FWIW, I noticed that all of those celebrating Boris' bravery in visiting Kyiv completely ignored the Lithuanian PM's visit to Borodianka when I posted it yesterday.
It's part of the job. We don't congratulate the Armed Forces for simply turning up to a theatre of war.
BTW, just a little comment. We went down to London by train yesterday, setting off just after ten from St Neots. Train down was fairly busy; the one returning just after five was very busy. Two adults and child; £53 for a turn-up return fare. Felt fairly good value to me.
I expect that with further fines likely, the may elections which look very difficult for the party, and the Sue Gray report Boris greatest moment of peril will arrive in may and june
I hope that the party then takes decisive action and elects a new leader
Most of the candidates are corrupted by association with Johnson, though. Wallace has, after all, served in the Cabinet. Hunt scrapped our stock of PPE, or as good as. To name but two.
You could apply the same logic to Starmer and his cabinet who all campaigned to elect Corbyn
Corbyn might be mistaken, but, AFAIK, he is not dishonest. Indeed, it's his honesty about his views which get's him into bother with the Right.
Corbyn is in a different league of unacceptability and he is rejected by far more than the right, unless you think Starmer is on the right
You and I are never going to agree about Corbyn, of course. However, I would rather have had hime, with all his baggage, as PM than Johnson. The nation was offered a poor choice in both 2017 and 2019.
Suppose we either get a new, bad, variant, or a different disease (remember we've also had avian flu, swine flu, and SARS in recent history) that's bad.
And then the PM has to tell people to stay at home.
How much moral authority will that plea have from this man?
My MP, Big_G_WestDevon as I think of him, has been saying Let's wait for Gray. I must write to him again to see if he is still saying that. The issue and payment of FPNs surely makes any further report redundant?
I expect that with further fines likely, the may elections which look very difficult for the party, and the Sue Gray report Boris greatest moment of peril will arrive in may and june
I hope that the party then takes decisive action and elects a new leader
Most of the candidates are corrupted by association with Johnson, though. Wallace has, after all, served in the Cabinet. Hunt scrapped our stock of PPE, or as good as. To name but two.
You could apply the same logic to Starmer and his cabinet who all campaigned to elect Corbyn
Corbyn might be mistaken, but, AFAIK, he is not dishonest. Indeed, it's his honesty about his views which get's him into bother with the Right.
Corbyn is in a different league of unacceptability and he is rejected by far more than the right, unless you think Starmer is on the right
You and I are never going to agree about Corbyn, of course. However, I would rather have had hime, with all his baggage, as PM than Johnson. The nation was offered a poor choice in both 2017 and 2019.
Really - are you saying you would rather have Corbyn dealing with war in Ukraine?
In my Trust we were banned from shared food during the lockdowns. Everyone had to provide their own and eat alone. Consuming alcohol on the premeses would have been a serious disciplinary offence.
We all know that Johnson and co are liars, though some seem curiously unbothered about it.
@ozymandias is right though about concentrating on policy in the campaign. Everyone knows Johnsons bad character, its his bad policies that need the scrutiny.
My MP, Big_G_WestDevon as I think of him, has been saying Let's wait for Gray. I must write to him again to see if he is still saying that. The issue and payment of FPNs surely makes any further report redundant?
I think Sue Gray's report will be so embarrassing and accompanied by any number of compromising photos will see him either resign or be removed
I expect that with further fines likely, the may elections which look very difficult for the party, and the Sue Gray report Boris greatest moment of peril will arrive in may and june
I hope that the party then takes decisive action and elects a new leader
Most of the candidates are corrupted by association with Johnson, though. Wallace has, after all, served in the Cabinet. Hunt scrapped our stock of PPE, or as good as. To name but two.
You could apply the same logic to Starmer and his cabinet who all campaigned to elect Corbyn
Corbyn might be mistaken, but, AFAIK, he is not dishonest. Indeed, it's his honesty about his views which get's him into bother with the Right.
Corbyn is in a different league of unacceptability and he is rejected by far more than the right, unless you think Starmer is on the right
You and I are never going to agree about Corbyn, of course. However, I would rather have had hime, with all his baggage, as PM than Johnson. The nation was offered a poor choice in both 2017 and 2019.
Really - are you saying you would rather have Corbyn dealing with war in Ukraine?
TBH, I'm not aware of any statements he has made about Ukraine. Has he made any?
A problem all friendly countries have is that their own stocks of weaponry are low - and they need to keep some back for their own use. Replenishment takes time.
Even the US has problems. They have given 7,000 Javelins to Ukraine. That is 1/3 of their inventory. Yet they only make 1,000 a year - and could, with time, get it up to 6,480 a year.
They have sent 2,000 Stingers to Ukraine. They do not make them for themselves any more, and it is believed that the 2,000 is one quarter of the US's remaining stocks. Lead time is 24 months.
There is only so much material that can be given. That does not really excuse Germany (and to a lesser extent France's) tardiness in providing anything.
Part of the excellent performance by the Ukraine forces against armour is due to incredibly profligate expenditure of weapons; they are firing off hundreds of ATGMs every day.
No other armed forces that weren't a) in an existential struggle for survival and b) were getting them all gratis would expend them at that rate.
But you're correct to observe that's there's a limit and they are probably going to run NATO dry quite soon.
The rate of expenditure is also because their supplies of other kit - notably artillery and ground attack aircraft - have been very limited.
'No other armed forces' isn't entirely correct, since Russia seems to have run through its medium range missiles at an unsustainable rate, too. Not to mention its tanks.
And there are very large stocks of NATO artillery ammo, and medium range AA missiles, which have not been sent to Ukraine.
I expect that with further fines likely, the may elections which look very difficult for the party, and the Sue Gray report Boris greatest moment of peril will arrive in may and june
I hope that the party then takes decisive action and elects a new leader
Most of the candidates are corrupted by association with Johnson, though. Wallace has, after all, served in the Cabinet. Hunt scrapped our stock of PPE, or as good as. To name but two.
You could apply the same logic to Starmer and his cabinet who all campaigned to elect Corbyn
Corbyn might be mistaken, but, AFAIK, he is not dishonest. Indeed, it's his honesty about his views which get's him into bother with the Right.
Corbyn is in a different league of unacceptability and he is rejected by far more than the right, unless you think Starmer is on the right
You and I are never going to agree about Corbyn, of course. However, I would rather have had hime, with all his baggage, as PM than Johnson. The nation was offered a poor choice in both 2017 and 2019.
Really - are you saying you would rather have Corbyn dealing with war in Ukraine?
TBH, I'm not aware of any statements he has made about Ukraine. Has he made any?
I expect that with further fines likely, the may elections which look very difficult for the party, and the Sue Gray report Boris greatest moment of peril will arrive in may and june
I hope that the party then takes decisive action and elects a new leader
Most of the candidates are corrupted by association with Johnson, though. Wallace has, after all, served in the Cabinet. Hunt scrapped our stock of PPE, or as good as. To name but two.
You could apply the same logic to Starmer and his cabinet who all campaigned to elect Corbyn
Corbyn might be mistaken, but, AFAIK, he is not dishonest. Indeed, it's his honesty about his views which get's him into bother with the Right.
Corbyn is in a different league of unacceptability and he is rejected by far more than the right, unless you think Starmer is on the right
You and I are never going to agree about Corbyn, of course. However, I would rather have had hime, with all his baggage, as PM than Johnson. The nation was offered a poor choice in both 2017 and 2019.
Do you honestly believe Corbyn would have dealt with the Covid and Ukraine crises better than Johnson? He has been wrong on both issues: he won't even say whether he has had the vaccine (and that's really important in encouraging people to come forward), and he signed Stop The War's mid-bendingly stupid statement about the Ukrainian war.
So whilst Johnson isn't good, and I did not vote for him, I would much rather have him dealing with these external issues than Corbyn, McDonnell and their followers.
FWIW, I noticed that all of those celebrating Boris' bravery in visiting Kyiv completely ignored the Lithuanian PM's visit to Borodianka when I posted it yesterday.
It's part of the job. We don't congratulate the Armed Forces for simply turning up to a theatre of war.
I don't disagree. If only everyone were so consistent.
I expect that with further fines likely, the may elections which look very difficult for the party, and the Sue Gray report Boris greatest moment of peril will arrive in may and june
I hope that the party then takes decisive action and elects a new leader
Most of the candidates are corrupted by association with Johnson, though. Wallace has, after all, served in the Cabinet. Hunt scrapped our stock of PPE, or as good as. To name but two.
You could apply the same logic to Starmer and his cabinet who all campaigned to elect Corbyn
Corbyn might be mistaken, but, AFAIK, he is not dishonest. Indeed, it's his honesty about his views which get's him into bother with the Right.
Corbyn is in a different league of unacceptability and he is rejected by far more than the right, unless you think Starmer is on the right
You and I are never going to agree about Corbyn, of course. However, I would rather have had hime, with all his baggage, as PM than Johnson. The nation was offered a poor choice in both 2017 and 2019.
Really - are you saying you would rather have Corbyn dealing with war in Ukraine?
TBH, I'm not aware of any statements he has made about Ukraine. Has he made any?
Just read STW's stupid statement on the Ukrainian conflict. A statement that spends one paragraph talking about the war, and the rest talking about how it is all our fault.
And which ends with the following: "We urge the entire anti-war movement to unite on the basis of challenging the British government’s aggressive posturing and direct its campaigning to that end above all."
