The queues we are seeing at the UK's airports currently tell you so much about how crap senior managements often are in the private sector. They took a short-term decision to save money during covid by laying off a shedload of staff and are now inflicting the inevitable long-term consequences of that on their customers. It's the British business malaise laid bear - we are incapable of seeing beyond the end of our noses. We lionise those who cut costs as people who take the hard decisions. But there is nothing tough about doing it. It's easy. Any fool can do it. But there is almost always a price to pay. As ever, the idea that the private sector knows best is revealed by real life to be a load of old pony.
I can understand the need for a business to lay off a chunk of its staff in a downturn. There's no work for you - sorry - so here's some cash to go away and when things pick up replacement hires are easy. Harder to justify if its a megabucks company, much easier if its small and on the brink.
But the play only works if "replacement hires are easy". And what seems to have caught the airport companies with their pants down is the new environment we find ourselves in post-Covid. A whole stack of people - 610k - have decided they may as well stop working completely. Which means big pockets of unfillable jobs in key sectors in certain places.
Which is how we find ourselves here - airports unable to hire the staff they need to function as an airport. As the likes of Manchestoh Airport are council owned and have had months I assume this isn't a salary issue as they must have been offering more and more money to bring in anyone they can get. So its conditions - people just don't want to do the work, don't need to do the work as other jobs available, and likely some could be tempted but shift work and they have kids.
Manchester Airport - to take one example - was not a small business on the brink. It could have kept all its staff on, but chose not to. Because staff are disposable and can easily be replaced. Can't they? Better treatment and relations with staff equals a better job being done equals happier customers. Why haven't companies understood this?
AIUI the problem is the security clearance. They can't start to train till they get it. It takes weeks. By the time it arrives they've found other work.
We have the same with DBR checks. We appoint staff, but they get a job elsewhere before they can start.
The queues we are seeing at the UK's airports currently tell you so much about how crap senior managements often are in the private sector. They took a short-term decision to save money during covid by laying off a shedload of staff and are now inflicting the inevitable long-term consequences of that on their customers. It's the British business malaise laid bear - we are incapable of seeing beyond the end of our noses. We lionise those who cut costs as people who take the hard decisions. But there is nothing tough about doing it. It's easy. Any fool can do it. But there is almost always a price to pay. As ever, the idea that the private sector knows best is revealed by real life to be a load of old pony.
I can understand the need for a business to lay off a chunk of its staff in a downturn. There's no work for you - sorry - so here's some cash to go away and when things pick up replacement hires are easy. Harder to justify if its a megabucks company, much easier if its small and on the brink.
But the play only works if "replacement hires are easy". And what seems to have caught the airport companies with their pants down is the new environment we find ourselves in post-Covid. A whole stack of people - 610k - have decided they may as well stop working completely. Which means big pockets of unfillable jobs in key sectors in certain places.
Which is how we find ourselves here - airports unable to hire the staff they need to function as an airport. As the likes of Manchestoh Airport are council owned and have had months I assume this isn't a salary issue as they must have been offering more and more money to bring in anyone they can get. So its conditions - people just don't want to do the work, don't need to do the work as other jobs available, and likely some could be tempted but shift work and they have kids.
Manchester Airport - to take one example - was not a small business on the brink. It could have kept all its staff on, but chose not to. Because staff are disposable and can easily be replaced. Can't they? Better treatment and relations with staff equals a better job being done equals happier customers. Why haven't companies understood this?
AIUI the problem is the security clearance. They can't start to train till they get it. It takes weeks. By the time it arrives they've found other work.
We have the same with DBR checks. We appoint staff, but they get a job elsewhere before they can start.
Speeding this process up - which shouldn't be difficult - is something really useful that the government could be doing.
The queues we are seeing at the UK's airports currently tell you so much about how crap senior managements often are in the private sector. They took a short-term decision to save money during covid by laying off a shedload of staff and are now inflicting the inevitable long-term consequences of that on their customers. It's the British business malaise laid bear - we are incapable of seeing beyond the end of our noses. We lionise those who cut costs as people who take the hard decisions. But there is nothing tough about doing it. It's easy. Any fool can do it. But there is almost always a price to pay. As ever, the idea that the private sector knows best is revealed by real life to be a load of old pony.
I can understand the need for a business to lay off a chunk of its staff in a downturn. There's no work for you - sorry - so here's some cash to go away and when things pick up replacement hires are easy. Harder to justify if its a megabucks company, much easier if its small and on the brink.
But the play only works if "replacement hires are easy". And what seems to have caught the airport companies with their pants down is the new environment we find ourselves in post-Covid. A whole stack of people - 610k - have decided they may as well stop working completely. Which means big pockets of unfillable jobs in key sectors in certain places.
Which is how we find ourselves here - airports unable to hire the staff they need to function as an airport. As the likes of Manchestoh Airport are council owned and have had months I assume this isn't a salary issue as they must have been offering more and more money to bring in anyone they can get. So its conditions - people just don't want to do the work, don't need to do the work as other jobs available, and likely some could be tempted but shift work and they have kids.
Manchester Airport - to take one example - was not a small business on the brink. It could have kept all its staff on, but chose not to. Because staff are disposable and can easily be replaced. Can't they? Better treatment and relations with staff equals a better job being done equals happier customers. Why haven't companies understood this?
AIUI the problem is the security clearance. They can't start to train till they get it. It takes weeks. By the time it arrives they've found other work.
