Howdy, Stranger!

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

The Barnet Bypass: Can the Tories hold on again? – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited April 17 in General
imageThe Barnet Bypass: Can the Tories hold on again? – politicalbetting.com

It’s hard to believe these days, but London used to be a swing city politically. Labour tended to have an edge, but the Tories were frequently hot on their heels. The ‘popular vote’ across local elections in the city was frequently within a couple of percentage points, such as the 1990, 2002, and 2006 elections. In 2006 the Tories even swept control of half a dozen councils off Labour and governed 14 of the city’s 32 boroughs (Labour controlled 7, the rest were Lib Dem or No Overall Control).

Read the full story here

«1345678

Comments

  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 19,157
    "Barnet Bypass" sounds like a guest post by @malcolmg
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088
    This period also saw a certain Tory politician get elected Mayor of London a couple of times.

    Never heard of him.

    Quincel sets out a decent case. If Barnet was felt to hold out against tide at least in part for reasons which no longer apply so directly, then it seems a fair bet they can manage it.
  • London is trending one way: Labour.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 22,723
    Suspect Labour has come off the peak in London.
    So results will be disappointing.
  • Gary_BurtonGary_Burton Posts: 737
    My thinking is that the Tories will eek it out with a bare majority like in 2014 although boundary changes do favour Labour particularly in wards such as West Hendon which was a shock loss last time.

  • Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    It’s great. Just a shame they’re so useless
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 8,968
    If you bypass Barnet you run the risk of being encircled in Brent...

    I know that national politics is the most important factor when it comes to the overall tides in local election results, but it does seem strange to have a discussion of whether control of the council might change without even a cursory discussion of how well the council is currently being run.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 22,723
    edited March 25
    Anyone know why London elects three councillors per ward every four years rather than one in 3 years out of four like much of the rest of the country?
    Unlike here. Where we elect only one councillor per ward every four years. Well, for 65 of them. The 66th elects two.
    But of course it does.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 22,723
    IshmaelZ said:

    "Barnet Bypass" sounds like a guest post by @malcolmg

    Change at Baker Street territory.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088
    edited March 25
    HYUFD said:
    Tangentially, your regular reminder that 2 of the 5 MPs ahead of Corbyn in order of seniority are not standing at the next election (Sheerman and Harman). Only Bottomly, Edward Leigh (no, me neither) and Nick Brown stand between him and being Father of the House.

    Well, and not being able to stand as a Labour candidate perhaps, but we'll see.

    Didn't realise Beckett has actually served 44 years, having been in parliament 74-19 too.
    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    As noted previously wikipedia tells us Jamaica in particular has talked about becoming a republic for a long time, decades infact, with it being an explicit promise of various PMs across the political divide, with popular support it seems, for at least the last 15 years.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republicanism_in_Jamaica

    So when it comes to Jamaica specifically and the Caribbean more generally, it is not so much that the writing is on the wall as its a surprise the wall was still standing after all this time anyway. None of the links on that page at least seem to explain why they've not found the time, given the level of political support there seems to be.

    Waiting for London Bridge?
    You'd think so, but it didn't stop Barbados, so where there's a will there's a way.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 50,178

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    Boris Johnson is of mixed race as well. The usual reminder that his grandfather was Turkish.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 100,923
    edited March 25
    Given 2/3 of the Barnet constituencies are in the top 50 Labour target seats ie Chipping Barnet and Hendon, if Labour do not win Barnet Council in May then Starmer can forget about being PM.

    As London was already Labour's strongest UK region even in 2019 it is not surprising it has seen less swung there since the last general election than the North. Nonetheless, Labour must win the marginal seats the Tories hold in the capital still to form a government
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 21,799

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    It’s great. Just a shame they’re so useless
    Lol you have made my point....
    You think we'd do better to have a government of white men?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 100,923
    dixiedean said:

    Anyone know why London elects three councillors per ward every four years rather than one in 3 years out of four like much of the rest of the country?
    Unlike here. Where we elect only one councillor per ward every four years. Well, for 65 of them. The 66th elects two.
    But of course it does.

    Most of the country only elects district or unitary councillors one year out of 4 in all out elections, not just London boroughs
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088
    edited March 25

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    Depends what people are proponing about it I suppose. It is a diverse government, way more than someone just trying to make token appointments, but I don't know why anyone would think diversity in itself would lead to quality, incompetence knows no ethnicity or gender after all.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 8,968
    edited March 25
    dixiedean said:

    Anyone know why London elects three councillors per ward every four years rather than one in 3 years out of four like much of the rest of the country?
    Unlike here. Where we elect only one councillor per ward every four years. Well, for 65 of them. The 66th elects two.
    But of course it does.

    It's part of a long-term strategy to encourage adoption of STV, by virtue of producing absurd outcomes with elections for multiple councillors in single FPTP wards. Surely that has to be one of the most absurd electoral systems?

    Albeit, it's a quiet long-term strategy.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 19,157

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    It’s great. Just a shame they’re so useless
    Lol you have made my point....
    Which is, what, that you are some kind of sexist/racist creep who thinks that is impossible to think of patel as an odious POS because she is a member of the weaker sex, and coffee coloured?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 22,723
    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anyone know why London elects three councillors per ward every four years rather than one in 3 years out of four like much of the rest of the country?
    Unlike here. Where we elect only one councillor per ward every four years. Well, for 65 of them. The 66th elects two.
    But of course it does.

    Most of the country only elects district or unitary councillors one year out of 4 in all out elections, not just London boroughs
    Yes. But the other Metropolitan Boroughs don't. Which are more comparable with London Boroughs than Epping or Northumberland.
    I was just wondering if there was a good reason that anyone knew of for that?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 22,723

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    It’s great. Just a shame they’re so useless
    Lol you have made my point....
    You think we'd do better to have a government of white men?
    It's that "content of their character" business again, isn't it?
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 19,157
    ydoethur said:

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    Boris Johnson is of mixed race as well. The usual reminder that his grandfather was Turkish.
    A nonsensical claim. Who is not "of mixed race" by that sort of standard?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088
    edited March 25
    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anyone know why London elects three councillors per ward every four years rather than one in 3 years out of four like much of the rest of the country?
    Unlike here. Where we elect only one councillor per ward every four years. Well, for 65 of them. The 66th elects two.
    But of course it does.

    Most of the country only elects district or unitary councillors one year out of 4 in all out elections, not just London boroughs
    And thank heaven's for that. I'm not sure what the proportions are though, the list of councils this year electing by thirds is pretty high. Some are even electing by halfs, the maniacs. dixiedean might be right, but I've never seen the overall figures

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_United_Kingdom_local_elections

    As to 65 wards being 1 cllr and 1 ward having 2, you can blame the LGBCE for that sort of thing - it makes drawing boundaries easier for them to create wards of acceptable variance, and I've seen councils with a mixture of 1,2 and 3. I did wonder if they have been given new guidance on that, as I was stunned that Buckinghamshire Council, the new unitary, not only had well over 100 seats (which is not well liked by them and is rare) but 49 wards each with 3 cllrs.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 18,315
    Farringdon Without obviously isn't a great area for Labour. In yesterday's election there were 11 candidates standing for the ten seats, ten independents and one Labour candidate. The candidate who wasn't elected was the Labour one.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_City_of_London_Corporation_election#Farringdon_Without
  • Gary_BurtonGary_Burton Posts: 737
    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anyone know why London elects three councillors per ward every four years rather than one in 3 years out of four like much of the rest of the country?
    Unlike here. Where we elect only one councillor per ward every four years. Well, for 65 of them. The 66th elects two.
    But of course it does.