No call on Russia to withdraw. To these traitorous fuckwits, it is our fault.
I think getting rid of him over a triviality like this
The only PM in history confirmed to have broken the law.
I know the Brexit cult have no regard to the rule of law, but I hoped the Country as a whole still did.
Apparently not.
Nope.
If he'd done 25 in a 20 mph zone I wouldn't think he should go either.
It's a trivial law that never should have been there in the first place and isn't even a law any more. I broke it all the time when it was in force.
If he'd robbed a bank he definitely should.
Somewhere between those two is a line. Not sure exactly where.
You aren't worried about the lying or misleading of parliament or the people then?
Sure, but he's lied numerous times before and he hasn't resigned or been fired. As have numerous other politicians, including Starmer. So, again, I think it's worrying, but not sufficient for him to resign. If I were his boss, I might give him a verbal warning for it, not sack him, if that analogy makes sense.
Raising taxes when he explicitly said he wouldn't, on the other hand, I think is sufficient for him to resign. It's a lie that actually matters to people, rather than one about whether he attended a party in his own garden, which doesn't. But he didn't resign, and few seriously called on him to do so iirc.
I expect that with further fines likely, the may elections which look very difficult for the party, and the Sue Gray report Boris greatest moment of peril will arrive in may and june
I hope that the party then takes decisive action and elects a new leader
Most of the candidates are corrupted by association with Johnson, though. Wallace has, after all, served in the Cabinet. Hunt scrapped our stock of PPE, or as good as. To name but two.
You could apply the same logic to Starmer and his cabinet who all campaigned to elect Corbyn
Corbyn might be mistaken, but, AFAIK, he is not dishonest. Indeed, it's his honesty about his views which get's him into bother with the Right.
Corbyn is in a different league of unacceptability and he is rejected by far more than the right, unless you think Starmer is on the right
I expect that with further fines likely, the may elections which look very difficult for the party, and the Sue Gray report Boris greatest moment of peril will arrive in may and june
I hope that the party then takes decisive action and elects a new leader
Most of the candidates are corrupted by association with Johnson, though. Wallace has, after all, served in the Cabinet. Hunt scrapped our stock of PPE, or as good as. To name but two.
You could apply the same logic to Starmer and his cabinet who all campaigned to elect Corbyn
Corbyn might be mistaken, but, AFAIK, he is not dishonest. Indeed, it's his honesty about his views which get's him into bother with the Right.
Corbyn is in a different league of unacceptability and he is rejected by far more than the right, unless you think Starmer is on the right
You and I are never going to agree about Corbyn, of course. However, I would rather have had hime, with all his baggage, as PM than Johnson. The nation was offered a poor choice in both 2017 and 2019.
Really - are you saying you would rather have Corbyn dealing with war in Ukraine?
TBH, I'm not aware of any statements he has made about Ukraine. Has he made any?
Just read STW's stupid statement on the Ukrainian conflict. A statement that spends one paragraph talking about the war, and the rest talking about how it is all our fault.
And which ends with the following: "We urge the entire anti-war movement to unite on the basis of challenging the British government’s aggressive posturing and direct its campaigning to that end above all."
No call on Russia to withdraw. To these traitorous fuckwits, it is our fault.
I hate STW (aka the SWP rebadged for people who shop at Waitrose) but this is out of date - the statement you link to is dated 18 February. The war began (or at least it’s current incarnation started) on 24 February. So it’s not perhaps surprising that there is not much space devoted to the Russian occupation.
I expect that with further fines likely, the may elections which look very difficult for the party, and the Sue Gray report Boris greatest moment of peril will arrive in may and june
I hope that the party then takes decisive action and elects a new leader
Most of the candidates are corrupted by association with Johnson, though. Wallace has, after all, served in the Cabinet. Hunt scrapped our stock of PPE, or as good as. To name but two.
You could apply the same logic to Starmer and his cabinet who all campaigned to elect Corbyn
Corbyn might be mistaken, but, AFAIK, he is not dishonest. Indeed, it's his honesty about his views which get's him into bother with the Right.
Corbyn is in a different league of unacceptability and he is rejected by far more than the right, unless you think Starmer is on the right
You and I are never going to agree about Corbyn, of course. However, I would rather have had hime, with all his baggage, as PM than Johnson. The nation was offered a poor choice in both 2017 and 2019.
Our choices are always going to be poor because with 24/7 news and social media anyone sane is not going to go into politics. And a lot of people that might want to are destroyed by historic poorly formed or just poor social media posts.
I expect that with further fines likely, the may elections which look very difficult for the party, and the Sue Gray report Boris greatest moment of peril will arrive in may and june
I hope that the party then takes decisive action and elects a new leader
Most of the candidates are corrupted by association with Johnson, though. Wallace has, after all, served in the Cabinet. Hunt scrapped our stock of PPE, or as good as. To name but two.
You could apply the same logic to Starmer and his cabinet who all campaigned to elect Corbyn
Corbyn might be mistaken, but, AFAIK, he is not dishonest. Indeed, it's his honesty about his views which get's him into bother with the Right.
Corbyn is in a different league of unacceptability and he is rejected by far more than the right, unless you think Starmer is on the right
You and I are never going to agree about Corbyn, of course. However, I would rather have had hime, with all his baggage, as PM than Johnson. The nation was offered a poor choice in both 2017 and 2019.
Really - are you saying you would rather have Corbyn dealing with war in Ukraine?
TBH, I'm not aware of any statements he has made about Ukraine. Has he made any?
I expect that with further fines likely, the may elections which look very difficult for the party, and the Sue Gray report Boris greatest moment of peril will arrive in may and june
I hope that the party then takes decisive action and elects a new leader
Most of the candidates are corrupted by association with Johnson, though. Wallace has, after all, served in the Cabinet. Hunt scrapped our stock of PPE, or as good as. To name but two.
You could apply the same logic to Starmer and his cabinet who all campaigned to elect Corbyn
Corbyn might be mistaken, but, AFAIK, he is not dishonest. Indeed, it's his honesty about his views which get's him into bother with the Right.
Corbyn is in a different league of unacceptability and he is rejected by far more than the right, unless you think Starmer is on the right
You and I are never going to agree about Corbyn, of course. However, I would rather have had hime, with all his baggage, as PM than Johnson. The nation was offered a poor choice in both 2017 and 2019.
Really - are you saying you would rather have Corbyn dealing with war in Ukraine?
TBH, I'm not aware of any statements he has made about Ukraine. Has he made any?
Just read STW's stupid statement on the Ukrainian conflict. A statement that spends one paragraph talking about the war, and the rest talking about how it is all our fault.
And which ends with the following: "We urge the entire anti-war movement to unite on the basis of challenging the British government’s aggressive posturing and direct its campaigning to that end above all."
No call on Russia to withdraw. To these traitorous fuckwits, it is our fault.
I think you're going a bit over the top, but I personally would be very, very chary about associating with anything that Claudia Webbe was. One has to be careful about being wise after the event, but one cannot say that Ukraine has always been whiter than white. However, there's no doubt whatsoever that the Russian state and particularly the Russian army has behaved appallingly.
A problem all friendly countries have is that their own stocks of weaponry are low - and they need to keep some back for their own use. Replenishment takes time.
Even the US has problems. They have given 7,000 Javelins to Ukraine. That is 1/3 of their inventory. Yet they only make 1,000 a year - and could, with time, get it up to 6,480 a year.
They have sent 2,000 Stingers to Ukraine. They do not make them for themselves any more, and it is believed that the 2,000 is one quarter of the US's remaining stocks. Lead time is 24 months.
There is only so much material that can be given. That does not really excuse Germany (and to a lesser extent France's) tardiness in providing anything.
Part of the excellent performance by the Ukraine forces against armour is due to incredibly profligate expenditure of weapons; they are firing off hundreds of ATGMs every day.
No other armed forces that weren't a) in an existential struggle for survival and b) were getting them all gratis would expend them at that rate.
But you're correct to observe that's there's a limit and they are probably going to run NATO dry quite soon.
Where do you get the figure that they are firing off hundreds per day? Or do you count RPGs?
If they were firing that number, and knocking out a handful of tanks each day, it would be a problem, but I suspect the effectiveness to be rather better than that.
I am not willing to bet that BoZo won't jump if it looks to be in his interest.
I don't think the Tory cult will bin him.
Boris "resigning" is the fig leaf that he gets to use to leave Downing Street before the election. So he doesn't face the humiliation of getting pushed out by his MPs.
Hard not to admire all these Cabinet members who, like Grant Shapps, are managing to overcome their personal fury at law-breaking and their deep disappointment with Boris Johnson in order to keep their jobs for the good of the country. https://twitter.com/RobDotHutton/status/1514140988863918083
I expect that with further fines likely, the may elections which look very difficult for the party, and the Sue Gray report Boris greatest moment of peril will arrive in may and june
I hope that the party then takes decisive action and elects a new leader
Most of the candidates are corrupted by association with Johnson, though. Wallace has, after all, served in the Cabinet. Hunt scrapped our stock of PPE, or as good as. To name but two.
You could apply the same logic to Starmer and his cabinet who all campaigned to elect Corbyn
Corbyn might be mistaken, but, AFAIK, he is not dishonest. Indeed, it's his honesty about his views which get's him into bother with the Right.
‘I was present, but I don’t think I was involved’ waves hello.