That’s a good point. A lot of laid-off or found-better-jobs workers at airports will have had airside passes, so finding replacements takes a lot longer.
They should put the new staff on payroll immediately, have them classroom training, and start moaning loudly about whichever government agency (MI5?) issues security clearances.
It’s alright, the Government has committed to cutting the number of civil servants, which will solve this problem by… um… oh, look, do you want to buy those mangoes in pounds and ounces?
It’s the layers of six-figure paper pushers, who appear to do little but make work for each other, that need to be got out of the way to allow the frontline staff to get on with their jobs
"I'm not leaving until the bailiffs come". That was the latest email sent to me from a tenant. This is the third tenant this year I am evicting due to rent arrears.
In my entire landlord career of 20 years, I have never seen an environment turn so quickly and so badly – and that includes the financial crisis and pandemic. The amount of money owed in rental arrears is in the thousands of pounds and quickly rising. Supposedly good tenants are souring quickly and I am left wondering who I can trust."
That’s worrying, especially that this downturn doesn’t appear (yet!) to have high unemployment associated with it.
Is it a warning of unemployment to come, or is it a regulatory issue, that tenants have collectively realised they can get away for months without paying rent before they get evicted?
It's not really enough information to be useful imo, because we are not told.
We know some things from the profile. The portfolio is geographically spread countrywide, so there will be management fees on everything, which will be costing 13-15% of total income. We know that there has not been major investment in energy efficiency, because it was being written about as a challenge in 2021 by the Secret Landlord - sensible people did that when they renovated or refurbished from about 2014 on and took advantage of the wide range of schemes available throughout.
We don't know where his problems are, or what sort of tenants they are with. Or what rent levels are charged. Or how hard he drives his rents wrt market - where is his balance between long-term tenancies and maximum rents? It's a choice.
It can't be job losses, as we have full employment.
And arrears significant enough to cause eviction do not occur overnight - it would normally be several months at least. Given that there is a large portfolio, "thousands of ££" could still be quite marginal.
IMO we are not told enough.
all good points, but if we can trust him at all he has comparators going back to before 2008. And job losses are not required as an explanation if you accept that lots of jobs no longer cover the bills even with UC top up.
The queues we are seeing at the UK's airports currently tell you so much about how crap senior managements often are in the private sector. They took a short-term decision to save money during covid by laying off a shedload of staff and are now inflicting the inevitable long-term consequences of that on their customers. It's the British business malaise laid bear - we are incapable of seeing beyond the end of our noses. We lionise those who cut costs as people who take the hard decisions. But there is nothing tough about doing it. It's easy. Any fool can do it. But there is almost always a price to pay. As ever, the idea that the private sector knows best is revealed by real life to be a load of old pony.
I can understand the need for a business to lay off a chunk of its staff in a downturn. There's no work for you - sorry - so here's some cash to go away and when things pick up replacement hires are easy. Harder to justify if its a megabucks company, much easier if its small and on the brink.
But the play only works if "replacement hires are easy". And what seems to have caught the airport companies with their pants down is the new environment we find ourselves in post-Covid. A whole stack of people - 610k - have decided they may as well stop working completely. Which means big pockets of unfillable jobs in key sectors in certain places.
Which is how we find ourselves here - airports unable to hire the staff they need to function as an airport. As the likes of Manchestoh Airport are council owned and have had months I assume this isn't a salary issue as they must have been offering more and more money to bring in anyone they can get. So its conditions - people just don't want to do the work, don't need to do the work as other jobs available, and likely some could be tempted but shift work and they have kids.
Manchester Airport - to take one example - was not a small business on the brink. It could have kept all its staff on, but chose not to. Because staff are disposable and can easily be replaced. Can't they? Better treatment and relations with staff equals a better job being done equals happier customers. Why haven't companies understood this?
AIUI the problem is the security clearance. They can't start to train till they get it. It takes weeks. By the time it arrives they've found other work.
We have the same with DBR checks. We appoint staff, but they get a job elsewhere before they can start.
Speeding this process up - which shouldn't be difficult - is something really useful that the government could be doing.
Now why would it want to do that. The Smirking One is too busy going off on jollies to dangerous countries to sign deportation deals than to actually make her department function.
This should be of huge significance. While it’s a compromise to accommodate Russia friendly Hungary, it affects two thirds or more of oil exports to the EU.
Nevertheless they will be importing oil from somewhere and the oil market is a global market. Russia can sell its oil elsewhere, just with a bit of inconvenience. An ineffective policy masquerading as 'something' for the something-must-be-done mindset. Gas is different.
One difficulty is that dislike of what Russia is doing is mostly a European and North American thing. Africa, Middle East and Latin America are more mixed in opinion, and India remains pro-Russian.
My enemy's enemy is my friend is the prevailing attitude of "anti-colonialists". They don't care about the rights and wrongs of an unprovoked invasion of a peaceful country.
I think anti-colonialists care deeply about the wrongs of an unprovoked invasion of a peaceful country, specifically their own peaceful country that was invaded without provocation by an imperial power. I think they should care more about the imperialist invasion of Ukraine by Russia, but I can understand if they have a different perspective on the topic than the West.
Maybe, but it does undercut if they should seek to claim a moral high ground on such issues in future, given the lack of overt concern showed. Take a cold practical view, as nations typically do, and dont be surprised if attempts to play the moral card later, about historical wrongs which they want present action over, dont work. Of course we face that outcome ourselves.
