not readmit him

    https://twitter.com/electpoliticsuk/status/1480232757959737349?s=20
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 7,297
    edited January 9
    All things considered, these results don't look too bad for Boris to me. I suspect Sky News thought they'd get some rather different findings.
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 3,855
    These polls are not the most conclusive imo
  • stodgestodge Posts: 9,606
    HYUFD said:

    54% of Conservative members wanting to keep Johnson in post however does not add to the pressure on him

    The opinions of Conservative members like you don't matter very much. The Parliamentary Party is all that matters - I would imagine in 1990 the overwhelming majority of Conservative members would have wanted Thatcher to stay - in 1975 they backed Heath.

    There's a lot to be said for loyalty but in the end motivated self-interest plays a stronger card. If Conservative backbenchers think with Johnson leading they will lose their seats and with either Sunak or Truss they will keep them there's only one outcome.

    The recent polling showed Sunak doing only slightly better than Johnson (all others worse). In 1990, removing Thatcher converted a 10% deficit to Labour to a tie so a 5% swing.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 92,645
    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    54% of Conservative members wanting to keep Johnson in post however does not add to the pressure on him

    The opinions of Conservative members like you don't matter very much. The Parliamentary Party is all that matters - I would imagine in 1990 the overwhelming majority of Conservative members would have wanted Thatcher to stay - in 1975 they backed Heath.

    There's a lot to be said for loyalty but in the end motivated self-interest plays a stronger card. If Conservative backbenchers think with Johnson leading they will lose their seats and with either Sunak or Truss they will keep them there's only one outcome.

    The recent polling showed Sunak doing only slightly better than Johnson (all others worse). In 1990, removing Thatcher converted a 10% deficit to Labour to a tie so a 5% swing.
    Yes but even a Sunak led Labour did not lead Starmer.

    Tory members also get the final say now unlike 1990 and no guarantee they would pick Sunak, they could pick Truss or Patel instead
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 11,446
    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    54% of Conservative members wanting to keep Johnson in post however does not add to the pressure on him

    The opinions of Conservative members like you don't matter very much. The Parliamentary Party is all that matters - I would imagine in 1990 the overwhelming majority of Conservative members would have wanted Thatcher to stay - in 1975 they backed Heath.

    There's a lot to be said for loyalty but in the end motivated self-interest plays a stronger card. If Conservative backbenchers think with Johnson leading they will lose their seats and with either Sunak or Truss they will keep them there's only one outcome.

    The recent polling showed Sunak doing only slightly better than Johnson (all others worse). In 1990, removing Thatcher converted a 10% deficit to Labour to a tie so a 5% swing.
    Yes but even a Sunak led Labour did not lead Starmer.

    Tory members also get the final say now unlike 1990 and no guarantee they would pick Sunak, they could pick Truss or Patel instead
    you'd hope people would learn from a mistake as big as IDS. but no.
  • theProletheProle Posts: 588
    HYUFD said:

    54% of Conservative members wanting to keep Johnson in post however does not add to the pressure on him

    54% of Tory members is a pretty poor show for a Tory prime minister. If nearly half of all Tory members want rid, never mind the wider public, he's on very thin ice indeed.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 9,606
    HYUFD said:


    Yes but even a Sunak led Labour did not lead Starmer.

    Tory members also get the final say now unlike 1990 and no guarantee they would pick Sunak, they could pick Truss or Patel instead

    I think the fact Sunak isn't doing appreciably better keeps Johnson in place. After all, would not the MPs have dumped Major in 1995 had any other candidate been shown to be stronger electorally?

    The other problem is the membership gets the choice provided by the MPs - in 2001, IDS got one more vote than Portillo in the second round and the latter was eliminated.

    Would you have supported Portillo over Clarke in a hypothetical 2001 membership vote?

    Do you think the MPs were wrong to oust IDS in the autumn of 2003? No consultation with the membership and no choice either as Howard was the only candidate - should someone else have contested to provide the members with a choice?

    We've also had David Cameron and Theresa May, both incumbent Prime Ministers, walking away under pressure from the parliamentary party but did the membership wish either gone?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 69,284
    Coincidental deaths working:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XqoZNL0hHBUCLWxPloT6449hLK_695jkD7al65GMyLg/edit?usp=sharing

    About 2 reported deaths/day at the moment.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 92,645
    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:


    Yes but even a Sunak led Labour did not lead Starmer.

    Tory members also get the final say now unlike 1990 and no guarantee they would pick Sunak, they could pick Truss or Patel instead

    I think the fact Sunak isn't doing appreciably better keeps Johnson in place. After all, would not the MPs have dumped Major in 1995 had any other candidate been shown to be stronger electorally?

    The other problem is the membership gets the choice provided by the MPs - in 2001, IDS got one more vote than Portillo in the second round and the latter was eliminated.

    Would you have supported Portillo over Clarke in a hypothetical 2001 membership vote?

    Do you think the MPs were wrong to oust IDS in the autumn of 2003? No consultation with the membership and no choice either as Howard was the only candidate - should someone else have contested to provide the members with a choice?

    We've also had David Cameron and Theresa May, both incumbent Prime Ministers, walking away under pressure from the parliamentary party but did the membership wish either gone?
    Howard made little difference in 2005 to what IDS was polling.

    In 2001 I voted for Clarke and would have done so over Portillo too. His problem was the Euro although he offered a free vote
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 1,506
    @FAIRLIERED SAID “Good post Malcolm. @MoonRabbit if you want to understand why many of us Scots want Independence, the attached post may help explain.
    https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2021/12/29/how-i-hoped/

    I thank you for something to read to help me understand better. 👍🏻

    I’ll concede before reading it I expect Scottish Independence more complicated and nuanced than a couple of posts from Yorkie Girl could ever hope to help or even put my own concern about it very clearly. Especially if someone wants to say not all shared history of UK has been great, because we probably haven’t all been made aware of history the same, been taught UK history the same for me to agree, or disagree, only listen with open mind.

    Certainly if you say you are hurting, although I can’t feel or know your pain, speaking for myself I have no reason to doubt what you are telling me. I think this is different to some replies you are getting, claiming you don’t have a problem because you’ve never had it so good from Barnett formula, which I suspect might miss the point if you see how to take back control to be in better place.

    However. Certainly I don’t doubt too, after decades of globalisation the so called Brexit states of the US, the rust belt, are genuinely hurting, and they thought Dr Trump had the answer. It’s not that rust belt voters are stupid imo, it’s they were genuinely hurting, wanting change, and to be honest and fair to them, and Trump, just 4 years of such a change probably isn’t long enough to properly gauge if a new direction actually working or not.

    So what is the change which helps? Because I can’t think it is Purely political. For control you do need to take back control of what you believe is your own wealth?

    Do you already regard English Capital at work in Scotland as foreign? Because after Independence it should be seen as foreign.

    Neither England or the USA are free of the agency of foreign capital and globalisation, so in a very nuanced picture there is one clear black and white answer - if this is the cause of your pain, for sure Independence does not relieve you of this type of pain - after Independence, power and controlling interest of English Capital will own land, housing, businesses and industry in Scotland. To a large degree. Perhaps even to a growing degree.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 70,000
    HYUFD said:

    Corbyn may set up his own party if Labour do not readmit him

    https://twitter.com/electpoliticsuk/status/1480232757959737349?s=20

    That would be hilarious, probably be more enjoyable for him than being part of a party he has so often been opposed to so much (not as much as it seems perhaps, but it seems telling many of those who like him the most have spent a lot of time outside it), and a pretty rare occurence for a former leader to so quickly be completely persona non grata within the party.

    But he'll never do it. Unlike those supporters of his he's been Labour the whole time without any hint of wanting to be elsewhere, and his age means he can stand down and act little different to when he was a rebellious backbencher, and still be feted by the Left of the party.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 46,148
    London-based UCL iSAGE lockdown fanatic, Prof Pagel, interviewed via video by Sky News from, erm...

    ...checks notes.

    Penrith, Cumbria.

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 70,000

    Fck me, you'd think the last thing the Balkans needs is a Farage.


    Regardless of why he would insert himself into this, why on earth would they want a probably obscure (to them) English politico inserting himself into it? They surely did not actually meet with him, so he's 'with' them in spirit, right?
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 992

    @FAIRLIERED SAID “Good post Malcolm. @MoonRabbit if you want to understand why many of us Scots want Independence, the attached post may help explain.
    https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2021/12/29/how-i-hoped/

    I thank you for something to read to help me understand better. 👍🏻

    I’ll concede before reading it I expect Scottish Independence more complicated and nuanced than a couple of posts from Yorkie Girl could ever hope to help or even put my own concern about it very clearly. Especially if someone wants to say not all shared history of UK has been great, because we probably haven’t all been made aware of history the same, been taught UK history the same for me to agree, or disagree, only listen with open mind.

