Jacob Rees-Mogg calling someone else 'lightweight' is delicious, isn't it?
I can practically hear from my window yells of 'Hey, tha's oor lightweight'. I think in Scotland that will play and play into how little the Conservatives value the Union, when they dismiss even their own man. Maybe I'm a bit too sensitive to this but I think it's a pretty devastating attitude to take. It won't be seen as an attack on Douglas Ross (who is not personally super popular), but an attack on Scottish influence within the Union.
Time and time again, the second biggest (estimates vary) threat to the Union is the Conservative and Unionist Party. Their understanding of power is so, so narrow that they seem to believe that power insulates them from any responsibility when it should be precisely the opposite. They remind me of small town American cops, thinking because they have power, because their jobs maybe difficult, that they can act how they want. I mean even the fucking Lion King addressed this. Everyone remembers Simba singing 'I just can't wait to be King', but the entire rest of the film, from Mufasa explaining how there's more to being a king than doing what you want, to Scar fucking up the Pride Lands, to Simba finally understanding, is about how a ruler has responsibility for the people they rule.
Interesting perspective. HYUFD is also taking very much that [edit] same viewpoint as Mr R-M - and he is our resident Tory official (if at a low level).
Thank you. I was actually quite shocked watching BBC Breakfast this morning to hear JRM saying words that reminded me precisely of HYUFD. No disrespect to HYUFD, but it did give me a sense of foreboding about the path the Conservative Party is on.
As an ex-Constituency executive member of the Conservative Party (no longer even a member), I must correct the previous poster about HYUFD's party status. I do this hesitantly because though I believe some of his posts a little silly, I suspect he is a decent person and not always deserving of the regular kickings he gets on here. Fundamentally HYUFD carries no weight in the CP as he has stated he is a member of a Town Council (equivalent of a Parish Council) and he is a BRANCH Chairman. Almost any member can become a branch chairman. The Party is always gagging for them. It is essentially a very localised fundraiser It really holds no status in practice whatsoever. If he becomes a Constituency Party Chairman that would be a very different matter indeed.
Yet even more 2019 Conservative voters, let alone current Tory voters, still think Boris should stay than go.
JRM and I are more representative of the current Conservative Party than you are
That wasn't what I was saying old chap. I think you should just quit the "I am a branch chairman" stuff. For those of us in the know it makes you look truly silly. As for that absurd Cnut Rees Mogg being more representative of the Conservative Party than I am, you are absolutely right and this is why I, and many others have left.
As for you, probably the only significant difference politically between you and me is that I do not, will not and never have been able to insert my head up the backside of any political figure, particularly one as incompetent and ridiculous as Boris Johnson. If the Conservative Party can alienate someone like me, they are, in the short term at least, doomed.
Totally off topic I thought I would give an update on air source heat pumps. A local County Council we deal with has a plan to replace ageing boilers in schools with ASHP and last year carried out a cost analysis/feasability study into it. They found that to install an ASHP system in a school would cost between 5-10 times as much as a new gas boiler system. They also estimate that due to the vast increase in the use of electricity to power the ASHPs there would only be limited energy savings. Therefore they are going to recommend to the Councillors to install new gas boilers not ASHPs.
ASHP's remind me of a Sinclair C5, great idea on paper and clever technology, they are just not practical.
Whoever suggested an ASHP retrofit for a school was clearly a moron.
It would probably work in a new build school though.
What on earth is Chatham House? Is this like a swingers thing?
I guess most swingers groups might have the Chatham House rule, to be fair - you can discuss what happened with outsiders, but not with whom? I hasten to add this is not from personal experience. Although I did almost buy a house with pampas grass outside it last year
Working from sterotypes - probably reasonably well built, but very poorly insulated, not very cramped, with squarish rooms or sub-rooms, and in the same ownership for a long time in a leafy environment. May contain asbestos, and a small change of concrete cancer in the slab. Currently expensive to run if they have been too tight to invest in it.
I'm not totally sure, but I think you may have quoted the wrong post.
- 'reasonably well built' -- Fine - 'very poorly insulated' - Not much fat then? - 'not very cramped' -- too much information - 'with squarish rooms or sub-rooms' -- again, too much info - 'same ownership for a long time in a leafy environment' -- yep, I guess this squares with much of the sterotype of leafy suburbia and long term marriages - 'May contain asbestos' -- What? - 'small change of concrete cancer in the slab' -- ? - 'expensive to run if they have been too tight to invest in it' -- what are the operating costs for swingers' clubs? just a bowl for the keys, surely?
Edit: Or, referring to swingers' houses? Probably all those comments were fair about the house we looked at...
I would suggest the world is seeing the results of too much haste to move to green and insufficient planning for transitional energy which is highlighted by the controversy over Cambo oil field in Scotland
This is precisely the wrong conclusion.
Consider the alternative scenarios. Suppose we had moved to renewables more slowly and were burning more coal and gas now. Would that be better? Coal prices are also up now, we would be having even higher prices for gas and electricity.
However, if we'd moved to renewables more quickly, we'd need to be burning less gas and so our electricity prices would be lower.
The point the analyst was making is that the transition did not take into account a sensible period to complete it and as a result, for the reasons he stated, gas is the transition energy and the demand for the foreseeable future is going to cause serious costs of loving crisis for government's worldwide
It may be of interest but I am looking out on 'Gwynt y Mor' wind farm and there is not a breath of wind and the turbines are barely turning
It's the same old rubbish of wanting to delay action, and if you go straight to renewables you don't need gas as a transition fuel.
We all know the wind doesn't always blow, which is why we need a diverse range of energy sources (including tidal, Moroccan solar, Norwegian hydroelectric, Icelandic geothermal, perhaps some nuclear and an excess of wind that can be stored).
The reality is that storage is going to end up much, much higher than anyone can imagine.
By 2050 I expect we'll have many TW of storage plugged into the network.
Interesting point (excuse pun). If policy makers have any sense (a big ask) they will push for localised storage or even household such as Tesla Powerwall (oh dear I will be accused of being a Tesla bore again)
The important thing right now is to get a few large factories making batteries you and running in the UK as soon as possible.
Whether those batteries end up inside cars, houses, or in containers on industrial estates, or old coal power station sites, matters a lot less. We don't really want to end up importing them as happened with wind turbines.
Jacob Rees-Mogg calling someone else 'lightweight' is delicious, isn't it?
I can practically hear from my window yells of 'Hey, tha's oor lightweight'. I think in Scotland that will play and play into how little the Conservatives value the Union, when they dismiss even their own man. Maybe I'm a bit too sensitive to this but I think it's a pretty devastating attitude to take. It won't be seen as an attack on Douglas Ross (who is not personally super popular), but an attack on Scottish influence within the Union.
Time and time again, the second biggest (estimates vary) threat to the Union is the Conservative and Unionist Party. Their understanding of power is so, so narrow that they seem to believe that power insulates them from any responsibility when it should be precisely the opposite. They remind me of small town American cops, thinking because they have power, because their jobs maybe difficult, that they can act how they want. I mean even the fucking Lion King addressed this. Everyone remembers Simba singing 'I just can't wait to be King', but the entire rest of the film, from Mufasa explaining how there's more to being a king than doing what you want, to Scar fucking up the Pride Lands, to Simba finally understanding, is about how a ruler has responsibility for the people they rule.
Interesting perspective. HYUFD is also taking very much that [edit] same viewpoint as Mr R-M - and he is our resident Tory official (if at a low level).
Thank you. I was actually quite shocked watching BBC Breakfast this morning to hear JRM saying words that reminded me precisely of HYUFD. No disrespect to HYUFD, but it did give me a sense of foreboding about the path the Conservative Party is on.
As an ex-Constituency executive member of the Conservative Party (no longer even a member), I must correct the previous poster about HYUFD's party status. I do this hesitantly because though I believe some of his posts a little silly, I suspect he is a decent person and not always deserving of the regular kickings he gets on here. Fundamentally HYUFD carries no weight in the CP as he has stated he is a member of a Town Council (equivalent of a Parish Council) and he is a BRANCH Chairman. Almost any member can become a branch chairman. The Party is always gagging for them. It is essentially a very localised fundraiser It really holds no status in practice whatsoever. If he becomes a Constituency Party Chairman that would be a very different matter indeed.
JRM and I are representative of the majority of the current Conservative Party
That's interesting. This is M&S changing the name. Crazy decision by M&S imo; it is a northern product originally and the North generally does not like BS. The name is not offensive, any more than having "small" as a shirt size or "mini" as a car. Guilt by association for words only works in a handful of cases.
I thought Midget Gems was a brand from a company called Maynards owned or at least marketed by Cadbury, but perhaps it has become a generic?
I recall a vehicle called the MG Midget, which I rather fancied owning at one stage of my life. However, as a two seater soft-top it wasn't really practical in industrial Lancashire so I bought a Mini instead.
When I first went to London to live and work I bought a Midget. It had fabric covers for the headlights and one day I went out of my flat to find they had burnt through because I had left the lights on.
Tim Montgomerie 🇬🇧 @montie · 3h Good morning @Jacob_Rees_Mogg . I urge you to apologise ASAP for the personal+playground way you dismissed @Douglas4Moray on Newsnight. Johnson uber-loyalists risk looking like you're willing to trash colleagues and anyone who dares to think a new PM is necessary. Stop it. Now.
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 14m If he's lucky, Boris might be able to withdraw the omicron restrictions before Gray reports (or perhaps even on the day Winking face).
Ironically the restrictions aren't heavy enough for that to be a big good news story.
Jacob Rees-Mogg calling someone else 'lightweight' is delicious, isn't it?
I can practically hear from my window yells of 'Hey, tha's oor lightweight'. I think in Scotland that will play and play into how little the Conservatives value the Union, when they dismiss even their own man. Maybe I'm a bit too sensitive to this but I think it's a pretty devastating attitude to take. It won't be seen as an attack on Douglas Ross (who is not personally super popular), but an attack on Scottish influence within the Union.
Time and time again, the second biggest (estimates vary) threat to the Union is the Conservative and Unionist Party. Their understanding of power is so, so narrow that they seem to believe that power insulates them from any responsibility when it should be precisely the opposite. They remind me of small town American cops, thinking because they have power, because their jobs maybe difficult, that they can act how they want. I mean even the fucking Lion King addressed this. Everyone remembers Simba singing 'I just can't wait to be King', but the entire rest of the film, from Mufasa explaining how there's more to being a king than doing what you want, to Scar fucking up the Pride Lands, to Simba finally understanding, is about how a ruler has responsibility for the people they rule.
Interesting perspective. HYUFD is also taking very much that [edit] same viewpoint as Mr R-M - and he is our resident Tory official (if at a low level).
Thank you. I was actually quite shocked watching BBC Breakfast this morning to hear JRM saying words that reminded me precisely of HYUFD. No disrespect to HYUFD, but it did give me a sense of foreboding about the path the Conservative Party is on.
As an ex-Constituency executive member of the Conservative Party (no longer even a member), I must correct the previous poster about HYUFD's party status. I do this hesitantly because though I believe some of his posts a little silly, I suspect he is a decent person and not always deserving of the regular kickings he gets on here. Fundamentally HYUFD carries no weight in the CP as he has stated he is a member of a Town Council (equivalent of a Parish Council) and he is a BRANCH Chairman. Almost any member can become a branch chairman. The Party is always gagging for them. It is essentially a very localised fundraiser It really holds no status in practice whatsoever. If he becomes a Constituency Party Chairman that would be a very different matter indeed.
Yet even more 2019 Conservative voters, let alone current Tory voters, still think Boris should stay than go.
JRM and I are more representative of the current Conservative Party than you are
That wasn't what I was saying old chap. I think you should just quit the "I am a branch chairman" stuff. For those of us in the know it makes you look truly silly. As for that absurd Cnut Rees Mogg being more representative of the Conservative Party than I am, you are absolutely right and this is why I, and many others have left.
As for you, probably the only significant difference politically between you and me is that I do not, will not and never have been able to insert my head up the backside of any political figure, particularly one as incompetent and ridiculous as Boris Johnson. If the Conservative Party can alienate someone like me, they are, in the short term at least, doomed.
Yes but you voted LD in 2019.
I rarely mention my position, I agree it does not matter, however more Tory voters still want to keep Boris than remove him. Of Tory members even if he went at least half would vote for Truss or even Rees Mogg over Sunak.
The party is moving to the populist right and has been since Cameron went. After Blair went Labour too of course went further and further to the populist left until the 2019 defeat saw it move back to the centre with Starmer
I would suggest the world is seeing the results of too much haste to move to green and insufficient planning for transitional energy which is highlighted by the controversy over Cambo oil field in Scotland
This is precisely the wrong conclusion.
Consider the alternative scenarios. Suppose we had moved to renewables more slowly and were burning more coal and gas now. Would that be better? Coal prices are also up now, we would be having even higher prices for gas and electricity.
However, if we'd moved to renewables more quickly, we'd need to be burning less gas and so our electricity prices would be lower.
The point the analyst was making is that the transition did not take into account a sensible period to complete it and as a result, for the reasons he stated, gas is the transition energy and the demand for the foreseeable future is going to cause serious costs of loving crisis for government's worldwide
It may be of interest but I am looking out on 'Gwynt y Mor' wind farm and there is not a breath of wind and the turbines are barely turning
It's the same old rubbish of wanting to delay action, and if you go straight to renewables you don't need gas as a transition fuel.
We all know the wind doesn't always blow, which is why we need a diverse range of energy sources (including tidal, Moroccan solar, Norwegian hydroelectric, Icelandic geothermal, perhaps some nuclear and an excess of wind that can be stored).
The reality is that storage is going to end up much, much higher than anyone can imagine.
By 2050 I expect we'll have many TW of storage plugged into the network.
Interesting point (excuse pun). If policy makers have any sense (a big ask) they will push for localised storage or even household such as Tesla Powerwall (oh dear I will be accused of being a Tesla bore again)
On wind not blowing, it is worth a note that as the UK windfarm base has expanded, the Load Factor of new offshore wind is now just under 60%, whilst for existing onshore wind it is under 27%. This problem is being dealt with progressively. https://www.renewableuk.com/page/UKWEDExplained/Statistics-Explained.htm
Load Factor = power delivered vs theoretical maximum.
On storage, we will end up with boxes of tricks in the Smart Meter that manage local storage, and optimise battery usage. An issue is the lifetime in cycles of current Li batteries.
That's interesting. This is M&S changing the name. Crazy decision by M&S imo; it is a northern product originally and the North generally does not like BS. The name is not offensive, any more than having "small" as a shirt size or "mini" as a car. Guilt by association for words only works in a handful of cases.
I thought Midget Gems was a brand from a company called Maynards owned or at least marketed by Cadbury, but perhaps it has become a generic?
I recall a vehicle called the MG Midget, which I rather fancied owning at one stage of my life. However, as a two seater soft-top it wasn't really practical in industrial Lancashire so I bought a Mini instead.
When I first went to London to live and work I bought a Midget. It had fabric covers for the headlights and one day I went out of my flat to find they had burnt through because I had left the lights on.
My sister bought a Midget as one of her first cars, as a teenager. There was a little rust in the footwell, so my brother decided to cut it out and weld a patch on.
By the time he had chased all the rust, he had replaced most of the bottom of the car.
A years or so later, he got an MGB. Having learnt the lesson, he bought a brand-new bodyshell and transferred all the mechanics into that, renovating them as he went...
(Both my brother and sister have mechanical skills that appear to have utterly bypassed me.)
I would suggest the world is seeing the results of too much haste to move to green and insufficient planning for transitional energy which is highlighted by the controversy over Cambo oil field in Scotland
This is precisely the wrong conclusion.
Consider the alternative scenarios. Suppose we had moved to renewables more slowly and were burning more coal and gas now. Would that be better? Coal prices are also up now, we would be having even higher prices for gas and electricity.
However, if we'd moved to renewables more quickly, we'd need to be burning less gas and so our electricity prices would be lower.
The point the analyst was making is that the transition did not take into account a sensible period to complete it and as a result, for the reasons he stated, gas is the transition energy and the demand for the foreseeable future is going to cause serious costs of loving crisis for government's worldwide
It may be of interest but I am looking out on 'Gwynt y Mor' wind farm and there is not a breath of wind and the turbines are barely turning
It's the same old rubbish of wanting to delay action, and if you go straight to renewables you don't need gas as a transition fuel.
We all know the wind doesn't always blow, which is why we need a diverse range of energy sources (including tidal, Moroccan solar, Norwegian hydroelectric, Icelandic geothermal, perhaps some nuclear and an excess of wind that can be stored).
The reality is that storage is going to end up much, much higher than anyone can imagine.
By 2050 I expect we'll have many TW of storage plugged into the network.
Interesting point (excuse pun). If policy makers have any sense (a big ask) they will push for localised storage or even household such as Tesla Powerwall (oh dear I will be accused of being a Tesla bore again)
Consumers and the free market should find a way to get there in the end anyway.
Especially for anyone charging their vehicle at home, the car already has a major battery for storage even without adding any extras like Powerwalls. But then Powerwalls etc too if they become cheap enough should become a wise investment for people to power their home with cheap energy.
If you can charge your car/Powerwall etc with cheap to almost free energy with plunge pricing, then run your home, heating and vehicle with that, then why not do so? And then who cares when the wind is blowing, only that it is enough.
The other odd thing about the "wind doesn't always blow" argument is that in most traditional sources of energy we build significant surplus capacity. The CCGT turbines don't always turn either, in fact most of the time most of our gas capacity lies idle, and is fired up during peak times.
The intermittency issue with wind and solar is because we still have much less capacity than we need. Total wind power is around 17gw on a very windy day, with total electricity demand around 30-35gw most of the time. If we build wind capacity up to closer to 100gw - no reason why not, once marginal cost goes low enough - then even without storage we could be generating at least 10-15gw on a very calm day, enough to power 100% of needs on an average day, and way more than enough, with some turbines idle, on windy days.
Once we have enough storage we should be seeking wind capacity at about 200% of demand.
Any excess wind just give it away for storage. Edit: Or export it via interconnectors.
Jacob Rees-Mogg calling someone else 'lightweight' is delicious, isn't it?
I can practically hear from my window yells of 'Hey, tha's oor lightweight'. I think in Scotland that will play and play into how little the Conservatives value the Union, when they dismiss even their own man. Maybe I'm a bit too sensitive to this but I think it's a pretty devastating attitude to take. It won't be seen as an attack on Douglas Ross (who is not personally super popular), but an attack on Scottish influence within the Union.
Time and time again, the second biggest (estimates vary) threat to the Union is the Conservative and Unionist Party. Their understanding of power is so, so narrow that they seem to believe that power insulates them from any responsibility when it should be precisely the opposite. They remind me of small town American cops, thinking because they have power, because their jobs maybe difficult, that they can act how they want. I mean even the fucking Lion King addressed this. Everyone remembers Simba singing 'I just can't wait to be King', but the entire rest of the film, from Mufasa explaining how there's more to being a king than doing what you want, to Scar fucking up the Pride Lands, to Simba finally understanding, is about how a ruler has responsibility for the people they rule.
Interesting perspective. HYUFD is also taking very much that [edit] same viewpoint as Mr R-M - and he is our resident Tory official (if at a low level).