When the public hear Johnson and his cheerleaders say he must stay on because of the Ukraine war, do they add rank hypocrisy to the callousness of his original offence? Or do they see a great leader protecting the free world from the Russian aggression?
Actually I'm not sure they're even trying to justify this to others. I think they're trying to convince themselves.
People may think that when Zelensky praises Boris as a great friend of Ukraine, this is for some reason more important than attending a party for ten minutes in his own garden.
Bizarre train of logic, I know.
Thatcher's international standing was godlike by comparison with Boris's, and that didn't stop her being toppled.
Very true.
There needs to be an election by the end of 2023. My analysis and prediction is it can all happen very quickly as soon as the bad local election results are in next month.
In terms of managing expectations, what sort of figure is not very spinnable - minus 500 councillors?
And what is the current expectation for the size of Tory losses? Are we due any sort of polling, or any predictive modelling?
I'm thinking the Tories will lose 200 councillors although I may have underestimated the no. of all out elections so there is potential for more damage on a bad night.
I agree with AndyJS that a Lab lead of 5% or less is perfectly spinnable for the Conservatives.
EdM led by 7% in 2012 and Kinnock by 7% in 1985.
It was Labour's 11% lead in 1990 which put the pressure on Thatcher.
Yes I am aware of all that although I notice John Smith only led by 8% in 1993 which is perhaps a good comparison as well (although that was county councils and Wales). I am only confident of Labour doing 'well' in Northern Met districts and Wales and I think Bury is the only all up Met council?
I also only expect a modest Labour gain of about 3% in Scotland although Lab could narrowly come 2nd in cllrs there now.
Honestly I think Labour would have to win Plymouth and Swindon and make proper inroads in the West Midlands to put proper pressure on the gvt which I don't see happening.
I think Scottish Labour jumping up from third to second in May is now nailed on. Their recent polling has been great, whereas the Scottish Tories appear to be back down to close to core vote territory.
Further, you’ve got to remember that SLab is the least Unionist of the 3 Unionist parties, and hence the most transfer-friendly in the Single Transferable Vote election in three weeks time. A typical pro-independence voter might rank candidates 1 SNP 2 Grn 3 Lab 4 LD 5 Con. In tight contests that will play out in Sarwar’s favour.
25 SLab candidates in May are pro-independence or pro IndyRef2. A remarkable statistic when you consider the official party line and vitriol these strong individuals have to put up with. As soon as the lock is removed, their numbers will quickly swell. Labour are the final bastion holding the Union together, and their resolve is wavering.
Really interesting Stuart.
Assuming Labour can't win outright in GE2024 (they might) and assuming they don't have enough for power with the LibDems alone then an agreement with the SNP at Westminster would be fascinating. It would make the SNP's life a lot easier if they didn't have to fight in the courts to get indyref2 so there's a lot in it for them and I'm fairly sure the two parties could agree to work together, but on the question of independence campaign as free agents. That wouldn't be the first time pragmatism like that has happened.
I don't really understand to be honest why Labour and the LibDems are officially so unionist.
Let Scotland have another vote and decide for themselves! What's wrong with being democratic?
Good question. And they might go for Ref2 as a policy. It may gain votes and perhaps not lose a lot.
The case for status quo unionism is thin, and has been for years. In a secular age there is no decent case for the island of Ireland not being unified, and Brexit amplifies this. But the Ireland border problem emphasises how difficult the Scottish/English border problem would be if it became an EU border. (I can see Scotland from where I live so am biased, but it is still objectively true).
The border, currency and economy issues make it impossible (IMHO) that a Ref2 can be won by the Nats. But it would be a lengthy and divisive distraction.
Tactically (and I want Labour to lead the next government, I thing I have not wanted for decades) allowing Ref2 would probably be the best policy, on the private basis that it coud not win, especially if Labour were in power.
And after RefBrexit obvs nothing could possibly go wrong.
I expect that with further fines likely, the may elections which look very difficult for the party, and the Sue Gray report Boris greatest moment of peril will arrive in may and june
I hope that the party then takes decisive action and elects a new leader
Most of the candidates are corrupted by association with Johnson, though. Wallace has, after all, served in the Cabinet. Hunt scrapped our stock of PPE, or as good as. To name but two.
You could apply the same logic to Starmer and his cabinet who all campaigned to elect Corbyn
Corbyn might be mistaken, but, AFAIK, he is not dishonest. Indeed, it's his honesty about his views which get's him into bother with the Right.
Corbyn is in a different league of unacceptability and he is rejected by far more than the right, unless you think Starmer is on the right
You and I are never going to agree about Corbyn, of course. However, I would rather have had hime, with all his baggage, as PM than Johnson. The nation was offered a poor choice in both 2017 and 2019.
Really - are you saying you would rather have Corbyn dealing with war in Ukraine?
Yes I would in a heartbeat. Boris is doing f all other than letting weapons be sent over, a child could do that.
The most ridiculous thing about that ridiculous Daily Mail front page is the claim that Johnson ate a salad at the party. As if!
That said, if there was food to eat it was not an impromptu gathering, was it?
The odd thing about the Mail headline if it was intended to shore up the PM is that it's so cack-handed. The reason PR companies advise a fullsome apology at the first whiff of trouble is because it works
The alternatives 'It wasn't me guv' or cringe worthy excuses were ditched years ago as they give the story legs and remove sympathy
On twitter Robert Colvile is rightfully pointing out that Bozo and Sunak have been fined for the birthday cake that they didn't even know about.
Which is such a low bar and so early on in the history of parties that there could still be a lot of fines still to come.
Boris may have survived the first FPN but can he survive a second one or a fifth?
Why not?
Once you establish the principle that an FPN is no big deal, and that it's OK to mislead Parliament, five is no big deal either. Five times nothing is still nothing. There's no threshold where two parties are OK, but three aren't.
If he's still there in 2024, the opposition campaign writes itself, but unless the Conservative backbenchers find a spine they were selected not to have, they go down with the good ship Bozza.
It's the local council candidates I feel sorry for.
I expect that with further fines likely, the may elections which look very difficult for the party, and the Sue Gray report Boris greatest moment of peril will arrive in may and june
I hope that the party then takes decisive action and elects a new leader
Most of the candidates are corrupted by association with Johnson, though. Wallace has, after all, served in the Cabinet. Hunt scrapped our stock of PPE, or as good as. To name but two.
You could apply the same logic to Starmer and his cabinet who all campaigned to elect Corbyn
Corbyn might be mistaken, but, AFAIK, he is not dishonest. Indeed, it's his honesty about his views which get's him into bother with the Right.
‘I was present, but I don’t think I was involved’ waves hello.
LOL. Point taken. On a par with 'there wasn't a party'!
A problem all friendly countries have is that their own stocks of weaponry are low - and they need to keep some back for their own use. Replenishment takes time.
Even the US has problems. They have given 7,000 Javelins to Ukraine. That is 1/3 of their inventory. Yet they only make 1,000 a year - and could, with time, get it up to 6,480 a year.
They have sent 2,000 Stingers to Ukraine. They do not make them for themselves any more, and it is believed that the 2,000 is one quarter of the US's remaining stocks. Lead time is 24 months.
There is only so much material that can be given. That does not really excuse Germany (and to a lesser extent France's) tardiness in providing anything.
Part of the excellent performance by the Ukraine forces against armour is due to incredibly profligate expenditure of weapons; they are firing off hundreds of ATGMs every day.
No other armed forces that weren't a) in an existential struggle for survival and b) were getting them all gratis would expend them at that rate.
But you're correct to observe that's there's a limit and they are probably going to run NATO dry quite soon.
Pre-Granby the Milan allocation was one missile per pl member per year.
On Granby pre-deployment 30-40 per day were fired per platoon.
I expect that with further fines likely, the may elections which look very difficult for the party, and the Sue Gray report Boris greatest moment of peril will arrive in may and june
I hope that the party then takes decisive action and elects a new leader
Most of the candidates are corrupted by association with Johnson, though. Wallace has, after all, served in the Cabinet. Hunt scrapped our stock of PPE, or as good as. To name but two.
You could apply the same logic to Starmer and his cabinet who all campaigned to elect Corbyn
Corbyn might be mistaken, but, AFAIK, he is not dishonest. Indeed, it's his honesty about his views which get's him into bother with the Right.
Corbyn is in a different league of unacceptability and he is rejected by far more than the right, unless you think Starmer is on the right
You and I are never going to agree about Corbyn, of course. However, I would rather have had hime, with all his baggage, as PM than Johnson. The nation was offered a poor choice in both 2017 and 2019.
Really - are you saying you would rather have Corbyn dealing with war in Ukraine?
TBH, I'm not aware of any statements he has made about Ukraine. Has he made any?
He would have invited Putin to no 10
Rather than taking his money for years as Boris and Tories have been doing
The most ridiculous thing about that ridiculous Daily Mail front page is the claim that Johnson ate a salad at the party. As if!
That said, if there was food to eat it was not an impromptu gathering, was it?
The odd thing about the Mail headline if it was intended to shore up the PM is that it's so cack-handed. The reason PR companies advise a fullsome apology at the first whiff of trouble is because it works
The alternatives 'It wasn't me guv' or cringe worthy excuses were ditched years ago as they give the story legs and remove sympathy
I had to look at the Mail front twice - my initial reaction was that it was taking the piss, as some of it could be off the next Eye front page. Always a bad sign when one can't instantly tell satire from reality.