    Most of the country only elects district or unitary councillors one year out of 4 in all out elections, not just London boroughs
    Yes. But the other Metropolitan Boroughs don't. Which are more comparable with London Boroughs than Epping or Northumberland.
    I was just wondering if there was a good reason that anyone knew of for that?
    This is no longer the case with a weird mixture of 2 cllr and 3 cllr wards in various London boroughs such as this one, Wandsworth and others.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088
    edited March 25
    Andy_JS said:

    Farringdon Without obviously isn't a great area for Labour. In yesterday's election there were 11 candidates standing for the ten seats, ten independents and one Labour candidate. The candidate who wasn't elected was the Labour one.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_City_of_London_Corporation_election#Farringdon_Without

    It's a common occurence that where you get a properly organised localist party it will sweep up the seats.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088
    edited March 25
    IshmaelZ said:

    ydoethur said:

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    Boris Johnson is of mixed race as well. The usual reminder that his grandfather was Turkish.
    A nonsensical claim. Who is not "of mixed race" by that sort of standard?
    More than you might think, but looking at places where you can claim citizenship based on grandparent lineage it's not treated nonsensically universally, even though if he were to call himself Turkish it would be silly. If he were still american he would definitely call himself of English-Turkish heritage.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 19,157

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    It’s great. Just a shame they’re so useless
    Lol you have made my point....
    You think we'd do better to have a government of white men?
    I just think having 2 people of South Asian descent in the big offices of state smarks of tokenism when one is priti patel
    I think you attach more importance to peoples' "descent" than most of us do.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 6,398

    IshmaelZ said:

    Behind the smiles and glamour the discontent over the Cambridges’ Caribbean tour was unmissable

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2022/03/25/cambridges-caribbean-tour-triumph-monarchy-relic-past/

    telegraph having another pop

    I think the writing is on the wall. By the time they succeed dear old Katie is going to look like the desiccated mummy of Cruella de Ville, baldy is going to turn into fat Old Baldy, and the more they mishandle the whole piccaninny thang, the more shutting out (the admittedly ghastly) Meghan is going to look like a terrible mistake.

    Some of the pictures were embarrassing and shameful and really did the royal family no favours

    I have long been of the opinion that once HMQ goes so most countries will separate from the monarchy

    It is becoming an anachronism
    Whaaaaaaaaaat rubbish!

    Anachronism? Why compare it to spiders?

    Who are we as a people, as a nation? What direction do we want to go? Sure there comes a time when the most fundamental questions need to be addressed, no matter how challenging. Where One needs ones heart to follow an idea, it is the monarchy that is already bringing us together. Holding us together. A monarchy to unite Our colours, Our Faiths, our principles. Before us now is our future, a wider road upon which we seek one another in our aloneness, and we walk the road when we have no hearth to sit beside. Where we will live upon one another according to the law, ancient and timeless, and thus live together in loving kindness. A path To cross the divides of neighbourhoods. A way shared by all Cultures and religion.
    Our monarchy is that opening, an opportunity To Walk rough shod over the divide between us, as nations, and as people’s.
    When you are Venturing forth together into unknown territory. You cannot be an adventurer without an unknown to explore. Each and every one of us venturing now into a new landscape, we can only be guided by our hearts, our love, our faith. The monarchy let’s all hearts join with ours, it’s never been more relevant.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 22,723
    kle4 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    ydoethur said:

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    Boris Johnson is of mixed race as well. The usual reminder that his grandfather was Turkish.
    A nonsensical claim. Who is not "of mixed race" by that sort of standard?
    More than you might think, but looking at places where you can claim citizenship based on grandparent lineage it's not treated nonsensically universally, even though if he were to call himself Turkish it would be silly. If he were still american he would definitely call himself of English-Turkish heritage.
    Although a surprising number of women seem to find him an albeit temporary delight.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 19,157
    dixiedean said:

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    It’s great. Just a shame they’re so useless
    Lol you have made my point....
    You think we'd do better to have a government of white men?
    It's that "content of their character" business again, isn't it?
    Fucking hell, what is this lefty meme meant to be about? Is the claim that MLK didn't say it (he did) or that it is in any sense controversial (it isn't) or that it rules out stuff like positive discrimination as a route to getting to where he wanted to end up (it doesn't)?
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 8,968
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anyone know why London elects three councillors per ward every four years rather than one in 3 years out of four like much of the rest of the country?
    Unle here. Where we elect only one councillor per ward every four years. Well, for 65 of them. The 66th elects two.
    But of course it does.

    Most of the country only elects district or unitary councillors one year out of 4 in all out elections, not just London boroughs
    And thank heaven's for that. I'm not sure what the proportions are though, the list of councils this year electing by thirds is pretty high. Some are even electing by halfs, the maniacs. dixiedean might be right, but I've never seen the overall figures

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_United_Kingdom_local_elections

    As to 65 wards being 1 cllr and 1 ward having 2, you can blame the LGBCE for that sort of thing - it makes drawing boundaries easier for them to create wards of acceptable variance, and I've seen councils with a mixture of 1,2 and 3. I did wonder if they have been given new guidance on that, as I was stunned that Buckinghamshire Council, the new unitary, not only had well over 100 seats (which is not well liked by them and is rare) but 49 wards each with 3 cllrs.
    There's an election timetable on Gov.uk (pdf) though it's dated 2019, so I don't know how it has been affected by skipping the elections in 2020. No explanation.

    My impression is that electing in thirds was the standard where the wards had multiple members (because electing one person at a time makes most sense for FPTP elections), which was normally the case for densely populated metropolitan councils, while the County Councils normally had one councillor per area, and so would be whole elections. But this has gradually been complicated over the years. Perhaps running all-out elections has been seen as a cost-cutting measure, or a way to create more stable council administration, and has been adopted in an adhoc manner by individual councils when such arguments have won favour.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 22,723
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anyone know why London elects three councillors per ward every four years rather than one in 3 years out of four like much of the rest of the country?
    Unlike here. Where we elect only one councillor per ward every four years. Well, for 65 of them. The 66th elects two.
    But of course it does.

    Most of the country only elects district or unitary councillors one year out of 4 in all out elections, not just London boroughs
    And thank heaven's for that. I'm not sure what the proportions are though, the list of councils this year electing by thirds is pretty high. Some are even electing by halfs, the maniacs. dixiedean might be right, but I've never seen the overall figures

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_United_Kingdom_local_elections

    As to 65 wards being 1 cllr and 1 ward having 2, you can blame the LGBCE for that sort of thing - it makes drawing boundaries easier for them to create wards of acceptable variance, and I've seen councils with a mixture of 1,2 and 3. I did wonder if they have been given new guidance on that, as I was stunned that Buckinghamshire Council, the new unitary, not only had well over 100 seats (which is not well liked by them and is rare) but 49 wards each with 3 cllrs.
    Re Bucks. The Tory membership needs sinecures to aspire to.
    The entirety of local government is a hotch-potch mess.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 8,731
    kle4 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    ydoethur said:

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    Boris Johnson is of mixed race as well. The usual reminder that his grandfather was Turkish.
    A nonsensical claim. Who is not "of mixed race" by that sort of standard?
    More than you might think, but looking at places where you can claim citizenship based on grandparent lineage it's not treated nonsensically universally, even though if he were to call himself Turkish it would be silly. If he were still american he would definitely call himself of English-Turkish heritage.
    I reckon I’m Wiltshire back to the Stone Age, certainly as far as it’s been traced. Makes me proud, kinda
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 52,574