Thank you. I was actually quite shocked watching BBC Breakfast this morning to hear JRM saying words that reminded me precisely of HYUFD. No disrespect to HYUFD, but it did give me a sense of foreboding about the path the Conservative Party is on.
As an ex-Constituency executive member of the Conservative Party (no longer even a member), I must correct the previous poster about HYUFD's party status. I do this hesitantly because though I believe some of his posts a little silly, I suspect he is a decent person and not always deserving of the regular kickings he gets on here. Fundamentally HYUFD carries no weight in the CP as he has stated he is a member of a Town Council (equivalent of a Parish Council) and he is a BRANCH Chairman. Almost any member can become a branch chairman. The Party is always gagging for them. It is essentially a very localised fundraiser It really holds no status in practice whatsoever. If he becomes a Constituency Party Chairman that would be a very different matter indeed.
It's less of a question of HYUFD's status in the Conservative Party for me. I wouldn't be concerned overmuch with the views of a Conservative Councillor or branch chairman or constituency party chairman. It's more like if JRM, on newsnight, had said 'the workers must rise up and seize the means of production.' It's not that I think Karl Marx is in an influential position within the party but I would be concerned about the state of the mind of the party if they started to espouse those views.
I mean Douglas Ross being a lightweight is a widespread view across Scotland, but I think it will be read that Douglas Ross, as leader of the Scottish Conservatives is irrelevant to the Conservatives at Westminster (despite being an MP like any other). That in turn will be read as the Conservative Party thinking that Scotland is irrelevant. HYUFD is not notable enough to cause that, but JRM is.
I would suggest the world is seeing the results of too much haste to move to green and insufficient planning for transitional energy which is highlighted by the controversy over Cambo oil field in Scotland
This is precisely the wrong conclusion.
Consider the alternative scenarios. Suppose we had moved to renewables more slowly and were burning more coal and gas now. Would that be better? Coal prices are also up now, we would be having even higher prices for gas and electricity.
However, if we'd moved to renewables more quickly, we'd need to be burning less gas and so our electricity prices would be lower.
The point the analyst was making is that the transition did not take into account a sensible period to complete it and as a result, for the reasons he stated, gas is the transition energy and the demand for the foreseeable future is going to cause serious costs of loving crisis for government's worldwide
It may be of interest but I am looking out on 'Gwynt y Mor' wind farm and there is not a breath of wind and the turbines are barely turning
It's the same old rubbish of wanting to delay action, and if you go straight to renewables you don't need gas as a transition fuel.
We all know the wind doesn't always blow, which is why we need a diverse range of energy sources (including tidal, Moroccan solar, Norwegian hydroelectric, Icelandic geothermal, perhaps some nuclear and an excess of wind that can be stored).
The reality is that storage is going to end up much, much higher than anyone can imagine.
By 2050 I expect we'll have many TW of storage plugged into the network.
Interesting point (excuse pun). If policy makers have any sense (a big ask) they will push for localised storage or even household such as Tesla Powerwall (oh dear I will be accused of being a Tesla bore again)
Consumers and the free market should find a way to get there in the end anyway.
Especially for anyone charging their vehicle at home, the car already has a major battery for storage even without adding any extras like Powerwalls. But then Powerwalls etc too if they become cheap enough should become a wise investment for people to power their home with cheap energy.
If you can charge your car/Powerwall etc with cheap to almost free energy with plunge pricing, then run your home, heating and vehicle with that, then why not do so? And then who cares when the wind is blowing, only that it is enough.
The other odd thing about the "wind doesn't always blow" argument is that in most traditional sources of energy we build significant surplus capacity. The CCGT turbines don't always turn either, in fact most of the time most of our gas capacity lies idle, and is fired up during peak times.
The intermittency issue with wind and solar is because we still have much less capacity than we need. Total wind power is around 17gw on a very windy day, with total electricity demand around 30-35gw most of the time. If we build wind capacity up to closer to 100gw - no reason why not, once marginal cost goes low enough - then even without storage we could be generating at least 10-15gw on a very calm day, enough to power 100% of needs on an average day, and way more than enough, with some turbines idle, on windy days.
There's been quite a lot of analysis of this, and Europe is actually one of the worse regions of the world as far as the intermittency problem is concerned.
Continent wide interconnects would mitigate the problem considerably, but occasional week long periods without sufficient wind/solar to meet demand are still quite likely even with quite a high (but economically sensible) level of surplus capacity. Hence the requirement for significant storage (and/or nuclear baseload).
Totally off topic I thought I would give an update on air source heat pumps. A local County Council we deal with has a plan to replace ageing boilers in schools with ASHP and last year carried out a cost analysis/feasability study into it. They found that to install an ASHP system in a school would cost between 5-10 times as much as a new gas boiler system. They also estimate that due to the vast increase in the use of electricity to power the ASHPs there would only be limited energy savings. Therefore they are going to recommend to the Councillors to install new gas boilers not ASHPs.
ASHP's remind me of a Sinclair C5, great idea on paper and clever technology, they are just not practical.
Our experience is not encouraging, at least for big houses.
We live in an old farmhouse. It's a large house and insulation is poor. However, we had a specialist firm do the calculations, and a hybrid ASHP system with oil boiler backup looks technically feasible. The oil boiler would kick in when it's very cold and especially if at the same time we are heating all the rooms, but for much of the time the twin ASHPs would be adequate. Also we could run the ASHPs for longer during the middle of the day and at night, when the oil boiler is currently switched off, thus giving better background heat and compensating for the lower peak power of the ASHPs. Overall, we could probably reduce our oil consumption by 80% or more.
So far so good, but the costs are absolutely eye-watering. Before we even start thinking about the system itself, we would need to upgrade to a 3-phase mains supply. That's not particularly hard - the 11Kv line goes through our land - but UK Power networks still quoted £20K. Add in the rewiring, the heat pumps, the header tanks, the replumbing, the listed building application etc etc, and it's looking like a total well north of £60K. Possibly a lot more. A ground-source system, which would be necessary if we were trying to rely exclusively on the heat-pump, would be very much more expensive even that that.
A Rhodes Scholar who won a coveted scholarship at Oxford after claiming she overcame childhood abuse and grew up in foster care has been accused of lying to officials and is in fact the daughter of a radiologist who went to private school.
Mackenzie Fierceton, 24, describes herself as a 'queer, first generation, low income' student at The University of Pennsylvania. In 2020, she was given a scholarship to go to Oxford after dazzling the Rhodes Trust with her story of how she overcame welfare, an abusive mother and the foster care system.
Cannot remember the man's name right now, but Tony Curtis played him in the movie. Started out wanting to be a Catholic brother, then pretends to be one, then graduates to the priesthood, gets busted, moved on to impersonating doctor in the Canadian navy (becoming a hero in the process), then a reforming prison warden in Texas. And he was good at all of these jobs, until he either lost his cool, or circumstances got the better of him.
It was a disease, a mental condition. Sounds like this young woman has something similar. Person of considerable intelligence and talent, who is unable to cope with their reality to some significant degree. And - most unlike most of us - actually does something about it, by creating a better one for themselves. As long as they can keep all the spinning plates in the air, that is.
Sound familiar?
PLUS she and #45 share the same alma mater, the University of Pennsylvania.
Ben Franklin must be proud?
Jeffrey Archer (once a Tory MP) also afflicted with this syndrome
What syndromes that then? Bit disappointed in all three of you to be honest. 🤨 none of you have a clue what’s really gone on here. The expensive school says what? Proof she came from stable and loving household? Where’s the proof of family accepting of her sexuality? School is school at the end of the day from perspective of child.
I read it as a sad story. That she’s been victimised, and that’s got to stop! I hope it works out for her.
How so? I'm skeptical. I read that as being at least an equal probability that the "victim" is actually an abuser or a fantasist, and I perhaps feel nore sympathy for her mother. As soon as anyone, such as the Rhodes Trust, starts asking reasonable questions they get blamed. The next Dolezal?
But if funding schemes set themselves up to be exploited, then they will be exploited.
Fake abuse narratives of various sorts is a growth industry imo.
“Fake abuse narratives of various sorts is a growth industry imo”
But take all cases on their own merits surely? Are we just going to swallow a slanted Daily Mail article at face value all on its own?
“Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein."
“Additionally, all those coming of age and coming out in US today, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these, the right people who may suffer the wrong part of the Divided House of America today - for a house divided cannot stand and offers only desolation ” MoonRabbit 10:30ish (MRV)
Perhaps I can reply to you all less pompous and full of myself than that.
I have had it so bloody easy compared to others I have spoken to that sometimes I sort of feel guilty for it. Maybe that is why my first inclination is to just hug them. Actually, for whatever reason anyone anywhere cannot live a life as who they are, and be who they are, so channelled into living a lie and all the misery and isolation of that, and all the toll that takes on mental health.
I don’t have all answers about THAT article, but that is the open mind with which I read between the lines of such things.
I understand the Daily Mail has never attempted strong balanced journalism for many a decade, and enjoys trading on its cynical and twisted slant. But you have to wonder, if we are so enlightened and progressive in 2022, whose lapping this up?
Maybe that is the whole point of those keeping the Daily Mail going - to keep us in the Dark Ages?
All sources of information are biased.
When I was growing up, my father got me to read the Times, Telegraph, Independent, Guardian, Economist and Scientific American - this was pre-WWW, of course.
They are all selling something. Which is why you need to read multiple sources (IMHO) to see the underlying stories.
I agree. That is what I have done from a young age - cross refer as much as possible. Read all papers. And periodicals. Spectator, Prospect. You are correct they all have their slant to the extent you can hear in your head their take and presentation of a story before you even open it.
I actually find the FT the most balanced and informative at the moment, though I don’t have a subscription just grab what I can, even sometimes taking it out of bins. I also wonder has the historically famous “Times of London” always been as shit as this? Just shallow right wing populist gloop all the way through.
Then of course there are those people who religiously read Daily Mail cover to cover everyday, and nothing else. like my mum.
One other point if I may, the header - I love whoever edits The National. I’ve never read a copy, but his opening line “Boris Johnson thinks your an idiot.” 🤣
Nursing and midwifery leaders have urged Sajid Javid to delay the introduction of compulsory Covid jabs for NHS staff and said the controversial policy amounted to “self-sabotage”.
Significantly, the NHS Confederation, which represents hospital trusts in England, made clear it believed that the policy is being introduced at undue haste
The thing is just kicking the can down the road won't change anything. Those working for the NHS, who have always been at the front of the queue for jabs, and yet still aren't jabbed over a year after they could, aren't just going to do so in a few weeks time.
NHS workers have had far longer than care home staff to get the bloody jab.
It is self-sabotage. And is it needed? With Omicron we could very well get out of this without needing this policy against the unvaccinated anyway. Those opposed to this should argue against it in these practical terms rather than from moral positions.
It is a pity that ritual protests are thought necessary. Just get on with it.
Though as vaccination is very far from perfect at stopping transmission though very good at preventing serious disease, what is the objective?
To reduce the risk to pregnant women, or just to be beastly to the unvaxxed? Increasingly it looks like the latter.
I think it is entirely reasonable for the Health Service to seek to minimise risks to patients. It is clearly the case that vaccination does significantly reduce risks.
I think the "beastly to the unvaxxed" one is a red herring.
Is it clearly the case? By next month there's probably not going to be many health workers who don't have some immunity from prior infection or vaccination. Is someone who has recently had Omicron a significantly greater risk to patients than someone who has been vaccinated?
For a service caring for people who, for example, may have had their immune systems damaged by their condition, or deliberately as part of their treatment, I don't think that "probably" and "some" make a strong enough case.
For me the balance of this argument is firmly on the side of the precautionary principle wrt to patient safety.
OK, but I was asking if it is as you said "clearly the case" that vaccination of health care workers significantly reduces the risk to patients. If you are switching to the "precautionary principle" now, does that mean you no longer think that it is clearly the case?
I don't think I switched.
Vaccination does significantly reduce risk of transmission, and it is basic to the Health Service that risks to patients need to be minimised.
"First, do no harm"?
I don't know if the mandate is a good idea or not, I'm open to persuasion either way. Not that it matters what I think. But a bit more analysis of costs and benefits would be useful. Would comparing transmission for vaccinated staff vs recovered staff would be part of that?
I think that as the % vaxxed increases, then it becomes more acceptable.
The current process is perhaps a nudge, and a final view will be taken towards the end date.
Jacob Rees-Mogg calling someone else 'lightweight' is delicious, isn't it?
I can practically hear from my window yells of 'Hey, tha's oor lightweight'. I think in Scotland that will play and play into how little the Conservatives value the Union, when they dismiss even their own man. Maybe I'm a bit too sensitive to this but I think it's a pretty devastating attitude to take. It won't be seen as an attack on Douglas Ross (who is not personally super popular), but an attack on Scottish influence within the Union.
Time and time again, the second biggest (estimates vary) threat to the Union is the Conservative and Unionist Party. Their understanding of power is so, so narrow that they seem to believe that power insulates them from any responsibility when it should be precisely the opposite. They remind me of small town American cops, thinking because they have power, because their jobs maybe difficult, that they can act how they want. I mean even the fucking Lion King addressed this. Everyone remembers Simba singing 'I just can't wait to be King', but the entire rest of the film, from Mufasa explaining how there's more to being a king than doing what you want, to Scar fucking up the Pride Lands, to Simba finally understanding, is about how a ruler has responsibility for the people they rule.
Interesting perspective. HYUFD is also taking very much that [edit] same viewpoint as Mr R-M - and he is our resident Tory official (if at a low level).
Thank you. I was actually quite shocked watching BBC Breakfast this morning to hear JRM saying words that reminded me precisely of HYUFD. No disrespect to HYUFD, but it did give me a sense of foreboding about the path the Conservative Party is on.
As an ex-Constituency executive member of the Conservative Party (no longer even a member), I must correct the previous poster about HYUFD's party status. I do this hesitantly because though I believe some of his posts a little silly, I suspect he is a decent person and not always deserving of the regular kickings he gets on here. Fundamentally HYUFD carries no weight in the CP as he has stated he is a member of a Town Council (equivalent of a Parish Council) and he is a BRANCH Chairman. Almost any member can become a branch chairman. The Party is always gagging for them. It is essentially a very localised fundraiser It really holds no status in practice whatsoever. If he becomes a Constituency Party Chairman that would be a very different matter indeed.
Yet even more 2019 Conservative voters, let alone current Tory voters, still think Boris should stay than go.
JRM and I are more representative of the current Conservative Party than you are
That wasn't what I was saying old chap. I think you should just quit the "I am a branch chairman" stuff. For those of us in the know it makes you look truly silly. As for that absurd Cnut Rees Mogg being more representative of the Conservative Party than I am, you are absolutely right and this is why I, and many others have left.
As for you, probably the only significant difference politically between you and me is that I do not, will not and never have been able to insert my head up the backside of any political figure, particularly one as incompetent and ridiculous as Boris Johnson. If the Conservative Party can alienate someone like me, they are, in the short term at least, doomed.
Yes but you voted LD in 2019.
I rarely mention my position, I agree it does not matter, however more Tory voters still want to keep Boris than remove him. Of Tory members even if he went at least half would vote for Truss or even Rees Mogg over Sunak.
The party is moving to the populist right and has been since Cameron went
The direction of travel is to remove him and you can see that even on the uber-right wing ConHome. I know this is all a bit upsetting for you, but attempting to alienate people like me further is hardly going to help the Tories is it? I have voted Tory almost all my adult life. How much do you think suggesting on a public forum Rees Mogg is the true face of the Tory Party is going to help the Tory cause?
I would suggest the world is seeing the results of too much haste to move to green and insufficient planning for transitional energy which is highlighted by the controversy over Cambo oil field in Scotland
This is precisely the wrong conclusion.
Consider the alternative scenarios. Suppose we had moved to renewables more slowly and were burning more coal and gas now. Would that be better? Coal prices are also up now, we would be having even higher prices for gas and electricity.
However, if we'd moved to renewables more quickly, we'd need to be burning less gas and so our electricity prices would be lower.
The point the analyst was making is that the transition did not take into account a sensible period to complete it and as a result, for the reasons he stated, gas is the transition energy and the demand for the foreseeable future is going to cause serious costs of loving crisis for government's worldwide
It may be of interest but I am looking out on 'Gwynt y Mor' wind farm and there is not a breath of wind and the turbines are barely turning
It's the same old rubbish of wanting to delay action, and if you go straight to renewables you don't need gas as a transition fuel.
We all know the wind doesn't always blow, which is why we need a diverse range of energy sources (including tidal, Moroccan solar, Norwegian hydroelectric, Icelandic geothermal, perhaps some nuclear and an excess of wind that can be stored).
The reality is that storage is going to end up much, much higher than anyone can imagine.
By 2050 I expect we'll have many TW of storage plugged into the network.
Interesting point (excuse pun). If policy makers have any sense (a big ask) they will push for localised storage or even household such as Tesla Powerwall (oh dear I will be accused of being a Tesla bore again)
On wind not blowing, it is worth a note that as the UK windfarm base has expanded, the Load Factor of new offshore wind is now just under 60%, whilst for existing onshore wind it is under 27%. This problem is being dealt with progressively. https://www.renewableuk.com/page/UKWEDExplained/Statistics-Explained.htm
Load Factor = power delivered vs theoretical maximum.
On storage, we will end up with boxes of tricks in the Smart Meter that manage local storage, and optimise battery usage. An issue is the lifetime in cycles of current Li batteries.
I think fixed (dispersed or central) storage is a far better answer than using car batteries. The latter is very inefficient because you are adding weight to a vehicle that needs to be propelled around the place, and it's really only ever going to be storage for car travel anyway - would be a difficult sell to have people agree to the grid drawing off power from their car at peak times when everyone is so range-anxious.
I would suggest the world is seeing the results of too much haste to move to green and insufficient planning for transitional energy which is highlighted by the controversy over Cambo oil field in Scotland
This is precisely the wrong conclusion.
Consider the alternative scenarios. Suppose we had moved to renewables more slowly and were burning more coal and gas now. Would that be better? Coal prices are also up now, we would be having even higher prices for gas and electricity.
However, if we'd moved to renewables more quickly, we'd need to be burning less gas and so our electricity prices would be lower.
The point the analyst was making is that the transition did not take into account a sensible period to complete it and as a result, for the reasons he stated, gas is the transition energy and the demand for the foreseeable future is going to cause serious costs of loving crisis for government's worldwide
It may be of interest but I am looking out on 'Gwynt y Mor' wind farm and there is not a breath of wind and the turbines are barely turning
It's the same old rubbish of wanting to delay action, and if you go straight to renewables you don't need gas as a transition fuel.
We all know the wind doesn't always blow, which is why we need a diverse range of energy sources (including tidal, Moroccan solar, Norwegian hydroelectric, Icelandic geothermal, perhaps some nuclear and an excess of wind that can be stored).
The reality is that storage is going to end up much, much higher than anyone can imagine.
By 2050 I expect we'll have many TW of storage plugged into the network.
Interesting point (excuse pun). If policy makers have any sense (a big ask) they will push for localised storage or even household such as Tesla Powerwall (oh dear I will be accused of being a Tesla bore again)
The important thing right now is to get a few large factories making batteries up and running in the UK as soon as possible.....