One good side. The DBS, along with valid, clean driving licence, is rapidly becoming extinct as a person spec for jobs which have absolutely no bloody need of them. It always was a way (and a discriminatory one) of lazy recruitment shortening the shortlist.
The queues we are seeing at the UK's airports currently tell you so much about how crap senior managements often are in the private sector. They took a short-term decision to save money during covid by laying off a shedload of staff and are now inflicting the inevitable long-term consequences of that on their customers. It's the British business malaise laid bear - we are incapable of seeing beyond the end of our noses. We lionise those who cut costs as people who take the hard decisions. But there is nothing tough about doing it. It's easy. Any fool can do it. But there is almost always a price to pay. As ever, the idea that the private sector knows best is revealed by real life to be a load of old pony.
I can understand the need for a business to lay off a chunk of its staff in a downturn. There's no work for you - sorry - so here's some cash to go away and when things pick up replacement hires are easy. Harder to justify if its a megabucks company, much easier if its small and on the brink.
But the play only works if "replacement hires are easy". And what seems to have caught the airport companies with their pants down is the new environment we find ourselves in post-Covid. A whole stack of people - 610k - have decided they may as well stop working completely. Which means big pockets of unfillable jobs in key sectors in certain places.
Which is how we find ourselves here - airports unable to hire the staff they need to function as an airport. As the likes of Manchestoh Airport are council owned and have had months I assume this isn't a salary issue as they must have been offering more and more money to bring in anyone they can get. So its conditions - people just don't want to do the work, don't need to do the work as other jobs available, and likely some could be tempted but shift work and they have kids.
Manchester Airport - to take one example - was not a small business on the brink. It could have kept all its staff on, but chose not to. Because staff are disposable and can easily be replaced. Can't they? Better treatment and relations with staff equals a better job being done equals happier customers. Why haven't companies understood this?
AIUI the problem is the security clearance. They can't start to train till they get it. It takes weeks. By the time it arrives they've found other work.
We have the same with DBR checks. We appoint staff, but they get a job elsewhere before they can start.
Teaching assistants. The same.
Teachers the same, the way things are going.
The other problem that schools have got is that they are really screwed by the increase in flexible work from home.
A fair chunk of the benefit package for school staff is not being needed during the holidays. So everyone who works in schools (receptionists, business managers, cooks, cleaners, TAs and teachers) can be at home with their children. Traditionally, that's been worth quite a lot, even if it's been unpaid. Another benefit has been that there are schools in literally every part of the country. It's been a useful gig for the trailing spouse.
Now that other employers are having to offer a lot more flexibility over where and when work is done, that doesn't apply to the same degree.
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
If Johnson loses both by-elections he'll have to go Full Tonto and offer a vote on fox hunting.
Our best hope there is: monarchy abolished, SF start taking seats, hold whip hand in minority government. In the meantime there's always the Emerald Isle. Begorrah.
None of the 3 main party leaders now want to abolish the monarchy, nor is it even a priority for SF who just want to be governed by Dublin not London
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
If Johnson loses both by-elections he'll have to go Full Tonto and offer a vote on fox hunting.
Pritis 24 election manifesto will be led by the restoration of the death penalty, not just for cop killers but also random foxes.
Allowing fox-hunting seems morally unsound to me on two grounds, but why should I be surprised at anything this administration does?
a) Always look for any upper class/lower class differential in any 'morality'-driven regulation. Cf. divorce under the C of E of old (Scotland was a bit more sensible, not sure about Wales). In this case fox hunting is definitely toff territory, largely upper class/snobbish activity (albeit with quite a few prole followers) - but why allow nobby blood sports when banning working class ones such as cock fighting and bull baiting?
b) foxes obv don't like being hunted*, but cockerels are only too happy to have a scrap, like squaddies of different regiments in an Aldershot pub, so who's being unkind to whom?
*On empirical grounds. They run away. Cf. M. S. Dawkins's 1970s/1980s research on hens, which showed that they preferred not to live in a battery cage but in the more old fashioned alternative, simply by giving them the option.
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
If Johnson loses both by-elections he'll have to go Full Tonto and offer a vote on fox hunting.
Our best hope there is: monarchy abolished, SF start taking seats, hold whip hand in minority government. In the meantime there's always the Emerald Isle. Begorrah.
None of the 3 main party leaders now want to abolish the monarchy, nor is it even a priority for SF who just want to be governed by Dublin not London
This should be of huge significance. While it’s a compromise to accommodate Russia friendly Hungary, it affects two thirds or more of oil exports to the EU.
Nevertheless they will be importing oil from somewhere and the oil market is a global market. Russia can sell its oil elsewhere, just with a bit of inconvenience. An ineffective policy masquerading as 'something' for the something-must-be-done mindset. Gas is different.
One difficulty is that dislike of what Russia is doing is mostly a European and North American thing. Africa, Middle East and Latin America are more mixed in opinion, and India remains pro-Russian.
My enemy's enemy is my friend is the prevailing attitude of "anti-colonialists". They don't care about the rights and wrongs of an unprovoked invasion of a peaceful country.
I think anti-colonialists care deeply about the wrongs of an unprovoked invasion of a peaceful country, specifically their own peaceful country that was invaded without provocation by an imperial power. I think they should care more about the imperialist invasion of Ukraine by Russia, but I can understand if they have a different perspective on the topic than the West.
Maybe, but it does undercut if they should seek to claim a moral high ground on such issues in future, given the lack of overt concern showed. Take a cold practical view, as nations typically do, and dont be surprised if attempts to play the moral card later, about historical wrongs which they want present action over, dont work. Of course we face that outcome ourselves.