I expect that with further fines likely, the may elections which look very difficult for the party, and the Sue Gray report Boris greatest moment of peril will arrive in may and june
I hope that the party then takes decisive action and elects a new leader
Most of the candidates are corrupted by association with Johnson, though. Wallace has, after all, served in the Cabinet. Hunt scrapped our stock of PPE, or as good as. To name but two.
You could apply the same logic to Starmer and his cabinet who all campaigned to elect Corbyn
Corbyn might be mistaken, but, AFAIK, he is not dishonest. Indeed, it's his honesty about his views which get's him into bother with the Right.
Corbyn is in a different league of unacceptability and he is rejected by far more than the right, unless you think Starmer is on the right
You and I are never going to agree about Corbyn, of course. However, I would rather have had hime, with all his baggage, as PM than Johnson. The nation was offered a poor choice in both 2017 and 2019.
Really - are you saying you would rather have Corbyn dealing with war in Ukraine?
TBH, I'm not aware of any statements he has made about Ukraine. Has he made any?
I expect that with further fines likely, the may elections which look very difficult for the party, and the Sue Gray report Boris greatest moment of peril will arrive in may and june
I hope that the party then takes decisive action and elects a new leader
Most of the candidates are corrupted by association with Johnson, though. Wallace has, after all, served in the Cabinet. Hunt scrapped our stock of PPE, or as good as. To name but two.
You could apply the same logic to Starmer and his cabinet who all campaigned to elect Corbyn
Corbyn might be mistaken, but, AFAIK, he is not dishonest. Indeed, it's his honesty about his views which get's him into bother with the Right.
Corbyn is in a different league of unacceptability and he is rejected by far more than the right, unless you think Starmer is on the right
You and I are never going to agree about Corbyn, of course. However, I would rather have had hime, with all his baggage, as PM than Johnson. The nation was offered a poor choice in both 2017 and 2019.
Really - are you saying you would rather have Corbyn dealing with war in Ukraine?
Yes I would in a heartbeat. Boris is doing f all other than letting weapons be sent over, a child could do that.
As for Boris, I'm with @Fishing - of all the things to get rid of him for this seems at the more trivial end. But then I'm a sucker for a crooked tie and those hang dog eyes. I can't rouse myself to get outraged by him having a birthday cake on his birthday at the office (yes and I know many thousands couldn't go to the funeral of their loved ones) but then perhaps that's just because I thought those laws were absurd and didn't follow them all myself so it just seems like sensible behaviour.
I think also @MarqueeMark had it right in his post. He defeated Corbyn, he did get Brexit done, which is what he was elected to do, and then he lied and broke the law and hence he should go. Not sure the mechanism, that said. Perhaps the voters in 2024 and @MM I will absolutely take your bet that he will be there at that time leading the Cons. A fiver to the other's favourite charity.
Tories really have hyped Corbyn up to be some sort of supervillain. It’s helps them soothe their conscience and avoid dealing with the fact they stuck Boris in number 10 and went a bit UKIPy. Today the Tories are basically as extreme as what they criticise. Just in a different direction and arguably more so than Corbyn on key points, who in many ways was very conservative.
I expect that with further fines likely, the may elections which look very difficult for the party, and the Sue Gray report Boris greatest moment of peril will arrive in may and june
I hope that the party then takes decisive action and elects a new leader
Most of the candidates are corrupted by association with Johnson, though. Wallace has, after all, served in the Cabinet. Hunt scrapped our stock of PPE, or as good as. To name but two.
You could apply the same logic to Starmer and his cabinet who all campaigned to elect Corbyn
Corbyn might be mistaken, but, AFAIK, he is not dishonest. Indeed, it's his honesty about his views which get's him into bother with the Right.
Corbyn is in a different league of unacceptability and he is rejected by far more than the right, unless you think Starmer is on the right
You and I are never going to agree about Corbyn, of course. However, I would rather have had hime, with all his baggage, as PM than Johnson. The nation was offered a poor choice in both 2017 and 2019.
Really - are you saying you would rather have Corbyn dealing with war in Ukraine?
TBH, I'm not aware of any statements he has made about Ukraine. Has he made any?
The horrific discovery of mass graves in Bucha must be investigated and those responsible held accountable.
There must be an urgent and immediate ceasefire in Ukraine to end the bloodshed that has already taken so many lives. https://t.co/E6xsvPtqaj
That’s still ambiguous. He’s saying ‘those responsible’ and even Lavrov has said that.
The point he needs to make is that ‘those responsible’ were Russian soldiers there on the orders of his admirees in the Russian government.
What is all this about Corbyn and using him as an excuse for law-breakers and incompetents? It's not as if he is actually the alternative to Mr J, is he? He's not even a Labour MP. This is like saying vote Tory in case you get Jo Swinson or Michael Foot.
This is getting tiresome now. Most normal Conservative voters are desperate to move on. It will be forgotten again when the Tories end up level pegging with Labour in the local elections and then all the heat will be on Starmer.
The most ridiculous thing about that ridiculous Daily Mail front page is the claim that Johnson ate a salad at the party. As if!
That said, if there was food to eat it was not an impromptu gathering, was it?
The odd thing about the Mail headline if it was intended to shore up the PM is that it's so cack-handed. The reason PR companies advise a fullsome apology at the first whiff of trouble is because it works
The alternatives 'It wasn't me guv' or cringe worthy excuses were ditched years ago as they give the story legs and remove sympathy
"I couldn't have been at the party as I was caught on CCTV running over an old lady in my 4x4 at the time in question."
I expect that with further fines likely, the may elections which look very difficult for the party, and the Sue Gray report Boris greatest moment of peril will arrive in may and june
I hope that the party then takes decisive action and elects a new leader
Most of the candidates are corrupted by association with Johnson, though. Wallace has, after all, served in the Cabinet. Hunt scrapped our stock of PPE, or as good as. To name but two.
You could apply the same logic to Starmer and his cabinet who all campaigned to elect Corbyn
Corbyn might be mistaken, but, AFAIK, he is not dishonest. Indeed, it's his honesty about his views which get's him into bother with the Right.
Corbyn is in a different league of unacceptability and he is rejected by far more than the right, unless you think Starmer is on the right
You and I are never going to agree about Corbyn, of course. However, I would rather have had hime, with all his baggage, as PM than Johnson. The nation was offered a poor choice in both 2017 and 2019.
Really - are you saying you would rather have Corbyn dealing with war in Ukraine?
Yes I would in a heartbeat. Boris is doing f all other than letting weapons be sent over, a child could do that.
And Corbyn would likely have prevented it.
Speculation nigel, not that I had any regard for Corbyn
This is getting tiresome now. Most normal Conservative voters are desperate to move on. It will be forgotten again when the Tories end up level pegging with Labour in the local elections and then all the heat will be on Starmer.
This is getting tiresome now. Most normal Conservative voters are desperate to move on. It will be forgotten again when the Tories end up level pegging with Labour in the local elections and then all the heat will be on Starmer.
The local elections are in 3 weeks time and I suspect there will be at least one more round of FPN including another for Boris...
I expect that with further fines likely, the may elections which look very difficult for the party, and the Sue Gray report Boris greatest moment of peril will arrive in may and june
I hope that the party then takes decisive action and elects a new leader
Most of the candidates are corrupted by association with Johnson, though. Wallace has, after all, served in the Cabinet. Hunt scrapped our stock of PPE, or as good as. To name but two.
You could apply the same logic to Starmer and his cabinet who all campaigned to elect Corbyn
Corbyn might be mistaken, but, AFAIK, he is not dishonest. Indeed, it's his honesty about his views which get's him into bother with the Right.
Corbyn is in a different league of unacceptability and he is rejected by far more than the right, unless you think Starmer is on the right
You and I are never going to agree about Corbyn, of course. However, I would rather have had hime, with all his baggage, as PM than Johnson. The nation was offered a poor choice in both 2017 and 2019.
Really - are you saying you would rather have Corbyn dealing with war in Ukraine?
TBH, I'm not aware of any statements he has made about Ukraine. Has he made any?
The horrific discovery of mass graves in Bucha must be investigated and those responsible held accountable.
There must be an urgent and immediate ceasefire in Ukraine to end the bloodshed that has already taken so many lives. https://t.co/E6xsvPtqaj
That’s still ambiguous. He’s saying ‘those responsible’ and even Lavrov has said that.
The point he needs to make is that ‘those responsible’ were Russian soldiers there on the orders of his admirees in the Russian government.
What is all this about Corbyn and using him as an excuse for law-breakers and incompetents? It's not as if he is actually the alternative to Mr J, is he? He's not even a Labour MP. This is like saying vote Tory in case you get Jo Swinson or Michael Foot.
Hey, I’m hardly using him as an excuse. I’m just pointing out he’s not honest and he’s alarmingly pro-Russian.
That doesn’t mean Johnson shouldn’t go. He should have gone yesterday (arguably a lot sooner).
I expect that with further fines likely, the may elections which look very difficult for the party, and the Sue Gray report Boris greatest moment of peril will arrive in may and june
I hope that the party then takes decisive action and elects a new leader
Most of the candidates are corrupted by association with Johnson, though. Wallace has, after all, served in the Cabinet. Hunt scrapped our stock of PPE, or as good as. To name but two.