I rather think too many hopes are being pinned on the Sue Grey investigation report.
She may be a tough cookie but -
1. She is not independent. 2. The scope is limited. She is being asked to establish facts in the light of applicable guidelines. 3. Guidelines are not and were not then the law. Non-compliance with a guideline did not mean that an offence had been committed. 4. If there is any suggestion of a criminal offence this would be reported to the police. So she will not be saying that the PM comitted a criminal offence or anything like it. 5. She is not reporting on whether he has misled the Commons or whether his apology is acceptable or not. 6. It is likely to show that a large number of civil servants, some of them pretty senior had poor judgment and/or gave poor advice and/or misunderstood what the rules / guidelines were.
Frankly Tory MPs have all the evidence they need now about the PM. Waiting for the report is an avoidance technique.
I will repost what I posted last night.
Tory MPs need to realise that this is not about whether he broke this or that rule. This is about a PM who has, in this and many other things, given the impression that the elite at the top are not subject to the same rules as the rest of us. Quite apart from the corrosion this does to the solidarity necessary in a society, especially during a crisis such as Covid, it completely undermines the Tories Brexit USP i.e. that they were on the side of the people against the unaccountable arrogant elite - a USP which Boris seemed to embody and which seemed to motivate the "levelling up" agenda. If that is undermined what do they have left?
And what USP do any of the rivals for the crown have?
I am no Boris supporter. But I do think the levelling up agenda - if properly thought and pushed through - had great promise and was necessary. It will be a shame if it gets forgotten. Sunak has already harmed it with the cuts to the rail improvements. And, frankly, I think Labour has nothing to say on this. They still take the same complacent and arrogant view that the North somehow "belongs" to them. So if the Tories lose those seats Labour will just behave as if nothing has changed and nothing will change.
Tories should be thinking about these issues when deciding the PM's future not fretting about parties. And, by the way, they need to be asking all the potential leaders these 2 questions, if they want to avoid jumping out of a frying pan into a fire -
1. During lockdowns did they ever attend any social events or "work parties" or meetings at which alcoholic drinks were served at all at No 10 and, if so, how many and when? 2. During lockdowns did they ever have any social events or "work parties" or meetings at which alcoholic drinks were served at their own departments and, if so, how many and when?
And about lying about it afterwards, which is as you say beyond her brief
Sir Jonathan is to take up a new role as the Pro-Vice Chancellor for the faculty of medicine and health sciences at University of Nottingham.
Vice Chancellor must be one of the worst job titles. Pro-Vice Chancellor suggests his boss is an amateur?
Its an odd one - Chancellor is the figurehead, but not the boss. VC is the boss. Pro-VC is the deputy boss (and may have specific remits).
Any title that includes the word Vice is liable to be misconstrued in this salacious age. I still think of Warwickshire as the 32nd county for Vice and would be pleased to see it even lower.
What on earth is Chatham House? Is this like a swingers thing?
It's a foreign policy think-tank with close links to the UK foreign policy establishment. The Chatham House rule is that you can report what was discussed at its meetings but not attribute anything to an individual participant. This rule has been adopted more broadly in reporting private discussions but is frequently a source of confusion, including over whether it is a singular or plural.
Jacob Rees-Mogg calling someone else 'lightweight' is delicious, isn't it?
I can practically hear from my window yells of 'Hey, tha's oor lightweight'. I think in Scotland that will play and play into how little the Conservatives value the Union, when they dismiss even their own man. Maybe I'm a bit too sensitive to this but I think it's a pretty devastating attitude to take. It won't be seen as an attack on Douglas Ross (who is not personally super popular), but an attack on Scottish influence within the Union.
Time and time again, the second biggest (estimates vary) threat to the Union is the Conservative and Unionist Party. Their understanding of power is so, so narrow that they seem to believe that power insulates them from any responsibility when it should be precisely the opposite. They remind me of small town American cops, thinking because they have power, because their jobs maybe difficult, that they can act how they want. I mean even the fucking Lion King addressed this. Everyone remembers Simba singing 'I just can't wait to be King', but the entire rest of the film, from Mufasa explaining how there's more to being a king than doing what you want, to Scar fucking up the Pride Lands, to Simba finally understanding, is about how a ruler has responsibility for the people they rule.
Interesting perspective. HYUFD is also taking very much that [edit] same viewpoint as Mr R-M - and he is our resident Tory official (if at a low level).
Thank you. I was actually quite shocked watching BBC Breakfast this morning to hear JRM saying words that reminded me precisely of HYUFD. No disrespect to HYUFD, but it did give me a sense of foreboding about the path the Conservative Party is on.
As an ex-Constituency executive member of the Conservative Party (no longer even a member), I must correct the previous poster about HYUFD's party status. I do this hesitantly because though I believe some of his posts a little silly, I suspect he is a decent person and not always deserving of the regular kickings he gets on here. Fundamentally HYUFD carries no weight in the CP as he has stated he is a member of a Town Council (equivalent of a Parish Council) and he is a BRANCH Chairman. Almost any member can become a branch chairman. The Party is always gagging for them. It is essentially a very localised fundraiser It really holds no status in practice whatsoever. If he becomes a Constituency Party Chairman that would be a very different matter indeed.
Yet even more 2019 Conservative voters, let alone current Tory voters, still think Boris should stay than go.
JRM and I are more representative of the current Conservative Party than you are
That wasn't what I was saying old chap. I think you should just quit the "I am a branch chairman" stuff. For those of us in the know it makes you look truly silly. As for that absurd Cnut Rees Mogg being more representative of the Conservative Party than I am, you are absolutely right and this is why I, and many others have left.
As for you, probably the only significant difference politically between you and me is that I do not, will not and never have been able to insert my head up the backside of any political figure, particularly one as incompetent and ridiculous as Boris Johnson. If the Conservative Party can alienate someone like me, they are, in the short term at least, doomed.
Yes but you voted LD in 2019.
I rarely mention my position, I agree it does not matter, however more Tory voters still want to keep Boris than remove him. Of Tory members even if he went at least half would vote for Truss or even Rees Mogg over Sunak.
The party is moving to the populist right and has been since Cameron went
The direction of travel is to remove him and you can see that even on the uber-right wing ConHome. I know this is all a bit upsetting for you, but attempting to alienate people like me further is hardly going to help the Tories is it? I have voted Tory almost all my adult life. How much do you think suggesting on a public forum Rees Mogg is the true face of the Tory Party is going to help the Tory cause?
Part of the interest in HYUFD's posts is that he gives an unvarnished, completely honest reading of things and doesn't try to hide any unpalatable opinions. It's an insight into the subconscious of a part of the Tory base, as if someone has taken a truth pill. I find that very interesting and informative. A bit like when Corbynistas let slip that they prefer a Tory government to letting a Blairite traitor into power.
The other issue facing HMG is the cost of living crisis and I listened to a report on BBC business yesterday about the worldwide energy price hikes
Apparently, it has many factors including last year wind generation was poor due to an exceptionally wind free summer, the loss of coal, including the recent flooding of some of China’s coal mines, and the haste to move to green energy which has provided a vacuum that gas is now filling and is the transition fuel.
The demand worldwide far outstrips the supply and above all else Russia is holding Europe and the west to ransom over its abundance of gas, which has made things very much worse
Merkel also stopped all nuclear power stations following Fukushima creating a German energy crisis
The analyst said the idea this is short term is not born out by the facts and expects high energy prices for the next two years at least
I would suggest the world is seeing the results of too much haste to move to green and insufficient planning for transitional energy which is highlighted by the controversy over Cambo oil field in Scotland
Yes. Another one of BJ's mistakes - I suspect Carrie had a bit to do with that one in pushing the Green agenda.
BJ has been a full signed up member of the Green grouping in the Conservative Party for a long. long time.
I see no harm in pushing a green agenda. I'd see harm in backing away from pushing it on owner occupied housing, which is a running sore, and in not sufficiently planning for contingency.
The problem with owner occupied housing is that there is a principle of non interference. If you are not changing anything, and requiring planning permission or building regs, then the principle is that you don't have to upgrade.
Even changes to electrical or gas regulations do not require active retrofitting in private housing. This is in contrast to commercial and letting properties which need regular electrical and gas safety certification, and therefore regular improvement.
Any changes to domestic regulations therefore are slow to change, and if costly to implement lead to economic disincentives. If the UK government today legislated in building regulations that replacement heating systems should be electric, then there would be a thriving trade in fixing clapped out gas systems to avoid replacement and this could lead to the opposite of the intention of legislation . As with all policy and government it is not just good intentions that count but how policy works in the real world.
Totally off topic I thought I would give an update on air source heat pumps. A local County Council we deal with has a plan to replace ageing boilers in schools with ASHP and last year carried out a cost analysis/feasability study into it. They found that to install an ASHP system in a school would cost between 5-10 times as much as a new gas boiler system. They also estimate that due to the vast increase in the use of electricity to power the ASHPs there would only be limited energy savings. Therefore they are going to recommend to the Councillors to install new gas boilers not ASHPs.
ASHP's remind me of a Sinclair C5, great idea on paper and clever technology, they are just not practical.
Our experience is not encouraging, at least for big houses.
We live in an old farmhouse. It's a large house and insulation is poor. However, we had a specialist firm do the calculations, and a hybrid ASHP system with oil boiler backup looks technically feasible. The oil boiler would kick in when it's very cold and especially if at the same time we are heating all the rooms, but for much of the time the twin ASHPs would be adequate. Also we could run the ASHPs for longer during the middle of the day and at night, when the oil boiler is currently switched off, thus giving better background heat and compensating for the lower peak power of the ASHPs. Overall, we could probably reduce our oil consumption by 80% or more.
So far so good, but the costs are absolutely eye-watering. Before we even start thinking about the system itself, we would need to upgrade to a 3-phase mains supply. That's not particularly hard - the 11Kv line goes through our land - but UK Power networks still quoted £20K. Add in the rewiring, the heat pumps, the header tanks, the replumbing, the listed building application etc etc, and it's looking like a total well north of £60K. Possibly a lot more. A ground-source system, which would be necessary if we were trying to rely exclusively on the heat-pump, would be very much more expensive even that that.
OK, this is not a typical house, but even so...
Sounds similar to our own considerations. Its a 200ish year old detached building with a Grade C listing. Windows need replacing as most of the sashes are stuck / painted or nailed shut and secondary glazing behind them.
There are drafts which I am chasing down with filler. But fundamentally all new windows are needed, and £50k has been quoted. That buys a lot of heating oil! So having done the maths we decided to patch the drafts where we find them and keep burning oil.
Its a new boiler as well. Looked at Heat Pump and Biomass options but the ROI wasn't there. There is no point spending £lots to save £little.
I rather think too many hopes are being pinned on the Sue Grey investigation report.
She may be a tough cookie but -
1. She is not independent. 2. The scope is limited. She is being asked to establish facts in the light of applicable guidelines. 3. Guidelines are not and were not then the law. Non-compliance with a guideline did not mean that an offence had been committed. 4. If there is any suggestion of a criminal offence this would be reported to the police. So she will not be saying that the PM comitted a criminal offence or anything like it. 5. She is not reporting on whether he has misled the Commons or whether his apology is acceptable or not. 6. It is likely to show that a large number of civil servants, some of them pretty senior had poor judgment and/or gave poor advice and/or misunderstood what the rules / guidelines were.
Frankly Tory MPs have all the evidence they need now about the PM. Waiting for the report is an avoidance technique.
I will repost what I posted last night.
Tory MPs need to realise that this is not about whether he broke this or that rule. This is about a PM who has, in this and many other things, given the impression that the elite at the top are not subject to the same rules as the rest of us. Quite apart from the corrosion this does to the solidarity necessary in a society, especially during a crisis such as Covid, it completely undermines the Tories Brexit USP i.e. that they were on the side of the people against the unaccountable arrogant elite - a USP which Boris seemed to embody and which seemed to motivate the "levelling up" agenda. If that is undermined what do they have left?
And what USP do any of the rivals for the crown have?
I am no Boris supporter. But I do think the levelling up agenda - if properly thought and pushed through - had great promise and was necessary. It will be a shame if it gets forgotten. Sunak has already harmed it with the cuts to the rail improvements. And, frankly, I think Labour has nothing to say on this. They still take the same complacent and arrogant view that the North somehow "belongs" to them. So if the Tories lose those seats Labour will just behave as if nothing has changed and nothing will change.
Tories should be thinking about these issues when deciding the PM's future not fretting about parties. And, by the way, they need to be asking all the potential leaders these 2 questions, if they want to avoid jumping out of a frying pan into a fire -
1. During lockdowns did they ever attend any social events or "work parties" or meetings at which alcoholic drinks were served at all at No 10 and, if so, how many and when? 2. During lockdowns did they ever have any social events or "work parties" or meetings at which alcoholic drinks were served at their own departments and, if so, how many and when?
And about lying about it afterwards, which is as you say beyond her brief
The report itself will be "independent" in that it will provide neutral information to ministers within the scope of its commission.
However, that scope is likely to be very limited and the report itself will contain the personal details of junior civil servants and won't be made public. Expect a vague summary, approved by the PM, to be placed in the Commons library.
I remember the days when an Austin Maxi was the only option.
What a wonderful machine! (not)
The Maxi had some excellent Issigonis ideas such as standard 5 speed transmission and anticipated the 'monospace' trend by at least 15 years. The cost cutting decision to reuse the Austin 1800 door panel tooling resulted in an ungainly appearance that it never overcame.
If you look at its contemporary competition it looks a lot more like modern car than any of them.
By the way just catching up on the politics. So much for my theory that Rees Mogg would be the one to hand Johnson the revolver. What a charlatan!
His comments on Newsnight have given the Tories in Scotland a big problem, if the clown doesn't go reasonably soon.
DRoss and most of his colleagues look at the PM, the polls and the forthcoming May local elections and think "uh oh". So set out a principled position before yesterday's sorrynotsorry and followed through with it.
On one hand that should give them an element of protection from the electorate. But BJ continues to suck and now Lord Mogg says that Scotland and Scottish MPs and the leader of the party in Scotland are "lightweight".
In the short term how does DRoss try and form a compact with the electorate to save May's elections? What can he say / do? And what does it mean for the medium and long term - a divorce between the parties either side of the wall?
And yet if they split - who would take the Scottish Tories seriously? Both HYUFD and Mr R-M are already dissing them; they have given up on them already.
What is Mr Ross going to do without the money and assets? Bearing in mind a lot of members and voters will hop ship to the SLDs and Ms Ballantyne's mob rather than vote for Unionist Party 2.0 - which really, really has an unhappy name/connotations in Scotland.
What is Mr Ross going to tell voters? "That bunch in London are a big golden turd like an Edinburgh hotel and I want Scotland to stick to them and do whatever they say."
I hear you. What message do they have for voters? That they've boosted Farming and Fishing with a Brexit deal that delivered harm instead of benefit? That they stand for the Union having split NI off from GB? That they represent propriety and good government? (stop sniggering at the back) That the Scottish people are loved and respected by the party?
That's why they'd almost be better off going it alone.
This week Farming Today has been covering seafood industries. Successes seem to get far too little coverage.
For example 4 minutes in to this there is a piece about a Scottish producer exporting live shellfish by the tonne, and other products too: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m00139dp
He is not keen on the absurd and entirely unnecessary EU bureaucracy, though, which requires each bag of cockles to be marked with a count of the numbers of individual cockles in the bag.
UK bureaucracy not EU. We did this. We demanded this. Treat us like a 3rd country!
No. EU bureaucracy.
The UK did not make the decision to introduce it.
The UK decided to Brexit. The EU chooses to make it difficult for 3rd countries to trade with the EU.
That the EU makes it easier for 3rd countries to trade with each other than to trade with the EU, is an EU problem of the EU's creation. They will end up inside a wall they have built around themselves, self-abusing with their own paperwork.
Mate, we knew what "3rd country" rules were. We chose which bits we wanted to negotiate away in the TCA. This was not one of them.
So we asked to be treated like any other country without a trade agreement in this area and they obliged. How is this forcing something on us unwillingly when they said "do you want this" we said "yes please" and they said "ok"?
The fault lies with the government not having a clue how trade works, what the details were, and what was important to Scottish fishermen. No matter how you try and deflect blame from your government to other parties it doesn't change both reality and the way that fishermen are rightly blaming the government for the mess.
The underlying responsibility lies with Brussels for having crazy / stupid / irrational rules, where Brussels has crazy / stupid / irrational rules. I think that that is blatantly obvious.
Where the UK has taken a view that all things considered we are better off outside, that is a UK responsibiity.
But to say that the UK is responsible for EU craziness is a bit bonkers.
I'd love to see a rational explanation of the EU rules on which alcoholic drinks can and cannot be sold in 500ml bottles, in addition to 750ml and 375ml options. EU Directive 2007/45/EC - this came up in the "modern pint of Champagne" flapping amongst EU-types in December. Why can I buy still white and red wine in a 500mI, but not yellow wine or sparkling? haven't looked at lager / beer.
The answer is that Brussels does not really do thorough logic, but panders to vested interests far too much.
Totally off topic I thought I would give an update on air source heat pumps. A local County Council we deal with has a plan to replace ageing boilers in schools with ASHP and last year carried out a cost analysis/feasability study into it. They found that to install an ASHP system in a school would cost between 5-10 times as much as a new gas boiler system. They also estimate that due to the vast increase in the use of electricity to power the ASHPs there would only be limited energy savings. Therefore they are going to recommend to the Councillors to install new gas boilers not ASHPs.
ASHP's remind me of a Sinclair C5, great idea on paper and clever technology, they are just not practical.
Whoever suggested an ASHP retrofit for a school was clearly a moron.
It would probably work in a new build school though.
To expand on this point, while its been some time since I did these kind of heat load calculations, a new school built to current or better building standards with underfloor heating and mechanical heat recovery should have no problem being heated by a couple of heat pumps.
This site needs at least one contributor from the bona fide upper class, for balance. (It could also do with more w/c contributors, mind you).
So it's a shame that Charles has departed.
Yes this site is swarming with the kind of people who buy their own furniture. Charles lent it a touch of genuine class.
Why has Charles left?
Charles is always happy to mention his family and friends (especially if they are or were CEOs of multinational pharma companies). He took exception to someone taking such PB "banter" (which he sees as subject to Chatham House rules) and bringing it into the real world.
I had an incident with him some time ago. He happily uses his own identity on here and talks about his work. I mentioned his employer and he asked me not to. Edit: I was happy to comply as it was only good manners to do so.
As I said it's a bit run with the hare and hunt with the hounds. His view is that he brings that information to PB but we must treat it confidentially on PB or outside. So he could say, for example, my family's trust is having an exhibition of Byzantine Phallic Imagery but would not want anyone from PB to say on PB well isn't that Bob's exhibition, I know him well can't wait to speak to him; or to go to the exhibition and say, oh yes Charles told me about this on PB.
It does seem to me that people who wish to be anonymous - which is fair enough - should avoid posting lots of identifiable stuff about their private lives up here. That's just common sense, as well as avoiding trying to have it both ways.
What is really taking the **** is when those who wish to be anonymous post a load of made up stuff about themselves and then get the hump when anyone calls it out. Thankfully Charles didn't sink to that.