    Certainly if you say you are hurting, although I can’t feel or know your pain, speaking for myself I have no reason to doubt what you are telling me. I think this is different to some replies you are getting, claiming you don’t have a problem because you’ve never had it so good from Barnett formula, which I suspect might miss the point if you see how to take back control to be in better place.

    However. Certainly I don’t doubt too, after decades of globalisation the so called Brexit states of the US, the rust belt, are genuinely hurting, and they thought Dr Trump had the answer. It’s not that rust belt voters are stupid imo, it’s they were genuinely hurting, wanting change, and to be honest and fair to them, and Trump, just 4 years of such a change probably isn’t long enough to properly gauge if a new direction actually working or not.

    So what is the change which helps? Because I can’t think it is Purely political. For control you do need to take back control of what you believe is your own wealth?

    Do you already regard English Capital at work in Scotland as foreign? Because after Independence it should be seen as foreign.

    Neither England or the USA are free of the agency of foreign capital and globalisation, so in a very nuanced picture there is one clear black and white answer - if this is the cause of your pain, for sure Independence does not relieve you of this type of pain - after Independence, power and controlling interest of English Capital will own land, housing, businesses and industry in Scotland. To a large degree. Perhaps even to a growing degree.

    We just want to be friendly neighbours rather than surly lodgers.
    English Capital is bound to continue to own resources in Scotland, just as e.g. American Capital will continue to own resources in England, Scotland and elsewhere. I don’t think the ownership of the capital is as important as how it is managed. There are plenty of Scottish owned resources that are badly managed, whether land or ferries.
    Another thing the article reminded me is that whereas in Geology, the past is the key to the future, in politics it doesn’t have to be.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 46,148
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Corbyn may set up his own party if Labour do not readmit him

    https://twitter.com/electpoliticsuk/status/1480232757959737349?s=20

    That would be hilarious, probably be more enjoyable for him than being part of a party he has so often been opposed to so much (not as much as it seems perhaps, but it seems telling many of those who like him the most have spent a lot of time outside it), and a pretty rare occurence for a former leader to so quickly be completely persona non grata within the party.

    But he'll never do it. Unlike those supporters of his he's been Labour the whole time without any hint of wanting to be elsewhere, and his age means he can stand down and act little different to when he was a rebellious backbencher, and still be feted by the Left of the party.
    Chris Williamson of Derby will be delighted. He's been trying to set up a new left party for months.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 4,141
    kle4 said:

    Fck me, you'd think the last thing the Balkans needs is a Farage.


    Regardless of why he would insert himself into this, why on earth would they want a probably obscure (to them) English politico inserting himself into it? They surely did not actually meet with him, so he's 'with' them in spirit, right?
    Serbia has a fascination with fringe English characters - remember when Boysie from Fools and Horses Died? There was national mourning in Serbia.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 42,387
    MrEd said:

    kle4 said:

    Fck me, you'd think the last thing the Balkans needs is a Farage.


    Regardless of why he would insert himself into this, why on earth would they want a probably obscure (to them) English politico inserting himself into it? They surely did not actually meet with him, so he's 'with' them in spirit, right?
    Serbia has a fascination with fringe English characters - remember when Boysie from Fools and Horses Died? There was national mourning in Serbia.
    I believe Samantha Fox had quite a long-lived career in Yugoslavia
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 42,387
    MrEd said:

    kle4 said:

    Fck me, you'd think the last thing the Balkans needs is a Farage.


    Regardless of why he would insert himself into this, why on earth would they want a probably obscure (to them) English politico inserting himself into it? They surely did not actually meet with him, so he's 'with' them in spirit, right?
    Serbia has a fascination with fringe English characters - remember when Boysie from Fools and Horses Died? There was national mourning in Serbia.
    That being said... It seems like only yesterday that Farage was championing national sovereignty and the right of democratic governments to do what was right for their people.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 46,148


    Boris Johnson has been urged by an influential Conservative MP to end all Covid-19 restrictions in England by the end of this month, or face a massive revolt within his party and the prospect of a leadership challenge later this year.

    Mark Harper, chair of the lockdown-sceptic Tory Covid Recovery Group, said Johnson should announce by January 26 — when most current rules expire — that he will end them and never bring them back.

    https://www.ft.com/content/b076fc81-2320-4e08-ab18-73a19871be9d
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 4,141
    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    54% of Conservative members wanting to keep Johnson in post however does not add to the pressure on him

    The opinions of Conservative members like you don't matter very much. The Parliamentary Party is all that matters - I would imagine in 1990 the overwhelming majority of Conservative members would have wanted Thatcher to stay - in 1975 they backed Heath.

    There's a lot to be said for loyalty but in the end motivated self-interest plays a stronger card. If Conservative backbenchers think with Johnson leading they will lose their seats and with either Sunak or Truss they will keep them there's only one outcome.

    The recent polling showed Sunak doing only slightly better than Johnson (all others worse). In 1990, removing Thatcher converted a 10% deficit to Labour to a tie so a 5% swing.
    Banging the drum again but which is why I don't think Sunak or Truss are good value bets. It's the MPs who decide who goes through and, given the change in the composition of the MP base, there will be a lot of RW MPs who will be thinking who will keep them their seats.

    It is also worth noting that this bunch of newbie Tory MPs has been a lot more rebellious than their newbie predecessors. I do not think that is a coincidence - they are a lot more self-made and less willing to doff their hats in deference and be told what they should do.

    I also don't think Sunak aligning himself with Hunt (if that is true) is going to do Sunak much good. Many of these MPs come from constituencies where Hunt has, errmmm, not much appeal (typical, pro-Remain Tory that represents a Home Counties seat). Sunak is making the mistake of not thinking about the MP base.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 17,076



    Boris Johnson has been urged by an influential Conservative MP to end all Covid-19 restrictions in England by the end of this month, or face a massive revolt within his party and the prospect of a leadership challenge later this year.

    Mark Harper, chair of the lockdown-sceptic Tory Covid Recovery Group, said Johnson should announce by January 26 — when most current rules expire — that he will end them and never bring them back.

    https://www.ft.com/content/b076fc81-2320-4e08-ab18-73a19871be9d

    "Never"?
    Under any circumstances whatsoever?
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 4,141
    rcs1000 said:

    MrEd said:

    kle4 said:

    Fck me, you'd think the last thing the Balkans needs is a Farage.


    Regardless of why he would insert himself into this, why on earth would they want a probably obscure (to them) English politico inserting himself into it? They surely did not actually meet with him, so he's 'with' them in spirit, right?
    Serbia has a fascination with fringe English characters - remember when Boysie from Fools and Horses Died? There was national mourning in Serbia.
    I believe Samantha Fox had quite a long-lived career in Yugoslavia
    Blimey - did they have a thing for lesbian 80s models?
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 4,141
    rcs1000 said:

    MrEd said:

    kle4 said:

    Fck me, you'd think the last thing the Balkans needs is a Farage.


    Regardless of why he would insert himself into this, why on earth would they want a probably obscure (to them) English politico inserting himself into it? They surely did not actually meet with him, so he's 'with' them in spirit, right?
    Serbia has a fascination with fringe English characters - remember when Boysie from Fools and Horses Died? There was national mourning in Serbia.
    That being said... It seems like only yesterday that Farage was championing national sovereignty and the right of democratic governments to do what was right for their people.
    Well, yes. However, never let the logic get in the way of a good future op.

    He is clearly positioning himself for the pro-'choice' / anti-vaxx vote at home
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 1,506
    @kinabalu

    wonder horse

    Written on the fly, unsullied by commercial tie or financial obligation, by Jade (2022)

    Alone in the stables, aside on your hay,
    Your body mounting above mine,
    The insatiate dance of your tail,
    Your traveled, generous thigh.
    Chestnut coat, washed first in rain,
    Blessed by sun of late.
    Finger through forest fern of mane
    From astride your strong back,
    And here there I have gone and come again.

    Sharing ginger snaps, with my hand
    I feel your neck and press my body close,
    While you turn your head around me now,
    I go in for the hug and you wrap your neck
    around, neither of us want to stop.
    Innocence yet wisdom of this close,
    Two of us carefree.
    I whisper, I wonder horse -
    What becomes of you and me.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 46,148
    rcs1000 said:

    MrEd said:

    kle4 said:

    Fck me, you'd think the last thing the Balkans needs is a Farage.