Many nations that were once colonies are probably receptive to the Russian argument that the boundaries are wrong.
Their own boundaries are often squiggles on a map, handed down by the former colonial powers.
So, it is not too surprising that Africa, Middle East and Latin America are more mixed in their opinion.
(I don't think boundaries should be changed by war, but it is perfectly reasonable to question whether the existing boundaries of a country are justified).
Is it because Bozza is -15? If so it isn't really relevant. He is PM. Not that anyone remotely sane or sensible or not a twat would have done what he has done but in difficult times the PM takes the hit. Grass is always greener syndrome.
I see him leading the Cons (to a possible win) at the next GE.
*cue immediate vonc and ejection of current PM...*
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
If Johnson loses both by-elections he'll have to go Full Tonto and offer a vote on fox hunting.
Our best hope there is: monarchy abolished, SF start taking seats, hold whip hand in minority government. In the meantime there's always the Emerald Isle. Begorrah.
..SF who just want to be governed by Dublin not London
Which they see as the capital city of the island or Ireland. You make it sound as though it is a foreign country.
This should be of huge significance. While it’s a compromise to accommodate Russia friendly Hungary, it affects two thirds or more of oil exports to the EU.
Nevertheless they will be importing oil from somewhere and the oil market is a global market. Russia can sell its oil elsewhere, just with a bit of inconvenience. An ineffective policy masquerading as 'something' for the something-must-be-done mindset. Gas is different.
One difficulty is that dislike of what Russia is doing is mostly a European and North American thing. Africa, Middle East and Latin America are more mixed in opinion, and India remains pro-Russian.
My enemy's enemy is my friend is the prevailing attitude of "anti-colonialists". They don't care about the rights and wrongs of an unprovoked invasion of a peaceful country.
I think anti-colonialists care deeply about the wrongs of an unprovoked invasion of a peaceful country, specifically their own peaceful country that was invaded without provocation by an imperial power. I think they should care more about the imperialist invasion of Ukraine by Russia, but I can understand if they have a different perspective on the topic than the West.
Maybe, but it does undercut if they should seek to claim a moral high ground on such issues in future, given the lack of overt concern showed. Take a cold practical view, as nations typically do, and dont be surprised if attempts to play the moral card later, about historical wrongs which they want present action over, dont work. Of course we face that outcome ourselves.
Many nations that were once colonies are probably receptive to the Russian argument that the boundaries are wrong.
Their own boundaries were often squiggles on a map, handed down by the former colonial powers.
So, it is not too surprising that Africa, Middle East and Latin America are more mixed in their opinion.
(I don't think boundaries should be changed by war, but it is perfectly reasonable to question whether the existing boundaries of a country are justified).
Ukraine was very happy with the boundaries just as they were in 2014.
There was no justification for Putin annexing land eight years ago, and there’s sure as hell no justification for what was a full-scale invasion of Ukraine this year.
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
Even if Johnson goes party members would be looking for some serious conservative red meat from his successor. We are 12 years into a Conservative government which has won a landslide majority in 2019, they expect a return for that.
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
If Johnson loses both by-elections he'll have to go Full Tonto and offer a vote on fox hunting.
Pritis 24 election manifesto will be led by the restoration of the death penalty, not just for cop killers but also random foxes.
Allowing fox-hunting seems morally unsound to me on two grounds, but why should I be surprised at anything this administration does?
a) Always look for any upper class/lower class differential in any 'morality'-driven regulation. Cf. divorce under the C of E of old (Scotland was a bit more sensible, not sure about Wales). In this case fox hunting is definitely toff territory, largely upper class/snobbish activity (albeit with quite a few prole followers) - but why allow nobby blood sports when banning working class ones such as cock fighting and bull baiting?
b) foxes obv don't like being hunted*, but cockerels are only too happy to have a scrap, like squaddies of different regiments in an Aldershot pub, so who's being unkind to whom?
*On empirical grounds. They run away. Cf. M. S. Dawkins's 1970s/1980s research on hens, which showed that they preferred not to live in a battery cage but in the more old fashioned alternative, simply by giving them the option.
And in any case there are other good arguments against any sport such as cockfighting!
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
If Johnson loses both by-elections he'll have to go Full Tonto and offer a vote on fox hunting.
Our best hope there is: monarchy abolished, SF start taking seats, hold whip hand in minority government. In the meantime there's always the Emerald Isle. Begorrah.
None of the 3 main party leaders now want to abolish the monarchy, nor is it even a priority for SF who just want to be governed by Dublin not London
Sure, I was just outlining the least unlikely glide path to the desired end. I don't expect a tory in name only like yourself to understand the absolute centrality of the hunting of the fox to true Conservatism. Doubtless you can tell us PC's position, though.
The queues we are seeing at the UK's airports currently tell you so much about how crap senior managements often are in the private sector. They took a short-term decision to save money during covid by laying off a shedload of staff and are now inflicting the inevitable long-term consequences of that on their customers. It's the British business malaise laid bear - we are incapable of seeing beyond the end of our noses. We lionise those who cut costs as people who take the hard decisions. But there is nothing tough about doing it. It's easy. Any fool can do it. But there is almost always a price to pay. As ever, the idea that the private sector knows best is revealed by real life to be a load of old pony.