It's a tricky one because I think we all see PB as a bit of a refuge from real life and that whatever we say on here is in "PB World" and hence would not necessarily want it to be transposed into that real life. Especially as one of the joys of PB is that we are sometimes more robust on here than IRL.
Charles was no different except his posts contained a lot of real life information so at some point it was likely that there would be a clash and so it proved.
It's also natural for us to draw on our personal experiences when debating our opinions, and so it's inevitable that some degree of personal identifying information will be exposed.
Though you'd have to put a bit of effort in to identify me from the pictures of my knitting. (Not a challenge by the way).
Jacob Rees-Mogg calling someone else 'lightweight' is delicious, isn't it?
I can practically hear from my window yells of 'Hey, tha's oor lightweight'. I think in Scotland that will play and play into how little the Conservatives value the Union, when they dismiss even their own man. Maybe I'm a bit too sensitive to this but I think it's a pretty devastating attitude to take. It won't be seen as an attack on Douglas Ross (who is not personally super popular), but an attack on Scottish influence within the Union.
Time and time again, the second biggest (estimates vary) threat to the Union is the Conservative and Unionist Party. Their understanding of power is so, so narrow that they seem to believe that power insulates them from any responsibility when it should be precisely the opposite. They remind me of small town American cops, thinking because they have power, because their jobs maybe difficult, that they can act how they want. I mean even the fucking Lion King addressed this. Everyone remembers Simba singing 'I just can't wait to be King', but the entire rest of the film, from Mufasa explaining how there's more to being a king than doing what you want, to Scar fucking up the Pride Lands, to Simba finally understanding, is about how a ruler has responsibility for the people they rule.
Interesting perspective. HYUFD is also taking very much that [edit] same viewpoint as Mr R-M - and he is our resident Tory official (if at a low level).
Thank you. I was actually quite shocked watching BBC Breakfast this morning to hear JRM saying words that reminded me precisely of HYUFD. No disrespect to HYUFD, but it did give me a sense of foreboding about the path the Conservative Party is on.
As an ex-Constituency executive member of the Conservative Party (no longer even a member), I must correct the previous poster about HYUFD's party status. I do this hesitantly because though I believe some of his posts a little silly, I suspect he is a decent person and not always deserving of the regular kickings he gets on here. Fundamentally HYUFD carries no weight in the CP as he has stated he is a member of a Town Council (equivalent of a Parish Council) and he is a BRANCH Chairman. Almost any member can become a branch chairman. The Party is always gagging for them. It is essentially a very localised fundraiser It really holds no status in practice whatsoever. If he becomes a Constituency Party Chairman that would be a very different matter indeed.
Yet even more 2019 Conservative voters, let alone current Tory voters, still think Boris should stay than go.
JRM and I are more representative of the current Conservative Party than you are
That wasn't what I was saying old chap. I think you should just quit the "I am a branch chairman" stuff. For those of us in the know it makes you look truly silly. As for that absurd Cnut Rees Mogg being more representative of the Conservative Party than I am, you are absolutely right and this is why I, and many others have left.
As for you, probably the only significant difference politically between you and me is that I do not, will not and never have been able to insert my head up the backside of any political figure, particularly one as incompetent and ridiculous as Boris Johnson. If the Conservative Party can alienate someone like me, they are, in the short term at least, doomed.
Yes but you voted LD in 2019.
I rarely mention my position, I agree it does not matter, however more Tory voters still want to keep Boris than remove him. Of Tory members even if he went at least half would vote for Truss or even Rees Mogg over Sunak.
The party is moving to the populist right and has been since Cameron went
The direction of travel is to remove him and you can see that even on the uber-right wing ConHome. I know this is all a bit upsetting for you, but attempting to alienate people like me further is hardly going to help the Tories is it? I have voted Tory almost all my adult life. How much do you think suggesting on a public forum Rees Mogg is the true face of the Tory Party is going to help the Tory cause?
Part of the interest in HYUFD's posts is that he gives an unvarnished, completely honest reading of things and doesn't try to hide any unpalatable opinions. It's an insight into the subconscious of a part of the Tory base, as if someone has taken a truth pill. I find that very interesting and informative. A bit like when Corbynistas let slip that they prefer a Tory government to letting a Blairite traitor into power.
Perhaps. His loyalty to Johnson is odd because on actual policy areas that he has given away on over the years I would guess he is probably quite moderate (exception on social matters) and not really part of the populist right. Some of his more extreme posts are more to do with the amount of attack he receives from other posters that are sometimes over the top.
Twelfth Night. If it be aught to the old tune, my lord, It is as fat and fulsome to mine ear As howling after music.
Fat and fulsome - not a bad pair of epithets for our PM.
I'm guessing a significant number of them know exactly what fulsome means. Using a word which doesn't actually mean what people think it means is an artform. Boris himself is very good at it. I remember his description of a previous scandal around him as 'piffle' - which does not, as people inferred, mean nonsense; it means unimportant.
I rather think too many hopes are being pinned on the Sue Grey investigation report.
She may be a tough cookie but -
1. She is not independent. 2. The scope is limited. She is being asked to establish facts in the light of applicable guidelines. 3. Guidelines are not and were not then the law. Non-compliance with a guideline did not mean that an offence had been committed. 4. If there is any suggestion of a criminal offence this would be reported to the police. So she will not be saying that the PM comitted a criminal offence or anything like it. 5. She is not reporting on whether he has misled the Commons or whether his apology is acceptable or not. 6. It is likely to show that a large number of civil servants, some of them pretty senior had poor judgment and/or gave poor advice and/or misunderstood what the rules / guidelines were.
Frankly Tory MPs have all the evidence they need now about the PM. Waiting for the report is an avoidance technique.
I will repost what I posted last night.
Tory MPs need to realise that this is not about whether he broke this or that rule. This is about a PM who has, in this and many other things, given the impression that the elite at the top are not subject to the same rules as the rest of us. Quite apart from the corrosion this does to the solidarity necessary in a society, especially during a crisis such as Covid, it completely undermines the Tories Brexit USP i.e. that they were on the side of the people against the unaccountable arrogant elite - a USP which Boris seemed to embody and which seemed to motivate the "levelling up" agenda. If that is undermined what do they have left?
And what USP do any of the rivals for the crown have?
I am no Boris supporter. But I do think the levelling up agenda - if properly thought and pushed through - had great promise and was necessary. It will be a shame if it gets forgotten. Sunak has already harmed it with the cuts to the rail improvements. And, frankly, I think Labour has nothing to say on this. They still take the same complacent and arrogant view that the North somehow "belongs" to them. So if the Tories lose those seats Labour will just behave as if nothing has changed and nothing will change.
Tories should be thinking about these issues when deciding the PM's future not fretting about parties. And, by the way, they need to be asking all the potential leaders these 2 questions, if they want to avoid jumping out of a frying pan into a fire -
1. During lockdowns did they ever attend any social events or "work parties" or meetings at which alcoholic drinks were served at all at No 10 and, if so, how many and when? 2. During lockdowns did they ever have any social events or "work parties" or meetings at which alcoholic drinks were served at their own departments and, if so, how many and when?
And about lying about it afterwards, which is as you say beyond her brief
The report itself will be "independent" in that it will provide neutral information to ministers within the scope of its commission.
However, that scope is likely to be very limited and the report itself will contain the personal details of junior civil servants and won't be made public. Expect a vague summary, approved by the PM, to be placed in the Commons library.
The importance of its not being independent is that she will not be permitted to say anything outside of that brief.
I rather think too many hopes are being pinned on the Sue Grey investigation report.
She may be a tough cookie but -
1. She is not independent. 2. The scope is limited. She is being asked to establish facts in the light of applicable guidelines. 3. Guidelines are not and were not then the law. Non-compliance with a guideline did not mean that an offence had been committed. 4. If there is any suggestion of a criminal offence this would be reported to the police. So she will not be saying that the PM comitted a criminal offence or anything like it. 5. She is not reporting on whether he has misled the Commons or whether his apology is acceptable or not. 6. It is likely to show that a large number of civil servants, some of them pretty senior had poor judgment and/or gave poor advice and/or misunderstood what the rules / guidelines were.
Frankly Tory MPs have all the evidence they need now about the PM. Waiting for the report is an avoidance technique.
I will repost what I posted last night.
Tory MPs need to realise that this is not about whether he broke this or that rule. This is about a PM who has, in this and many other things, given the impression that the elite at the top are not subject to the same rules as the rest of us. Quite apart from the corrosion this does to the solidarity necessary in a society, especially during a crisis such as Covid, it completely undermines the Tories Brexit USP i.e. that they were on the side of the people against the unaccountable arrogant elite - a USP which Boris seemed to embody and which seemed to motivate the "levelling up" agenda. If that is undermined what do they have left?
And what USP do any of the rivals for the crown have?
I am no Boris supporter. But I do think the levelling up agenda - if properly thought and pushed through - had great promise and was necessary. It will be a shame if it gets forgotten. Sunak has already harmed it with the cuts to the rail improvements. And, frankly, I think Labour has nothing to say on this. They still take the same complacent and arrogant view that the North somehow "belongs" to them. So if the Tories lose those seats Labour will just behave as if nothing has changed and nothing will change.
Tories should be thinking about these issues when deciding the PM's future not fretting about parties. And, by the way, they need to be asking all the potential leaders these 2 questions, if they want to avoid jumping out of a frying pan into a fire -
1. During lockdowns did they ever attend any social events or "work parties" or meetings at which alcoholic drinks were served at all at No 10 and, if so, how many and when? 2. During lockdowns did they ever have any social events or "work parties" or meetings at which alcoholic drinks were served at their own departments and, if so, how many and when?
Why do you say “not independent”? Surely as a civil servant independent from the politics of this, and can provide what is needed, a list of the facts?
She is reasonably independent in as much as she is a civil servant who has worked for both conservative and Labour governments.
I have to agree on the levelling up agenda and I think that it is important that someone really make the case for the benefit to the south. If overcrowded cities, congestion and overwhelmed public services are to be overcome, then sensible investment around the country is essential. It may be that the congestion around London might be better relieved by spending on infrastructure, and moving government departments out of London, rather than the diminishing returns from more and more roads. Labour can't make this case as they want to promise sweeties for everyone.
This site needs at least one contributor from the bona fide upper class, for balance. (It could also do with more w/c contributors, mind you).
So it's a shame that Charles has departed.
Yes this site is swarming with the kind of people who buy their own furniture. Charles lent it a touch of genuine class.
Why has Charles left?
Charles is always happy to mention his family and friends (especially if they are or were CEOs of multinational pharma companies). He took exception to someone taking such PB "banter" (which he sees as subject to Chatham House rules) and bringing it into the real world.
I had an incident with him some time ago. He happily uses his own identity on here and talks about his work. I mentioned his employer and he asked me not to. Edit: I was happy to comply as it was only good manners to do so.
As I said it's a bit run with the hare and hunt with the hounds. His view is that he brings that information to PB but we must treat it confidentially on PB or outside. So he could say, for example, my family's trust is having an exhibition of Byzantine Phallic Imagery but would not want anyone from PB to say on PB well isn't that Bob's exhibition, I know him well can't wait to speak to him; or to go to the exhibition and say, oh yes Charles told me about this on PB.
It does seem to me that people who wish to be anonymous - which is fair enough - should avoid posting lots of identifiable stuff about their private lives up here. That's just common sense, as well as avoiding trying to have it both ways.
What is really taking the **** is when those who wish to be anonymous post a load of made up stuff about themselves and then get the hump when anyone calls it out. Thankfully Charles didn't sink to that.
It's a tricky one because I think we all see PB as a bit of a refuge from real life and that whatever we say on here is in "PB World" and hence would not necessarily want it to be transposed into that real life. Especially as one of the joys of PB is that we are sometimes more robust on here than IRL.
Charles was no different except his posts contained a lot of real life information so at some point it was likely that there would be a clash and so it proved.
Just because you can work out the identity of an anonymous poster, doesn’t mean that you need to reference it on a public forum. It wouldn’t be too difficult to work out quite a few, if someone was in the mood to do so. Yes, @charles is an easy guess from what he’s said on here, but we should all respect each others’ anonymity.
It's different. Charles, like others, posted non-anonymously. We were all supposed to know exactly who he was and if we weren't he pointed us to his various family activities (eg. the Bulldog Trust) where it was plain as day. So he wasn't by his own volition an anonymous poster.
Totally off topic I thought I would give an update on air source heat pumps. A local County Council we deal with has a plan to replace ageing boilers in schools with ASHP and last year carried out a cost analysis/feasability study into it. They found that to install an ASHP system in a school would cost between 5-10 times as much as a new gas boiler system. They also estimate that due to the vast increase in the use of electricity to power the ASHPs there would only be limited energy savings. Therefore they are going to recommend to the Councillors to install new gas boilers not ASHPs.
ASHP's remind me of a Sinclair C5, great idea on paper and clever technology, they are just not practical.
Our experience is not encouraging, at least for big houses.
We live in an old farmhouse. It's a large house and insulation is poor. However, we had a specialist firm do the calculations, and a hybrid ASHP system with oil boiler backup looks technically feasible. The oil boiler would kick in when it's very cold and especially if at the same time we are heating all the rooms, but for much of the time the twin ASHPs would be adequate. Also we could run the ASHPs for longer during the middle of the day and at night, when the oil boiler is currently switched off, thus giving better background heat and compensating for the lower peak power of the ASHPs. Overall, we could probably reduce our oil consumption by 80% or more.
So far so good, but the costs are absolutely eye-watering. Before we even start thinking about the system itself, we would need to upgrade to a 3-phase mains supply. That's not particularly hard - the 11Kv line goes through our land - but UK Power networks still quoted £20K. Add in the rewiring, the heat pumps, the header tanks, the replumbing, the listed building application etc etc, and it's looking like a total well north of £60K. Possibly a lot more. A ground-source system, which would be necessary if we were trying to rely exclusively on the heat-pump, would be very much more expensive even that that.
OK, this is not a typical house, but even so...
Sounds similar to our own considerations. Its a 200ish year old detached building with a Grade C listing. Windows need replacing as most of the sashes are stuck / painted or nailed shut and secondary glazing behind them.
There are drafts which I am chasing down with filler. But fundamentally all new windows are needed, and £50k has been quoted. That buys a lot of heating oil! So having done the maths we decided to patch the drafts where we find them and keep burning oil.
Its a new boiler as well. Looked at Heat Pump and Biomass options but the ROI wasn't there. There is no point spending £lots to save £little.
If gas prices stay this high (and presumably start to drag oil prices up too as people shift to alternate sources of energy) then that economic gap is going to narrow significantly.
Lots of things start making sense when your energy input cost has gone up by a factor of five!
(As an aside, has anyone kicked the planning people into pulling their heads out of their backsides & permitting double glazing in Grade II+ listings where the original windows are single glazed? Until recently I believe they were still insisting on like-for-like replacement which is completely insane given the world we live in right now.)
I rather think too many hopes are being pinned on the Sue Grey investigation report.
She may be a tough cookie but -
1. She is not independent. 2. The scope is limited. She is being asked to establish facts in the light of applicable guidelines. 3. Guidelines are not and were not then the law. Non-compliance with a guideline did not mean that an offence had been committed. 4. If there is any suggestion of a criminal offence this would be reported to the police. So she will not be saying that the PM comitted a criminal offence or anything like it. 5. She is not reporting on whether he has misled the Commons or whether his apology is acceptable or not. 6. It is likely to show that a large number of civil servants, some of them pretty senior had poor judgment and/or gave poor advice and/or misunderstood what the rules / guidelines were.
Frankly Tory MPs have all the evidence they need now about the PM. Waiting for the report is an avoidance technique.
I will repost what I posted last night.
Tory MPs need to realise that this is not about whether he broke this or that rule. This is about a PM who has, in this and many other things, given the impression that the elite at the top are not subject to the same rules as the rest of us. Quite apart from the corrosion this does to the solidarity necessary in a society, especially during a crisis such as Covid, it completely undermines the Tories Brexit USP i.e. that they were on the side of the people against the unaccountable arrogant elite - a USP which Boris seemed to embody and which seemed to motivate the "levelling up" agenda. If that is undermined what do they have left?
And what USP do any of the rivals for the crown have?
I am no Boris supporter. But I do think the levelling up agenda - if properly thought and pushed through - had great promise and was necessary. It will be a shame if it gets forgotten. Sunak has already harmed it with the cuts to the rail improvements. And, frankly, I think Labour has nothing to say on this. They still take the same complacent and arrogant view that the North somehow "belongs" to them. So if the Tories lose those seats Labour will just behave as if nothing has changed and nothing will change.
Tories should be thinking about these issues when deciding the PM's future not fretting about parties. And, by the way, they need to be asking all the potential leaders these 2 questions, if they want to avoid jumping out of a frying pan into a fire -
1. During lockdowns did they ever attend any social events or "work parties" or meetings at which alcoholic drinks were served at all at No 10 and, if so, how many and when? 2. During lockdowns did they ever have any social events or "work parties" or meetings at which alcoholic drinks were served at their own departments and, if so, how many and when?
And about lying about it afterwards, which is as you say beyond her brief
The report itself will be "independent" in that it will provide neutral information to ministers within the scope of its commission.
However, that scope is likely to be very limited and the report itself will contain the personal details of junior civil servants and won't be made public. Expect a vague summary, approved by the PM, to be placed in the Commons library.
The AJ promised that MPs would get the full report
I remember the days when an Austin Maxi was the only option.
What a wonderful machine! (not)
The Maxi had some excellent Issigonis ideas such as standard 5 speed transmission and anticipated the 'monospace' trend by at least 15 years. The cost cutting decision to reuse the Austin 1800 door panel tooling resulted in an ungainly appearance that it never overcame.
If you look at its contemporary competition it looks a lot more like modern car than any of them.
We had one in our family. To be fair, other than a terrible problem with rust it was a pretty good car for it's day
Can't fault that - none of them beyond Matt Vickers are safe and I suspect they already know they are doomed.
I would think Dehenna Davison has a good chance of re-election. Bishop Auckland has been trending away from labour for a while now. Just look at all the nice new estates too in the more populated parts of the seat as well.
Sir Jonathan is to take up a new role as the Pro-Vice Chancellor for the faculty of medicine and health sciences at University of Nottingham.
Vice Chancellor must be one of the worst job titles. Pro-Vice Chancellor suggests his boss is an amateur?
Its an odd one - Chancellor is the figurehead, but not the boss. VC is the boss. Pro-VC is the deputy boss (and may have specific remits).
Any title that includes the word Vice is liable to be misconstrued in this salacious age. I still think of Warwickshire as the 32nd county for Vice and would be pleased to see it even lower.
Oh well, looks like I’m still in a very small minority when it comes to the PM.
I don’t have any particular like for the guy, have met several sales people with similar personalities over the years and know not to trust them as far as I can throw them. He was in the right place at the right time in 2019 though, and added many Conservative seats in traditionally Labour areas.
He wouldn’t have been many people’s choice to handle a pandemic, but the vaccine rollout was brilliant and in recent times he’s avoided imposing restrictions that were put in place elsewhere.
When the LotO calls directly for the PM to resign, and he doesn’t, that makes Starmer look weak. All the attacks at PMQs will have done is strengthened his position, even if it’s only on a temporary basis.