    Regardless of why he would insert himself into this, why on earth would they want a probably obscure (to them) English politico inserting himself into it? They surely did not actually meet with him, so he's 'with' them in spirit, right?
    Serbia has a fascination with fringe English characters - remember when Boysie from Fools and Horses Died? There was national mourning in Serbia.
    That being said... It seems like only yesterday that Farage was championing national sovereignty and the right of democratic governments to do what was right for their people.
    I'm lost. Farage is now supporting immigration from eastern europe into points-based obsessed and member of the Commonwealth Australia?

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 17,443

    @FAIRLIERED SAID “Good post Malcolm. @MoonRabbit if you want to understand why many of us Scots want Independence, the attached post may help explain.
    https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2021/12/29/how-i-hoped/

    I thank you for something to read to help me understand better. 👍🏻

    I’ll concede before reading it I expect Scottish Independence more complicated and nuanced than a couple of posts from Yorkie Girl could ever hope to help or even put my own concern about it very clearly. Especially if someone wants to say not all shared history of UK has been great, because we probably haven’t all been made aware of history the same, been taught UK history the same for me to agree, or disagree, only listen with open mind.

    Certainly if you say you are hurting, although I can’t feel or know your pain, speaking for myself I have no reason to doubt what you are telling me. I think this is different to some replies you are getting, claiming you don’t have a problem because you’ve never had it so good from Barnett formula, which I suspect might miss the point if you see how to take back control to be in better place.

    However. Certainly I don’t doubt too, after decades of globalisation the so called Brexit states of the US, the rust belt, are genuinely hurting, and they thought Dr Trump had the answer. It’s not that rust belt voters are stupid imo, it’s they were genuinely hurting, wanting change, and to be honest and fair to them, and Trump, just 4 years of such a change probably isn’t long enough to properly gauge if a new direction actually working or not.

    So what is the change which helps? Because I can’t think it is Purely political. For control you do need to take back control of what you believe is your own wealth?

    Do you already regard English Capital at work in Scotland as foreign? Because after Independence it should be seen as foreign.

    Neither England or the USA are free of the agency of foreign capital and globalisation, so in a very nuanced picture there is one clear black and white answer - if this is the cause of your pain, for sure Independence does not relieve you of this type of pain - after Independence, power and controlling interest of English Capital will own land, housing, businesses and industry in Scotland. To a large degree. Perhaps even to a growing degree.

    We just want to be friendly neighbours rather than surly lodgers.
    English Capital is bound to continue to own resources in Scotland, just as e.g. American Capital will continue to own resources in England, Scotland and elsewhere. I don’t think the ownership of the capital is as important as how it is managed. There are plenty of Scottish owned resources that are badly managed, whether land or ferries.
    Another thing the article reminded me is that whereas in Geology, the past is the key to the future, in politics it doesn’t have to be.
    PB pedantry: It's 'the past is the key to the present' ((c) C. Lyell 1830-33). But, by extension, also to the future.

    Which makes a better comparison, no?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 42,387
    MrEd said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    54% of Conservative members wanting to keep Johnson in post however does not add to the pressure on him

    The opinions of Conservative members like you don't matter very much. The Parliamentary Party is all that matters - I would imagine in 1990 the overwhelming majority of Conservative members would have wanted Thatcher to stay - in 1975 they backed Heath.

    There's a lot to be said for loyalty but in the end motivated self-interest plays a stronger card. If Conservative backbenchers think with Johnson leading they will lose their seats and with either Sunak or Truss they will keep them there's only one outcome.

    The recent polling showed Sunak doing only slightly better than Johnson (all others worse). In 1990, removing Thatcher converted a 10% deficit to Labour to a tie so a 5% swing.
    Banging the drum again but which is why I don't think Sunak or Truss are good value bets. It's the MPs who decide who goes through and, given the change in the composition of the MP base, there will be a lot of RW MPs who will be thinking who will keep them their seats.

    It is also worth noting that this bunch of newbie Tory MPs has been a lot more rebellious than their newbie predecessors. I do not think that is a coincidence - they are a lot more self-made and less willing to doff their hats in deference and be told what they should do.

    I also don't think Sunak aligning himself with Hunt (if that is true) is going to do Sunak much good. Many of these MPs come from constituencies where Hunt has, errmmm, not much appeal (typical, pro-Remain Tory that represents a Home Counties seat). Sunak is making the mistake of not thinking about the MP base.
    I agree with your general thrust - and I certainly agree with selling Truss and Sunak here - but you do need to remember that there aren't that many Blue Wall Maps. They are outnumber 3-1 (or more) by their colleagues from the prosperous shires.

    The Blue Wall, on its own, does not have the numbers to force someone of their liking into the last two. (Plus, of course, some Blue Wall MPs, like TissuePrice of this site, are fearsomely independent.)
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 46,148
    rcs1000 said:

    MrEd said:

    kle4 said:

    Fck me, you'd think the last thing the Balkans needs is a Farage.


    Regardless of why he would insert himself into this, why on earth would they want a probably obscure (to them) English politico inserting himself into it? They surely did not actually meet with him, so he's 'with' them in spirit, right?
    Serbia has a fascination with fringe English characters - remember when Boysie from Fools and Horses Died? There was national mourning in Serbia.
    That being said... It seems like only yesterday that Farage was championing national sovereignty and the right of democratic governments to do what was right for their people.
    Serbian rules for covid according to Foreign office:

    Entry to Serbia
    All visitors to Serbia (with a limited number of exceptions set out below) must present one of the following documents on arrival. You will be refused entry if you do not provide one of these documents:

    A negative PCR test result issued within 48 hours of arrival. Visitors travelling from the USA may also present an antigen FIA Rapid Test result. Tests cannot be taken on arrival;
    Certificate of vaccination issued in Serbia, or a country with which Serbia has concluded an agreement on vaccine recognition (includes the UK – See Demonstrating your COVID-19 status);
    Certificate of Covid-19 recovery, issued within 6 months of arrival, issued in Serbia or a country with which Serbia has concluded an agreement on such documents (does not include the UK).
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 33,263
    dixiedean said:



    Boris Johnson has been urged by an influential Conservative MP to end all Covid-19 restrictions in England by the end of this month, or face a massive revolt within his party and the prospect of a leadership challenge later this year.

    Mark Harper, chair of the lockdown-sceptic Tory Covid Recovery Group, said Johnson should announce by January 26 — when most current rules expire — that he will end them and never bring them back.

    https://www.ft.com/content/b076fc81-2320-4e08-ab18-73a19871be9d

    "Never"?
    Under any circumstances whatsoever?
    Not for COVID. There's clearly enough latent population immunity to absorb tens of millions of cases without a huge rise in hospitalisations and deaths now.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 6,926
    MrEd said:

    kle4 said:

    Fck me, you'd think the last thing the Balkans needs is a Farage.


    Regardless of why he would insert himself into this, why on earth would they want a probably obscure (to them) English politico inserting himself into it? They surely did not actually meet with him, so he's 'with' them in spirit, right?
    Serbia has a fascination with fringe English characters - remember when Boysie from Fools and Horses Died? There was national mourning in Serbia.
    Don't some fringe English characters also have a fascination with Serbia, like those weird Marxists who tried to pretend that Srebrenica etc didn't happen and who now all seem to work for or support the Tories?
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 5,390
    dixiedean said:



    Boris Johnson has been urged by an influential Conservative MP to end all Covid-19 restrictions in England by the end of this month, or face a massive revolt within his party and the prospect of a leadership challenge later this year.

    Mark Harper, chair of the lockdown-sceptic Tory Covid Recovery Group, said Johnson should announce by January 26 — when most current rules expire — that he will end them and never bring them back.

    https://www.ft.com/content/b076fc81-2320-4e08-ab18-73a19871be9d

    "Never"?
    Under any circumstances whatsoever?
    I have a lot of sympathy with the idea of rolling back on plan b on the 26th, assuming things are moving in the right direction. But saying you will never bring them back? No sensible person should ever do that.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 44,738
    edited January 9
    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:


    Yes but even a Sunak led Labour did not lead Starmer.

    Tory members also get the final say now unlike 1990 and no guarantee they would pick Sunak, they could pick Truss or Patel instead

    I think the fact Sunak isn't doing appreciably better keeps Johnson in place. After all, would not the MPs have dumped Major in 1995 had any other candidate been shown to be stronger electorally?
    Only if they had stood against him. Remember, voting against Major in 1995 meant voting for John Redwood. And in no place in the current space time continuum was that a better option.

    Had Heseltine stood he might well have won, but he chose not to.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 44,738
    dixiedean said:



    Boris Johnson has been urged by an influential Conservative MP to end all Covid-19 restrictions in England by the end of this month, or face a massive revolt within his party and the prospect of a leadership challenge later this year.