I can understand the need for a business to lay off a chunk of its staff in a downturn. There's no work for you - sorry - so here's some cash to go away and when things pick up replacement hires are easy. Harder to justify if its a megabucks company, much easier if its small and on the brink.
But the play only works if "replacement hires are easy". And what seems to have caught the airport companies with their pants down is the new environment we find ourselves in post-Covid. A whole stack of people - 610k - have decided they may as well stop working completely. Which means big pockets of unfillable jobs in key sectors in certain places.
Which is how we find ourselves here - airports unable to hire the staff they need to function as an airport. As the likes of Manchestoh Airport are council owned and have had months I assume this isn't a salary issue as they must have been offering more and more money to bring in anyone they can get. So its conditions - people just don't want to do the work, don't need to do the work as other jobs available, and likely some could be tempted but shift work and they have kids.
Manchester Airport - to take one example - was not a small business on the brink. It could have kept all its staff on, but chose not to. Because staff are disposable and can easily be replaced. Can't they? Better treatment and relations with staff equals a better job being done equals happier customers. Why haven't companies understood this?
AIUI the problem is the security clearance. They can't start to train till they get it. It takes weeks. By the time it arrives they've found other work.
That’s a good point. A lot of laid-off or found-better-jobs workers at airports will have had airside passes, so finding replacements takes a lot longer.
They should put the new staff on payroll immediately, have them classroom training, and start moaning loudly about whichever government agency (MI5?) issues security clearances.
It’s alright, the Government has committed to cutting the number of civil servants, which will solve this problem by… um… oh, look, do you want to buy those mangoes in pounds and ounces?
It’s the layers of six-figure paper pushers, who appear to do little but make work for each other, that need to be got out of the way to allow the frontline staff to get on with their jobs
The first catch is that if you eliminate the paper-pushers without eliminating the paper, you end up worse off than before. Having admin staff push paper is bad, but having frontline staff push the paper is worse, and that's where crackdowns on bureaucracy usually end up.
The second catch is that every bit of paper was introduced in good faith for a good reason. It may be that the paper has exploded out of control, but I doubt that there are significant bits of buraucracy that can just be zapped without downsides. As the UK is seeing now. For example, Ofsted and the school data industry are expensive and tell us much less than we like to think about what goes on in schools. But I'm not sure that we would be better off if they didn't exist at all.
I suppose it's possible that BoJo and JRM have carefully calculated the optimum size of the Civil Service, rather than pulling a number out of their bottoms based on little more than hatred of an institution that points out that the can't have what they want...
Mr. Observer, amused that you manage to try and attack the UK for the EU watering down their sanctions due to Hungary's pro-Russian sympathies.
Attacking the UK government's abandonment of our Parliamentary democracy is not attacking the UK. All I did initially was to observe that Orban is the favourite EU leader of every right-wing Tory and US Republican. He also happens to be Putin's favourite EU leader.
The other issue with the DBS is that you can't apply for anything other than the very basic for yourself. If your role requires anything more by statute, you have to go via an organisation who have offered you a role. This makes recruiting quickly impossible. Unless you poach. I could go back into teaching. I'm qualified to. But not for months. Why should I wait around with no work?
This should be of huge significance. While it’s a compromise to accommodate Russia friendly Hungary, it affects two thirds or more of oil exports to the EU.
Who could possibly have imagined that Viktor Orban - the man who destroyed Hungarian democracy, the darling of the right in the UK and the US - would turn out to be Putin's principal European ally?
You mean that Brexit Britain actually turned out to be nothing like Orban’s Hungary? Colour me shocked!
Hmmm - relentless government grift and lies, criminalising peaceful protest, taking away the Electoral Commission's independence, making it harder to vote, bypassing Parliament, reducing the power of the courts to scrutinise the executive, placemen in media oversight positions, walking away from international treaty commitments. Where could this government possibly have got those ideas from?
I’m old enough to remember Brexiteers boosting Orban & Hungary as part of the awkward squad that would ally with the UK in the great patriotic war against the EU.
Yes, he was going to ride to the rescue, wasn't he? But they still love him for how he has owned the libs by closing down Hungarian democracy.
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
If Johnson loses both by-elections he'll have to go Full Tonto and offer a vote on fox hunting.
Pritis 24 election manifesto will be led by the restoration of the death penalty, not just for cop killers but also random foxes.
Allowing fox-hunting seems morally unsound to me on two grounds, but why should I be surprised at anything this administration does?
a) Always look for any upper class/lower class differential in any 'morality'-driven regulation. Cf. divorce under the C of E of old (Scotland was a bit more sensible, not sure about Wales). In this case fox hunting is definitely toff territory, largely upper class/snobbish activity (albeit with quite a few prole followers) - but why allow nobby blood sports when banning working class ones such as cock fighting and bull baiting?
b) foxes obv don't like being hunted*, but cockerels are only too happy to have a scrap, like squaddies of different regiments in an Aldershot pub, so who's being unkind to whom?
*On empirical grounds. They run away. Cf. M. S. Dawkins's 1970s/1980s research on hens, which showed that they preferred not to live in a battery cage but in the more old fashioned alternative, simply by giving them the option.
There is plenty of treatment of animals which people disagree over. Look at the cracking social media campaign that VFC is conducting right now.
One of the criteria to be applied to any activity, from riding ponies to foxhunting to keeping goldfish to having a domestic dog to having a dairy herd to zapping a fly should be - is it cruel.
And it was determined that foxhunting was not cruel.
That said, now is not the time to have a vote to bring back foxhunting. Not least because it would be defeated. Badly.