I disagree on Johnson, in that I think he should go for this. The rules were controversial and grated for those of us with a more liberal bent (particularly the daft rules on meeting outside) but can be stomached, just about, if those imposing them follow them to the letter, even if shown to be over the top in hindsight - honest mistakes made on limited information etc. But if the rule makers ignored them at the time then the rest of us feel like we were taken for fools. And we don't like that.
But I do agree that it's a bizarre self-made disaster when he should really be riding high right now as the leader who resisted panic/caution (delete according to personal viewpoint) over Omicron and appears to have been proven right on that. It was a big call and he got it right. That may have been more from being forced to by cabinet or through fear of the CRG sending in their letters or the embarassment of having to rely on Labour votes to pass anything else, but as leader he takes the credit just as he (should) take the blame when things go wrong.
I don't think calling for resignation and failing to get it makes Starmer look weak. He'd have looked a numpty if he'd not called on Johnson to resign. The failure of the Conservative party MPs to eject Johnson makes them look weak/spineless.
Johnson has a magic touch. Will it still be tainted 12, 18 months from a general election? That is what I imagine many Cons MPs are waiting to see.
He is a burst balloon. A busted flush. Beria in the final 10 minutes of Death of Stalin. There is no coming back from this. Sunak will be PM at the conference.
Fair play for not fannying about with a prediction.
I’ve come to the conclusion that aside from spraying his DNA all over the world and personal enrichment (the latter of which he’s very bad at), BJ’s personal principles and ambitions revolve around seeing how much he can transgress and fcuk up but still be able to pull back from the brink, chestnuts outta the fire, bacon saved etc. Each time he’s done it (which is a lot) it reinforces the self entitlement and belief. Dread thought but if BJ manages it again, he’ll yet again have a massive hard on for being Boris Johnson and carry on regardless, convinced of his genius.
Jacob Rees-Mogg calling someone else 'lightweight' is delicious, isn't it?
I can practically hear from my window yells of 'Hey, tha's oor lightweight'. I think in Scotland that will play and play into how little the Conservatives value the Union, when they dismiss even their own man. Maybe I'm a bit too sensitive to this but I think it's a pretty devastating attitude to take. It won't be seen as an attack on Douglas Ross (who is not personally super popular), but an attack on Scottish influence within the Union.
Time and time again, the second biggest (estimates vary) threat to the Union is the Conservative and Unionist Party. Their understanding of power is so, so narrow that they seem to believe that power insulates them from any responsibility when it should be precisely the opposite. They remind me of small town American cops, thinking because they have power, because their jobs maybe difficult, that they can act how they want. I mean even the fucking Lion King addressed this. Everyone remembers Simba singing 'I just can't wait to be King', but the entire rest of the film, from Mufasa explaining how there's more to being a king than doing what you want, to Scar fucking up the Pride Lands, to Simba finally understanding, is about how a ruler has responsibility for the people they rule.
Interesting perspective. HYUFD is also taking very much that [edit] same viewpoint as Mr R-M - and he is our resident Tory official (if at a low level).
Thank you. I was actually quite shocked watching BBC Breakfast this morning to hear JRM saying words that reminded me precisely of HYUFD. No disrespect to HYUFD, but it did give me a sense of foreboding about the path the Conservative Party is on.
As an ex-Constituency executive member of the Conservative Party (no longer even a member), I must correct the previous poster about HYUFD's party status. I do this hesitantly because though I believe some of his posts a little silly, I suspect he is a decent person and not always deserving of the regular kickings he gets on here. Fundamentally HYUFD carries no weight in the CP as he has stated he is a member of a Town Council (equivalent of a Parish Council) and he is a BRANCH Chairman. Almost any member can become a branch chairman. The Party is always gagging for them. It is essentially a very localised fundraiser It really holds no status in practice whatsoever. If he becomes a Constituency Party Chairman that would be a very different matter indeed.
Yet even more 2019 Conservative voters, let alone current Tory voters, still think Boris should stay than go.
JRM and I are more representative of the current Conservative Party than you are
That wasn't what I was saying old chap. I think you should just quit the "I am a branch chairman" stuff. For those of us in the know it makes you look truly silly. As for that absurd Cnut Rees Mogg being more representative of the Conservative Party than I am, you are absolutely right and this is why I, and many others have left.
As for you, probably the only significant difference politically between you and me is that I do not, will not and never have been able to insert my head up the backside of any political figure, particularly one as incompetent and ridiculous as Boris Johnson. If the Conservative Party can alienate someone like me, they are, in the short term at least, doomed.
Yes but you voted LD in 2019.
I rarely mention my position, I agree it does not matter, however more Tory voters still want to keep Boris than remove him. Of Tory members even if he went at least half would vote for Truss or even Rees Mogg over Sunak.
The party is moving to the populist right and has been since Cameron went
The direction of travel is to remove him and you can see that even on the uber-right wing ConHome. I know this is all a bit upsetting for you, but attempting to alienate people like me further is hardly going to help the Tories is it? I have voted Tory almost all my adult life. How much do you think suggesting on a public forum Rees Mogg is the true face of the Tory Party is going to help the Tory cause?
Part of the interest in HYUFD's posts is that he gives an unvarnished, completely honest reading of things and doesn't try to hide any unpalatable opinions. It's an insight into the subconscious of a part of the Tory base, as if someone has taken a truth pill. I find that very interesting and informative. A bit like when Corbynistas let slip that they prefer a Tory government to letting a Blairite traitor into power.
Perhaps. His loyalty to Johnson is odd because on actual policy areas that he has given away on over the years I would guess he is probably quite moderate (exception on social matters) and not really part of the populist right. Some of his more extreme posts are more to do with the amount of attack he receives from other posters that are sometimes over the top.
A certain type of Tory is always loyal to the leader even when they disagree with them on a lot of things.
Sir Jonathan is to take up a new role as the Pro-Vice Chancellor for the faculty of medicine and health sciences at University of Nottingham.
Vice Chancellor must be one of the worst job titles. Pro-Vice Chancellor suggests his boss is an amateur?
Its an odd one - Chancellor is the figurehead, but not the boss. VC is the boss. Pro-VC is the deputy boss (and may have specific remits).
Any title that includes the word Vice is liable to be misconstrued in this salacious age. I still think of Warwickshire as the 32nd county for Vice and would be pleased to see it even lower.
Girton College Cambridge has a Vice Mistress.
Who at one point was a charming chemist called Trevor.
The US... https://twitter.com/SpiroAgnewGhost/status/1481372834987274240 Former Chief of Staff of a GOP state Senator. In a road rage incident, he rammed his BMW into the Prius on the driver’s door & began pushing the car sideways, then shot a gun at the white Prius. The Prius driver drew a gun and fired back... killing him.
I rather think too many hopes are being pinned on the Sue Grey investigation report.
She may be a tough cookie but -
1. She is not independent. 2. The scope is limited. She is being asked to establish facts in the light of applicable guidelines. 3. Guidelines are not and were not then the law. Non-compliance with a guideline did not mean that an offence had been committed. 4. If there is any suggestion of a criminal offence this would be reported to the police. So she will not be saying that the PM comitted a criminal offence or anything like it. 5. She is not reporting on whether he has misled the Commons or whether his apology is acceptable or not. 6. It is likely to show that a large number of civil servants, some of them pretty senior had poor judgment and/or gave poor advice and/or misunderstood what the rules / guidelines were.
Frankly Tory MPs have all the evidence they need now about the PM. Waiting for the report is an avoidance technique.
I will repost what I posted last night.
Tory MPs need to realise that this is not about whether he broke this or that rule. This is about a PM who has, in this and many other things, given the impression that the elite at the top are not subject to the same rules as the rest of us. Quite apart from the corrosion this does to the solidarity necessary in a society, especially during a crisis such as Covid, it completely undermines the Tories Brexit USP i.e. that they were on the side of the people against the unaccountable arrogant elite - a USP which Boris seemed to embody and which seemed to motivate the "levelling up" agenda. If that is undermined what do they have left?
And what USP do any of the rivals for the crown have?
I am no Boris supporter. But I do think the levelling up agenda - if properly thought and pushed through - had great promise and was necessary. It will be a shame if it gets forgotten. Sunak has already harmed it with the cuts to the rail improvements. And, frankly, I think Labour has nothing to say on this. They still take the same complacent and arrogant view that the North somehow "belongs" to them. So if the Tories lose those seats Labour will just behave as if nothing has changed and nothing will change.
Tories should be thinking about these issues when deciding the PM's future not fretting about parties. And, by the way, they need to be asking all the potential leaders these 2 questions, if they want to avoid jumping out of a frying pan into a fire -
1. During lockdowns did they ever attend any social events or "work parties" or meetings at which alcoholic drinks were served at all at No 10 and, if so, how many and when? 2. During lockdowns did they ever have any social events or "work parties" or meetings at which alcoholic drinks were served at their own departments and, if so, how many and when?
Why do you say “not independent”? Surely as a civil servant independent from the politics of this, and can provide what is needed, a list of the facts?
She is reasonably independent in as much as she is a civil servant who has worked for both conservative and Labour governments.
I have to agree on the levelling up agenda and I think that it is important that someone really make the case for the benefit to the south. If overcrowded cities, congestion and overwhelmed public services are to be overcome, then sensible investment around the country is essential. It may be that the congestion around London might be better relieved by spending on infrastructure, and moving government departments out of London, rather than the diminishing returns from more and more roads. Labour can't make this case as they want to promise sweeties for everyone.
Yes, but as Mrs T's old PS said this week, she will have to negotiate the contents with the PM before publication. And, ultimately, he can have her sacked, or at least shunted off to the paperclip department
I remember the days when an Austin Maxi was the only option.
What a wonderful machine! (not)
The Maxi had some excellent Issigonis ideas such as standard 5 speed transmission and anticipated the 'monospace' trend by at least 15 years. The cost cutting decision to reuse the Austin 1800 door panel tooling resulted in an ungainly appearance that it never overcame.
If you look at its contemporary competition it looks a lot more like modern car than any of them.
We had one in our family. To be fair, other than a terrible problem with rust it was a pretty good car for it's day
The first car we ever bought was a second-hand Maxi. On the way home having bought it, the handbrake lever detached itself from the floor. Luckily my wife's father ran his own engineering firm, and was able to get it sorted.
Totally off topic I thought I would give an update on air source heat pumps. A local County Council we deal with has a plan to replace ageing boilers in schools with ASHP and last year carried out a cost analysis/feasability study into it. They found that to install an ASHP system in a school would cost between 5-10 times as much as a new gas boiler system. They also estimate that due to the vast increase in the use of electricity to power the ASHPs there would only be limited energy savings. Therefore they are going to recommend to the Councillors to install new gas boilers not ASHPs.
ASHP's remind me of a Sinclair C5, great idea on paper and clever technology, they are just not practical.
Our experience is not encouraging, at least for big houses.
We live in an old farmhouse. It's a large house and insulation is poor. However, we had a specialist firm do the calculations, and a hybrid ASHP system with oil boiler backup looks technically feasible. The oil boiler would kick in when it's very cold and especially if at the same time we are heating all the rooms, but for much of the time the twin ASHPs would be adequate. Also we could run the ASHPs for longer during the middle of the day and at night, when the oil boiler is currently switched off, thus giving better background heat and compensating for the lower peak power of the ASHPs. Overall, we could probably reduce our oil consumption by 80% or more.
So far so good, but the costs are absolutely eye-watering. Before we even start thinking about the system itself, we would need to upgrade to a 3-phase mains supply. That's not particularly hard - the 11Kv line goes through our land - but UK Power networks still quoted £20K. Add in the rewiring, the heat pumps, the header tanks, the replumbing, the listed building application etc etc, and it's looking like a total well north of £60K. Possibly a lot more. A ground-source system, which would be necessary if we were trying to rely exclusively on the heat-pump, would be very much more expensive even that that.
OK, this is not a typical house, but even so...
Sounds similar to our own considerations. Its a 200ish year old detached building with a Grade C listing. Windows need replacing as most of the sashes are stuck / painted or nailed shut and secondary glazing behind them.
There are drafts which I am chasing down with filler. But fundamentally all new windows are needed, and £50k has been quoted. That buys a lot of heating oil! So having done the maths we decided to patch the drafts where we find them and keep burning oil.
Its a new boiler as well. Looked at Heat Pump and Biomass options but the ROI wasn't there. There is no point spending £lots to save £little.
If gas prices stay this high (and presumably start to drag oil prices up too as people shift to alternate sources of energy) then that economic gap is going to narrow significantly.
Lots of things start making sense when your energy input cost has gone up by a factor of five!
(As an aside, has anyone kicked the planning people into pulling their heads out of their backsides & permitting double glazing in Grade II+ listings where the original windows are single glazed? Until recently I believe they were still insisting on like-for-like replacement which is completely insane given the world we live in right now.)
There have been some instances where, when windows are being completely replaced, repro sash windows using double glazing have been allowed, IIRC. The kind where it's a proper, full sash window, with individual glazing in each pane, using narrow spaced double glazing.
Jacob Rees-Mogg calling someone else 'lightweight' is delicious, isn't it?
I can practically hear from my window yells of 'Hey, tha's oor lightweight'. I think in Scotland that will play and play into how little the Conservatives value the Union, when they dismiss even their own man. Maybe I'm a bit too sensitive to this but I think it's a pretty devastating attitude to take. It won't be seen as an attack on Douglas Ross (who is not personally super popular), but an attack on Scottish influence within the Union.
Time and time again, the second biggest (estimates vary) threat to the Union is the Conservative and Unionist Party. Their understanding of power is so, so narrow that they seem to believe that power insulates them from any responsibility when it should be precisely the opposite. They remind me of small town American cops, thinking because they have power, because their jobs maybe difficult, that they can act how they want. I mean even the fucking Lion King addressed this. Everyone remembers Simba singing 'I just can't wait to be King', but the entire rest of the film, from Mufasa explaining how there's more to being a king than doing what you want, to Scar fucking up the Pride Lands, to Simba finally understanding, is about how a ruler has responsibility for the people they rule.
Exactly , it just cements the opinion that Westminster considers Scotland as a mrere colony and that anyone involved has no influence and should doff their cap and lick the Westminster Leader's butt at all times. It shows how irrelevant the Scottish Tories are.
This site needs at least one contributor from the bona fide upper class, for balance. (It could also do with more w/c contributors, mind you).
So it's a shame that Charles has departed.
Yes this site is swarming with the kind of people who buy their own furniture. Charles lent it a touch of genuine class.
Though I recall Charlie once recommending Samuel Windsor shoes. Once I’d picked myself up from the floor, I felt a burst of gratification that the old saw about poshos being tight as fuck was confirmed.
Oh well, looks like I’m still in a very small minority when it comes to the PM.
I don’t have any particular like for the guy, have met several sales people with similar personalities over the years and know not to trust them as far as I can throw them. He was in the right place at the right time in 2019 though, and added many Conservative seats in traditionally Labour areas.
He wouldn’t have been many people’s choice to handle a pandemic, but the vaccine rollout was brilliant and in recent times he’s avoided imposing restrictions that were put in place elsewhere.
When the LotO calls directly for the PM to resign, and he doesn’t, that makes Starmer look weak. All the attacks at PMQs will have done is strengthened his position, even if it’s only on a temporary basis.
I disagree on Johnson, in that I think he should go for this. The rules were controversial and grated for those of us with a more liberal bent (particularly the daft rules on meeting outside) but can be stomached, just about, if those imposing them follow them to the letter, even if shown to be over the top in hindsight - honest mistakes made on limited information etc. But if the rule makers ignored them at the time then the rest of us feel like we were taken for fools. And we don't like that.
But I do agree that it's a bizarre self-made disaster when he should really be riding high right now as the leader who resisted panic/caution (delete according to personal viewpoint) over Omicron and appears to have been proven right on that. It was a big call and he got it right. That may have been more from being forced to by cabinet or through fear of the CRG sending in their letters or the embarassment of having to rely on Labour votes to pass anything else, but as leader he takes the credit just as he (should) take the blame when things go wrong.
I don't think calling for resignation and failing to get it makes Starmer look weak. He'd have looked a numpty if he'd not called on Johnson to resign. The failure of the Conservative party MPs to eject Johnson makes them look weak/spineless.
Johnson has a magic touch. Will it still be tainted 12, 18 months from a general election? That is what I imagine many Cons MPs are waiting to see.
He is a burst balloon. A busted flush. Beria in the final 10 minutes of Death of Stalin. There is no coming back from this. Sunak will be PM at the conference.
Fair play for not fannying about with a prediction.
I’ve come to the conclusion that aside from spraying his DNA all over the world and personal enrichment (the latter of which he’s very bad at), BJ’s personal principles and ambitions revolve around seeing how much he can transgress and fcuk up but still be able to pull back from the brink, chestnuts outta the fire, bacon saved etc. Each time he’s done it (which is a lot) it reinforces the self entitlement and belief. Dread thought but if BJ manages it again, he’ll yet again have a massive hard on for being Boris Johnson and carry on regardless, convinced of his genius.
Extremely similar to Trump in this respect. He, and some of his fans, love the sense of transgreession, and then rubbing that in people' faces and not being held to account for that transgression. Power without responsibility, and above all provoking and confounding the "do-gooders" and worthies, which is most fun of all.
I would suggest the world is seeing the results of too much haste to move to green and insufficient planning for transitional energy which is highlighted by the controversy over Cambo oil field in Scotland
This is precisely the wrong conclusion.
Consider the alternative scenarios. Suppose we had moved to renewables more slowly and were burning more coal and gas now. Would that be better? Coal prices are also up now, we would be having even higher prices for gas and electricity.
However, if we'd moved to renewables more quickly, we'd need to be burning less gas and so our electricity prices would be lower.
The point the analyst was making is that the transition did not take into account a sensible period to complete it and as a result, for the reasons he stated, gas is the transition energy and the demand for the foreseeable future is going to cause serious costs of loving crisis for government's worldwide
It may be of interest but I am looking out on 'Gwynt y Mor' wind farm and there is not a breath of wind and the turbines are barely turning
It's the same old rubbish of wanting to delay action, and if you go straight to renewables you don't need gas as a transition fuel.
We all know the wind doesn't always blow, which is why we need a diverse range of energy sources (including tidal, Moroccan solar, Norwegian hydroelectric, Icelandic geothermal, perhaps some nuclear and an excess of wind that can be stored).
The reality is that storage is going to end up much, much higher than anyone can imagine.
By 2050 I expect we'll have many TW of storage plugged into the network.
Interesting point (excuse pun). If policy makers have any sense (a big ask) they will push for localised storage or even household such as Tesla Powerwall (oh dear I will be accused of being a Tesla bore again)
Consumers and the free market should find a way to get there in the end anyway.
Especially for anyone charging their vehicle at home, the car already has a major battery for storage even without adding any extras like Powerwalls. But then Powerwalls etc too if they become cheap enough should become a wise investment for people to power their home with cheap energy.
If you can charge your car/Powerwall etc with cheap to almost free energy with plunge pricing, then run your home, heating and vehicle with that, then why not do so? And then who cares when the wind is blowing, only that it is enough.