    Allie Hodgkins-Brown
    @AllieHBNews
    Saturday’s Daily MAIL: “Raab: Free Speech To Get Legal Supremacy” #TomorrowsPapersToday
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 52,574
    UK to get a 1st amendment?
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 19,157

    IshmaelZ said:

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    It’s great. Just a shame they’re so useless
    Lol you have made my point....
    You think we'd do better to have a government of white men?
    I just think having 2 people of South Asian descent in the big offices of state smarks of tokenism when one is priti patel
    I think you attach more importance to peoples' "descent" than most of us do.
    So you think priti Patel is worthy of her office then...
    No, moron, but I genuinely don't give a fuck in either direction about her "Asian descent," and failure to be white, and certainly not enough to introduce it out of the blue as an off-topic topic at the beginning of a thread. You do. Why?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088
    IshmaelZ said:

    dixiedean said:

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    It’s great. Just a shame they’re so useless
    Lol you have made my point....
    You think we'd do better to have a government of white men?
    It's that "content of their character" business again, isn't it?
    Fucking hell, what is this lefty meme meant to be about? Is the claim that MLK didn't say it (he did) or that it is in any sense controversial (it isn't) or that it rules out stuff like positive discrimination as a route to getting to where he wanted to end up (it doesn't)?
    I've seen the argument most recently that there is concern rightwingers, particularly in america but not only there, use that MLK line as an attempt to suggest that there are no problems and therefore nothing needs to be done in relation to any matters of race. And if someone is using it that way that's wrong. But the other objection was that that line was an aspiration, not that it had been achieved, which I don't think counters some of those using it the way they think it does - since one argument is that a hyperfocus on race and privilege suggests it is not an aspiration we should aim for at all.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 22,723
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anyone know why London elects three councillors per ward every four years rather than one in 3 years out of four like much of the rest of the country?
    Unlike here. Where we elect only one councillor per ward every four years. Well, for 65 of them. The 66th elects two.
    But of course it does.

    Most of the country only elects district or unitary councillors one year out of 4 in all out elections, not just London boroughs
    And thank heaven's for that. I'm not sure what the proportions are though, the list of councils this year electing by thirds is pretty high. Some are even electing by halfs, the maniacs. dixiedean might be right, but I've never seen the overall figures

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_United_Kingdom_local_elections

    As to 65 wards being 1 cllr and 1 ward having 2, you can blame the LGBCE for that sort of thing - it makes drawing boundaries easier for them to create wards of acceptable variance, and I've seen councils with a mixture of 1,2 and 3. I did wonder if they have been given new guidance on that, as I was stunned that Buckinghamshire Council, the new unitary, not only had well over 100 seats (which is not well liked by them and is rare) but 49 wards each with 3 cllrs.
    Alnwick elects 2 to keep Alnwick together. But Prudhoe is divided into 2. Berwick and Hexham to three.
    Ponteland has its tiny centre quartered into four wards. Each one having a huge hinterland of villages many, many miles from Ponteland.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088

    kle4 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    ydoethur said:

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    Boris Johnson is of mixed race as well. The usual reminder that his grandfather was Turkish.
    A nonsensical claim. Who is not "of mixed race" by that sort of standard?
    More than you might think, but looking at places where you can claim citizenship based on grandparent lineage it's not treated nonsensically universally, even though if he were to call himself Turkish it would be silly. If he were still american he would definitely call himself of English-Turkish heritage.
    I reckon I’m Wiltshire back to the Stone Age, certainly as far as it’s been traced. Makes me proud, kinda
    There you have the advantage of me, I'm a first generation moonraker.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 8,968
    dixiedean said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anyone know why London elects three councillors per ward every four years rather than one in 3 years out of four like much of the rest of the country?
    Unlike here. Where we elect only one councillor per ward every four years. Well, for 65 of them. The 66th elects two.
    But of course it does.

    Most of the country only elects district or unitary councillors one year out of 4 in all out elections, not just London boroughs
    And thank heaven's for that. I'm not sure what the proportions are though, the list of councils this year electing by thirds is pretty high. Some are even electing by halfs, the maniacs. dixiedean might be right, but I've never seen the overall figures

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_United_Kingdom_local_elections

    As to 65 wards being 1 cllr and 1 ward having 2, you can blame the LGBCE for that sort of thing - it makes drawing boundaries easier for them to create wards of acceptable variance, and I've seen councils with a mixture of 1,2 and 3. I did wonder if they have been given new guidance on that, as I was stunned that Buckinghamshire Council, the new unitary, not only had well over 100 seats (which is not well liked by them and is rare) but 49 wards each with 3 cllrs.
    Re Bucks. The Tory membership needs sinecures to aspire to.
    The entirety of local government is a hotch-potch mess.
    I quite like a hotch-potch mess, if things have developed for idiosyncratic reasons, provided that people are mostly happy with them, and they largely work. But it's not just the elections to local government that are a mess. Revenue-raising is a mess. Accountability is a mess, partly because local journalism is mostly dead, but mostly because central government has made most of the decisions and restricted the funding so much that there's no leeway to be accountable for anything much else.

    Local government seems to exist largely to act as a scapegoat for decisions made in Westminster.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 52,574
    Ohhhh!

    Newsnight have heard that Treasury officials urged Sunak to do something on UC to cope with cost of living.

    He overruled them.

    Massive, if true.

    Sunak is a lay.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 8,731

    UK to get a 1st amendment?

    Would need something to amend first, surely?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 33,420

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    So what does them being four useless fuckwits prove?
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 6,398
    edited March 25
    On topic. Nice piece Pip.

    But I’m betting for Labour to fail to gain Barnet on my understanding of politics, the main reason they lost last time isn’t the sort of thing to melt in the face of a “New Management” sign, especially when so called “new” management was right beside old management on the last campaign trail.

    People need to survive in an uncertain world.

    image
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 46,234

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    White men hold no monopoly on incompetence.
  • VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 1,194
    edited March 25
    kle4 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Farringdon Without obviously isn't a great area for Labour. In yesterday's election there were 11 candidates standing for the ten seats, ten independents and one Labour candidate. The candidate who wasn't elected was the Labour one.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_City_of_London_Corporation_election#Farringdon_Without

    It's a common occurence that where you get a properly organised localist party it will sweep up the seats.
    I thought that ward was mainly lawyers as it includes both Middle and Inner Temple?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 22,723
    IshmaelZ said:

    dixiedean said:

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    It’s great. Just a shame they’re so useless
    Lol you have made my point....
    You think we'd do better to have a government of white men?
    It's that "content of their character" business again, isn't it?
    Fucking hell, what is this lefty meme meant to be about? Is the claim that MLK didn't say it (he did) or that it is in any sense controversial (it isn't) or that it rules out stuff like positive discrimination as a route to getting to where he wanted to end up (it doesn't)?
    Calm down my friend.
    It was merely to point that it is good to have folk from different backgrounds. Providing they are honest and halfway competent.
    I believe you take the same view.
    Nothing more.
    It would also. be nice if fewer went to Eton.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088
    edited March 25
    dixiedean said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anyone know why London elects three councillors per ward every four years rather than one in 3 years out of four like much of the rest of the country?
    Unlike here. Where we elect only one councillor per ward every four years. Well, for 65 of them. The 66th elects two.
    But of course it does.