    Mark Harper, chair of the lockdown-sceptic Tory Covid Recovery Group, said Johnson should announce by January 26 — when most current rules expire — that he will end them and never bring them back.

    https://www.ft.com/content/b076fc81-2320-4e08-ab18-73a19871be9d

    "Never"?
    Under any circumstances whatsoever?
    Well, 'Boris Johnson never bringing them back' only covers about three months. Then it will be up to PM Sunak instead.

    So it seems a reasonable request.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 7,297
    MrEd said:

    kle4 said:

    Fck me, you'd think the last thing the Balkans needs is a Farage.


    Regardless of why he would insert himself into this, why on earth would they want a probably obscure (to them) English politico inserting himself into it? They surely did not actually meet with him, so he's 'with' them in spirit, right?
    Serbia has a fascination with fringe English characters - remember when Boysie from Fools and Horses Died? There was national mourning in Serbia.
    Did they mistake Farage for Boycie perhaps? There are certainly similarities, though the difference in trustworthiness is of course vast.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 33,263

    dixiedean said:



    Boris Johnson has been urged by an influential Conservative MP to end all Covid-19 restrictions in England by the end of this month, or face a massive revolt within his party and the prospect of a leadership challenge later this year.

    Mark Harper, chair of the lockdown-sceptic Tory Covid Recovery Group, said Johnson should announce by January 26 — when most current rules expire — that he will end them and never bring them back.

    https://www.ft.com/content/b076fc81-2320-4e08-ab18-73a19871be9d

    "Never"?
    Under any circumstances whatsoever?
    I have a lot of sympathy with the idea of rolling back on plan b on the 26th, assuming things are moving in the right direction. But saying you will never bring them back? No sensible person should ever do that.
    I think they're positioning themselves as Spartans to force Boris into dumping restrictions and not ever going down the "restrictions just in case" like we had this time. Clearly plan b has made little difference, at least 10-12m will have had Omicron by now, that took 6 months with Delta. We didn't have "lockdown just in case" because the 100 MPs and Cabinet pushed back. Now we need to get to a place where restrictions like plan b actually need to backed up by real world data, not just fear mongering from scientists about some unlikely outcomes of not having them.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 17,888
    HYUFD said:

    Corbyn may set up his own party if Labour do not readmit him

    https://twitter.com/electpoliticsuk/status/1480232757959737349?s=20

    Its Lee Harpin, ignore
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 992
    MrEd said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    54% of Conservative members wanting to keep Johnson in post however does not add to the pressure on him

    The opinions of Conservative members like you don't matter very much. The Parliamentary Party is all that matters - I would imagine in 1990 the overwhelming majority of Conservative members would have wanted Thatcher to stay - in 1975 they backed Heath.

    There's a lot to be said for loyalty but in the end motivated self-interest plays a stronger card. If Conservative backbenchers think with Johnson leading they will lose their seats and with either Sunak or Truss they will keep them there's only one outcome.

    The recent polling showed Sunak doing only slightly better than Johnson (all others worse). In 1990, removing Thatcher converted a 10% deficit to Labour to a tie so a 5% swing.
    Banging the drum again but which is why I don't think Sunak or Truss are good value bets. It's the MPs who decide who goes through and, given the change in the composition of the MP base, there will be a lot of RW MPs who will be thinking who will keep them their seats.

    It is also worth noting that this bunch of newbie Tory MPs has been a lot more rebellious than their newbie predecessors. I do not think that is a coincidence - they are a lot more self-made and less willing to doff their hats in deference and be told what they should do.

    I also don't think Sunak aligning himself with Hunt (if that is true) is going to do Sunak much good. Many of these MPs come from constituencies where Hunt has, errmmm, not much appeal (typical, pro-Remain Tory that represents a Home Counties seat). Sunak is making the mistake of not thinking about the MP base.
    I suspect that Conservative MPs will be thinking about three interlinked concerns. How do I retain my seat/salary/pension.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 992

    HYUFD said:

    Corbyn may set up his own party if Labour do not readmit him

    https://twitter.com/electpoliticsuk/status/1480232757959737349?s=20

    Its Lee Harpin, ignore
    Would you join, BJO?
  • kjhkjh Posts: 4,779
    Here is the link that @moonshine posted here Friday night
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cHYbphiulKc&feature=youtu.be

    A cursory inspection shows it to be a QAnon post generated by 'DemoQracy Fighters' (note the Capitalised Q is as they describe themselves). Amongst their videos are videos on Pizzagate, several on Pedogate (with Tom Hanks given over to a whole video) Alien Invasion (the take over of Govt by aliens), David Icke the freedom fighter, Plandemic, New World Order, Covid 19 is a Global Scam. The list goes on. It was not rocket science to identify the source; it's there with the video. @Moonshine should be called out for posting this stuff.

    I appreciate it is not my place but my view is that anyone posting and promoting QAon videos should be banned.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 15,391
    Have been doing some reading on the new interlinked smoke alarms legislation up here from next month.

    As I haven't yet clicked the button to buy new interlinked alarms to replace the existing interlinked alarms I was curious about the whole fiasco.

    Various MSPs and councillors demanding a further delay as so many people don't know about it or don't have the cash or think they are already compliant.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 992
    Carnyx said:

    @FAIRLIERED SAID “Good post Malcolm. @MoonRabbit if you want to understand why many of us Scots want Independence, the attached post may help explain.
    https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2021/12/29/how-i-hoped/

    I thank you for something to read to help me understand better. 👍🏻

    I’ll concede before reading it I expect Scottish Independence more complicated and nuanced than a couple of posts from Yorkie Girl could ever hope to help or even put my own concern about it very clearly. Especially if someone wants to say not all shared history of UK has been great, because we probably haven’t all been made aware of history the same, been taught UK history the same for me to agree, or disagree, only listen with open mind.

    Certainly if you say you are hurting, although I can’t feel or know your pain, speaking for myself I have no reason to doubt what you are telling me. I think this is different to some replies you are getting, claiming you don’t have a problem because you’ve never had it so good from Barnett formula, which I suspect might miss the point if you see how to take back control to be in better place.

    However. Certainly I don’t doubt too, after decades of globalisation the so called Brexit states of the US, the rust belt, are genuinely hurting, and they thought Dr Trump had the answer. It’s not that rust belt voters are stupid imo, it’s they were genuinely hurting, wanting change, and to be honest and fair to them, and Trump, just 4 years of such a change probably isn’t long enough to properly gauge if a new direction actually working or not.

    So what is the change which helps? Because I can’t think it is Purely political. For control you do need to take back control of what you believe is your own wealth?

    Do you already regard English Capital at work in Scotland as foreign? Because after Independence it should be seen as foreign.

    Neither England or the USA are free of the agency of foreign capital and globalisation, so in a very nuanced picture there is one clear black and white answer - if this is the cause of your pain, for sure Independence does not relieve you of this type of pain - after Independence, power and controlling interest of English Capital will own land, housing, businesses and industry in Scotland. To a large degree. Perhaps even to a growing degree.

    We just want to be friendly neighbours rather than surly lodgers.
    English Capital is bound to continue to own resources in Scotland, just as e.g. American Capital will continue to own resources in England, Scotland and elsewhere. I don’t think the ownership of the capital is as important as how it is managed. There are plenty of Scottish owned resources that are badly managed, whether land or ferries.
    Another thing the article reminded me is that whereas in Geology, the past is the key to the future, in politics it doesn’t have to be.
    PB pedantry: It's 'the past is the key to the present' ((c) C. Lyell 1830-33). But, by extension, also to the future.

    Which makes a better comparison, no?
    Both, @Carnyx
    http://www.open.ac.uk/blogs/per/?p=1793
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 992

    Have been doing some reading on the new interlinked smoke alarms legislation up here from next month.

    As I haven't yet clicked the button to buy new interlinked alarms to replace the existing interlinked alarms I was curious about the whole fiasco.

    Various MSPs and councillors demanding a further delay as so many people don't know about it or don't have the cash or think they are already compliant.

    We got ours fitted just before Christmas. Don’t want to give the Insurance Company any excuse not to pay out in case of fire.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 70,000

    dixiedean said:



    Boris Johnson has been urged by an influential Conservative MP to end all Covid-19 restrictions in England by the end of this month, or face a massive revolt within his party and the prospect of a leadership challenge later this year.