The other odd thing about the "wind doesn't always blow" argument is that in most traditional sources of energy we build significant surplus capacity. The CCGT turbines don't always turn either, in fact most of the time most of our gas capacity lies idle, and is fired up during peak times.
The intermittency issue with wind and solar is because we still have much less capacity than we need. Total wind power is around 17gw on a very windy day, with total electricity demand around 30-35gw most of the time. If we build wind capacity up to closer to 100gw - no reason why not, once marginal cost goes low enough - then even without storage we could be generating at least 10-15gw on a very calm day, enough to power 100% of needs on an average day, and way more than enough, with some turbines idle, on windy days.
Once we have enough storage we should be seeking wind capacity at about 200% of demand.
Any excess wind just give it away for storage. Edit: Or export it via interconnectors.
It will mostly be the other way round, of course, once we have excess wind energy the storage capacity will be built to store it.
Ireland should be the place to watch as they have more wind capacity as a percentage of peak demand then we do, so unless there are regulatory barriers we would expect to see storage take off there first.
Totally off topic I thought I would give an update on air source heat pumps. A local County Council we deal with has a plan to replace ageing boilers in schools with ASHP and last year carried out a cost analysis/feasability study into it. They found that to install an ASHP system in a school would cost between 5-10 times as much as a new gas boiler system. They also estimate that due to the vast increase in the use of electricity to power the ASHPs there would only be limited energy savings. Therefore they are going to recommend to the Councillors to install new gas boilers not ASHPs.
ASHP's remind me of a Sinclair C5, great idea on paper and clever technology, they are just not practical.
We live in an old farmhouse. It's a large house and insulation is poor. However, we had a specialist firm do the calculations, and a hybrid ASHP system with oil boiler backup looks technically feasible. The oil boiler would kick in when it's very cold and especially if at the same time we are heating all the rooms, but for much of the time the twin ASHPs would be adequate. Also we could run the ASHPs for longer during the middle of the day and at night, when the oil boiler is currently switched off, thus giving better background heat and compensating for the lower peak power of the ASHPs. Overall, we could probably reduce our oil consumption by 80% or more.
So far so good, but the costs are absolutely eye-watering. Before we even start thinking about the system itself, we would need to upgrade to a 3-phase mains supply. That's not particularly hard - the 11Kv line goes through our land - but UK Power networks still quoted £20K. Add in the rewiring, the heat pumps, the header tanks, the replumbing, the listed building application etc etc, and it's looking like a total well north of £60K. Possibly a lot more. A ground-source system, which would be necessary if we were trying to rely exclusively on the heat-pump, would be very much more expensive even that that.
OK, this is not a typical house, but even so...
Sounds similar to our own considerations. Its a 200ish year old detached building with a Grade C listing. Windows need replacing as most of the sashes are stuck / painted or nailed shut and secondary glazing behind them.
There are drafts which I am chasing down with filler. But fundamentally all new windows are needed, and £50k has been quoted. That buys a lot of heating oil! So having done the maths we decided to patch the drafts where we find them and keep burning oil.
Its a new boiler as well. Looked at Heat Pump and Biomass options but the ROI wasn't there. There is no point spending £lots to save £little.
If gas prices stay this high (and presumably start to drag oil prices up too as people shift to alternate sources of energy) then that economic gap is going to narrow significantly.
Lots of things start making sense when your energy input cost has gone up by a factor of five!
(As an aside, has anyone kicked the planning people into pulling their heads out of their backsides & permitting double glazing in Grade II+ listings where the original windows are single glazed? Until recently I believe they were still insisting on like-for-like replacement which is completely insane given the world we live in right now.)
We had a big 11kv or more electric line running through a field sold for development. When we examined the Wayleave agreement from 1956, we just had to give them about 12-18 months notice to remove it.
It's an area that takes patience to look into (starting with the Wayleaves debt of the provider), and they are a bit more proactive with Necessary Wayleaves these days. But its also an area where negotiation is possible.
I rather think too many hopes are being pinned on the Sue Grey investigation report.
She may be a tough cookie but -
1. She is not independent. 2. The scope is limited. She is being asked to establish facts in the light of applicable guidelines. 3. Guidelines are not and were not then the law. Non-compliance with a guideline did not mean that an offence had been committed. 4. If there is any suggestion of a criminal offence this would be reported to the police. So she will not be saying that the PM comitted a criminal offence or anything like it. 5. She is not reporting on whether he has misled the Commons or whether his apology is acceptable or not. 6. It is likely to show that a large number of civil servants, some of them pretty senior had poor judgment and/or gave poor advice and/or misunderstood what the rules / guidelines were.
Frankly Tory MPs have all the evidence they need now about the PM. Waiting for the report is an avoidance technique.
I will repost what I posted last night.
Tory MPs need to realise that this is not about whether he broke this or that rule. This is about a PM who has, in this and many other things, given the impression that the elite at the top are not subject to the same rules as the rest of us. Quite apart from the corrosion this does to the solidarity necessary in a society, especially during a crisis such as Covid, it completely undermines the Tories Brexit USP i.e. that they were on the side of the people against the unaccountable arrogant elite - a USP which Boris seemed to embody and which seemed to motivate the "levelling up" agenda. If that is undermined what do they have left?
And what USP do any of the rivals for the crown have?
I am no Boris supporter. But I do think the levelling up agenda - if properly thought and pushed through - had great promise and was necessary. It will be a shame if it gets forgotten. Sunak has already harmed it with the cuts to the rail improvements. And, frankly, I think Labour has nothing to say on this. They still take the same complacent and arrogant view that the North somehow "belongs" to them. So if the Tories lose those seats Labour will just behave as if nothing has changed and nothing will change.
Tories should be thinking about these issues when deciding the PM's future not fretting about parties. And, by the way, they need to be asking all the potential leaders these 2 questions, if they want to avoid jumping out of a frying pan into a fire -
1. During lockdowns did they ever attend any social events or "work parties" or meetings at which alcoholic drinks were served at all at No 10 and, if so, how many and when? 2. During lockdowns did they ever have any social events or "work parties" or meetings at which alcoholic drinks were served at their own departments and, if so, how many and when?
You could have just said it will be yet another whitewash.
This site needs at least one contributor from the bona fide upper class, for balance. (It could also do with more w/c contributors, mind you).
So it's a shame that Charles has departed.
Yes this site is swarming with the kind of people who buy their own furniture. Charles lent it a touch of genuine class.
Why has Charles left?
Charles is always happy to mention his family and friends (especially if they are or were CEOs of multinational pharma companies). He took exception to someone taking such PB "banter" (which he sees as subject to Chatham House rules) and bringing it into the real world.
I had an incident with him some time ago. He happily uses his own identity on here and talks about his work. I mentioned his employer and he asked me not to. Edit: I was happy to comply as it was only good manners to do so.
As I said it's a bit run with the hare and hunt with the hounds. His view is that he brings that information to PB but we must treat it confidentially on PB or outside. So he could say, for example, my family's trust is having an exhibition of Byzantine Phallic Imagery but would not want anyone from PB to say on PB well isn't that Bob's exhibition, I know him well can't wait to speak to him; or to go to the exhibition and say, oh yes Charles told me about this on PB.
It does seem to me that people who wish to be anonymous - which is fair enough - should avoid posting lots of identifiable stuff about their private lives up here. That's just common sense, as well as avoiding trying to have it both ways.
What is really taking the **** is when those who wish to be anonymous post a load of made up stuff about themselves and then get the hump when anyone calls it out. Thankfully Charles didn't sink to that.
It's a tricky one because I think we all see PB as a bit of a refuge from real life and that whatever we say on here is in "PB World" and hence would not necessarily want it to be transposed into that real life. Especially as one of the joys of PB is that we are sometimes more robust on here than IRL.
Charles was no different except his posts contained a lot of real life information so at some point it was likely that there would be a clash and so it proved.
It's also natural for us to draw on our personal experiences when debating our opinions, and so it's inevitable that some degree of personal identifying information will be exposed.
Though you'd have to put a bit of effort in to identify me from the pictures of my knitting. (Not a challenge by the way).
Rees-Mogg's intervention is revealing. He clearly thinks that Boris's critics are just oiks getting above their station. This view - along with the conviction that Brexit is a miracle and Boris is the nation's saviour - is presumably shared by the rest of the ERG crowd, which now dominates the party. In conclusion: Boris stays.
This site needs at least one contributor from the bona fide upper class, for balance. (It could also do with more w/c contributors, mind you).
So it's a shame that Charles has departed.
Yes this site is swarming with the kind of people who buy their own furniture. Charles lent it a touch of genuine class.
Why has Charles left?
Charles is always happy to mention his family and friends (especially if they are or were CEOs of multinational pharma companies). He took exception to someone taking such PB "banter" (which he sees as subject to Chatham House rules) and bringing it into the real world.
I had an incident with him some time ago. He happily uses his own identity on here and talks about his work. I mentioned his employer and he asked me not to. Edit: I was happy to comply as it was only good manners to do so.
As I said it's a bit run with the hare and hunt with the hounds. His view is that he brings that information to PB but we must treat it confidentially on PB or outside. So he could say, for example, my family's trust is having an exhibition of Byzantine Phallic Imagery but would not want anyone from PB to say on PB well isn't that Bob's exhibition, I know him well can't wait to speak to him; or to go to the exhibition and say, oh yes Charles told me about this on PB.
It does seem to me that people who wish to be anonymous - which is fair enough - should avoid posting lots of identifiable stuff about their private lives up here. That's just common sense, as well as avoiding trying to have it both ways.
What is really taking the **** is when those who wish to be anonymous post a load of made up stuff about themselves and then get the hump when anyone calls it out. Thankfully Charles didn't sink to that.
It's a tricky one because I think we all see PB as a bit of a refuge from real life and that whatever we say on here is in "PB World" and hence would not necessarily want it to be transposed into that real life. Especially as one of the joys of PB is that we are sometimes more robust on here than IRL.
Charles was no different except his posts contained a lot of real life information so at some point it was likely that there would be a clash and so it proved.
Just because you can work out the identity of an anonymous poster, doesn’t mean that you need to reference it on a public forum. It wouldn’t be too difficult to work out quite a few, if someone was in the mood to do so. Yes, @charles is an easy guess from what he’s said on here, but we should all respect each others’ anonymity.
It's different. Charles, like others, posted non-anonymously. We were all supposed to know exactly who he was and if we weren't he pointed us to his various family activities (eg. the Bulldog Trust) where it was plain as day. So he wasn't by his own volition an anonymous poster.
Quite interesting how some people are desperate to tell you how posh they are. It is almost an insecurity. Perhaps they are used to mixing with others who have even more titles and it makes them feel the insecurity.
What on earth is Chatham House? Is this like a swingers thing?
It's a foreign policy think-tank with close links to the UK foreign policy establishment. The Chatham House rule is that you can report what was discussed at its meetings but not attribute anything to an individual participant. This rule has been adopted more broadly in reporting private discussions but is frequently a source of confusion, including over whether it is a singular or plural.
How can you operate the Chatham House rule on an internet comments board that nearly anyone in the world can read instantaneously at any time?
Jacob Rees-Mogg calling someone else 'lightweight' is delicious, isn't it?
I can practically hear from my window yells of 'Hey, tha's oor lightweight'. I think in Scotland that will play and play into how little the Conservatives value the Union, when they dismiss even their own man. Maybe I'm a bit too sensitive to this but I think it's a pretty devastating attitude to take. It won't be seen as an attack on Douglas Ross (who is not personally super popular), but an attack on Scottish influence within the Union.
Time and time again, the second biggest (estimates vary) threat to the Union is the Conservative and Unionist Party. Their understanding of power is so, so narrow that they seem to believe that power insulates them from any responsibility when it should be precisely the opposite. They remind me of small town American cops, thinking because they have power, because their jobs maybe difficult, that they can act how they want. I mean even the fucking Lion King addressed this. Everyone remembers Simba singing 'I just can't wait to be King', but the entire rest of the film, from Mufasa explaining how there's more to being a king than doing what you want, to Scar fucking up the Pride Lands, to Simba finally understanding, is about how a ruler has responsibility for the people they rule.
Exactly , it just cements the opinion that Westminster considers Scotland as a mrere colony and that anyone involved has no influence and should doff their cap and lick the Westminster Leader's butt at all times. It shows how irrelevant the Scottish Tories are.
THis just up on the Graun feed: 'Pete Wishart, the SNP’s spokeperson on House of Commons matters, told Jacob Rees-Mogg in the Commons that his comment about Douglas Ross (see 10.19am) showed how little respect Westminster Tories had for Scotland. He said:
"The Scottish Tories know exactly how the rest of Scotland feels as the Leader of the house poured his scorn and contempt upon them last night. According to him, the democratically-elected Scottish Tory leader is an insignificant figure, a lightweight, a nobody - presumably just like every single Tory MSP who agree with their Scottish leader.
The Scottish Tories are supposed to be the Praetorian Guard of the precious union and the leader of the house has just undermined them and thrown them under the proverbial bus. If this is how the government even treats the Scottish Tories, why should the Scottish people even entertain being any part of their useless union?"'
The US... https://twitter.com/SpiroAgnewGhost/status/1481372834987274240 Former Chief of Staff of a GOP state Senator. In a road rage incident, he rammed his BMW into the Prius on the driver’s door & began pushing the car sideways, then shot a gun at the white Prius. The Prius driver drew a gun and fired back... killing him.
Previously arrested for pointing a fire arm at the exact same intersection
Jacob Rees-Mogg calling someone else 'lightweight' is delicious, isn't it?
I can practically hear from my window yells of 'Hey, tha's oor lightweight'. I think in Scotland that will play and play into how little the Conservatives value the Union, when they dismiss even their own man. Maybe I'm a bit too sensitive to this but I think it's a pretty devastating attitude to take. It won't be seen as an attack on Douglas Ross (who is not personally super popular), but an attack on Scottish influence within the Union.
Time and time again, the second biggest (estimates vary) threat to the Union is the Conservative and Unionist Party. Their understanding of power is so, so narrow that they seem to believe that power insulates them from any responsibility when it should be precisely the opposite. They remind me of small town American cops, thinking because they have power, because their jobs maybe difficult, that they can act how they want. I mean even the fucking Lion King addressed this. Everyone remembers Simba singing 'I just can't wait to be King', but the entire rest of the film, from Mufasa explaining how there's more to being a king than doing what you want, to Scar fucking up the Pride Lands, to Simba finally understanding, is about how a ruler has responsibility for the people they rule.
Interesting perspective. HYUFD is also taking very much that [edit] same viewpoint as Mr R-M - and he is our resident Tory official (if at a low level).
Thank you. I was actually quite shocked watching BBC Breakfast this morning to hear JRM saying words that reminded me precisely of HYUFD. No disrespect to HYUFD, but it did give me a sense of foreboding about the path the Conservative Party is on.
As an ex-Constituency executive member of the Conservative Party (no longer even a member), I must correct the previous poster about HYUFD's party status. I do this hesitantly because though I believe some of his posts a little silly, I suspect he is a decent person and not always deserving of the regular kickings he gets on here. Fundamentally HYUFD carries no weight in the CP as he has stated he is a member of a Town Council (equivalent of a Parish Council) and he is a BRANCH Chairman. Almost any member can become a branch chairman. The Party is always gagging for them. It is essentially a very localised fundraiser It really holds no status in practice whatsoever. If he becomes a Constituency Party Chairman that would be a very different matter indeed.
Yet even more 2019 Conservative voters, let alone current Tory voters, still think Boris should stay than go.
This site needs at least one contributor from the bona fide upper class, for balance. (It could also do with more w/c contributors, mind you).
So it's a shame that Charles has departed.
Yes this site is swarming with the kind of people who buy their own furniture. Charles lent it a touch of genuine class.
Though I recall Charlie once recommending Samuel Windsor shoes. Once I’d picked myself up from the floor, I felt a burst of gratification that the old saw about poshos being tight as fuck was confirmed.
This site needs at least one contributor from the bona fide upper class, for balance. (It could also do with more w/c contributors, mind you).
So it's a shame that Charles has departed.
Yes this site is swarming with the kind of people who buy their own furniture. Charles lent it a touch of genuine class.
Though I recall Charlie once recommending Samuel Windsor shoes. Once I’d picked myself up from the floor, I felt a burst of gratification that the old saw about poshos being tight as fuck was confirmed.
I don't know anything about the world of posh shoes. I always get my shoes from Clarkes.
What on earth is Chatham House? Is this like a swingers thing?
It's a foreign policy think-tank with close links to the UK foreign policy establishment. The Chatham House rule is that you can report what was discussed at its meetings but not attribute anything to an individual participant. This rule has been adopted more broadly in reporting private discussions but is frequently a source of confusion, including over whether it is a singular or plural.
How can you operate the Chatham House rule on an internet comments board that nearly anyone in the world can read instantaneously at any time?
Because (unless you are using your real name) it is anonymous.
Rees-Mogg's intervention is revealing. He clearly thinks that Boris's critics are just oiks getting above their station. This view - along with the conviction that Brexit is a miracle and Boris is the nation's saviour - is presumably shared by the rest of the ERG crowd, which now dominates the party. In conclusion: Boris stays.
Yes. @HYUFD is spot as always when it comes to internal Tory politics. JRM very much is the Tories now. Not some outlier. He is the mainstream. It's no good ex Tories just hoping this faction will see the light and change. Only a defeat will do that.
I would suggest the world is seeing the results of too much haste to move to green and insufficient planning for transitional energy which is highlighted by the controversy over Cambo oil field in Scotland
This is precisely the wrong conclusion.
Consider the alternative scenarios. Suppose we had moved to renewables more slowly and were burning more coal and gas now. Would that be better? Coal prices are also up now, we would be having even higher prices for gas and electricity.
However, if we'd moved to renewables more quickly, we'd need to be burning less gas and so our electricity prices would be lower.
The point the analyst was making is that the transition did not take into account a sensible period to complete it and as a result, for the reasons he stated, gas is the transition energy and the demand for the foreseeable future is going to cause serious costs of loving crisis for government's worldwide
It may be of interest but I am looking out on 'Gwynt y Mor' wind farm and there is not a breath of wind and the turbines are barely turning
It's the same old rubbish of wanting to delay action, and if you go straight to renewables you don't need gas as a transition fuel.
We all know the wind doesn't always blow, which is why we need a diverse range of energy sources (including tidal, Moroccan solar, Norwegian hydroelectric, Icelandic geothermal, perhaps some nuclear and an excess of wind that can be stored).
The reality is that storage is going to end up much, much higher than anyone can imagine.
By 2050 I expect we'll have many TW of storage plugged into the network.
Interesting point (excuse pun). If policy makers have any sense (a big ask) they will push for localised storage or even household such as Tesla Powerwall (oh dear I will be accused of being a Tesla bore again)
On wind not blowing, it is worth a note that as the UK windfarm base has expanded, the Load Factor of new offshore wind is now just under 60%, whilst for existing onshore wind it is under 27%. This problem is being dealt with progressively. https://www.renewableuk.com/page/UKWEDExplained/Statistics-Explained.htm
Load Factor = power delivered vs theoretical maximum.
On storage, we will end up with boxes of tricks in the Smart Meter that manage local storage, and optimise battery usage. An issue is the lifetime in cycles of current Li batteries.