    Most of the country only elects district or unitary councillors one year out of 4 in all out elections, not just London boroughs
    And thank heaven's for that. I'm not sure what the proportions are though, the list of councils this year electing by thirds is pretty high. Some are even electing by halfs, the maniacs. dixiedean might be right, but I've never seen the overall figures

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_United_Kingdom_local_elections

    As to 65 wards being 1 cllr and 1 ward having 2, you can blame the LGBCE for that sort of thing - it makes drawing boundaries easier for them to create wards of acceptable variance, and I've seen councils with a mixture of 1,2 and 3. I did wonder if they have been given new guidance on that, as I was stunned that Buckinghamshire Council, the new unitary, not only had well over 100 seats (which is not well liked by them and is rare) but 49 wards each with 3 cllrs.
    Re Bucks. The Tory membership needs sinecures to aspire to.
    The entirety of local government is a hotch-potch mess.
    It certainly is, but that number of councillors will not help with the sinecures. Sure, they'll get a basic allowance, but there's only so many committee chairs' allowances (or in rare cases deputy chairs) to go around, and so with such a large council you actually increase the number of cllrs who get nothing on top of the basic allowance (and like many councils they do not allow more than one special responsibility allowance) and you have nothing to reward them with.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 33,420


    Allie Hodgkins-Brown
    @AllieHBNews
    Saturday’s Daily MAIL: “Raab: Free Speech To Get Legal Supremacy” #TomorrowsPapersToday

    Though you can get banged up for an annoying protest.

    "You have the right to free speech as long as you are not dumb enough to actually try it."
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 8,731
    edited March 25
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    ydoethur said:

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    Boris Johnson is of mixed race as well. The usual reminder that his grandfather was Turkish.
    A nonsensical claim. Who is not "of mixed race" by that sort of standard?
    More than you might think, but looking at places where you can claim citizenship based on grandparent lineage it's not treated nonsensically universally, even though if he were to call himself Turkish it would be silly. If he were still american he would definitely call himself of English-Turkish heritage.
    I reckon I’m Wiltshire back to the Stone Age, certainly as far as it’s been traced. Makes me proud, kinda
    There you have the advantage of me, I'm a first generation moonraker.
    Damn incomer. I’m amazed anyone even talks to you...
    It’s a bit weird really. In the village I grew up in, where my folks moved when I was 5, we turned out to be related to half the families. Dads family more Trowbridge, mum more east Wiltshire, including sadly many uncles who didn’t make it through the war.
    It does give me a sense of belonging though, which not everyone has.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 8,968

    Ohhhh!

    Newsnight have heard that Treasury officials urged Sunak to do something on UC to cope with cost of living.

    He overruled them.

    Massive, if true.

    Sunak is a lay.

    I'm not sure that "politician overrules civil servants" is that big a story.

    If it was a matter of Coffey urging him to do so, or other Cabinet Minsters, then it would be more consequential.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 8,731

    Ohhhh!

    Newsnight have heard that Treasury officials urged Sunak to do something on UC to cope with cost of living.

    He overruled them.

    Massive, if true.

    Sunak is a lay.

    Something will need to be done, so it seems mad not to have done it on Wednesday.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 4,780

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    Writing as an advocate of diversity, I'd argue that the 3 great offices of state do not demonstrate diversity at all. They have more in common than their diverse backgrounds. Namely, they're all rubbish at their jobs. And you can throw in the PM for good measure.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 19,000

    London is trending one way: Labour.

    Midlands the opposite
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 19,157

    kle4 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    ydoethur said:

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    Boris Johnson is of mixed race as well. The usual reminder that his grandfather was Turkish.
    A nonsensical claim. Who is not "of mixed race" by that sort of standard?
    More than you might think, but looking at places where you can claim citizenship based on grandparent lineage it's not treated nonsensically universally, even though if he were to call himself Turkish it would be silly. If he were still american he would definitely call himself of English-Turkish heritage.
    I reckon I’m Wiltshire back to the Stone Age, certainly as far as it’s been traced. Makes me proud, kinda
    Stone Age = 1,333 generations back, and if you can trace yourself 13 generations back then A. you are v posh and B. still only 1% of the way there. If you have exactly 5 digits per extremity, odds are against your being purebred over all that time.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 8,968

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    It’s great. Just a shame they’re so useless
    Lol you have made my point....
    You think we'd do better to have a government of white men?
    I just think having 2 people of South Asian descent in the big offices of state smarks of tokenism when one is priti patel
    I think you attach more importance to peoples' "descent" than most of us do.
    So you think priti Patel is worthy of her office then...
    No, moron, but I genuinely don't give a fuck in either direction about her "Asian descent," and failure to be white, and certainly not enough to introduce it out of the blue as an off-topic topic at the beginning of a thread. You do. Why?
    Would someone of priti patels competence have got to be home secretary if they were a white man...
    Gavin Williamson. Boris Johnson. Michael Green. Some fella who doored a cyclist as Transport Secretary, who was so useless I've deliberately forgotten their name, if not the complexion of their skin. Dominic "Dover" Raab.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 6,398
    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    It’s great. Just a shame they’re so useless
    Lol you have made my point....
    You think we'd do better to have a government of white men?
    I just think having 2 people of South Asian descent in the big offices of state smarks of tokenism when one is priti patel
    I think you attach more importance to peoples' "descent" than most of us do.
    So you think priti Patel is worthy of her office then...
    No, moron, but I genuinely don't give a fuck in either direction about her "Asian descent," and failure to be white, and certainly not enough to introduce it out of the blue as an off-topic topic at the beginning of a thread. You do. Why?
    It must be a white elephant?

    I’m very drunk. And I think I’ve caught a cold.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 19,157

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    It’s great. Just a shame they’re so useless
    Lol you have made my point....
    You think we'd do better to have a government of white men?
    I just think having 2 people of South Asian descent in the big offices of state smarks of tokenism when one is priti patel
    I think you attach more importance to peoples' "descent" than most of us do.
    So you think priti Patel is worthy of her office then...
    No, moron, but I genuinely don't give a fuck in either direction about her "Asian descent," and failure to be white, and certainly not enough to introduce it out of the blue as an off-topic topic at the beginning of a thread. You do. Why?
    Would someone of priti patels competence have got to be home secretary if they were a white man...
    Would you mind so much, if they had?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088
    edited March 25
    dixiedean said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anyone know why London elects three councillors per ward every four years rather than one in 3 years out of four like much of the rest of the country?
    Unlike here. Where we elect only one councillor per ward every four years. Well, for 65 of them. The 66th elects two.
    But of course it does.

    Most of the country only elects district or unitary councillors one year out of 4 in all out elections, not just London boroughs
    And thank heaven's for that. I'm not sure what the proportions are though, the list of councils this year electing by thirds is pretty high. Some are even electing by halfs, the maniacs. dixiedean might be right, but I've never seen the overall figures

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_United_Kingdom_local_elections

    As to 65 wards being 1 cllr and 1 ward having 2, you can blame the LGBCE for that sort of thing - it makes drawing boundaries easier for them to create wards of acceptable variance, and I've seen councils with a mixture of 1,2 and 3. I did wonder if they have been given new guidance on that, as I was stunned that Buckinghamshire Council, the new unitary, not only had well over 100 seats (which is not well liked by them and is rare) but 49 wards each with 3 cllrs.
    Alnwick elects 2 to keep Alnwick together. But Prudhoe is divided into 2. Berwick and Hexham to three.
    Ponteland has its tiny centre quartered into four wards. Each one having a huge hinterland of villages many, many miles from Ponteland.
    Interesting. My impression was they don't like to mix urban and rural in general if they can help it

    Of course, the way the process works they often work off the most plausible overall scheme initially proposed and tweak it in later stages, so it may be that the authority itself made that suggestion initially, and it was only in Alnwick that enough people argued against it and so persuaded them to make it a twofer to keep them together?