    Mark Harper, chair of the lockdown-sceptic Tory Covid Recovery Group, said Johnson should announce by January 26 — when most current rules expire — that he will end them and never bring them back.

    https://www.ft.com/content/b076fc81-2320-4e08-ab18-73a19871be9d

    "Never"?
    Under any circumstances whatsoever?
    I have a lot of sympathy with the idea of rolling back on plan b on the 26th, assuming things are moving in the right direction. But saying you will never bring them back? No sensible person should ever do that.
    It's like when polling found the public supposedly in favour of never removing restrictions ever - a way of emotionally showing committment to a position more than the reality. I hope.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 5,775
    The Covid Recovery Group is doing a good job holding Johnson's feet to the fire. Would that other parties had similar dissident policy groups within them (Alba doesn't qualify, being about personalities rather than policies).
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 17,076

    dixiedean said:



    Boris Johnson has been urged by an influential Conservative MP to end all Covid-19 restrictions in England by the end of this month, or face a massive revolt within his party and the prospect of a leadership challenge later this year.

    Mark Harper, chair of the lockdown-sceptic Tory Covid Recovery Group, said Johnson should announce by January 26 — when most current rules expire — that he will end them and never bring them back.

    https://www.ft.com/content/b076fc81-2320-4e08-ab18-73a19871be9d

    "Never"?
    Under any circumstances whatsoever?
    I have a lot of sympathy with the idea of rolling back on plan b on the 26th, assuming things are moving in the right direction. But saying you will never bring them back? No sensible person should ever do that.
    Very much my view too.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 5,036
    MaxPB said:

    dixiedean said:



    Boris Johnson has been urged by an influential Conservative MP to end all Covid-19 restrictions in England by the end of this month, or face a massive revolt within his party and the prospect of a leadership challenge later this year.

    Mark Harper, chair of the lockdown-sceptic Tory Covid Recovery Group, said Johnson should announce by January 26 — when most current rules expire — that he will end them and never bring them back.

    https://www.ft.com/content/b076fc81-2320-4e08-ab18-73a19871be9d

    "Never"?
    Under any circumstances whatsoever?
    I have a lot of sympathy with the idea of rolling back on plan b on the 26th, assuming things are moving in the right direction. But saying you will never bring them back? No sensible person should ever do that.
    I think they're positioning themselves as Spartans to force Boris into dumping restrictions and not ever going down the "restrictions just in case" like we had this time. Clearly plan b has made little difference, at least 10-12m will have had Omicron by now, that took 6 months with Delta. We didn't have "lockdown just in case" because the 100 MPs and Cabinet pushed back. Now we need to get to a place where restrictions like plan b actually need to backed up by real world data, not just fear mongering from scientists about some unlikely outcomes of not having them.
    Hm.
    I'm pretty anti-lockdown.
    But I'd see a case for restrictions in the face of, say, an outbreak of the bubonic plague.
    That said, anything short of 'never' is going to embolden the lockdowners.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 604
    edited January 9

    Have been doing some reading on the new interlinked smoke alarms legislation up here from next month.

    As I haven't yet clicked the button to buy new interlinked alarms to replace the existing interlinked alarms I was curious about the whole fiasco.

    Various MSPs and councillors demanding a further delay as so many people don't know about it or don't have the cash or think they are already compliant.

    Christ, I've just looked at the requirements for my tiny one bed flat. Complete overkill. I've got new, modern ones from when I moved here two years ago.

    £220. Piss off.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 13,107
    The interesting figure: 45% of Tory Party members think Johnson can be trusted to tell the truth. First of all, who are these people? Secondly if he can't be trusted to tell the truth, why is he is leader of your party?
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 1,251
    edited January 9
    I am increasingly convinced what remains of our fragile freedom is in the hands of backbench conservative MPs. They are keeping the lights on, as they go off in large parts of the world. Other parts of Western Europe and the Anglosphere seem to be sleepwalking in to a draconian biosurveillance state. But there is hope for us.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 17,888

    HYUFD said:

    Corbyn may set up his own party if Labour do not readmit him

    https://twitter.com/electpoliticsuk/status/1480232757959737349?s=20

    Its Lee Harpin, ignore
    Would you join, BJO?
    As i say its a story made up by Lee Harpin so wouldnt expect it to happen


    If their was a Socialist Party led by Corbyn I would donate money to it and vote for it but dont think its going to happen
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 17,076
    FF43 said:

    The interesting figure: 45% of Tory Party members think Johnson can be trusted to tell the truth. First of all, who are these people? Secondly if he can't be trusted to tell the truth, why is he is leader of your party?

    1) Conservative Party members.
    2) Because of Conservative Party members.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 39,061
    FF43 said:

    The interesting figure: 45% of Tory Party members think Johnson can be trusted to tell the truth. First of all, who are these people? Secondly if he can't be trusted to tell the truth, why is he is leader of your party?

    I always lie. In fact, I am lying to you now.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 604

    Have been doing some reading on the new interlinked smoke alarms legislation up here from next month.

    As I haven't yet clicked the button to buy new interlinked alarms to replace the existing interlinked alarms I was curious about the whole fiasco.

    Various MSPs and councillors demanding a further delay as so many people don't know about it or don't have the cash or think they are already compliant.

    We got ours fitted just before Christmas. Don’t want to give the Insurance Company any excuse not to pay out in case of fire.
    Balls. Going to have to get them, aren't I.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 92,645
    edited January 9

    MrEd said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    54% of Conservative members wanting to keep Johnson in post however does not add to the pressure on him

    The opinions of Conservative members like you don't matter very much. The Parliamentary Party is all that matters - I would imagine in 1990 the overwhelming majority of Conservative members would have wanted Thatcher to stay - in 1975 they backed Heath.

    There's a lot to be said for loyalty but in the end motivated self-interest plays a stronger card. If Conservative backbenchers think with Johnson leading they will lose their seats and with either Sunak or Truss they will keep them there's only one outcome.

    The recent polling showed Sunak doing only slightly better than Johnson (all others worse). In 1990, removing Thatcher converted a 10% deficit to Labour to a tie so a 5% swing.
    Banging the drum again but which is why I don't think Sunak or Truss are good value bets. It's the MPs who decide who goes through and, given the change in the composition of the MP base, there will be a lot of RW MPs who will be thinking who will keep them their seats.

    It is also worth noting that this bunch of newbie Tory MPs has been a lot more rebellious than their newbie predecessors. I do not think that is a coincidence - they are a lot more self-made and less willing to doff their hats in deference and be told what they should do.

    I also don't think Sunak aligning himself with Hunt (if that is true) is going to do Sunak much good. Many of these MPs come from constituencies where Hunt has, errmmm, not much appeal (typical, pro-Remain Tory that represents a Home Counties seat). Sunak is making the mistake of not thinking about the MP base.
    I suspect that Conservative MPs will be thinking about three interlinked concerns. How do I retain my seat/salary/pension.
    If they are in marginals, less so in safe seats. Especially if they earnt more before election anyway
  • sladeslade Posts: 1,391
    I missed the earlier discussion on the disposal of books. I recently did an inventory of my library which revealed I had nearly 1500 books and hundreds of journals. Like many others I an loathe to dispose any of them but do reflect on their potential value. I suspect I have paid the equivalent of £15000 for them in real terms but what are they worth now? For example is a first edition of Dudintsev's Not by Bread Alone worth more than a complete paperback set of Dennis Wheatley? When I die I suspect they are all destined for the dump. What a waste.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 17,076
    edited January 9
    darkage said:

    I am increasingly convinced what remains of our fragile freedom is in the hands of backbench conservative MPs. They are keeping the lights on, as they go off in large parts of the world. Other parts of Western Europe and the Anglosphere seem to be sleepwalking in to a draconian biosurveillance state. But there is hope for us.

    Would that fragile freedom include the right not to be stripped of your citizenship in secret?
    Cos that frightens me more than wearing a mask in Tesco.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 992
    Eabhal said:

    Have been doing some reading on the new interlinked smoke alarms legislation up here from next month.

    As I haven't yet clicked the button to buy new interlinked alarms to replace the existing interlinked alarms I was curious about the whole fiasco.

    Various MSPs and councillors demanding a further delay as so many people don't know about it or don't have the cash or think they are already compliant.

    Christ, I've just looked at the requirements for my tiny one bed flat. Complete overkill. I've got new, modern ones from when I moved here two years ago.

    £220. Piss off.
    We paid £229.50 for supply and fitting of 4 smoke alarms and 2 CO2 alarms. Local firm.
    Suggest you shop around or ask for recommendations.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 992

    FF43 said:

    The interesting figure: 45% of Tory Party members think Johnson can be trusted to tell the truth. First of all, who are these people? Secondly if he can't be trusted to tell the truth, why is he is leader of your party?

    I always lie. In fact, I am lying to you now.
    How do we know whether, when you tell us you’re lying, you’re telling the truth?
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 5,775
    slade said:

    I missed the earlier discussion on the disposal of books. I recently did an inventory of my library which revealed I had nearly 1500 books and hundreds of journals. Like many others I an loathe to dispose any of them but do reflect on their potential value. I suspect I have paid the equivalent of £15000 for them in real terms but what are they worth now? For example is a first edition of Dudintsev's Not by Bread Alone worth more than a complete paperback set of Dennis Wheatley? When I die I suspect they are all destined for the dump. What a waste.