I think fixed (dispersed or central) storage is a far better answer than using car batteries. The latter is very inefficient because you are adding weight to a vehicle that needs to be propelled around the place, and it's really only ever going to be storage for car travel anyway - would be a difficult sell to have people agree to the grid drawing off power from their car at peak times when everyone is so range-anxious.
Cars have to have range for the longest journey you'll need between charges but most of the time you're doing short, predictable ones, so I'm sure plenty of people will be happy to set their charger to "free money" when they expect to be doing their routine.
Totally off topic I thought I would give an update on air source heat pumps. A local County Council we deal with has a plan to replace ageing boilers in schools with ASHP and last year carried out a cost analysis/feasability study into it. They found that to install an ASHP system in a school would cost between 5-10 times as much as a new gas boiler system. They also estimate that due to the vast increase in the use of electricity to power the ASHPs there would only be limited energy savings. Therefore they are going to recommend to the Councillors to install new gas boilers not ASHPs.
ASHP's remind me of a Sinclair C5, great idea on paper and clever technology, they are just not practical.
Our experience is not encouraging, at least for big houses.
We live in an old farmhouse. It's a large house and insulation is poor. However, we had a specialist firm do the calculations, and a hybrid ASHP system with oil boiler backup looks technically feasible. The oil boiler would kick in when it's very cold and especially if at the same time we are heating all the rooms, but for much of the time the twin ASHPs would be adequate. Also we could run the ASHPs for longer during the middle of the day and at night, when the oil boiler is currently switched off, thus giving better background heat and compensating for the lower peak power of the ASHPs. Overall, we could probably reduce our oil consumption by 80% or more.
So far so good, but the costs are absolutely eye-watering. Before we even start thinking about the system itself, we would need to upgrade to a 3-phase mains supply. That's not particularly hard - the 11Kv line goes through our land - but UK Power networks still quoted £20K. Add in the rewiring, the heat pumps, the header tanks, the replumbing, the listed building application etc etc, and it's looking like a total well north of £60K. Possibly a lot more. A ground-source system, which would be necessary if we were trying to rely exclusively on the heat-pump, would be very much more expensive even that that.
OK, this is not a typical house, but even so...
Sounds similar to our own considerations. Its a 200ish year old detached building with a Grade C listing. Windows need replacing as most of the sashes are stuck / painted or nailed shut and secondary glazing behind them.
There are drafts which I am chasing down with filler. But fundamentally all new windows are needed, and £50k has been quoted. That buys a lot of heating oil! So having done the maths we decided to patch the drafts where we find them and keep burning oil.
Its a new boiler as well. Looked at Heat Pump and Biomass options but the ROI wasn't there. There is no point spending £lots to save £little.
If gas prices stay this high (and presumably start to drag oil prices up too as people shift to alternate sources of energy) then that economic gap is going to narrow significantly.
Lots of things start making sense when your energy input cost has gone up by a factor of five!
(As an aside, has anyone kicked the planning people into pulling their heads out of their backsides & permitting double glazing in Grade II+ listings where the original windows are single glazed? Until recently I believe they were still insisting on like-for-like replacement which is completely insane given the world we live in right now.)
There have been some instances where, when windows are being completely replaced, repro sash windows using double glazing have been allowed, IIRC. The kind where it's a proper, full sash window, with individual glazing in each pane, using narrow spaced double glazing.
Yes, when the sash windows in our house were renovated, every pane was double glazed using the existing wooden window frames. It’s perfectly doable & the change in external impressive is next to non-existant. But I have read of this kind of glazing change being denied by conservationists in listed buildings on the grounds that “it changes the external look of the building”. Fortunately ours is a bog standard Edwardian terrace, so no chance of any conservations insisting on ludicrous conditions.
(Obviously, the payback on doing this didn’t make a great deal of sense in purely financial terms at the time, but the increase in comfort level - no draughts! - was worth the outlay. Our previous house was a nightmare keep warm in winter.)
Totally off topic I thought I would give an update on air source heat pumps. A local County Council we deal with has a plan to replace ageing boilers in schools with ASHP and last year carried out a cost analysis/feasability study into it. They found that to install an ASHP system in a school would cost between 5-10 times as much as a new gas boiler system. They also estimate that due to the vast increase in the use of electricity to power the ASHPs there would only be limited energy savings. Therefore they are going to recommend to the Councillors to install new gas boilers not ASHPs.
ASHP's remind me of a Sinclair C5, great idea on paper and clever technology, they are just not practical.
Whoever suggested an ASHP retrofit for a school was clearly a moron.
It would probably work in a new build school though.
I think the suggestion comes from TV reports on ASHPs when it just looks like you can swap your boiler for an ASHP, save money and save the planet. There is never any mention of all the other stuff that goes with an ASHP. Councils have to try and decarbon everything now, however the costs are eyewatering.
We think that hydrogen is the future, probably in 5-10 years time.
What on earth is Chatham House? Is this like a swingers thing?
It's a foreign policy think-tank with close links to the UK foreign policy establishment. The Chatham House rule is that you can report what was discussed at its meetings but not attribute anything to an individual participant. This rule has been adopted more broadly in reporting private discussions but is frequently a source of confusion, including over whether it is a singular or plural.
How can you operate the Chatham House rule on an internet comments board that nearly anyone in the world can read instantaneously at any time?
You can't. Its invocation here is a classic example of the confusion over its actual meaning!
Oh well, looks like I’m still in a very small minority when it comes to the PM.
I don’t have any particular like for the guy, have met several sales people with similar personalities over the years and know not to trust them as far as I can throw them. He was in the right place at the right time in 2019 though, and added many Conservative seats in traditionally Labour areas.
He wouldn’t have been many people’s choice to handle a pandemic, but the vaccine rollout was brilliant and in recent times he’s avoided imposing restrictions that were put in place elsewhere.
When the LotO calls directly for the PM to resign, and he doesn’t, that makes Starmer look weak. All the attacks at PMQs will have done is strengthened his position, even if it’s only on a temporary basis.
I disagree on Johnson, in that I think he should go for this. The rules were controversial and grated for those of us with a more liberal bent (particularly the daft rules on meeting outside) but can be stomached, just about, if those imposing them follow them to the letter, even if shown to be over the top in hindsight - honest mistakes made on limited information etc. But if the rule makers ignored them at the time then the rest of us feel like we were taken for fools. And we don't like that.
But I do agree that it's a bizarre self-made disaster when he should really be riding high right now as the leader who resisted panic/caution (delete according to personal viewpoint) over Omicron and appears to have been proven right on that. It was a big call and he got it right. That may have been more from being forced to by cabinet or through fear of the CRG sending in their letters or the embarassment of having to rely on Labour votes to pass anything else, but as leader he takes the credit just as he (should) take the blame when things go wrong.
I don't think calling for resignation and failing to get it makes Starmer look weak. He'd have looked a numpty if he'd not called on Johnson to resign. The failure of the Conservative party MPs to eject Johnson makes them look weak/spineless.
Johnson has a magic touch. Will it still be tainted 12, 18 months from a general election? That is what I imagine many Cons MPs are waiting to see.
He is a burst balloon. A busted flush. Beria in the final 10 minutes of Death of Stalin. There is no coming back from this. Sunak will be PM at the conference.
Fair play for not fannying about with a prediction.
I’ve come to the conclusion that aside from spraying his DNA all over the world and personal enrichment (the latter of which he’s very bad at), BJ’s personal principles and ambitions revolve around seeing how much he can transgress and fcuk up but still be able to pull back from the brink, chestnuts outta the fire, bacon saved etc. Each time he’s done it (which is a lot) it reinforces the self entitlement and belief. Dread thought but if BJ manages it again, he’ll yet again have a massive hard on for being Boris Johnson and carry on regardless, convinced of his genius.
Extremely similar to Trump in this respect. He, and some of his fans, love the sense of transgreession, and then rubbing that in people' faces and not being held to account for that transgression. Power without responsibility, and above all provoking and confounding the "do-gooders" and worthies, which is most fun of all.
The other lesson to be drawn from Trump is that he never actually goes away.
Totally off topic I thought I would give an update on air source heat pumps. A local County Council we deal with has a plan to replace ageing boilers in schools with ASHP and last year carried out a cost analysis/feasability study into it. They found that to install an ASHP system in a school would cost between 5-10 times as much as a new gas boiler system. They also estimate that due to the vast increase in the use of electricity to power the ASHPs there would only be limited energy savings. Therefore they are going to recommend to the Councillors to install new gas boilers not ASHPs.
ASHP's remind me of a Sinclair C5, great idea on paper and clever technology, they are just not practical.
Our experience is not encouraging, at least for big houses.
We live in an old farmhouse. It's a large house and insulation is poor. However, we had a specialist firm do the calculations, and a hybrid ASHP system with oil boiler backup looks technically feasible. The oil boiler would kick in when it's very cold and especially if at the same time we are heating all the rooms, but for much of the time the twin ASHPs would be adequate. Also we could run the ASHPs for longer during the middle of the day and at night, when the oil boiler is currently switched off, thus giving better background heat and compensating for the lower peak power of the ASHPs. Overall, we could probably reduce our oil consumption by 80% or more.
So far so good, but the costs are absolutely eye-watering. Before we even start thinking about the system itself, we would need to upgrade to a 3-phase mains supply. That's not particularly hard - the 11Kv line goes through our land - but UK Power networks still quoted £20K. Add in the rewiring, the heat pumps, the header tanks, the replumbing, the listed building application etc etc, and it's looking like a total well north of £60K. Possibly a lot more. A ground-source system, which would be necessary if we were trying to rely exclusively on the heat-pump, would be very much more expensive even that that.
OK, this is not a typical house, but even so...
Sounds similar to our own considerations. Its a 200ish year old detached building with a Grade C listing. Windows need replacing as most of the sashes are stuck / painted or nailed shut and secondary glazing behind them.
There are drafts which I am chasing down with filler. But fundamentally all new windows are needed, and £50k has been quoted. That buys a lot of heating oil! So having done the maths we decided to patch the drafts where we find them and keep burning oil.
Its a new boiler as well. Looked at Heat Pump and Biomass options but the ROI wasn't there. There is no point spending £lots to save £little.
If gas prices stay this high (and presumably start to drag oil prices up too as people shift to alternate sources of energy) then that economic gap is going to narrow significantly.
Lots of things start making sense when your energy input cost has gone up by a factor of five!
(As an aside, has anyone kicked the planning people into pulling their heads out of their backsides & permitting double glazing in Grade II+ listings where the original windows are single glazed? Until recently I believe they were still insisting on like-for-like replacement which is completely insane given the world we live in right now.)
There have been some instances where, when windows are being completely replaced, repro sash windows using double glazing have been allowed, IIRC. The kind where it's a proper, full sash window, with individual glazing in each pane, using narrow spaced double glazing.
Yes, when the sash windows in our house were renovated, every pane was double glazed using the existing wooden window frames. It’s perfectly doable & the change in external impressive is next to non-existant. But I have read of this kind of glazing change being denied by conservationists in listed buildings on the grounds that “it changes the external look of the building”. Fortunately ours is a bog standard Edwardian terrace, so no chance of any conservations insisting on ludicrous conditions.
(Obviously, the payback on doing this didn’t make a great deal of sense in purely financial terms at the time, but the increase in comfort level - no draughts! - was worth the outlay. Our previous house was a nightmare keep warm in winter.)
We used to apply toughened secondary glazing sheets in the autumn to spring, using foam strips and mirror hinges, to our listed house.
What you need is a hoary old git not a 18 year old box-ticker as your Conservation Officer.
Totally off topic I thought I would give an update on air source heat pumps. A local County Council we deal with has a plan to replace ageing boilers in schools with ASHP and last year carried out a cost analysis/feasability study into it. They found that to install an ASHP system in a school would cost between 5-10 times as much as a new gas boiler system. They also estimate that due to the vast increase in the use of electricity to power the ASHPs there would only be limited energy savings. Therefore they are going to recommend to the Councillors to install new gas boilers not ASHPs.
ASHP's remind me of a Sinclair C5, great idea on paper and clever technology, they are just not practical.
Whoever suggested an ASHP retrofit for a school was clearly a moron.
It would probably work in a new build school though.
I think the suggestion comes from TV reports on ASHPs when it just looks like you can swap your boiler for an ASHP, save money and save the planet. There is never any mention of all the other stuff that goes with an ASHP. Councils have to try and decarbon everything now, however the costs are eyewatering.
We think that hydrogen is the future, probably in 5-10 years time.
What’s the rate of leakage from a nationwide gas grid of hydrogen though?
Twelfth Night. If it be aught to the old tune, my lord, It is as fat and fulsome to mine ear As howling after music.
Fat and fulsome - not a bad pair of epithets for our PM.
Words mean whatever the speaker intends and the hearer understands. If fulsome is understood and applied in a different way then it will get a new meaning.
Totally off topic I thought I would give an update on air source heat pumps. A local County Council we deal with has a plan to replace ageing boilers in schools with ASHP and last year carried out a cost analysis/feasability study into it. They found that to install an ASHP system in a school would cost between 5-10 times as much as a new gas boiler system. They also estimate that due to the vast increase in the use of electricity to power the ASHPs there would only be limited energy savings. Therefore they are going to recommend to the Councillors to install new gas boilers not ASHPs.
ASHP's remind me of a Sinclair C5, great idea on paper and clever technology, they are just not practical.
Whoever suggested an ASHP retrofit for a school was clearly a moron.
It would probably work in a new build school though.
To expand on this point, while its been some time since I did these kind of heat load calculations, a new school built to current or better building standards with underfloor heating and mechanical heat recovery should have no problem being heated by a couple of heat pumps.
When I used to do energy surveys (over 10 years ago) we reported on recommendations that would see a ROI in less than 5 years. Unfortunately with the costs of new technologies this doesn't work - I have recently been looking at covered parking with solar panels on top - with the limited income the payback period is 175 years. To get to a 5 year ROI you would have to charge around £30 a day at full occupancy for a space whereas someone could charge at home for less than £1.
I would suggest the world is seeing the results of too much haste to move to green and insufficient planning for transitional energy which is highlighted by the controversy over Cambo oil field in Scotland
This is precisely the wrong conclusion.
Consider the alternative scenarios. Suppose we had moved to renewables more slowly and were burning more coal and gas now. Would that be better? Coal prices are also up now, we would be having even higher prices for gas and electricity.
However, if we'd moved to renewables more quickly, we'd need to be burning less gas and so our electricity prices would be lower.
The point the analyst was making is that the transition did not take into account a sensible period to complete it and as a result, for the reasons he stated, gas is the transition energy and the demand for the foreseeable future is going to cause serious costs of loving crisis for government's worldwide
It may be of interest but I am looking out on 'Gwynt y Mor' wind farm and there is not a breath of wind and the turbines are barely turning
It's the same old rubbish of wanting to delay action, and if you go straight to renewables you don't need gas as a transition fuel.
We all know the wind doesn't always blow, which is why we need a diverse range of energy sources (including tidal, Moroccan solar, Norwegian hydroelectric, Icelandic geothermal, perhaps some nuclear and an excess of wind that can be stored).
The reality is that storage is going to end up much, much higher than anyone can imagine.
By 2050 I expect we'll have many TW of storage plugged into the network.
Interesting point (excuse pun). If policy makers have any sense (a big ask) they will push for localised storage or even household such as Tesla Powerwall (oh dear I will be accused of being a Tesla bore again)
On wind not blowing, it is worth a note that as the UK windfarm base has expanded, the Load Factor of new offshore wind is now just under 60%, whilst for existing onshore wind it is under 27%. This problem is being dealt with progressively. https://www.renewableuk.com/page/UKWEDExplained/Statistics-Explained.htm
Load Factor = power delivered vs theoretical maximum.
On storage, we will end up with boxes of tricks in the Smart Meter that manage local storage, and optimise battery usage. An issue is the lifetime in cycles of current Li batteries.
I think fixed (dispersed or central) storage is a far better answer than using car batteries. The latter is very inefficient because you are adding weight to a vehicle that needs to be propelled around the place, and it's really only ever going to be storage for car travel anyway - would be a difficult sell to have people agree to the grid drawing off power from their car at peak times when everyone is so range-anxious.
Cars have to have range for the longest journey you'll need, between charges but most of the time you're doing short, predictable ones, so I'm sure plenty of people will be happy to set their charger to "free money" when they expect to be doing their routine.
Subject to maximum sensible drives between breaks.
I would suggest the world is seeing the results of too much haste to move to green and insufficient planning for transitional energy which is highlighted by the controversy over Cambo oil field in Scotland
This is precisely the wrong conclusion.
Consider the alternative scenarios. Suppose we had moved to renewables more slowly and were burning more coal and gas now. Would that be better? Coal prices are also up now, we would be having even higher prices for gas and electricity.
However, if we'd moved to renewables more quickly, we'd need to be burning less gas and so our electricity prices would be lower.
The point the analyst was making is that the transition did not take into account a sensible period to complete it and as a result, for the reasons he stated, gas is the transition energy and the demand for the foreseeable future is going to cause serious costs of loving crisis for government's worldwide
It may be of interest but I am looking out on 'Gwynt y Mor' wind farm and there is not a breath of wind and the turbines are barely turning
It's the same old rubbish of wanting to delay action, and if you go straight to renewables you don't need gas as a transition fuel.
We all know the wind doesn't always blow, which is why we need a diverse range of energy sources (including tidal, Moroccan solar, Norwegian hydroelectric, Icelandic geothermal, perhaps some nuclear and an excess of wind that can be stored).
The reality is that storage is going to end up much, much higher than anyone can imagine.
By 2050 I expect we'll have many TW of storage plugged into the network.
Interesting point (excuse pun). If policy makers have any sense (a big ask) they will push for localised storage or even household such as Tesla Powerwall (oh dear I will be accused of being a Tesla bore again)
Consumers and the free market should find a way to get there in the end anyway.
Especially for anyone charging their vehicle at home, the car already has a major battery for storage even without adding any extras like Powerwalls. But then Powerwalls etc too if they become cheap enough should become a wise investment for people to power their home with cheap energy.
If you can charge your car/Powerwall etc with cheap to almost free energy with plunge pricing, then run your home, heating and vehicle with that, then why not do so? And then who cares when the wind is blowing, only that it is enough.
The other odd thing about the "wind doesn't always blow" argument is that in most traditional sources of energy we build significant surplus capacity. The CCGT turbines don't always turn either, in fact most of the time most of our gas capacity lies idle, and is fired up during peak times.
The intermittency issue with wind and solar is because we still have much less capacity than we need. Total wind power is around 17gw on a very windy day, with total electricity demand around 30-35gw most of the time. If we build wind capacity up to closer to 100gw - no reason why not, once marginal cost goes low enough - then even without storage we could be generating at least 10-15gw on a very calm day, enough to power 100% of needs on an average day, and way more than enough, with some turbines idle, on windy days.
Once we have enough storage we should be seeking wind capacity at about 200% of demand.
Any excess wind just give it away for storage. Edit: Or export it via interconnectors.
It will mostly be the other way round, of course, once we have excess wind energy the storage capacity will be built to store it.
Ireland should be the place to watch as they have more wind capacity as a percentage of peak demand then we do, so unless there are regulatory barriers we would expect to see storage take off there first.