You could apply the same logic to Starmer and his cabinet who all campaigned to elect Corbyn
Corbyn might be mistaken, but, AFAIK, he is not dishonest. Indeed, it's his honesty about his views which get's him into bother with the Right.
Corbyn is in a different league of unacceptability and he is rejected by far more than the right, unless you think Starmer is on the right
You and I are never going to agree about Corbyn, of course. However, I would rather have had hime, with all his baggage, as PM than Johnson. The nation was offered a poor choice in both 2017 and 2019.
Really - are you saying you would rather have Corbyn dealing with war in Ukraine?
TBH, I'm not aware of any statements he has made about Ukraine. Has he made any?
The horrific discovery of mass graves in Bucha must be investigated and those responsible held accountable.
There must be an urgent and immediate ceasefire in Ukraine to end the bloodshed that has already taken so many lives. https://t.co/E6xsvPtqaj
That’s still ambiguous. He’s saying ‘those responsible’ and even Lavrov has said that.
The point he needs to make is that ‘those responsible’ were Russian soldiers there on the orders of his admirees in the Russian government.
What is all this about Corbyn and using him as an excuse for law-breakers and incompetents? It's not as if he is actually the alternative to Mr J, is he? He's not even a Labour MP. This is like saying vote Tory in case you get Jo Swinson or Michael Foot.
Hey, I’m hardly using him as an excuse. I’m just pointing out he’s not honest and he’s alarmingly pro-Russian.
That doesn’t mean Johnson shouldn’t go. He should have gone yesterday (arguably a lot sooner).
Sorry, was commenting as much on the widerr sentiment on PB passim as anything else. Apols.
BTW has nobody commented on the DT front page? It's rather wimpish. Neither fish nor fowl.
This is getting tiresome now. Most normal Conservative voters are desperate to move on. It will be forgotten again when the Tories end up level pegging with Labour in the local elections and then all the heat will be on Starmer.
Lol!
Yes, obeying the law is terribly tiresome, James. Think I'll not bother today.
The serious point however that it all speaks of a sense of entitlement amongst Boris and his associates. The laws don't apply to them. Laws are for little people like you and me.
This is getting tiresome now. Most normal Conservative voters are desperate to move on. It will be forgotten again when the Tories end up level pegging with Labour in the local elections and then all the heat will be on Starmer.
I suspect you may be correct until the final seven words. A no score draw in May is where I am leaning. With some wild local swings for each to point to
How are you feeling about it in the cold light of day. Not happy I would imagine, but in a difficult position.
Why?
He wanted BoZo to be PM.
BoZo is still PM and showing no signs of leaving.
Party on, dudes!
The punishment for Johnson's most devoted postulants is having Johnson as PM.
He did the job. Kept Corbyn out of power with an 80 seat majority - smashed him to the point where that strand of political thinking that so nearly took hold is now only espoused by a handful of proponents. And them, like Corbyn, now outside the Labour Party. (The silenced STOP THE WAR Coalition over Ukraine is especially pleasing, given how galling it must be for Soviet fan-bois to have to suck up. Still, a bit difficult when they have been on a Red Army-style orgy of raping, looting and pillaging. The poster boy for Russian Armed Forces is now captioned: WANTED FOR PAEDO-RAPE AND MURDER.
He did the job of getting Brexit through a previously stalemated political establishment.
He did the job of getting England through an upper-quartile outcome on Covid.
Now time to turf him out before the next election. Use him and abuse him, as he would one of his romantic dalliances. He has served his purpose; onwards and upwards. He could hardly complain.
And turf him out before the next election those Conservative MPs otherwise consigned to the dole inevitably will.
Every one who has put their name to that STW statement is a traitor.
The right to express contrary and unpopular opinions is one of our great strengths. A distinct advantage we have over Russia.
That's right, and I've been defending Conservative MPs recently for doing exactly that. Mccarthyite posts like tlg's tempt me to sign the statement myself just to assert my right to do so. (Possibly I should read it properly first though!)
When I worked in Switzerland, the staff association tried to expel me for successfully supporting the trade union list in internal elections. A delegation of very senior managers, I think all of them small-c conservative, informed them that if they went ahead, they would all join the union themselves, just to make the point that intimidation against freedom of expression and association could not be tolerated. The same applies now, to every part of the political spectrum.
Just had a look at the comments on the Mail. The massively best rated are hostile to Mr J (complaints re cheating, lies, not actually at war, pretend Churchill (and someone has spotted the logical implication there re Chamberlain), etc), the worst rated ones are in support (opposition leaders being malicious to poor Mr J, leave him alone cos of the war, other people did it etc.)
This is getting tiresome now. Most normal Conservative voters are desperate to move on. It will be forgotten again when the Tories end up level pegging with Labour in the local elections and then all the heat will be on Starmer.
Lol!
Yes, obeying the law is terribly tiresome, James. Think I'll not bother today.
The serious point however that it all speaks of a sense of entitlement amongst Boris and his associates. The laws don't apply to them. Laws are for little people like you and me.
They think we are mugs. I'm not though. Are you?
It's not just a question of the law.
It is about a public duty to set an example.
The Queen didn't sit alone simply because it was the law. She did it because she felt she should set an example and that was her honourable duty. Like her father during the War.
How are you feeling about it in the cold light of day. Not happy I would imagine, but in a difficult position.
Why?
He wanted BoZo to be PM.
BoZo is still PM and showing no signs of leaving.
Party on, dudes!
The punishment for Johnson's most devoted postulants is having Johnson as PM.
He did the job. Kept Corbyn out of power with an 80 seat majority - smashed him to the point where that strand of political thinking that so nearly took hold is now only espoused by a handful of proponents. And them, like Corbyn, now outside the Labour Party. (The silenced STOP THE WAR Coalition over Ukraine is especially pleasing, given how galling it must be for Soviet fan-bois to have to suck up. Still, a bit difficult when they have been on a Red Army-style orgy of raping, looting and pillaging. The poster boy for Russian Armed Forces is now captioned: WANTED FOR PAEDO-RAPE AND MURDER.
He did the job of getting Brexit through a previously stalemated political establishment.
He did the job of getting England through an upper-quartile outcome on Covid.
Now time to turf him out before the next election. Use him and abuse him, as he would one of his romantic dalliances. He has served his purpose; onwards and upwards. He could hardly complain.
And turf him out before the next election those Conservative MPs otherwise consigned to the dole inevitably will.
Except they won’t.
The key point is that Boris is safe until they find a replacement. Right now there isn’t one and Boris is adept at killing rivals careers. He knows all the tricks, he wrote the book. Boris is safe for now.
How are you feeling about it in the cold light of day. Not happy I would imagine, but in a difficult position.
Why?
He wanted BoZo to be PM.
BoZo is still PM and showing no signs of leaving.
Party on, dudes!
The punishment for Johnson's most devoted postulants is having Johnson as PM.
He did the job. Kept Corbyn out of power with an 80 seat majority - smashed him to the point where that strand of political thinking that so nearly took hold is now only espoused by a handful of proponents. And them, like Corbyn, now outside the Labour Party. (The silenced STOP THE WAR Coalition over Ukraine is especially pleasing, given how galling it must be for Soviet fan-bo
He did the job of getting Brexit through a previously stalemated political establishment.
He did the job of getting England through an upper-quartile outcome on Covid.
Now time to turf him out before the next election. Use him and abuse him, as he would one of his romantic dalliances. He has served his purpose; onwards and upwards. He could hardly complain.
And turf him out before the next election those Conservative MPs otherwise consigned to the dole inevitably will.
Except they won’t.
I tend to agree. They are elected representatives and might well decide to keep Boris in place and let's not forget Boris is a huge electoral operator.
If they do then that's fine - it will be the will of the people. And the people can cast their vote in 2024 to make their preferences known.
This is getting tiresome now. Most normal Conservative voters are desperate to move on. It will be forgotten again when the Tories end up level pegging with Labour in the local elections and then all the heat will be on Starmer.
The local elections are in 3 weeks time and I suspect there will be at least one more round of FPN including another for Boris...
Rumour is that Sue Grey will make an appearance just before postal ballots go out.
Tories really have hyped Corbyn up to be some sort of supervillain. It’s helps them soothe their conscience and avoid dealing with the fact they stuck Boris in number 10 and went a bit UKIPy. Today the Tories are basically as extreme as what they criticise. Just in a different direction and arguably more so than Corbyn on key points, who in many ways was very conservative.
It's an interesting phenomenon.
I am by no means a fan of Corbyn and I am, in all honesty, glad he is not prime minister at a time when Ukraine needed immediate and wholehearted military assistance (PM Corbyn's principles would have made it very hard for him to act promptly and without caveats).
And his hangers-on were at least as mediocre as the current mob.
But if you look at his actual policies they were not especially radical - certainly by comparison with Blair and Cameron I. Even the much derided headline grabbers were in fact quite practical measures that future governments of any complexion could consider. I'm thinking of aspects of the energy and environmental policy; or the sops to trade union "involvement" - which to be fair were balanced by sops to business too; and far from the "fuck business" attitude of the current Government
The issue is that the window has moved so far to the right that those policies *look* radical.
As I say, I didn't vote for him. And I probably wouldn't again despite everything we've seen since, but he was remarkably cautious for a "once in a generation" left-wing leader of a major party.
This is getting tiresome now. Most normal Conservative voters are desperate to move on. It will be forgotten again when the Tories end up level pegging with Labour in the local elections and then all the heat will be on Starmer.
Lol!