"I'm not leaving until the bailiffs come". That was the latest email sent to me from a tenant. This is the third tenant this year I am evicting due to rent arrears.
In my entire landlord career of 20 years, I have never seen an environment turn so quickly and so badly – and that includes the financial crisis and pandemic. The amount of money owed in rental arrears is in the thousands of pounds and quickly rising. Supposedly good tenants are souring quickly and I am left wondering who I can trust."
That’s worrying, especially that this downturn doesn’t appear (yet!) to have high unemployment associated with it.
Is it a warning of unemployment to come, or is it a regulatory issue, that tenants have collectively realised they can get away for months without paying rent before they get evicted?
I think it’s probably rampant inflation eating away at their disposable income. Something has to give and they’ve twigged they can, as you say, fail to pay and get away with it for several months.
What they do next is a different question. Councils are going to find it really expensive housing so many evicted tenants in anything other than council houses and they’ve not got enough of those already.
Well, OK. I think it is a bit 19th century to regard the existence of tenant protection as a problem, and their relying on it as "getting away with it." But then, I am not a landlord
I think the tenants are a bit buggered if they try to do the decent thing anyway, aren't they, because the council can then label them intentionally homeless?
Yes.
"I'm not leaving until the bailiffs come" is very often a Council forcing a T to stay as long as possible so they don't have to provide accommodation. It's been a problem forever.
It also forces the T to get a CCJ plus a couple of thousand extra debt (current court costs) in order to get a priority on the Council list, which means they get no credit for the next 6 years plus the extra debt. It is an abusive policy.
And it's a game that Councils have played forever.
Another one is to go into an HMO and register each room for a Band A council tax as a separate dwelling.
I'm bowled over by all the sympathy for the poor f*cking tenant in this conversation.
My heart bleeds for landlords who have the hassle of kicking the tenant out onto the street while the tenant wilfully chooses not to rob a bank to pay the rent. Those evicted tenants should pull themselves together - loads of cardboard boxes going spare for zero rent.
Tbf to @Ish, I think his point was that it's a sign of the CoL crisis looming.
@Sandpit's suggestion that getting into debt, taking a CCJ, risking eviction and the bailiffs seizing your car are all things tenants might do because they have "have collectively realised they can get away for months without paying rent before they get evicted" is pretty obnoxious.
Edit: Apologies to @IshmaelZ - I'd misread it that he was the landlord.
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
If Johnson loses both by-elections he'll have to go Full Tonto and offer a vote on fox hunting.
Our best hope there is: monarchy abolished, SF start taking seats, hold whip hand in minority government. In the meantime there's always the Emerald Isle. Begorrah.
..SF who just want to be governed by Dublin not London
Which they see as the capital city of the island or Ireland. You make it sound as though it is a foreign country.
"I'm not leaving until the bailiffs come". That was the latest email sent to me from a tenant. This is the third tenant this year I am evicting due to rent arrears.
In my entire landlord career of 20 years, I have never seen an environment turn so quickly and so badly – and that includes the financial crisis and pandemic. The amount of money owed in rental arrears is in the thousands of pounds and quickly rising. Supposedly good tenants are souring quickly and I am left wondering who I can trust."
That’s worrying, especially that this downturn doesn’t appear (yet!) to have high unemployment associated with it.
Is it a warning of unemployment to come, or is it a regulatory issue, that tenants have collectively realised they can get away for months without paying rent before they get evicted?
It's not really enough information to be useful imo, because we are not told.
We know some things from the profile. The portfolio is geographically spread countrywide, so there will be management fees on everything, which will be costing 13-15% of total income. We know that there has not been major investment in energy efficiency, because it was being written about as a challenge in 2021 by the Secret Landlord - sensible people did that when they renovated or refurbished from about 2014 on and took advantage of the wide range of schemes available throughout.
We don't know where his problems are, or what sort of tenants they are with. Or what rent levels are charged. Or how hard he drives his rents wrt market - where is his balance between long-term tenancies and maximum rents? It's a choice.
It can't be job losses, as we have full employment.
And arrears significant enough to cause eviction do not occur overnight - it would normally be several months at least. Given that there is a large portfolio, "thousands of ££" could still be quite marginal.
IMO we are not told enough.
all good points, but if we can trust him at all he has comparators going back to before 2008. And job losses are not required as an explanation if you accept that lots of jobs no longer cover the bills even with UC top up.
gonna be a tough winter
Agree with both of those paras.
It will very much depend on previous rainy day money, and how close to the edge people are running.
As it happens I did my end of May readings last night, and my bill is up on the same months last year, but I have managed some 25% reductions of usage on last year, partly because of the extra sun and turning the GFCH off 3 weeks early. But for me the gas next winter will be the expensive one.
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
If Johnson loses both by-elections he'll have to go Full Tonto and offer a vote on fox hunting.
Pritis 24 election manifesto will be led by the restoration of the death penalty, not just for cop killers but also random foxes.
Allowing fox-hunting seems morally unsound to me on two grounds, but why should I be surprised at anything this administration does?
a) Always look for any upper class/lower class differential in any 'morality'-driven regulation. Cf. divorce under the C of E of old (Scotland was a bit more sensible, not sure about Wales). In this case fox hunting is definitely toff territory, largely upper class/snobbish activity (albeit with quite a few prole followers) - but why allow nobby blood sports when banning working class ones such as cock fighting and bull baiting?
b) foxes obv don't like being hunted*, but cockerels are only too happy to have a scrap, like squaddies of different regiments in an Aldershot pub, so who's being unkind to whom?