    Edit: No, looks like the council and others objected to it, but they were dismissed, so the disparity with other areas is curious.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 8,968
    IshmaelZ said:

    kle4 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    ydoethur said:

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    Boris Johnson is of mixed race as well. The usual reminder that his grandfather was Turkish.
    A nonsensical claim. Who is not "of mixed race" by that sort of standard?
    More than you might think, but looking at places where you can claim citizenship based on grandparent lineage it's not treated nonsensically universally, even though if he were to call himself Turkish it would be silly. If he were still american he would definitely call himself of English-Turkish heritage.
    I reckon I’m Wiltshire back to the Stone Age, certainly as far as it’s been traced. Makes me proud, kinda
    Stone Age = 1,333 generations back, and if you can trace yourself 13 generations back then A. you are v posh and B. still only 1% of the way there. If you have exactly 5 digits per extremity, odds are against your being purebred over all that time.
    You calling him a blow-in from Gaul?
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 16,923
    Rather having 1 ward with 3 councillors there should be 3 smaller wards with 1 councillor each. Make politics more local.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 8,731
    IshmaelZ said:

    kle4 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    ydoethur said:

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    Boris Johnson is of mixed race as well. The usual reminder that his grandfather was Turkish.
    A nonsensical claim. Who is not "of mixed race" by that sort of standard?
    More than you might think, but looking at places where you can claim citizenship based on grandparent lineage it's not treated nonsensically universally, even though if he were to call himself Turkish it would be silly. If he were still american he would definitely call himself of English-Turkish heritage.
    I reckon I’m Wiltshire back to the Stone Age, certainly as far as it’s been traced. Makes me proud, kinda
    Stone Age = 1,333 generations back, and if you can trace yourself 13 generations back then A. you are v posh and B. still only 1% of the way there. If you have exactly 5 digits per extremity, odds are against your being purebred over all that time.
    I exaggerate for effect, as you do so well too. Most of us can never really know our ancestry, and I guess the further back you go, the more ancestors there are until we all reach genius khan, or something...
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 34,010

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    It’s great. Just a shame they’re so useless
    Lol you have made my point....
    You think we'd do better to have a government of white men?
    I just think having 2 people of South Asian descent in the big offices of state smarks of tokenism when one is priti patel
    I think you attach more importance to peoples' "descent" than most of us do.
    So you think priti Patel is worthy of her office then...
    No, moron, but I genuinely don't give a fuck in either direction about her "Asian descent," and failure to be white, and certainly not enough to introduce it out of the blue as an off-topic topic at the beginning of a thread. You do. Why?
    Would someone of priti patels competence have got to be home secretary if they were a white man...
    I think the party of Hancock, Grayling and Williamson might have been up to the task.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 19,157

    Ohhhh!

    Newsnight have heard that Treasury officials urged Sunak to do something on UC to cope with cost of living.

    He overruled them.

    Massive, if true.

    Sunak is a lay.

    Or, pile on to him - that sort of shit is catnip to the people with a vote on his future.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 7,449

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sorry is @Luckyguy1983 a Putin mouthpiece now

    He’s ‘just asking questions’.
    I mean how do we REALLY know that the 100+ dead children aren't cRiSiS aCtOrS
    Were those 4 Russian helicopters being shot down on here this morning really from a computer game?

    It had a sort of Ukraine government video message stamped on it I thought odd, why would it gratuitously need that? It was created by Russians wasn’t it? So it was a propaganda to try to undermine honest Ukraine message, which mainly feed onto our news as true facts, Ukraine message discredited by Russians with fake message using computer game footage?

    It’s got to be going on. I have suspected this all along. fake Russian pretend Ukraine propaganda, to undermine Ukraine giving us the facts. It doesn’t surprise me, firstly, as you would think the Russians would pay dirty truck loads of money to people to do that, whilst the real Ukraines are up their eyebrows in war zone, and a few times when bad news story’s of Russian aggression have come out, the Ukraine government have clarified it to excuse the Russians, so come across as honest to me.

    One example was the cars of women and children destroyed on the safe route out of maripole, it did happen, but the Ukraine government said they were actually not on the agreed safe route when butchered by Russians, the other example is when Russia claimed chemical weapon factories, the US said there are no factories, the Ukraine government said yes there are chemicals factories US built with us, but definitely not making weapons. Do you agree with me sometimes the Ukraine government playing it too honest, maybe thinking it’s important for us to trust them?

    so it’s fake Russian pretend Ukraine propaganda that could be causing your argument with LuckyMan? It’s obvious now PB are discussing these things to decide what’s true and not. We also need to appreciate, despite &kraine Government Official stamped on it, it’s come from GRU.

    It’s hard for lamestream news to back track, so they put this “not yet verified by us message” out a lot now hoping to protect their integrity.

    will you agree to meet LuckyMan in the middle and shake hands, as what is news and what is not is a bit hard? 💁‍♀️
    "Lamestream" fucking christ
    I knew you wouldn’t agree.

    That’s the clear difference between us maybe? You trust everything in old media newspapers and TV, more than you trust coming here to PB, and learning from it questioned and analysed by subject matter experts and put to debate?
    Perhaps I've just had 8 years of cretins dismissing the valuable work of journalists as "lamestream media". First it was SNPers, then Corbynites, Brexiters, Trumplettes at the same time, and now Putin apologists.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088
    Foxy said:


    Allie Hodgkins-Brown
    @AllieHBNews
    Saturday’s Daily MAIL: “Raab: Free Speech To Get Legal Supremacy” #TomorrowsPapersToday

    Though you can get banged up for an annoying protest.

    "You have the right to free speech as long as you are not dumb enough to actually try it."
    They certainly are sending very mixed signals. Either left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing, or a cynical strategy to be able to claim they are free speech/low tax etc with one measure, even as they do the opposite on another measure.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088

    dixiedean said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anyone know why London elects three councillors per ward every four years rather than one in 3 years out of four like much of the rest of the country?
    Unlike here. Where we elect only one councillor per ward every four years. Well, for 65 of them. The 66th elects two.
    But of course it does.

    Most of the country only elects district or unitary councillors one year out of 4 in all out elections, not just London boroughs
    And thank heaven's for that. I'm not sure what the proportions are though, the list of councils this year electing by thirds is pretty high. Some are even electing by halfs, the maniacs. dixiedean might be right, but I've never seen the overall figures

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_United_Kingdom_local_elections

    As to 65 wards being 1 cllr and 1 ward having 2, you can blame the LGBCE for that sort of thing - it makes drawing boundaries easier for them to create wards of acceptable variance, and I've seen councils with a mixture of 1,2 and 3. I did wonder if they have been given new guidance on that, as I was stunned that Buckinghamshire Council, the new unitary, not only had well over 100 seats (which is not well liked by them and is rare) but 49 wards each with 3 cllrs.
    Re Bucks. The Tory membership needs sinecures to aspire to.
    The entirety of local government is a hotch-potch mess.
    I quite like a hotch-potch mess, if things have developed for idiosyncratic reasons, provided that people are mostly happy with them, and they largely work. But it's not just the elections to local government that are a mess. Revenue-raising is a mess. Accountability is a mess, partly because local journalism is mostly dead, but mostly because central government has made most of the decisions and restricted the funding so much that there's no leeway to be accountable for anything much else.