    I faced that problem some years ago when I retired. Long runs of top academic journals which I offered to the university library and also to academic departments with their own libraries. Interest was there none. Some textbooks made their way to Amazon market place, but mainly to charity sales.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 3,422
    darkage said:

    I am increasingly convinced what remains of our fragile freedom is in the hands of backbench conservative MPs. They are keeping the lights on, as they go off in large parts of the world. Other parts of Western Europe and the Anglosphere seem to be sleepwalking in to a draconian biosurveillance state. But there is hope for us.

    Are those the same backbenchers that are eagerly voting to remove the right to 'noisy' protest, to limit judicial reviews, and to make the revocation of citizenship easier?
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 5,775

    Eabhal said:

    Have been doing some reading on the new interlinked smoke alarms legislation up here from next month.

    As I haven't yet clicked the button to buy new interlinked alarms to replace the existing interlinked alarms I was curious about the whole fiasco.

    Various MSPs and councillors demanding a further delay as so many people don't know about it or don't have the cash or think they are already compliant.

    Christ, I've just looked at the requirements for my tiny one bed flat. Complete overkill. I've got new, modern ones from when I moved here two years ago.

    £220. Piss off.
    We paid £229.50 for supply and fitting of 4 smoke alarms and 2 CO2 alarms. Local firm.
    Suggest you shop around or ask for recommendations.
    Wasn't it carbon monoxide?
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 15,391
    Eabhal said:

    Have been doing some reading on the new interlinked smoke alarms legislation up here from next month.

    As I haven't yet clicked the button to buy new interlinked alarms to replace the existing interlinked alarms I was curious about the whole fiasco.

    Various MSPs and councillors demanding a further delay as so many people don't know about it or don't have the cash or think they are already compliant.

    We got ours fitted just before Christmas. Don’t want to give the Insurance Company any excuse not to pay out in case of fire.
    Balls. Going to have to get them, aren't I.
    Does make me laugh. Have interconnected alarms (Google Nest). Smoke. Carbon Monoxide. Dust. But as no heat detector non-compliant.

    So now supposedly they want a 2nd set. Including one on the ceiling of my living room right next to the one on the ceiling of my hallway. Which will go off interlinked even if there is a power cut just like the ones I already have.

    Point here is that a lot a lot of people appear not to have installed new alarms and there have been shortages of supply. I get fire safety but most of us don't live in Grenfell. How the insurance industry copes with mass non-compliance will be interesting - especially as the legislation makes 1st February not an absolute deadline...
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 15,800
    FF43 said:

    The interesting figure: 45% of Tory Party members think Johnson can be trusted to tell the truth. First of all, who are these people? Secondly if he can't be trusted to tell the truth, why is he is leader of your party?

    They'd rather have a lying Tory as PM than a truthful Tory as LotO.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 15,391

    Eabhal said:

    Have been doing some reading on the new interlinked smoke alarms legislation up here from next month.

    As I haven't yet clicked the button to buy new interlinked alarms to replace the existing interlinked alarms I was curious about the whole fiasco.

    Various MSPs and councillors demanding a further delay as so many people don't know about it or don't have the cash or think they are already compliant.

    Christ, I've just looked at the requirements for my tiny one bed flat. Complete overkill. I've got new, modern ones from when I moved here two years ago.

    £220. Piss off.
    We paid £229.50 for supply and fitting of 4 smoke alarms and 2 CO2 alarms. Local firm.
    Suggest you shop around or ask for recommendations.
    Suspect I'll have to do the same. Dumb detectors to sit redundant alongside my existing smart system. Pay £dollar for home insurance compliance because I do at least have the money.

    A lot of people don't though. And buying compliant smoke alarms when they already have smoke alarms and are skint is not their priority.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 44,738
    geoffw said:

    Eabhal said:

    Have been doing some reading on the new interlinked smoke alarms legislation up here from next month.

    As I haven't yet clicked the button to buy new interlinked alarms to replace the existing interlinked alarms I was curious about the whole fiasco.

    Various MSPs and councillors demanding a further delay as so many people don't know about it or don't have the cash or think they are already compliant.

    Christ, I've just looked at the requirements for my tiny one bed flat. Complete overkill. I've got new, modern ones from when I moved here two years ago.

    £220. Piss off.
    We paid £229.50 for supply and fitting of 4 smoke alarms and 2 CO2 alarms. Local firm.
    Suggest you shop around or ask for recommendations.
    Wasn't it carbon monoxide?
    It was meant to be, but their supply was exhausted.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 604

    Eabhal said:

    Have been doing some reading on the new interlinked smoke alarms legislation up here from next month.

    As I haven't yet clicked the button to buy new interlinked alarms to replace the existing interlinked alarms I was curious about the whole fiasco.

    Various MSPs and councillors demanding a further delay as so many people don't know about it or don't have the cash or think they are already compliant.

    Christ, I've just looked at the requirements for my tiny one bed flat. Complete overkill. I've got new, modern ones from when I moved here two years ago.

    £220. Piss off.
    We paid £229.50 for supply and fitting of 4 smoke alarms and 2 CO2 alarms. Local firm.
    Suggest you shop around or ask for recommendations.
    Suspect I'll have to do the same. Dumb detectors to sit redundant alongside my existing smart system. Pay £dollar for home insurance compliance because I do at least have the money.

    A lot of people don't though. And buying compliant smoke alarms when they already have smoke alarms and are skint is not their priority.
    The Grenfell explanation is a bit off given there are flats in Edinburgh with dodgy cladding. Sort that out first.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 44,738
    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Have been doing some reading on the new interlinked smoke alarms legislation up here from next month.

    As I haven't yet clicked the button to buy new interlinked alarms to replace the existing interlinked alarms I was curious about the whole fiasco.

    Various MSPs and councillors demanding a further delay as so many people don't know about it or don't have the cash or think they are already compliant.

    Christ, I've just looked at the requirements for my tiny one bed flat. Complete overkill. I've got new, modern ones from when I moved here two years ago.

    £220. Piss off.
    We paid £229.50 for supply and fitting of 4 smoke alarms and 2 CO2 alarms. Local firm.
    Suggest you shop around or ask for recommendations.
    Suspect I'll have to do the same. Dumb detectors to sit redundant alongside my existing smart system. Pay £dollar for home insurance compliance because I do at least have the money.

    A lot of people don't though. And buying compliant smoke alarms when they already have smoke alarms and are skint is not their priority.
    The Grenfell explanation is a bit off given there are flats in Edinburgh with dodgy cladding. Sort that out first.
    Rather than arson about with pointless second smoke alarms.

    Good night.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 15,800
    slade said:

    I missed the earlier discussion on the disposal of books. I recently did an inventory of my library which revealed I had nearly 1500 books and hundreds of journals. Like many others I an loathe to dispose any of them but do reflect on their potential value. I suspect I have paid the equivalent of £15000 for them in real terms but what are they worth now? For example is a first edition of Dudintsev's Not by Bread Alone worth more than a complete paperback set of Dennis Wheatley? When I die I suspect they are all destined for the dump. What a waste.

    I always take the view that if nobody in the house is ever going to read a book on the shelf then there is no point in owning it. Either sell it, donate it or leave it in a public place.

    (Autocomplete suggested "convenience" after "public". That would also be an option.)
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 5,775
    ydoethur said:

    geoffw said:

    Eabhal said:

    Have been doing some reading on the new interlinked smoke alarms legislation up here from next month.

    As I haven't yet clicked the button to buy new interlinked alarms to replace the existing interlinked alarms I was curious about the whole fiasco.

    Various MSPs and councillors demanding a further delay as so many people don't know about it or don't have the cash or think they are already compliant.

    Christ, I've just looked at the requirements for my tiny one bed flat. Complete overkill. I've got new, modern ones from when I moved here two years ago.

    £220. Piss off.
    We paid £229.50 for supply and fitting of 4 smoke alarms and 2 CO2 alarms. Local firm.
    Suggest you shop around or ask for recommendations.
    Wasn't it carbon monoxide?
    It was meant to be, but their supply was exhausted.
    Incomplete burn there.

  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 17,076
    Just seen the FA Cup draw.
    Could it possibly be duller?
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 4,141

    MrEd said:

    kle4 said:

    Fck me, you'd think the last thing the Balkans needs is a Farage.