Yes, obeying the law is terribly tiresome, James. Think I'll not bother today.
The serious point however that it all speaks of a sense of entitlement amongst Boris and his associates. The laws don't apply to them. Laws are for little people like you and me.
They think we are mugs. I'm not though. Are you?
It's not just a question of the law.
It is about a public duty to set an example.
The Queen didn't sit alone simply because it was the law. She did it because she felt she should set an example and that was her honourable duty. Like her father during the War.
Johnson and co have no concept of the word.
I was once asked what would happen if the Queen broke the law.
I said she would have to give up the throne, like her uncle.
But, I added, because of who she is, what she is and how she sees her role, she would never do it.
On twitter Robert Colvile is rightfully pointing out that Bozo and Sunak have been fined for the birthday cake that they didn't even know about.
Which is such a low bar and so early on in the history of parties that there could still be a lot of fines still to come.
Boris may have survived the first FPN but can he survive a second one or a fifth?
Why not?
Once you establish the principle that an FPN is no big deal, and that it's OK to mislead Parliament, five is no big deal either. Five times nothing is still nothing. There's no threshold where two parties are OK, but three aren't.
If he's still there in 2024, the opposition campaign writes itself, but unless the Conservative backbenchers find a spine they were selected not to have, they go down with the good ship Bozza.
It's the local council candidates I feel sorry for.
It's a sad truth that most MPs don't really care much about council candidates - they wish them well and all that, happy to do a little canvassing with them now and then, but they're out there with preservation of canals and preventing metorite strikes - very important, of course, but not front of mind.
This is getting tiresome now. Most normal Conservative voters are desperate to move on. It will be forgotten again when the Tories end up level pegging with Labour in the local elections and then all the heat will be on Starmer.
I suspect when you have your performance review by CCHQ they may suggest your posts lack imagination.
This is getting tiresome now. Most normal Conservative voters are desperate to move on. It will be forgotten again when the Tories end up level pegging with Labour in the local elections and then all the heat will be on Starmer.
Lol!
Yes, obeying the law is terribly tiresome, James. Think I'll not bother today.
The serious point however that it all speaks of a sense of entitlement amongst Boris and his associates. The laws don't apply to them. Laws are for little people like you and me.
They think we are mugs. I'm not though. Are you?
It's not just a question of the law.
It is about a public duty to set an example.
The Queen didn't sit alone simply because it was the law. She did it because she felt she should set an example and that was her honourable duty. Like her father during the War.
Johnson and co have no concept of the word.
I was once asked what would happen if the Queen broke the law.
I said she would have to give up the throne, like her uncle.
But, I added, because of who she is, what she is and how she sees her role, she would never do it.
When the public hear Johnson and his cheerleaders say he must stay on because of the Ukraine war, do they add rank hypocrisy to the callousness of his original offence? Or do they see a great leader protecting the free world from the Russian aggression?
Actually I'm not sure they're even trying to justify this to others. I think they're trying to convince themselves.
People may think that when Zelensky praises Boris as a great friend of Ukraine, this is for some reason more important than attending a party for ten minutes in his own garden.
Bizarre train of logic, I know.
Thatcher's international standing was godlike by comparison with Boris's, and that didn't stop her being toppled.
Very true.
There needs to be an election by the end of 2023. My analysis and prediction is it can all happen very quickly as soon as the bad local election results are in next month.
In terms of managing expectations, what sort of figure is not very spinnable - minus 500 councillors?
And what is the current expectation for the size of Tory losses? Are we due any sort of polling, or any predictive modelling?
I'm thinking the Tories will lose 200 councillors although I may have underestimated the no. of all out elections so there is potential for more damage on a bad night.
I agree with AndyJS that a Lab lead of 5% or less is perfectly spinnable for the Conservatives.
EdM led by 7% in 2012 and Kinnock by 7% in 1985.
It was Labour's 11% lead in 1990 which put the pressure on Thatcher.
Yes I am aware of all that although I notice John Smith only led by 8% in 1993 which is perhaps a good comparison as well (although that was county councils and Wales). I am only confident of Labour doing 'well' in Northern Met districts and Wales and I think Bury is the only all up Met council?
I also only expect a modest Labour gain of about 3% in Scotland although Lab could narrowly come 2nd in cllrs there now.
Honestly I think Labour would have to win Plymouth and Swindon and make proper inroads in the West Midlands to put proper pressure on the gvt which I don't see happening.
I think Scottish Labour jumping up from third to second in May is now nailed on. Their recent polling has been great, whereas the Scottish Tories appear to be back down to close to core vote territory.
Further, you’ve got to remember that SLab is the least Unionist of the 3 Unionist parties, and hence the most transfer-friendly in the Single Transferable Vote election in three weeks time. A typical pro-independence voter might rank candidates 1 SNP 2 Grn 3 Lab 4 LD 5 Con. In tight contests that will play out in Sarwar’s favour.
25 SLab candidates in May are pro-independence or pro IndyRef2. A remarkable statistic when you consider the official party line and vitriol these strong individuals have to put up with. As soon as the lock is removed, their numbers will quickly swell. Labour are the final bastion holding the Union together, and their resolve is wavering.
Really interesting Stuart.
Assuming Labour can't win outright in GE2024 (they might) and assuming they don't have enough for power with the LibDems alone then an agreement with the SNP at Westminster would be fascinating. It would make the SNP's life a lot easier if they didn't have to fight in the courts to get indyref2 so there's a lot in it for them and I'm fairly sure the two parties could agree to work together, but on the question of independence campaign as free agents. That wouldn't be the first time pragmatism like that has happened.
I don't really understand to be honest why Labour and the LibDems are officially so unionist.
Let Scotland have another vote and decide for themselves! What's wrong with being democratic?
Good question. And they might go for Ref2 as a policy. It may gain votes and perhaps not lose a lot.
The case for status quo unionism is thin, and has been for years. In a secular age there is no decent case for the island of Ireland not being unified, and Brexit amplifies this. But the Ireland border problem emphasises how difficult the Scottish/English border problem would be if it became an EU border. (I can see Scotland from where I live so am biased, but it is still objectively true).
The border, currency and economy issues make it impossible (IMHO) that a Ref2 can be won by the Nats. But it would be a lengthy and divisive distraction.
Tactically (and I want Labour to lead the next government, I thing I have not wanted for decades) allowing Ref2 would probably be the best policy, on the private basis that it coud not win, especially if Labour were in power.
And after RefBrexit obvs nothing could possibly go wrong.
Ok then, your scenario:
Outcome next UK GE: NOM and PM Starmer
Starmer “allows” (your word) IndyRef2
No wins again because Scotland are an economic basket case, the Irish are crap and the new Labour-led minority government in London is competent, effective and popular.
Sending hundreds of weapons to Ukraine seems to be doing nothing but feeding the fire. There seems to be only one thing that makes a country secure and that is ownership of a nuclear weapon. If 'The West' want to deter Russia's invasion give Ukraine the ultimate deterrant. Ten nuclear warheads with instructions.
This is getting tiresome now. Most normal Conservative voters are desperate to move on. It will be forgotten again when the Tories end up level pegging with Labour in the local elections and then all the heat will be on Starmer.
I suspect you may be correct until the final seven words. A no score draw in May is where I am leaning. With some wild local swings for each to point to
"Most normal Conservative voters are desperate to move on." - most normal [as opposed to activist/engaged] Conservative voters aren't happy (according to the polling yesterday). That makes them more likely to stay at home.
Most normal Labour voters are angry at the government. Which encourages them to pop along to the ballot box and give them a gentle kicking on the way to work. I don't see how this translates into your Local Election scenario.
(Apologies @dixiedean - obviously I am replying one message upthread!)
I expect that with further fines likely, the may elections which look very difficult for the party, and the Sue Gray report Boris greatest moment of peril will arrive in may and june
I hope that the party then takes decisive action and elects a new leader
Most of the candidates are corrupted by association with Johnson, though. Wallace has, after all, served in the Cabinet. Hunt scrapped our stock of PPE, or as good as. To name but two.
You could apply the same logic to Starmer and his cabinet who all campaigned to elect Corbyn
Corbyn might be mistaken, but, AFAIK, he is not dishonest. Indeed, it's his honesty about his views which get's him into bother with the Right.
Corbyn is in a different league of unacceptability and he is rejected by far more than the right, unless you think Starmer is on the right
You and I are never going to agree about Corbyn, of course. However, I would rather have had hime, with all his baggage, as PM than Johnson. The nation was offered a poor choice in both 2017 and 2019.
Really - are you saying you would rather have Corbyn dealing with war in Ukraine?
Yes I would in a heartbeat. Boris is doing f all other than letting weapons be sent over, a child could do that.
And Corbyn would likely have prevented it.
Speculation nigel, not that I had any regard for Corbyn
Hence 'likely', malcolm - I think it's a reasonable prediction.
As for Boris, I'm with @Fishing - of all the things to get rid of him for this seems at the more trivial end. But then I'm a sucker for a crooked tie and those hang dog eyes. I can't rouse myself to get outraged by him having a birthday cake on his birthday at the office (yes and I know many thousands couldn't go to the funeral of their loved ones) but then perhaps that's just because I thought those laws were absurd and didn't follow them all myself so it just seems like sensible behaviour.