    Local government seems to exist largely to act as a scapegoat for decisions made in Westminster.
    I like a bit of chaotic nature but there are limitations, and the devolution nonsense does not help, though the push for unitaries does. As to the latter point, and don't they know it too!
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 7,449
    rcs1000 said:

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    White men hold no monopoly on incompetence.
    But they've still got a pretty good grip on the opportunities to demonstrate it.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088
    Farooq said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    White men hold no monopoly on incompetence.
    But they've still got a pretty good grip on the opportunities to demonstrate it.
    I won't let you down on that score.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 52,574
    IshmaelZ said:

    Ohhhh!

    Newsnight have heard that Treasury officials urged Sunak to do something on UC to cope with cost of living.

    He overruled them.

    Massive, if true.

    Sunak is a lay.

    Or, pile on to him - that sort of shit is catnip to the people with a vote on his future.
    Many of those voters on the green benches are red wall these days. UC cuts, foodbanks and so on are a disaster for those seats.

  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 7,449


    Allie Hodgkins-Brown
    @AllieHBNews
    Saturday’s Daily MAIL: “Raab: Free Speech To Get Legal Supremacy” #TomorrowsPapersToday

    The government is going to stop telling schools not to teach history properly? Welcome news if true.
  • ExiledInScotlandExiledInScotland Posts: 1,390
    edited March 25
    IshmaelZ said:

    Ohhhh!

    Newsnight have heard that Treasury officials urged Sunak to do something on UC to cope with cost of living.

    He overruled them.

    Massive, if true.

    Sunak is a lay.

    Or, pile on to him - that sort of shit is catnip to the people with a vote on his future.
    Actually no it isn't. I was not happy when the UC uplift was withdrawn and the rough sleeping support measures were stopped. Most of the Conservatives I know want a decent society with support for people who need it - the argument is how it's paid for.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 7,080

    kle4 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    ydoethur said:

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    Boris Johnson is of mixed race as well. The usual reminder that his grandfather was Turkish.
    A nonsensical claim. Who is not "of mixed race" by that sort of standard?
    More than you might think, but looking at places where you can claim citizenship based on grandparent lineage it's not treated nonsensically universally, even though if he were to call himself Turkish it would be silly. If he were still american he would definitely call himself of English-Turkish heritage.
    I reckon I’m Wiltshire back to the Stone Age, certainly as far as it’s been traced. Makes me proud, kinda
    I'm SW London as far back as I can go, but seeing as that is only about 150 years it's not that impressive. There also seems to be an unhealthy involvement in pubs in my family history.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 7,449
    edited March 25
    kle4 said:

    Farooq said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    White men hold no monopoly on incompetence.
    But they've still got a pretty good grip on the opportunities to demonstrate it.
    I won't let you down on that score.
    Surely you're more a sort of grey-beige rather than white.
    I don't know about your incompetence. Your posts are normally disappointingly sane and rational.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 52,574

    Ohhhh!

    Newsnight have heard that Treasury officials urged Sunak to do something on UC to cope with cost of living.

    He overruled them.

    Massive, if true.

    Sunak is a lay.

    Something will need to be done, so it seems mad not to have done it on Wednesday.
    It's the worst budget since Thatcher's days imho.

    Utterly appalling, tin eared and counter productive.

    Sunak will spend the autumn statement undoing much of it.

    If not before.

    No wonder he looked nervous before he stood up to deliver it. Something in the back of his mind was shouting this is a turd.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 22,723
    A thought. If Westminster had 3 member constituencies, say 220 of them, with annual elections for one-third, would we be better or worse governed?
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 7,449
    dixiedean said:

    A thought. If Westminster had 3 member constituencies, say 220 of them, with annual elections for one-third, would we be better or worse governed?

    better
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 6,398
    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sorry is @Luckyguy1983 a Putin mouthpiece now

    He’s ‘just asking questions’.
    I mean how do we REALLY know that the 100+ dead children aren't cRiSiS aCtOrS
    Were those 4 Russian helicopters being shot down on here this morning really from a computer game?

    It had a sort of Ukraine government video message stamped on it I thought odd, why would it gratuitously need that? It was created by Russians wasn’t it? So it was a propaganda to try to undermine honest Ukraine message, which mainly feed onto our news as true facts, Ukraine message discredited by Russians with fake message using computer game footage?

    It’s got to be going on. I have suspected this all along. fake Russian pretend Ukraine propaganda, to undermine Ukraine giving us the facts. It doesn’t surprise me, firstly, as you would think the Russians would pay dirty truck loads of money to people to do that, whilst the real Ukraines are up their eyebrows in war zone, and a few times when bad news story’s of Russian aggression have come out, the Ukraine government have clarified it to excuse the Russians, so come across as honest to me.

    One example was the cars of women and children destroyed on the safe route out of maripole, it did happen, but the Ukraine government said they were actually not on the agreed safe route when butchered by Russians, the other example is when Russia claimed chemical weapon factories, the US said there are no factories, the Ukraine government said yes there are chemicals factories US built with us, but definitely not making weapons. Do you agree with me sometimes the Ukraine government playing it too honest, maybe thinking it’s important for us to trust them?

    so it’s fake Russian pretend Ukraine propaganda that could be causing your argument with LuckyMan? It’s obvious now PB are discussing these things to decide what’s true and not. We also need to appreciate, despite &kraine Government Official stamped on it, it’s come from GRU.

    It’s hard for lamestream news to back track, so they put this “not yet verified by us message” out a lot now hoping to protect their integrity.

    will you agree to meet LuckyMan in the middle and shake hands, as what is news and what is not is a bit hard? 💁‍♀️
    "Lamestream" fucking christ
    I knew you wouldn’t agree.

    That’s the clear difference between us maybe? You trust everything in old media newspapers and TV, more than you trust coming here to PB, and learning from it questioned and analysed by subject matter experts and put to debate?
    Perhaps I've just had 8 years of cretins dismissing the valuable work of journalists as "lamestream media". First it was SNPers, then Corbynites, Brexiters, Trumplettes at the same time, and now Putin apologists.
    You calling me a Putin apologist? Eh? You want some? I’ll fight you Farooq.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 7,449

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sorry is @Luckyguy1983 a Putin mouthpiece now

    He’s ‘just asking questions’.
    I mean how do we REALLY know that the 100+ dead children aren't cRiSiS aCtOrS
    Were those 4 Russian helicopters being shot down on here this morning really from a computer game?

    It had a sort of Ukraine government video message stamped on it I thought odd, why would it gratuitously need that? It was created by Russians wasn’t it? So it was a propaganda to try to undermine honest Ukraine message, which mainly feed onto our news as true facts, Ukraine message discredited by Russians with fake message using computer game footage?

    It’s got to be going on. I have suspected this all along. fake Russian pretend Ukraine propaganda, to undermine Ukraine giving us the facts. It doesn’t surprise me, firstly, as you would think the Russians would pay dirty truck loads of money to people to do that, whilst the real Ukraines are up their eyebrows in war zone, and a few times when bad news story’s of Russian aggression have come out, the Ukraine government have clarified it to excuse the Russians, so come across as honest to me.

    One example was the cars of women and children destroyed on the safe route out of maripole, it did happen, but the Ukraine government said they were actually not on the agreed safe route when butchered by Russians, the other example is when Russia claimed chemical weapon factories, the US said there are no factories, the Ukraine government said yes there are chemicals factories US built with us, but definitely not making weapons. Do you agree with me sometimes the Ukraine government playing it too honest, maybe thinking it’s important for us to trust them?

    so it’s fake Russian pretend Ukraine propaganda that could be causing your argument with LuckyMan? It’s obvious now PB are discussing these things to decide what’s true and not. We also need to appreciate, despite &kraine Government Official stamped on it, it’s come from GRU.