    Regardless of why he would insert himself into this, why on earth would they want a probably obscure (to them) English politico inserting himself into it? They surely did not actually meet with him, so he's 'with' them in spirit, right?
    Serbia has a fascination with fringe English characters - remember when Boysie from Fools and Horses Died? There was national mourning in Serbia.
    Did they mistake Farage for Boycie perhaps? There are certainly similarities, though the difference in trustworthiness is of course vast.
    The Second Coming perhaps?
  • sladeslade Posts: 1,391
    According to Mark Pack since May last year local by-elections have seen the following results: Con -11, Lab -5, LD +12. Green =+12, Ref -1, SNP - +1. The balance in probably Ind and localists.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 604
    At least I have my PB-related winnings to dig into for these stupid fire alarms.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 15,800
    dixiedean said:

    Just seen the FA Cup draw.
    Could it possibly be duller?

    The 4th round draw is always dull when you've been knocked out in the third round. Moreso when you were at home against a team from two divisions lower. With your newly signed England international making his debut. I suppose the Toon are now the richest club not in the 4th round draw!
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 4,141

    MrEd said:

    kle4 said:

    Fck me, you'd think the last thing the Balkans needs is a Farage.


    Regardless of why he would insert himself into this, why on earth would they want a probably obscure (to them) English politico inserting himself into it? They surely did not actually meet with him, so he's 'with' them in spirit, right?
    Serbia has a fascination with fringe English characters - remember when Boysie from Fools and Horses Died? There was national mourning in Serbia.
    Don't some fringe English characters also have a fascination with Serbia, like those weird Marxists who tried to pretend that Srebrenica etc didn't happen and who now all seem to work for or support the Tories?
    I know there were some who were pro-Serbian and / or probably Marxists. Did they end up in the Tory party? Honestly, don’t know.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 15,391
    Hypothetical question. Smoke alarms are there not to prevent fire but to prevent death. Fire in house. Alarms allow the safe evacuation of inhabitants.

    Will their insurance company refuse to pay out because their functional alarms which worked as intended were not the specific type required by Scotland's new law?

    Most insurance policies have a clause about complying with legislation. But that's always so far been about things like building codes (which Grenfell did!). So it's a letter vs spirit of the law question...
  • stodgestodge Posts: 9,606
    dixiedean said:

    Just seen the FA Cup draw.
    Could it possibly be duller?

    Certainly seems to have favoured the bigger clubs with most avoiding each other and getting easy home draws. West Ham might not relish the trip to Kidderminster.

    Perhaps, as @darkage suggests, we should have got the draw carried out by those last bastions of hope and freedom against the encroaching darkness, Conservative backbench MPs.

    We can but hope these doughty fighters for freedom and civilisation will ensure it's a decent day tomorrow and my milk is nice and cold - to be fair, they wouldn't allow me to protest about it in case I was too "noisy" or they'll take my citizenship away if I as much as mutter the slightest discontent against their munificent rule.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 4,141
    slade said:

    According to Mark Pack since May last year local by-elections have seen the following results: Con -11, Lab -5, LD +12. Green =+12, Ref -1, SNP - +1. The balance in probably Ind and localists.

    It feels like the Greens are becoming like the LDs, namely a repository for protest / NONA votes will be interesting to see if they can use local support to transform that into MPs.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 46,148
    Eabhal said:

    Have been doing some reading on the new interlinked smoke alarms legislation up here from next month.

    As I haven't yet clicked the button to buy new interlinked alarms to replace the existing interlinked alarms I was curious about the whole fiasco.

    Various MSPs and councillors demanding a further delay as so many people don't know about it or don't have the cash or think they are already compliant.

    We got ours fitted just before Christmas. Don’t want to give the Insurance Company any excuse not to pay out in case of fire.
    Balls. Going to have to get them, aren't I.
    I had extension done ten years ago. They had to be fitted then, i was told. Maybe that was because it was building regs for a part of the house that was effectively new build?
  • Hypothetical question. Smoke alarms are there not to prevent fire but to prevent death. Fire in house. Alarms allow the safe evacuation of inhabitants.

    Will their insurance company refuse to pay out because their functional alarms which worked as intended were not the specific type required by Scotland's new law?

    Most insurance policies have a clause about complying with legislation. But that's always so far been about things like building codes (which Grenfell did!). So it's a letter vs spirit of the law question...

    Messing around with insurance companies is probably not a smart move in general. If you give them a loophole to get out of paying, or paying less than you expect, then don't be surprised if they take it. It seems that's the assessors job post-incident.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 992
    geoffw said:

    Eabhal said:

    Have been doing some reading on the new interlinked smoke alarms legislation up here from next month.

    As I haven't yet clicked the button to buy new interlinked alarms to replace the existing interlinked alarms I was curious about the whole fiasco.

    Various MSPs and councillors demanding a further delay as so many people don't know about it or don't have the cash or think they are already compliant.

    Christ, I've just looked at the requirements for my tiny one bed flat. Complete overkill. I've got new, modern ones from when I moved here two years ago.

    £220. Piss off.
    We paid £229.50 for supply and fitting of 4 smoke alarms and 2 CO2 alarms. Local firm.
    Suggest you shop around or ask for recommendations.
    Wasn't it carbon monoxide?
    I think that’s what the invoice should have said!
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 39,061

    FF43 said:

    The interesting figure: 45% of Tory Party members think Johnson can be trusted to tell the truth. First of all, who are these people? Secondly if he can't be trusted to tell the truth, why is he is leader of your party?

    I always lie. In fact, I am lying to you now.
    How do we know whether, when you tell us you’re lying, you’re telling the truth?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liar_paradox
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 39,061
    dixiedean said:

    Just seen the FA Cup draw.
    Could it possibly be duller?

    Kidderminster v. West Ham should be interesting!
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 604
    edited January 9

    Hypothetical question. Smoke alarms are there not to prevent fire but to prevent death. Fire in house. Alarms allow the safe evacuation of inhabitants.

    Will their insurance company refuse to pay out because their functional alarms which worked as intended were not the specific type required by Scotland's new law?

    Most insurance policies have a clause about complying with legislation. But that's always so far been about things like building codes (which Grenfell did!). So it's a letter vs spirit of the law question...

    Messing around with insurance companies is probably not a smart move in general. If you give them a loophole to get out of paying, or paying less than you expect, then don't be surprised if they take it. It seems that's the assessors job post-incident.
    The assessor for my car took my word that it looked repairable (with a knowing tone to their voice) so that I'd get a courtesy car, and only certified it was a write off after I didn't need the car any more.

    Admiral. Legends.

    (Also that it was in mint condition. Hard to tell after the crash).
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 992

    Eabhal said:

    Have been doing some reading on the new interlinked smoke alarms legislation up here from next month.

    As I haven't yet clicked the button to buy new interlinked alarms to replace the existing interlinked alarms I was curious about the whole fiasco.

    Various MSPs and councillors demanding a further delay as so many people don't know about it or don't have the cash or think they are already compliant.

    We got ours fitted just before Christmas. Don’t want to give the Insurance Company any excuse not to pay out in case of fire.
    Balls. Going to have to get them, aren't I.
    Does make me laugh. Have interconnected alarms (Google Nest). Smoke. Carbon Monoxide. Dust. But as no heat detector non-compliant.

    So now supposedly they want a 2nd set. Including one on the ceiling of my living room right next to the one on the ceiling of my hallway. Which will go off interlinked even if there is a power cut just like the ones I already have.

    Point here is that a lot a lot of people appear not to have installed new alarms and there have been shortages of supply. I get fire safety but most of us don't live in Grenfell. How the insurance industry copes with mass non-compliance will be interesting - especially as the legislation makes 1st February not an absolute deadline...
    The one in the kitchen is a heat alarm. Just as well given the quality of my cooking!
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 15,391

    Hypothetical question. Smoke alarms are there not to prevent fire but to prevent death. Fire in house. Alarms allow the safe evacuation of inhabitants.

    Will their insurance company refuse to pay out because their functional alarms which worked as intended were not the specific type required by Scotland's new law?

    Most insurance policies have a clause about complying with legislation. But that's always so far been about things like building codes (which Grenfell did!). So it's a letter vs spirit of the law question...

    Messing around with insurance companies is probably not a smart move in general. If you give them a loophole to get out of paying, or paying less than you expect, then don't be surprised if they take it. It seems that's the assessors job post-incident.
    I'm going to get it done because I can. But as 95% of existing smoke alarms are not compliant there will be an awful lot of people who won't be. Because they don't know, can't afford it, or think it's stupid.

    So it's back down to how much of a row the insurance industry wants to have up here. Invalidating one person's policy because they had functional smoke alarms that did their job is one thing. If they try and do that to a lot of people, it may be the insurers in trouble.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 992

    Hypothetical question. Smoke alarms are there not to prevent fire but to prevent death. Fire in house. Alarms allow the safe evacuation of inhabitants.