If we play our cards right we will be exporting it, and European Mainland countries will not need to build so many power stations.
As people who were around last night may have seen, I had a small spat with someone.
While I’ve never made a particular secret of my identity this individual chose to highlight the fact that he knew some of my family in the real world.
That really doesn’t sit well with me and, frankly, doesn’t fit with the culture of this place which - to my mind - has always operated on “Chatham house rules”.
So it’s time for me to say goodbye.
Have fun and play nice. I shall miss the wit and insight.
I hope you reconsider, you would be much missed.
He probably needs another 3-4 people asking him to stay before the reverse flounce is on.
I would suggest the world is seeing the results of too much haste to move to green and insufficient planning for transitional energy which is highlighted by the controversy over Cambo oil field in Scotland
This is precisely the wrong conclusion.
Consider the alternative scenarios. Suppose we had moved to renewables more slowly and were burning more coal and gas now. Would that be better? Coal prices are also up now, we would be having even higher prices for gas and electricity.
However, if we'd moved to renewables more quickly, we'd need to be burning less gas and so our electricity prices would be lower.
The point the analyst was making is that the transition did not take into account a sensible period to complete it and as a result, for the reasons he stated, gas is the transition energy and the demand for the foreseeable future is going to cause serious costs of loving crisis for government's worldwide
It may be of interest but I am looking out on 'Gwynt y Mor' wind farm and there is not a breath of wind and the turbines are barely turning
It's the same old rubbish of wanting to delay action, and if you go straight to renewables you don't need gas as a transition fuel.
We all know the wind doesn't always blow, which is why we need a diverse range of energy sources (including tidal, Moroccan solar, Norwegian hydroelectric, Icelandic geothermal, perhaps some nuclear and an excess of wind that can be stored).
The reality is that storage is going to end up much, much higher than anyone can imagine.
By 2050 I expect we'll have many TW of storage plugged into the network.
Interesting point (excuse pun). If policy makers have any sense (a big ask) they will push for localised storage or even household such as Tesla Powerwall (oh dear I will be accused of being a Tesla bore again)
On wind not blowing, it is worth a note that as the UK windfarm base has expanded, the Load Factor of new offshore wind is now just under 60%, whilst for existing onshore wind it is under 27%. This problem is being dealt with progressively. https://www.renewableuk.com/page/UKWEDExplained/Statistics-Explained.htm
Load Factor = power delivered vs theoretical maximum.
On storage, we will end up with boxes of tricks in the Smart Meter that manage local storage, and optimise battery usage. An issue is the lifetime in cycles of current Li batteries.
I think fixed (dispersed or central) storage is a far better answer than using car batteries. The latter is very inefficient because you are adding weight to a vehicle that needs to be propelled around the place, and it's really only ever going to be storage for car travel anyway - would be a difficult sell to have people agree to the grid drawing off power from their car at peak times when everyone is so range-anxious.
Cars have to have range for the longest journey you'll need, between charges but most of the time you're doing short, predictable ones, so I'm sure plenty of people will be happy to set their charger to "free money" when they expect to be doing their routine.
I wouldn't, certainly not beyond a couple of kwhs. My Zoe has a range of 190m at best, and that's not unusual. Would I be happy for the grid to draw it down to 170, say? Maybe, but how often am I fully charged anyway? I certainly wouldn't want it taking me much below that. The point of a car is the flexibility to be able to jump in at any time and go where you want. Even if most of the time you are pottering around town, you want to keep charged up in case the mood takes you for a trip to the seaside or you have to head up the motorway to visit a sick relative. The downside of EVs is the time it takes to charge so mentally there's greater need for reassurance that the battery is full than with an ICE.
Perhaps once ranges are routinely 500+ miles, or rapid charging in 30 minutes is widely available at home, this may change.
This site needs at least one contributor from the bona fide upper class, for balance. (It could also do with more w/c contributors, mind you).
So it's a shame that Charles has departed.
Yes this site is swarming with the kind of people who buy their own furniture. Charles lent it a touch of genuine class.
Though I recall Charlie once recommending Samuel Windsor shoes. Once I’d picked myself up from the floor, I felt a burst of gratification that the old saw about poshos being tight as fuck was confirmed.
I don't know anything about the world of posh shoes. I always get my shoes from Clarkes.
I personally now only get Solovair for proper shoes - simply because you can be 100% sure they are made in the UK. Plus the factory tour and shop are both great fun - it literally if a factory between rows of houses.
Trainers however are whatever converse style things take my fancy.
I would suggest the world is seeing the results of too much haste to move to green and insufficient planning for transitional energy which is highlighted by the controversy over Cambo oil field in Scotland
This is precisely the wrong conclusion.
Consider the alternative scenarios. Suppose we had moved to renewables more slowly and were burning more coal and gas now. Would that be better? Coal prices are also up now, we would be having even higher prices for gas and electricity.
However, if we'd moved to renewables more quickly, we'd need to be burning less gas and so our electricity prices would be lower.
The point the analyst was making is that the transition did not take into account a sensible period to complete it and as a result, for the reasons he stated, gas is the transition energy and the demand for the foreseeable future is going to cause serious costs of loving crisis for government's worldwide
It may be of interest but I am looking out on 'Gwynt y Mor' wind farm and there is not a breath of wind and the turbines are barely turning
It's the same old rubbish of wanting to delay action, and if you go straight to renewables you don't need gas as a transition fuel.
We all know the wind doesn't always blow, which is why we need a diverse range of energy sources (including tidal, Moroccan solar, Norwegian hydroelectric, Icelandic geothermal, perhaps some nuclear and an excess of wind that can be stored).
The reality is that storage is going to end up much, much higher than anyone can imagine.
By 2050 I expect we'll have many TW of storage plugged into the network.
Interesting point (excuse pun). If policy makers have any sense (a big ask) they will push for localised storage or even household such as Tesla Powerwall (oh dear I will be accused of being a Tesla bore again)
On wind not blowing, it is worth a note that as the UK windfarm base has expanded, the Load Factor of new offshore wind is now just under 60%, whilst for existing onshore wind it is under 27%. This problem is being dealt with progressively. https://www.renewableuk.com/page/UKWEDExplained/Statistics-Explained.htm
Load Factor = power delivered vs theoretical maximum.
On storage, we will end up with boxes of tricks in the Smart Meter that manage local storage, and optimise battery usage. An issue is the lifetime in cycles of current Li batteries.
I think fixed (dispersed or central) storage is a far better answer than using car batteries. The latter is very inefficient because you are adding weight to a vehicle that needs to be propelled around the place, and it's really only ever going to be storage for car travel anyway - would be a difficult sell to have people agree to the grid drawing off power from their car at peak times when everyone is so range-anxious.
Cars have to have range for the longest journey you'll need between charges but most of the time you're doing short, predictable ones, so I'm sure plenty of people will be happy to set their charger to "free money" when they expect to be doing their routine.
Except that the reality will be sticks rather than carrots, with power companies and domestic electric car charging providers happy to use their smart meters to eat the margin for themselves rather than pass it on to the consumer.
Totally off topic I thought I would give an update on air source heat pumps. A local County Council we deal with has a plan to replace ageing boilers in schools with ASHP and last year carried out a cost analysis/feasability study into it. They found that to install an ASHP system in a school would cost between 5-10 times as much as a new gas boiler system. They also estimate that due to the vast increase in the use of electricity to power the ASHPs there would only be limited energy savings. Therefore they are going to recommend to the Councillors to install new gas boilers not ASHPs.
ASHP's remind me of a Sinclair C5, great idea on paper and clever technology, they are just not practical.
Whoever suggested an ASHP retrofit for a school was clearly a moron.
It would probably work in a new build school though.
I think the suggestion comes from TV reports on ASHPs when it just looks like you can swap your boiler for an ASHP, save money and save the planet. There is never any mention of all the other stuff that goes with an ASHP. Councils have to try and decarbon everything now, however the costs are eyewatering.
We think that hydrogen is the future, probably in 5-10 years time.
It's one of those mysteries though where nobody can explain why ASHPs are very common on the continent yet the UK seems to have all these problems with affordability and effectiveness. I have a house in a hamlet in central France and the neighbours almost all have ASHPs. It's just fitted as a matter of course every time someone does a renovation.
This site needs at least one contributor from the bona fide upper class, for balance. (It could also do with more w/c contributors, mind you).
So it's a shame that Charles has departed.
Yes this site is swarming with the kind of people who buy their own furniture. Charles lent it a touch of genuine class.
Though I recall Charlie once recommending Samuel Windsor shoes. Once I’d picked myself up from the floor, I felt a burst of gratification that the old saw about poshos being tight as fuck was confirmed.
I don't know anything about the world of posh shoes. I always get my shoes from Clarkes.
Clarks are pretty honest about what they are, SW are a kind of faux Palladian house built on the very cheap. Both manufacturers get most of their product made in India nowadays.
Comments
As for you, probably the only significant difference politically between you and me is that I do not, will not and never have been able to insert my head up the backside of any political figure, particularly one as incompetent and ridiculous as Boris Johnson. If the Conservative Party can alienate someone like me, they are, in the short term at least, doomed.
It would probably work in a new build school though.
- 'reasonably well built' -- Fine
- 'very poorly insulated' - Not much fat then?
- 'not very cramped' -- too much information
- 'with squarish rooms or sub-rooms' -- again, too much info
- 'same ownership for a long time in a leafy environment' -- yep, I guess this squares with much of the sterotype of leafy suburbia and long term marriages
- 'May contain asbestos' -- What?
- 'small change of concrete cancer in the slab' -- ?
- 'expensive to run if they have been too tight to invest in it' -- what are the operating costs for swingers' clubs? just a bowl for the keys, surely?
Edit: Or, referring to swingers' houses? Probably all those comments were fair about the house we looked at...
Whether those batteries end up inside cars, houses, or in containers on industrial estates, or old coal power station sites, matters a lot less. We don't really want to end up importing them as happened with wind turbines.
I rarely mention my position, I agree it does not matter, however more Tory voters still want to keep Boris than remove him. Of Tory members even if he went at least half would vote for Truss or even Rees Mogg over Sunak.
The party is moving to the populist right and has been since Cameron went. After Blair went Labour too of course went further and further to the populist left until the 2019 defeat saw it move back to the centre with Starmer
https://www.renewableuk.com/page/UKWEDExplained/Statistics-Explained.htm
Load Factor = power delivered vs theoretical maximum.
On storage, we will end up with boxes of tricks in the Smart Meter that manage local storage, and optimise battery usage. An issue is the lifetime in cycles of current Li batteries.
By the time he had chased all the rust, he had replaced most of the bottom of the car.
A years or so later, he got an MGB. Having learnt the lesson, he bought a brand-new bodyshell and transferred all the mechanics into that, renovating them as he went...
(Both my brother and sister have mechanical skills that appear to have utterly bypassed me.)
Any excess wind just give it away for storage. Edit: Or export it via interconnectors.
I mean Douglas Ross being a lightweight is a widespread view across Scotland, but I think it will be read that Douglas Ross, as leader of the Scottish Conservatives is irrelevant to the Conservatives at Westminster (despite being an MP like any other). That in turn will be read as the Conservative Party thinking that Scotland is irrelevant. HYUFD is not notable enough to cause that, but JRM is.
Continent wide interconnects would mitigate the problem considerably, but occasional week long periods without sufficient wind/solar to meet demand are still quite likely even with quite a high (but economically sensible) level of surplus capacity. Hence the requirement for significant storage (and/or nuclear baseload).
We live in an old farmhouse. It's a large house and insulation is poor. However, we had a specialist firm do the calculations, and a hybrid ASHP system with oil boiler backup looks technically feasible. The oil boiler would kick in when it's very cold and especially if at the same time we are heating all the rooms, but for much of the time the twin ASHPs would be adequate. Also we could run the ASHPs for longer during the middle of the day and at night, when the oil boiler is currently switched off, thus giving better background heat and compensating for the lower peak power of the ASHPs. Overall, we could probably reduce our oil consumption by 80% or more.
So far so good, but the costs are absolutely eye-watering. Before we even start thinking about the system itself, we would need to upgrade to a 3-phase mains supply. That's not particularly hard - the 11Kv line goes through our land - but UK Power networks still quoted £20K. Add in the rewiring, the heat pumps, the header tanks, the replumbing, the listed building application etc etc, and it's looking like a total well north of £60K. Possibly a lot more. A ground-source system, which would be necessary if we were trying to rely exclusively on the heat-pump, would be very much more expensive even that that.
OK, this is not a typical house, but even so...
They might want to check their dictionaries..
"fulsome
in British English
(ˈfʊlsəm)
ADJECTIVE - 1) excessive or insincere, esp in an offensive or distasteful way"
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/fulsome
Or maybe they did?
I actually find the FT the most balanced and informative at the moment, though I don’t have a subscription just grab what I can, even sometimes taking it out of bins. I also wonder has the historically famous “Times of London” always been as shit as this? Just shallow right wing populist gloop all the way through.
Then of course there are those people who religiously read Daily Mail cover to cover everyday, and nothing else. like my mum.
One other point if I may, the header - I love whoever edits The National. I’ve never read a copy, but his opening line “Boris Johnson thinks your an idiot.” 🤣
The current process is perhaps a nudge, and a final view will be taken towards the end date.
https://northeastbylines.co.uk/an-eye-to-the-future-for-our-new-red-wall-mps/
If it be aught to the old tune, my lord,
It is as fat and fulsome to mine ear
As howling after music.
Fat and fulsome - not a bad pair of epithets for our PM.
Even changes to electrical or gas regulations do not require active retrofitting in private housing. This is in contrast to commercial and letting properties which need regular electrical and gas safety certification, and therefore regular improvement.
Any changes to domestic regulations therefore are slow to change, and if costly to implement lead to economic disincentives. If the UK government today legislated in building regulations that replacement heating systems should be electric, then there would be a thriving trade in fixing clapped out gas systems to avoid replacement and this could lead to the opposite of the intention of legislation . As with all policy and government it is not just good intentions that count but how policy works in the real world.
There are drafts which I am chasing down with filler. But fundamentally all new windows are needed, and £50k has been quoted. That buys a lot of heating oil! So having done the maths we decided to patch the drafts where we find them and keep burning oil.
Its a new boiler as well. Looked at Heat Pump and Biomass options but the ROI wasn't there. There is no point spending £lots to save £little.
However, that scope is likely to be very limited and the report itself will contain the personal details of junior civil servants and won't be made public. Expect a vague summary, approved by the PM, to be placed in the Commons library.
If you look at its contemporary competition it looks a lot more like modern car than any of them.
Where the UK has taken a view that all things considered we are better off outside, that is a UK responsibiity.
But to say that the UK is responsible for EU craziness is a bit bonkers.
I'd love to see a rational explanation of the EU rules on which alcoholic drinks can and cannot be sold in 500ml bottles, in addition to 750ml and 375ml options. EU Directive 2007/45/EC - this came up in the "modern pint of Champagne" flapping amongst EU-types in December. Why can I buy still white and red wine in a 500mI, but not yellow wine or sparkling? haven't looked at lager / beer.
The answer is that Brussels does not really do thorough logic, but panders to vested interests far too much.
https://ec.europa.eu/growth/single-market/goods/building-blocks/legal-metrology/pack-sizes_en
It’s designed to improve working between the nations
(Not sure what structure he might propose for better cross-border relations within Tory party)
https://twitter.com/GlennBBC/status/1481583296983228416
Using a word which doesn't actually mean what people think it means is an artform. Boris himself is very good at it. I remember his description of a previous scandal around him as 'piffle' - which does not, as people inferred, mean nonsense; it means unimportant.
Smells like defeat.
I have to agree on the levelling up agenda and I think that it is important that someone really make the case for the benefit to the south. If overcrowded cities, congestion and overwhelmed public services are to be overcome, then sensible investment around the country is essential. It may be that the congestion around London might be better relieved by spending on infrastructure, and moving government departments out of London, rather than the diminishing returns from more and more roads. Labour can't make this case as they want to promise sweeties for everyone.
Lots of things start making sense when your energy input cost has gone up by a factor of five!
(As an aside, has anyone kicked the planning people into pulling their heads out of their backsides & permitting double glazing in Grade II+ listings where the original windows are single glazed? Until recently I believe they were still insisting on like-for-like replacement which is completely insane given the world we live in right now.)
I’ve come to the conclusion that aside from spraying his DNA all over the world and personal enrichment (the latter of which he’s very bad at), BJ’s personal principles and ambitions revolve around seeing how much he can transgress and fcuk up but still be able to pull back from the brink, chestnuts outta the fire, bacon saved etc. Each time he’s done it (which is a lot) it reinforces the self entitlement and belief. Dread thought but if BJ manages it again, he’ll yet again have a massive hard on for being Boris Johnson and carry on regardless, convinced of his genius.
Who at one point was a charming chemist called Trevor.
Blyth Valley isn't though.
https://twitter.com/SpiroAgnewGhost/status/1481372834987274240
Former Chief of Staff of a GOP state Senator. In a road rage incident, he rammed his BMW into the Prius on the driver’s door & began pushing the car sideways, then shot a gun at the white Prius. The Prius driver drew a gun and fired back... killing him.
That aside, it wasn't a bad car for the time.
Mogg: “The Secretary of State for Wales is called Simon Hart.”
The leader of the Welsh Conservatives is Andrew RT Davies.
https://twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/1481595667738943498
It shows how irrelevant the Scottish Tories are.
Ireland should be the place to watch as they have more wind capacity as a percentage of peak demand then we do, so unless there are regulatory barriers we would expect to see storage take off there first.
It's an area that takes patience to look into (starting with the Wayleaves debt of the provider), and they are a bit more proactive with Necessary Wayleaves these days. But its also an area where negotiation is possible.
https://forum.buildhub.org.uk/search/?q=wayleave
HTH someone. Richard usually knows his stuff.
'Pete Wishart, the SNP’s spokeperson on House of Commons matters, told Jacob Rees-Mogg in the Commons that his comment about Douglas Ross (see 10.19am) showed how little respect Westminster Tories had for Scotland. He said:
"The Scottish Tories know exactly how the rest of Scotland feels as the Leader of the house poured his scorn and contempt upon them last night. According to him, the democratically-elected Scottish Tory leader is an insignificant figure, a lightweight, a nobody - presumably just like every single Tory MSP who agree with their Scottish leader.
The Scottish Tories are supposed to be the Praetorian Guard of the precious union and the leader of the house has just undermined them and thrown them under the proverbial bus. If this is how the government even treats the Scottish Tories, why should the Scottish people even entertain being any part of their useless union?"'
https://twitter.com/shannonrwatts/status/1481516040043450368
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQLYHt-DM0Q
Sadly, the original video with his original trebuchet has been removed.... Burning pianos flying through the sky....
(Obviously, the payback on doing this didn’t make a great deal of sense in purely financial terms at the time, but the increase in comfort level - no draughts! - was worth the outlay. Our previous house was a nightmare keep warm in winter.)
We think that hydrogen is the future, probably in 5-10 years time.
What you need is a hoary old git not a 18 year old box-ticker as your Conservation Officer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-l5FyA3pgo
Perhaps once ranges are routinely 500+ miles, or rapid charging in 30 minutes is widely available at home, this may change.
Trainers however are whatever converse style things take my fancy.