    It’s hard for lamestream news to back track, so they put this “not yet verified by us message” out a lot now hoping to protect their integrity.

    will you agree to meet LuckyMan in the middle and shake hands, as what is news and what is not is a bit hard? 💁‍♀️
    "Lamestream" fucking christ
    I knew you wouldn’t agree.

    That’s the clear difference between us maybe? You trust everything in old media newspapers and TV, more than you trust coming here to PB, and learning from it questioned and analysed by subject matter experts and put to debate?
    Perhaps I've just had 8 years of cretins dismissing the valuable work of journalists as "lamestream media". First it was SNPers, then Corbynites, Brexiters, Trumplettes at the same time, and now Putin apologists.
    You calling me a Putin apologist? Eh? You want some? I’ll fight you Farooq.
    No, you're the weirder variety, the Putin apologist apologist.
  • RH1992RH1992 Posts: 703
    edited March 25
    dixiedean said:

    A thought. If Westminster had 3 member constituencies, say 220 of them, with annual elections for one-third, would we be better or worse governed?

    Worse. Unless there's a large majority then there'd be little stability so governments would be even less inclined to make unpopular decisions for fear of being kicked out within 12 months.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088
    dixiedean said:

    A thought. If Westminster had 3 member constituencies, say 220 of them, with annual elections for one-third, would we be better or worse governed?

    A very interesting thought. Not quite chartist, but almost.

    It's hard to argue we are particularly well governed with a mass change every 3-5 years on average, but being small c conservative I do worry about a government being able to take a medium term view even if something which might in the long run be popular causes them to lose seats after a year. I don't credit we the public with sufficient foresight on what will end up being good policy. But it would certainly keep them on their toes.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088
    Farooq said:

    kle4 said:

    Farooq said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    White men hold no monopoly on incompetence.
    But they've still got a pretty good grip on the opportunities to demonstrate it.
    I won't let you down on that score.
    Surely you're more a sort of grey-beige rather than white.
    I don't know about your incompetence. Your posts are normally disappointingly sane and rational.
    A misleading veneer, I assure you.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 52,574

    IshmaelZ said:

    Ohhhh!

    Newsnight have heard that Treasury officials urged Sunak to do something on UC to cope with cost of living.

    He overruled them.

    Massive, if true.

    Sunak is a lay.

    Or, pile on to him - that sort of shit is catnip to the people with a vote on his future.
    Actually no it isn't. I was not happy when the UC uplift was withdrawn and the rough sleeping support measures were stopped. Most of the Conservatives I know want a decent society with support for people who need it - the argument is how it's paid for.
    He has revealed his true self. He is an utterly dry Thatcher worshipper who knows the price of at least one of the twenty different types of loaf delivered to his house for breakfast each day by minimum wage courier.

    Initially I liked the way he seemed to be competent and hard working compared to the clown.

    But now I am done.

    Lay.


  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 22,723
    RH1992 said:

    dixiedean said:

    A thought. If Westminster had 3 member constituencies, say 220 of them, with annual elections for one-third, would we be better or worse governed?

    Worse. Unless there's a large majority then there'd be little stability so governments would be even less inclined to make unpopular decisions for fear of being kicked out within 12 months.
    So why do we have it for Councils?
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 8,968
    edited March 25

    Ohhhh!

    Newsnight have heard that Treasury officials urged Sunak to do something on UC to cope with cost of living.

    He overruled them.

    Massive, if true.

    Sunak is a lay.

    Something will need to be done, so it seems mad not to have done it on Wednesday.
    It's the worst budget since Thatcher's days imho.

    Utterly appalling, tin eared and counter productive.

    Sunak will spend the autumn statement undoing much of it.

    If not before.

    No wonder he looked nervous before he stood up to deliver it. Something in the back of his mind was shouting this is a turd.
    There's not much that he did that he can undo. He's not going to be able to claw back any of the money given away. The chances of the cut to fuel duty not becoming permanent must be zero, for example.

    So if he does provide more money for those who most need it, we will have to borrow it.

    What I'm surprised about is that I haven't heard anything from Tory backbenchers about more money for Defence. I know Reeves mentioned it. Maybe it's just not been reported on that prominently.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 19,157

    Ohhhh!

    Newsnight have heard that Treasury officials urged Sunak to do something on UC to cope with cost of living.

    He overruled them.

    Massive, if true.

    Sunak is a lay.

    Something will need to be done, so it seems mad not to have done it on Wednesday.
    It's the worst budget since Thatcher's days imho.

    Utterly appalling, tin eared and counter productive.

    Sunak will spend the autumn statement undoing much of it.

    If not before.

    No wonder he looked nervous before he stood up to deliver it. Something in the back of his mind was shouting this is a turd.
    Playing to too many audiences: the Conservative Party electorate and the actual electorate.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 19,375
    edited March 25
    dixiedean said:

    Anyone know why London elects three councillors per ward every four years rather than one in 3 years out of four like much of the rest of the country?
    Unlike here. Where we elect only one councillor per ward every four years. Well, for 65 of them. The 66th elects two.
    But of course it does.

    Waverley (Surrey) is much the same as London, as are many southern councils. I quite like that there isn't a continuous election campaign, though I know activists who prefer that because it helps mobilise the not-as-activists. I take Sandy's point that splitting up into lots of tiny wards would be more representative. Multiple councillors per ward makes progressive (or any other kind of) alliance easier, though.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 52,574
    IshmaelZ said:

    Ohhhh!

    Newsnight have heard that Treasury officials urged Sunak to do something on UC to cope with cost of living.

    He overruled them.

    Massive, if true.

    Sunak is a lay.

    Something will need to be done, so it seems mad not to have done it on Wednesday.
    It's the worst budget since Thatcher's days imho.

    Utterly appalling, tin eared and counter productive.

    Sunak will spend the autumn statement undoing much of it.

    If not before.

    No wonder he looked nervous before he stood up to deliver it. Something in the back of his mind was shouting this is a turd.
    Playing to too many audiences: the Conservative Party electorate and the actual electorate.
    And we know which one was uppermost in his mind.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088
    dixiedean said:

    RH1992 said:

    dixiedean said:

    A thought. If Westminster had 3 member constituencies, say 220 of them, with annual elections for one-third, would we be better or worse governed?

    Worse. Unless there's a large majority then there'd be little stability so governments would be even less inclined to make unpopular decisions for fear of being kicked out within 12 months.
    So why do we have it for Councils?
    Legacy. I've not checked by I'm guessing newly created authorities are now all out.

    And while you can request to become all-out if you think you think in the short term you will be winning seats under a by thirds approach you may not be inclined to make a switch. Most politicos I know are not fans of by thirds, but if, say, you did badly as all seats were up during the Maygasm, you might feel aggrieved.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Do you realise for the first time in history there is not a single white man in any of the 3 great offices of state outside the pm...an Asian man, an Asian woman and a white woman...if the proponents of diversity are correct this should be the greatest govt ever...

    It’s great. Just a shame they’re so useless
    Lol you have made my point....
    You think we'd do better to have a government of white men?
    I just think having 2 people of South Asian descent in the big offices of state smarks of tokenism when one is priti patel
    I think you attach more importance to peoples' "descent" than most of us do.
    So you think priti Patel is worthy of her office then...
    No, moron, but I genuinely don't give a fuck in either direction about her "Asian descent," and failure to be white, and certainly not enough to introduce it out of the blue as an off-topic topic at the beginning of a thread. You do. Why?
    Would someone of priti patels competence have got to be home secretary if they were a white man...
    There are too many examples to count of that being true across a plethora of senior ministerial posts.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 100,923

    IshmaelZ said:

    Ohhhh!