I think also @MarqueeMark had it right in his post. He defeated Corbyn, he did get Brexit done, which is what he was elected to do, and then he lied and broke the law and hence he should go. Not sure the mechanism, that said. Perhaps the voters in 2024 and @MM I will absolutely take your bet that he will be there at that time leading the Cons. A fiver to the other's favourite charity.
You're on. £5 from the loser to the winner's charity of choice. The bet: MarqueeMark says Boris Johnson will not lead the Conservatives into the next general election. Topping that he will.
Neither is it true that the fine is comparable to a speeding ticket, or past occasions when ministers did not resign after being fined. The PM imposed these extraordinary laws, implored us to abide by them, broke them himself, and then lied about doing so. Neither is it right to argue that the fine does not confirm guilt: in paying the fine and not challenging it the PM is accepting the verdict of the police.
This is getting tiresome now. Most normal Conservative voters are desperate to move on. It will be forgotten again when the Tories end up level pegging with Labour in the local elections and then all the heat will be on Starmer.
Lol!
Yes, obeying the law is terribly tiresome, James. Think I'll not bother today.
The serious point however that it all speaks of a sense of entitlement amongst Boris and his associates. The laws don't apply to them. Laws are for little people like you and me.
They think we are mugs. I'm not though. Are you?
It's not just a question of the law.
It is about a public duty to set an example.
The Queen didn't sit alone simply because it was the law. She did it because she felt she should set an example and that was her honourable duty. Like her father during the War.
Johnson and co have no concept of the word.
I was once asked what would happen if the Queen broke the law.
I said she would have to give up the throne, like her uncle.
But, I added, because of who she is, what she is and how she sees her role, she would never do it.
Would that include being done for speeding?
Regina non potest peccare.
In practice I don't believe she drives on public roads to prevent exactly this kind of issue arising
This is getting tiresome now. Most normal Conservative voters are desperate to move on. It will be forgotten again when the Tories end up level pegging with Labour in the local elections and then all the heat will be on Starmer.
I suspect you may be correct until the final seven words. A no score draw in May is where I am leaning. With some wild local swings for each to point to
"Most normal Conservative voters are desperate to move on." - most normal [as opposed to activist/engaged] Conservative voters aren't happy (according to the polling yesterday). That makes them more likely to stay at home.
Most normal Labour voters are angry at the government. Which encourages them to pop along to the ballot box and give them a gentle kicking on the way to work. I don't see how this translates into your Local Election scenario.
As I noted a moment ago, the Mail Online comments are v. hostile to Mr J. Which supports your scenario ...
This is getting tiresome now. Most normal Conservative voters are desperate to move on. It will be forgotten again when the Tories end up level pegging with Labour in the local elections and then all the heat will be on Starmer.
The local elections are in 3 weeks time and I suspect there will be at least one more round of FPN including another for Boris...
I really would not want to be a conservative candidate in this situation
When the public hear Johnson and his cheerleaders say he must stay on because of the Ukraine war, do they add rank hypocrisy to the callousness of his original offence? Or do they see a great leader protecting the free world from the Russian aggression?
Actually I'm not sure they're even trying to justify this to others. I think they're trying to convince themselves.
People may think that when Zelensky praises Boris as a great friend of Ukraine, this is for some reason more important than attending a party for ten minutes in his own garden.
Bizarre train of logic, I know.
Thatcher's international standing was godlike by comparison with Boris's, and that didn't stop her being toppled.
Very true.
There needs to be an election by the end of 2023. My analysis and prediction is it can all happen very quickly as soon as the bad local election results are in next month.
In terms of managing expectations, what sort of figure is not very spinnable - minus 500 councillors?
And what is the current expectation for the size of Tory losses? Are we due any sort of polling, or any predictive modelling?
I'm thinking the Tories will lose 200 councillors although I may have underestimated the no. of all out elections so there is potential for more damage on a bad night.
I agree with AndyJS that a Lab lead of 5% or less is perfectly spinnable for the Conservatives.
EdM led by 7% in 2012 and Kinnock by 7% in 1985.
It was Labour's 11% lead in 1990 which put the pressure on Thatcher.
Yes I am aware of all that although I notice John Smith only led by 8% in 1993 which is perhaps a good comparison as well (although that was county councils and Wales). I am only confident of Labour doing 'well' in Northern Met districts and Wales and I think Bury is the only all up Met council?
I also only expect a modest Labour gain of about 3% in Scotland although Lab could narrowly come 2nd in cllrs there now.
Honestly I think Labour would have to win Plymouth and Swindon and make proper inroads in the West Midlands to put proper pressure on the gvt which I don't see happening.
I think Scottish Labour jumping up from third to second in May is now nailed on. Their recent polling has been great, whereas the Scottish Tories appear to be back down to close to core vote territory.
Further, you’ve got to remember that SLab is the least Unionist of the 3 Unionist parties, and hence the most transfer-friendly in the Single Transferable Vote election in three weeks time. A typical pro-independence voter might rank candidates 1 SNP 2 Grn 3 Lab 4 LD 5 Con. In tight contests that will play out in Sarwar’s favour.
25 SLab candidates in May are pro-independence or pro IndyRef2. A remarkable statistic when you consider the official party line and vitriol these strong individuals have to put up with. As soon as the lock is removed, their numbers will quickly swell. Labour are the final bastion holding the Union together, and their resolve is wavering.
Really interesting Stuart.
Assuming Labour can't win outright in GE2024 (they might) and assuming they don't have enough for power with the LibDems alone then an agreement with the SNP at Westminster would be fascinating. It would make the SNP's life a lot easier if they didn't have to fight in the courts to get indyref2 so there's a lot in it for them and I'm fairly sure the two parties could agree to work together, but on the question of independence campaign as free agents. That wouldn't be the first time pragmatism like that has happened.
I don't really understand to be honest why Labour and the LibDems are officially so unionist.
Let Scotland have another vote and decide for themselves! What's wrong with being democratic?
Good question. And they might go for Ref2 as a policy. It may gain votes and perhaps not lose a lot.
The case for status quo unionism is thin, and has been for years. In a secular age there is no decent case for the island of Ireland not being unified, and Brexit amplifies this. But the Ireland border problem emphasises how difficult the Scottish/English border problem would be if it became an EU border. (I can see Scotland from where I live so am biased, but it is still objectively true).
The border, currency and economy issues make it impossible (IMHO) that a Ref2 can be won by the Nats. But it would be a lengthy and divisive distraction.
Tactically (and I want Labour to lead the next government, I thing I have not wanted for decades) allowing Ref2 would probably be the best policy, on the private basis that it coud not win, especially if Labour were in power.
And after RefBrexit obvs nothing could possibly go wrong.
Ok then, your scenario:
Outcome next UK GE: NOM and PM Starmer
Starmer “allows” (your word) IndyRef2
No wins again because Scotland are an economic basket case, the Irish are crap and the new Labour-led minority government in London is competent, effective and popular.
It doesn’t take a genius to spot the flaw.
Why do you think Scotland is an economic basket case? Which Irish are Crap? (your words not mine).
This is getting tiresome now. Most normal Conservative voters are desperate to move on. It will be forgotten again when the Tories end up level pegging with Labour in the local elections and then all the heat will be on Starmer.
Lol!
Yes, obeying the law is terribly tiresome, James. Think I'll not bother today.
The serious point however that it all speaks of a sense of entitlement amongst Boris and his associates. The laws don't apply to them. Laws are for little people like you and me.
They think we are mugs. I'm not though. Are you?
It's not just a question of the law.
It is about a public duty to set an example.
The Queen didn't sit alone simply because it was the law. She did it because she felt she should set an example and that was her honourable duty. Like her father during the War.
Johnson and co have no concept of the word.
I was once asked what would happen if the Queen broke the law.
I said she would have to give up the throne, like her uncle.
But, I added, because of who she is, what she is and how she sees her role, she would never do it.
Would that include being done for speeding?
Regina non potest peccare.
In practice I don't believe she drives on public roads to prevent exactly this kind of issue arising
This is getting tiresome now. Most normal Conservative voters are desperate to move on. It will be forgotten again when the Tories end up level pegging with Labour in the local elections and then all the heat will be on Starmer.
Lol!
Yes, obeying the law is terribly tiresome, James. Think I'll not bother today.
The serious point however that it all speaks of a sense of entitlement amongst Boris and his associates. The laws don't apply to them. Laws are for little people like you and me.
They think we are mugs. I'm not though. Are you?
It's not just a question of the law.
It is about a public duty to set an example.
The Queen didn't sit alone simply because it was the law. She did it because she felt she should set an example and that was her honourable duty. Like her father during the War.
Johnson and co have no concept of the word.
I was once asked what would happen if the Queen broke the law.
I said she would have to give up the throne, like her uncle.
But, I added, because of who she is, what she is and how she sees her role, she would never do it.
This is getting tiresome now. Most normal Conservative voters are desperate to move on. It will be forgotten again when the Tories end up level pegging with Labour in the local elections and then all the heat will be on Starmer.
Lol!
Yes, obeying the law is terribly tiresome, James. Think I'll not bother today.
The serious point however that it all speaks of a sense of entitlement amongst Boris and his associates. The laws don't apply to them. Laws are for little people like you and me.
They think we are mugs. I'm not though. Are you?
It's not just a question of the law.
It is about a public duty to set an example.
The Queen didn't sit alone simply because it was the law. She did it because she felt she should set an example and that was her honourable duty. Like her father during the War.
Johnson and co have no concept of the word.