*On empirical grounds. They run away. Cf. M. S. Dawkins's 1970s/1980s research on hens, which showed that they preferred not to live in a battery cage but in the more old fashioned alternative, simply by giving them the option.
There is plenty of treatment of animals which people disagree over. Look at the cracking social media campaign that VFC is conducting right now.
One of the criteria to be applied to any activity, from riding ponies to foxhunting to keeping goldfish to having a domestic dog to having a dairy herd to zapping a fly should be - is it cruel.
And it was determined that foxhunting was not cruel.
That said, now is not the time to have a vote to bring back foxhunting. Not least because it would be defeated. Badly.
Well said. People who think fox hunting was cruel never bothered to read the burns report because they were far too consumed by their prejudice and general hatred of genuinely rural people that don't share their plastic view of the countryside.
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
If Johnson loses both by-elections he'll have to go Full Tonto and offer a vote on fox hunting.
Our best hope there is: monarchy abolished, SF start taking seats, hold whip hand in minority government. In the meantime there's always the Emerald Isle. Begorrah.
None of the 3 main party leaders now want to abolish the monarchy, nor is it even a priority for SF who just want to be governed by Dublin not London
Liz Truss looks like the clear frontrunner on these figures. Can she gain support from enough MPs to make the final two?
I reckon she has the best chance of remaking the political terrain and building a new election-winning coalition, but she always seems to poll really badly.
Liz Truss looks like the clear frontrunner on these figures. Can she gain support from enough MPs to make the final two?
I reckon she has the best chance of remaking the political terrain and building a new election-winning coalition, but she always seems to poll really badly.
She may well poll well with the membership.
But she would be a frigging disaster at the helm of the tory party. If they choose her, then a landslide Labour victory really is on the cards.
despite changes to devolved income tax rates that overall were estimated to raise an additional £500 million, the Scottish Fiscal Commission forecast in December that the revenues the Scottish Government will receive this year will be £190 million lower than if income tax had not been devolved.
Top tip. Professional landlords. Solve your financial problems by simply getting a proper job.
Why is providing high quality housing services not a proper job?
Houses don't maintain or invest in themselves. Traditionally 15-20% or so of the income goes on maintenance and investment, often done in advance during a full refurbishment with a 10 year+ return period.
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
If Johnson loses both by-elections he'll have to go Full Tonto and offer a vote on fox hunting.
Pritis 24 election manifesto will be led by the restoration of the death penalty, not just for cop killers but also random foxes.
Allowing fox-hunting seems morally unsound to me on two grounds, but why should I be surprised at anything this administration does?
a) Always look for any upper class/lower class differential in any 'morality'-driven regulation. Cf. divorce under the C of E of old (Scotland was a bit more sensible, not sure about Wales). In this case fox hunting is definitely toff territory, largely upper class/snobbish activity (albeit with quite a few prole followers) - but why allow nobby blood sports when banning working class ones such as cock fighting and bull baiting?
b) foxes obv don't like being hunted*, but cockerels are only too happy to have a scrap, like squaddies of different regiments in an Aldershot pub, so who's being unkind to whom?
*On empirical grounds. They run away. Cf. M. S. Dawkins's 1970s/1980s research on hens, which showed that they preferred not to live in a battery cage but in the more old fashioned alternative, simply by giving them the option.
There is plenty of treatment of animals which people disagree over. Look at the cracking social media campaign that VFC is conducting right now.
One of the criteria to be applied to any activity, from riding ponies to foxhunting to keeping goldfish to having a domestic dog to having a dairy herd to zapping a fly should be - is it cruel.
And it was determined that foxhunting was not cruel.
That said, now is not the time to have a vote to bring back foxhunting. Not least because it would be defeated. Badly.
Fair enough, though I'm afraid Reynard differs.
One further point: any attempt would, actually, be a bit of the old cringe to one's posh betters who went to posh schools and Russell Group unis and know what to tell you to do. Like the good not so old days.
Also:
1. Mrs J wouldn't wear it. 2. But could it be a way of applying pressure to the wetter Tory MPs? And more generally a new front in the anti-woke wars? Quite a few party members woiuld like foxhunting back, like Spam and Honeycomb Mould and rods, poles and perches and so on.
So I wouldn't be surprised if they try. Mr J can always blame the wokists and wets.
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
If Johnson loses both by-elections he'll have to go Full Tonto and offer a vote on fox hunting.
Our best hope there is: monarchy abolished, SF start taking seats, hold whip hand in minority government. In the meantime there's always the Emerald Isle. Begorrah.
None of the 3 main party leaders now want to abolish the monarchy, nor is it even a priority for SF who just want to be governed by Dublin not London
The queues we are seeing at the UK's airports currently tell you so much about how crap senior managements often are in the private sector. They took a short-term decision to save money during covid by laying off a shedload of staff and are now inflicting the inevitable long-term consequences of that on their customers. It's the British business malaise laid bear - we are incapable of seeing beyond the end of our noses. We lionise those who cut costs as people who take the hard decisions. But there is nothing tough about doing it. It's easy. Any fool can do it. But there is almost always a price to pay. As ever, the idea that the private sector knows best is revealed by real life to be a load of old pony.
I can understand the need for a business to lay off a chunk of its staff in a downturn. There's no work for you - sorry - so here's some cash to go away and when things pick up replacement hires are easy. Harder to justify if its a megabucks company, much easier if its small and on the brink.