    Newsnight have heard that Treasury officials urged Sunak to do something on UC to cope with cost of living.

    He overruled them.

    Massive, if true.

    Sunak is a lay.

    Or, pile on to him - that sort of shit is catnip to the people with a vote on his future.
    Actually no it isn't. I was not happy when the UC uplift was withdrawn and the rough sleeping support measures were stopped. Most of the Conservatives I know want a decent society with support for people who need it - the argument is how it's paid for.
    He has revealed his true self. He is an utterly dry Thatcher worshipper who knows the price of at least one of the twenty different types of loaf delivered to his house for breakfast each day by minimum wage courier.

    Initially I liked the way he seemed to be competent and hard working compared to the clown.

    But now I am done.

    Lay.


    Yet the 3.1% increase in benefits is actually slightly more than the 3% average pay increase agreed for the average worker this year
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 8,968
    RH1992 said:

    dixiedean said:

    A thought. If Westminster had 3 member constituencies, say 220 of them, with annual elections for one-third, would we be better or worse governed?

    Worse. Unless there's a large majority then there'd be little stability so governments would be even less inclined to make unpopular decisions for fear of being kicked out within 12 months.
    That seems to me to be a fundamentally anti-democratic argument.

    You are saying that a government needs to be able to make decisions which the public have no ability to influence, because otherwise they will make the wrong decisions. Why not do away with elections altogether then?

    The current way in which we do politics infantilises the voters. If democracy is to work then we need to have voters who are prepared to take difficult decisions.

    What I thought was particularly terrible about Sunak's budget was that he completely ducked being honest with the voters about the difficulty of the situation.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 22,723
    edited March 25
    kle4 said:

    dixiedean said:

    A thought. If Westminster had 3 member constituencies, say 220 of them, with annual elections for one-third, would we be better or worse governed?

    A very interesting thought. Not quite chartist, but almost.

    It's hard to argue we are particularly well governed with a mass change every 3-5 years on average, but being small c conservative I do worry about a government being able to take a medium term view even if something which might in the long run be popular causes them to lose seats after a year. I don't credit we the public with sufficient foresight on what will end up being good policy. But it would certainly keep them on their toes.
    I suppose the counter argument is the we've got a majority so we can do what we like for 4/5 years. Much beloved of one poster.
    No matter how insane, inefficient or incompetent.
    Not summat I've thought through, mind.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 7,449
    kle4 said:

    dixiedean said:

    A thought. If Westminster had 3 member constituencies, say 220 of them, with annual elections for one-third, would we be better or worse governed?

    A very interesting thought. Not quite chartist, but almost.

    It's hard to argue we are particularly well governed with a mass change every 3-5 years on average, but being small c conservative I do worry about a government being able to take a medium term view even if something which might in the long run be popular causes them to lose seats after a year. I don't credit we the public with sufficient foresight on what will end up being good policy. But it would certainly keep them on their toes.
    Two seats up for election every week.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 100,923

    IshmaelZ said:

    Behind the smiles and glamour the discontent over the Cambridges’ Caribbean tour was unmissable

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2022/03/25/cambridges-caribbean-tour-triumph-monarchy-relic-past/

    telegraph having another pop

    I think the writing is on the wall. By the time they succeed dear old Katie is going to look like the desiccated mummy of Cruella de Ville, baldy is going to turn into fat Old Baldy, and the more they mishandle the whole piccaninny thang, the more shutting out (the admittedly ghastly) Meghan is going to look like a terrible mistake.

    Some of the pictures were embarrassing and shameful and really did the royal family no favours

    I have long been of the opinion that once HMQ goes so most countries will separate from the monarchy

    It is becoming an anachronism
    Whaaaaaaaaaat rubbish!

    Anachronism? Why compare it to spiders?

    Who are we as a people, as a nation? What direction do we want to go? Sure there comes a time when the most fundamental questions need to be addressed, no matter how challenging. Where One needs ones heart to follow an idea, it is the monarchy that is already bringing us together. Holding us together. A monarchy to unite Our colours, Our Faiths, our principles. Before us now is our future, a wider road upon which we seek one another in our aloneness, and we walk the road when we have no hearth to sit beside. Where we will live upon one another according to the law, ancient and timeless, and thus live together in loving kindness. A path To cross the divides of neighbourhoods. A way shared by all Cultures and religion.
    Our monarchy is that opening, an opportunity To Walk rough shod over the divide between us, as nations, and as people’s.
    When you are Venturing forth together into unknown territory. You cannot be an adventurer without an unknown to explore. Each and every one of us venturing now into a new landscape, we can only be guided by our hearts, our love, our faith. The monarchy let’s all hearts join with ours, it’s never been more relevant.
    How BigG can call our beloved royal family an anachronism and still pretend he is a Tory is beyond me!!
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 16,923
    I don't know how they count the ballots in multi member wards. How do you put the same ballot into three different piles?

    On that note of bafflement, goodnight.
  • TimTTimT Posts: 6,305
    edited March 25
    I am in awe of how ballsy so many Ukrainian citizens are. This video shows a group singing the Bayraktar song in taunting Russian troops down the road (apparently the main drag of Kherson)

    https://twitter.com/WashingtonPoint/status/1507336374067810306

    And then there is this dark sense of humour:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FOuqMViXsAAUJ9Z?format=jpg&name=900x900

  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 7,449
    RH1992 said:

    dixiedean said:

    A thought. If Westminster had 3 member constituencies, say 220 of them, with annual elections for one-third, would we be better or worse governed?

    Worse. Unless there's a large majority then there'd be little stability so governments would be even less inclined to make unpopular decisions for fear of being kicked out within 12 months.
    Here's a view: maybe governments shouldn't do unpopular things.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 6,398
    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Behind the smiles and glamour the discontent over the Cambridges’ Caribbean tour was unmissable

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2022/03/25/cambridges-caribbean-tour-triumph-monarchy-relic-past/

    telegraph having another pop

    I think the writing is on the wall. By the time they succeed dear old Katie is going to look like the desiccated mummy of Cruella de Ville, baldy is going to turn into fat Old Baldy, and the more they mishandle the whole piccaninny thang, the more shutting out (the admittedly ghastly) Meghan is going to look like a terrible mistake.

    Some of the pictures were embarrassing and shameful and really did the royal family no favours

    I have long been of the opinion that once HMQ goes so most countries will separate from the monarchy

    It is becoming an anachronism
    Whaaaaaaaaaat rubbish!

    Anachronism? Why compare it to spiders?

    Who are we as a people, as a nation? What direction do we want to go? Sure there comes a time when the most fundamental questions need to be addressed, no matter how challenging. Where One needs ones heart to follow an idea, it is the monarchy that is already bringing us together. Holding us together. A monarchy to unite Our colours, Our Faiths, our principles. Before us now is our future, a wider road upon which we seek one another in our aloneness, and we walk the road when we have no hearth to sit beside. Where we will live upon one another according to the law, ancient and timeless, and thus live together in loving kindness. A path To cross the divides of neighbourhoods. A way shared by all Cultures and religion.
    Our monarchy is that opening, an opportunity To Walk rough shod over the divide between us, as nations, and as people’s.
    When you are Venturing forth together into unknown territory. You cannot be an adventurer without an unknown to explore. Each and every one of us venturing now into a new landscape, we can only be guided by our hearts, our love, our faith. The monarchy let’s all hearts join with ours, it’s never been more relevant.
    How BigG can call our beloved royal family an anachronism and still pretend he is a Tory is beyond me!!
    👍🏻
This discussion has been closed.