I was once asked what would happen if the Queen broke the law.
I said she would have to give up the throne, like her uncle.
But, I added, because of who she is, what she is and how she sees her role, she would never do it.
Suppose we either get a new, bad, variant, or a different disease (remember we've also had avian flu, swine flu, and SARS in recent history) that's bad.
And then the PM has to tell people to stay at home.
How much moral authority will that plea have from this man?
Sounds a great reason to keep Boris as PM for life to me. When the history is written, there’s a good chance that the adoption of lockdown policies will be seen as the biggest policy error by the developed world since 1914.
This is getting tiresome now. Most normal Conservative voters are desperate to move on. It will be forgotten again when the Tories end up level pegging with Labour in the local elections and then all the heat will be on Starmer.
What would you know about normal? You are a lickspittle. A good little loyalist spin account.
The reality is that YOU are desperate for most people to move on. And there's an easy way for that to happen. Big Dog needs on final trip to the vet and a nice little plot at the bottom of the garden.
As for Boris, I'm with @Fishing - of all the things to get rid of him for this seems at the more trivial end. But then I'm a sucker for a crooked tie and those hang dog eyes. I can't rouse myself to get outraged by him having a birthday cake on his birthday at the office (yes and I know many thousands couldn't go to the funeral of their loved ones) but then perhaps that's just because I thought those laws were absurd and didn't follow them all myself so it just seems like sensible behaviour.
I think also @MarqueeMark had it right in his post. He defeated Corbyn, he did get Brexit done, which is what he was elected to do, and then he lied and broke the law and hence he should go. Not sure the mechanism, that said. Perhaps the voters in 2024 and @MM I will absolutely take your bet that he will be there at that time leading the Cons. A fiver to the other's favourite charity.
You're on. £5 from the loser to the winner's charity of choice. The bet: MarqueeMark says Boris Johnson will not lead the Conservatives into the next general election. Topping that he will.
Sounds good. It's a good emotional hedge for me as I think he should go before then just I can't see it happening.
Comments
I don't think the Tory cult will bin him.
The nation was offered a poor choice in both 2017 and 2019.
Suppose we either get a new, bad, variant, or a different disease (remember we've also had avian flu, swine flu, and SARS in recent history) that's bad.
And then the PM has to tell people to stay at home.
How much moral authority will that plea have from this man?
We all know that Johnson and co are liars, though some seem curiously unbothered about it.
@ozymandias is right though about concentrating on policy in the campaign. Everyone knows Johnsons bad character, its his bad policies that need the scrutiny.
'No other armed forces' isn't entirely correct, since Russia seems to have run through its medium range missiles at an unsustainable rate, too. Not to mention its tanks.
And there are very large stocks of NATO artillery ammo, and medium range AA missiles, which have not been sent to Ukraine.
So whilst Johnson isn't good, and I did not vote for him, I would much rather have him dealing with these external issues than Corbyn, McDonnell and their followers.
If only everyone were so consistent.
And which ends with the following:
"We urge the entire anti-war movement to unite on the basis of challenging the British government’s aggressive posturing and direct its campaigning to that end above all."
No call on Russia to withdraw. To these traitorous fuckwits, it is our fault.
And look at the first name at the bottom...
https://www.stopwar.org.uk/article/list-of-signatories-stop-the-war-statement-on-the-crisis-over-ukraine/
Raising taxes when he explicitly said he wouldn't, on the other hand, I think is sufficient for him to resign. It's a lie that actually matters to people, rather than one about whether he attended a party in his own garden, which doesn't. But he didn't resign, and few seriously called on him to do so iirc.
As I understand it, the laws were framed to save lives and prevent the NHS from collapsing. These were trivial objectives?
Tell me more.
Which is such a low bar and so early on in the history of parties that there could still be a lot of fines still to come.
Boris may have survived the first FPN but can he survive a second one or a fifth?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43380217
This is Corbyns most recent tweet on the subject:
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1511000514292600833?t=QnsFg7bVw9nBE0ZEkk_qhg&s=19
The horrific discovery of mass graves in Bucha must be investigated and those responsible held accountable.
There must be an urgent and immediate ceasefire in Ukraine to end the bloodshed that has already taken so many lives. https://t.co/E6xsvPtqaj
One has to be careful about being wise after the event, but one cannot say that Ukraine has always been whiter than white.
However, there's no doubt whatsoever that the Russian state and particularly the Russian army has behaved appallingly.
If they were firing that number, and knocking out a handful of tanks each day, it would be a problem, but I suspect the effectiveness to be rather better than that.
Your currency just got seriously debased.
1 million Scott_P retweets < 1 gold sovereign
https://twitter.com/RobDotHutton/status/1514140988863918083
The case for status quo unionism is thin, and has been for years. In a secular age there is no decent case for the island of Ireland not being unified, and Brexit amplifies this. But the Ireland border problem emphasises how difficult the Scottish/English border problem would be if it became an EU border. (I can see Scotland from where I live so am biased, but it is still objectively true).
The border, currency and economy issues make it impossible (IMHO) that a Ref2 can be won by the Nats. But it would be a lengthy and divisive distraction.
Tactically (and I want Labour to lead the next government, I thing I have not wanted for decades) allowing Ref2 would probably be the best policy, on the private basis that it coud not win, especially if Labour were in power.
And after RefBrexit obvs nothing could possibly go wrong.
Actually getting dizzy listening to @grantshapps being interviewed by @bbcnickrobinson on @BBCRadio4 #Partygatefines
The alternatives 'It wasn't me guv' or cringe worthy excuses were ditched years ago as they give the story legs and remove sympathy
Once you establish the principle that an FPN is no big deal, and that it's OK to mislead Parliament, five is no big deal either. Five times nothing is still nothing. There's no threshold where two parties are OK, but three aren't.
If he's still there in 2024, the opposition campaign writes itself, but unless the Conservative backbenchers find a spine they were selected not to have, they go down with the good ship Bozza.
It's the local council candidates I feel sorry for.
On Granby pre-deployment 30-40 per day were fired per platoon.
The point he needs to make is that ‘those responsible’ were Russian soldiers there on the orders of his admirees in the Russian government.
A distinct advantage we have over Russia.
I think also @MarqueeMark had it right in his post. He defeated Corbyn, he did get Brexit done, which is what he was elected to do, and then he lied and broke the law and hence he should go. Not sure the mechanism, that said. Perhaps the voters in 2024 and @MM I will absolutely take your bet that he will be there at that time leading the Cons. A fiver to the other's favourite charity.
That doesn’t mean Johnson shouldn’t go. He should have gone yesterday (arguably a lot sooner).
BTW has nobody commented on the DT front page? It's rather wimpish. Neither fish nor fowl.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-61088948
Yes, obeying the law is terribly tiresome, James. Think I'll not bother today.
The serious point however that it all speaks of a sense of entitlement amongst Boris and his associates. The laws don't apply to them. Laws are for little people like you and me.
They think we are mugs. I'm not though. Are you?
A no score draw in May is where I am leaning. With some wild local swings for each to point to
When I worked in Switzerland, the staff association tried to expel me for successfully supporting the trade union list in internal elections. A delegation of very senior managers, I think all of them small-c conservative, informed them that if they went ahead, they would all join the union themselves, just to make the point that intimidation against freedom of expression and association could not be tolerated. The same applies now, to every part of the political spectrum.
It is about a public duty to set an example.
The Queen didn't sit alone simply because it was the law. She did it because she felt she should set an example and that was her honourable duty. Like her father during the War.
Johnson and co have no concept of the word.
If they do then that's fine - it will be the will of the people. And the people can cast their vote in 2024 to make their preferences known.
Which seems to be where we are with known Johnson attendances at Lockdown parties.
I am by no means a fan of Corbyn and I am, in all honesty, glad he is not prime minister at a time when Ukraine needed immediate and wholehearted military assistance (PM Corbyn's principles would have made it very hard for him to act promptly and without caveats).
And his hangers-on were at least as mediocre as the current mob.
But if you look at his actual policies they were not especially radical - certainly by comparison with Blair and Cameron I. Even the much derided headline grabbers were in fact quite practical measures that future governments of any complexion could consider. I'm thinking of aspects of the energy and environmental policy; or the sops to trade union "involvement" - which to be fair were balanced by sops to business too; and far from the "fuck business" attitude of the current Government
The issue is that the window has moved so far to the right that those policies *look* radical.
As I say, I didn't vote for him. And I probably wouldn't again despite everything we've seen since, but he was remarkably cautious for a "once in a generation" left-wing leader of a major party.
I said she would have to give up the throne, like her uncle.
But, I added, because of who she is, what she is and how she sees her role, she would never do it.
Outcome next UK GE: NOM and PM Starmer
Starmer “allows” (your word) IndyRef2
No wins again because Scotland are an economic basket case, the Irish are crap and the new Labour-led minority government in London is competent, effective and popular.
It doesn’t take a genius to spot the flaw.
Most normal Labour voters are angry at the government. Which encourages them to pop along to the ballot box and give them a gentle kicking on the way to work. I don't see how this translates into your Local Election scenario.
(Apologies @dixiedean - obviously I am replying one message upthread!)
Nick Timothy - DT
In practice I don't believe she drives on public roads to prevent exactly this kind of issue arising
The reality is that YOU are desperate for most people to move on. And there's an easy way for that to happen. Big Dog needs on final trip to the vet and a nice little plot at the bottom of the garden.