    Will their insurance company refuse to pay out because their functional alarms which worked as intended were not the specific type required by Scotland's new law?

    Most insurance policies have a clause about complying with legislation. But that's always so far been about things like building codes (which Grenfell did!). So it's a letter vs spirit of the law question...

    Not looking forward to having to install a heat pump. There’s a railway tunnel somewhere under where we live!
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 604

    Eabhal said:

    Have been doing some reading on the new interlinked smoke alarms legislation up here from next month.

    As I haven't yet clicked the button to buy new interlinked alarms to replace the existing interlinked alarms I was curious about the whole fiasco.

    Various MSPs and councillors demanding a further delay as so many people don't know about it or don't have the cash or think they are already compliant.

    We got ours fitted just before Christmas. Don’t want to give the Insurance Company any excuse not to pay out in case of fire.
    Balls. Going to have to get them, aren't I.
    I had extension done ten years ago. They had to be fitted then, i was told. Maybe that was because it was building regs for a part of the house that was effectively new build?
    There is hope! I'll check them tomorrow morning.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 992

    Hypothetical question. Smoke alarms are there not to prevent fire but to prevent death. Fire in house. Alarms allow the safe evacuation of inhabitants.

    Will their insurance company refuse to pay out because their functional alarms which worked as intended were not the specific type required by Scotland's new law?

    Most insurance policies have a clause about complying with legislation. But that's always so far been about things like building codes (which Grenfell did!). So it's a letter vs spirit of the law question...

    Messing around with insurance companies is probably not a smart move in general. If you give them a loophole to get out of paying, or paying less than you expect, then don't be surprised if they take it. It seems that's the assessors job post-incident.
    I'm going to get it done because I can. But as 95% of existing smoke alarms are not compliant there will be an awful lot of people who won't be. Because they don't know, can't afford it, or think it's stupid.

    So it's back down to how much of a row the insurance industry wants to have up here. Invalidating one person's policy because they had functional smoke alarms that did their job is one thing. If they try and do that to a lot of people, it may be the insurers in trouble.
    I suspect that insurance companies will be more reasonable than jobsworth bureaucrats.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 18,144
    The cost of an independent UK carbon trading system. Brexit decision left UK firms paying 10% more than EU rivals for emissions by ⁦@fionaharvey⁩ https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jan/09/brexit-decision-left-uk-firms-paying-10-more-than-eu-rivals-for-emissions?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 18,982
    edited January 9

    FF43 said:

    The interesting figure: 45% of Tory Party members think Johnson can be trusted to tell the truth. First of all, who are these people? Secondly if he can't be trusted to tell the truth, why is he is leader of your party?

    I always lie. In fact, I am lying to you now.
    Answer: You don't always lie but do sometimes, as on this occasion.

    Edit: I have no idea why that post above displays with a line break after 'always' (at least it does on my browser).

    2nd edit: Damn! Now I've added the edit the line break has gone - PB is messing with my mind!
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 46,148
    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Have been doing some reading on the new interlinked smoke alarms legislation up here from next month.

    As I haven't yet clicked the button to buy new interlinked alarms to replace the existing interlinked alarms I was curious about the whole fiasco.

    Various MSPs and councillors demanding a further delay as so many people don't know about it or don't have the cash or think they are already compliant.

    We got ours fitted just before Christmas. Don’t want to give the Insurance Company any excuse not to pay out in case of fire.
    Balls. Going to have to get them, aren't I.
    I had extension done ten years ago. They had to be fitted then, i was told. Maybe that was because it was building regs for a part of the house that was effectively new build?
    There is hope! I'll check them tomorrow morning.
    iirc, you can check by pressing the test button on one alarm for three or four seconds, and then the other will respond if it is connected.

    To be honest I would have thought making them all mains wired rather than battery would save more lives, but that is a bigger change.

  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 15,391

    Hypothetical question. Smoke alarms are there not to prevent fire but to prevent death. Fire in house. Alarms allow the safe evacuation of inhabitants.

    Will their insurance company refuse to pay out because their functional alarms which worked as intended were not the specific type required by Scotland's new law?

    Most insurance policies have a clause about complying with legislation. But that's always so far been about things like building codes (which Grenfell did!). So it's a letter vs spirit of the law question...

    Messing around with insurance companies is probably not a smart move in general. If you give them a loophole to get out of paying, or paying less than you expect, then don't be surprised if they take it. It seems that's the assessors job post-incident.
    I'm going to get it done because I can. But as 95% of existing smoke alarms are not compliant there will be an awful lot of people who won't be. Because they don't know, can't afford it, or think it's stupid.

    So it's back down to how much of a row the insurance industry wants to have up here. Invalidating one person's policy because they had functional smoke alarms that did their job is one thing. If they try and do that to a lot of people, it may be the insurers in trouble.
    I suspect that insurance companies will be more reasonable than jobsworth bureaucrats.
    It's an interesting one. I understand that they get arsey if people have non-functional alarms. But what of you have functional alarms that do the job but aren't strictly compliant?

    This is the mess we have with this new law. Even the deadline isn't a deadline. Law says homeowners have a "reasonable period" afterwards to be compliant.

    So, 3rd April. Fire. Everyone out as the alarms go off. You're the insurance company. How do you handle it?

    Of course the Scottish government say everyone must know about the new rules as advertised in a locked filing cabinet in the basement with a sign that says beware of the leopard
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 18,982
    Scott_xP said:

    The cost of an independent UK carbon trading system. Brexit decision left UK firms paying 10% more than EU rivals for emissions by ⁦@fionaharvey⁩ https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jan/09/brexit-decision-left-uk-firms-paying-10-more-than-eu-rivals-for-emissions?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Another Brexit bonus.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 18,982

    Hypothetical question. Smoke alarms are there not to prevent fire but to prevent death. Fire in house. Alarms allow the safe evacuation of inhabitants.

    Will their insurance company refuse to pay out because their functional alarms which worked as intended were not the specific type required by Scotland's new law?

    Most insurance policies have a clause about complying with legislation. But that's always so far been about things like building codes (which Grenfell did!). So it's a letter vs spirit of the law question...

    Messing around with insurance companies is probably not a smart move in general. If you give them a loophole to get out of paying, or paying less than you expect, then don't be surprised if they take it. It seems that's the assessors job post-incident.
    I'm going to get it done because I can. But as 95% of existing smoke alarms are not compliant there will be an awful lot of people who won't be. Because they don't know, can't afford it, or think it's stupid.

    So it's back down to how much of a row the insurance industry wants to have up here. Invalidating one person's policy because they had functional smoke alarms that did their job is one thing. If they try and do that to a lot of people, it may be the insurers in trouble.
    I suspect that insurance companies will be more reasonable than jobsworth bureaucrats.
    Er... Insurance companies are staffed with jobsworth bureaucrats.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 604

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Have been doing some reading on the new interlinked smoke alarms legislation up here from next month.

    As I haven't yet clicked the button to buy new interlinked alarms to replace the existing interlinked alarms I was curious about the whole fiasco.

    Various MSPs and councillors demanding a further delay as so many people don't know about it or don't have the cash or think they are already compliant.

    We got ours fitted just before Christmas. Don’t want to give the Insurance Company any excuse not to pay out in case of fire.
    Balls. Going to have to get them, aren't I.
    I had extension done ten years ago. They had to be fitted then, i was told. Maybe that was because it was building regs for a part of the house that was effectively new build?
    There is hope! I'll check them tomorrow morning.
    iirc, you can check by pressing the test button on one alarm for three or four seconds, and then the other will respond if it is connected.

    To be honest I would have thought making them all mains wired rather than battery would save more lives, but that is a bigger change.

    This is the thing though. Loads of people don't have PB to consult.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 18,982

    Hypothetical question. Smoke alarms are there not to prevent fire but to prevent death. Fire in house. Alarms allow the safe evacuation of inhabitants.

    Will their insurance company refuse to pay out because their functional alarms which worked as intended were not the specific type required by Scotland's new law?

    Most insurance policies have a clause about complying with legislation. But that's always so far been about things like building codes (which Grenfell did!). So it's a letter vs spirit of the law question...

    Not looking forward to having to install a heat pump. There’s a railway tunnel somewhere under where we live!
    Unless you have a very big garden, air source is the better option.

    Even with a big garden, air source is probably the better option.
  • glwglw Posts: 7,935
    Scott_xP said:

    The cost of an independent UK carbon trading system. Brexit decision left UK firms paying 10% more than EU rivals for emissions by ⁦@fionaharvey⁩ https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jan/09/brexit-decision-left-uk-firms-paying-10-more-than-eu-rivals-for-emissions?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    UK polluters pay more for screwing up the planet.
Sign In or Register to comment.