But the play only works if "replacement hires are easy". And what seems to have caught the airport companies with their pants down is the new environment we find ourselves in post-Covid. A whole stack of people - 610k - have decided they may as well stop working completely. Which means big pockets of unfillable jobs in key sectors in certain places.
Which is how we find ourselves here - airports unable to hire the staff they need to function as an airport. As the likes of Manchestoh Airport are council owned and have had months I assume this isn't a salary issue as they must have been offering more and more money to bring in anyone they can get. So its conditions - people just don't want to do the work, don't need to do the work as other jobs available, and likely some could be tempted but shift work and they have kids.
Manchester Airport - to take one example - was not a small business on the brink. It could have kept all its staff on, but chose not to. Because staff are disposable and can easily be replaced. Can't they? Better treatment and relations with staff equals a better job being done equals happier customers. Why haven't companies understood this?
AIUI the problem is the security clearance. They can't start to train till they get it. It takes weeks. By the time it arrives they've found other work.
That’s a good point. A lot of laid-off or found-better-jobs workers at airports will have had airside passes, so finding replacements takes a lot longer.
They should put the new staff on payroll immediately, have them classroom training, and start moaning loudly about whichever government agency (MI5?) issues security clearances.
It’s alright, the Government has committed to cutting the number of civil servants, which will solve this problem by… um… oh, look, do you want to buy those mangoes in pounds and ounces?
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
If Johnson loses both by-elections he'll have to go Full Tonto and offer a vote on fox hunting.
Pritis 24 election manifesto will be led by the restoration of the death penalty, not just for cop killers but also random foxes.
Allowing fox-hunting seems morally unsound to me on two grounds, but why should I be surprised at anything this administration does?
a) Always look for any upper class/lower class differential in any 'morality'-driven regulation. Cf. divorce under the C of E of old (Scotland was a bit more sensible, not sure about Wales). In this case fox hunting is definitely toff territory, largely upper class/snobbish activity (albeit with quite a few prole followers) - but why allow nobby blood sports when banning working class ones such as cock fighting and bull baiting?
b) foxes obv don't like being hunted*, but cockerels are only too happy to have a scrap, like squaddies of different regiments in an Aldershot pub, so who's being unkind to whom?
*On empirical grounds. They run away. Cf. M. S. Dawkins's 1970s/1980s research on hens, which showed that they preferred not to live in a battery cage but in the more old fashioned alternative, simply by giving them the option.
The Free Church of Scotland takes as hard a line on divorce and traditional marriage as the Roman Catholic Church, if not harder
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
If Johnson loses both by-elections he'll have to go Full Tonto and offer a vote on fox hunting.
Pritis 24 election manifesto will be led by the restoration of the death penalty, not just for cop killers but also random foxes.
Allowing fox-hunting seems morally unsound to me on two grounds, but why should I be surprised at anything this administration does?
a) Always look for any upper class/lower class differential in any 'morality'-driven regulation. Cf. divorce under the C of E of old (Scotland was a bit more sensible, not sure about Wales). In this case fox hunting is definitely toff territory, largely upper class/snobbish activity (albeit with quite a few prole followers) - but why allow nobby blood sports when banning working class ones such as cock fighting and bull baiting?
b) foxes obv don't like being hunted*, but cockerels are only too happy to have a scrap, like squaddies of different regiments in an Aldershot pub, so who's being unkind to whom?
*On empirical grounds. They run away. Cf. M. S. Dawkins's 1970s/1980s research on hens, which showed that they preferred not to live in a battery cage but in the more old fashioned alternative, simply by giving them the option.
There is plenty of treatment of animals which people disagree over. Look at the cracking social media campaign that VFC is conducting right now.
One of the criteria to be applied to any activity, from riding ponies to foxhunting to keeping goldfish to having a domestic dog to having a dairy herd to zapping a fly should be - is it cruel.
And it was determined that foxhunting was not cruel.
That said, now is not the time to have a vote to bring back foxhunting. Not least because it would be defeated. Badly.
Fair enough, though I'm afraid Reynard differs.
One further point: any attempt would, actually, be a bit of the old cringe to one's posh betters who went to posh schools and Russell Group unis and know what to tell you to do. Like the good not so old days.
Also:
1. Mrs J wouldn't wear it. 2. But could it be a way of applying pressure to the wetter Tory MPs? And more generally a new front in the anti-woke wars? Quite a few party members woiuld like foxhunting back, like Spam and Honeycomb Mould and rods, poles and perches and so on.
So I wouldn't be surprised if they try. Mr J can always blame the wokists and wets.
Plenty of Blue Foxes who would see it off before you could say "posh twat on a horse".
The other issue with the DBS is that you can't apply for anything other than the very basic for yourself. If your role requires anything more by statute, you have to go via an organisation who have offered you a role. This makes recruiting quickly impossible. Unless you poach. I could go back into teaching. I'm qualified to. But not for months. Why should I wait around with no work?
If this is making recruitment difficult then employers can find ways around it. They could give someone the job, conditional on the DBS being successful, and pay them to do extra training, or other useful preparatory duties that didn't require the enhanced DBS, while waiting for it to come through.
"I'm not leaving until the bailiffs come". That was the latest email sent to me from a tenant. This is the third tenant this year I am evicting due to rent arrears.
In my entire landlord career of 20 years, I have never seen an environment turn so quickly and so badly – and that includes the financial crisis and pandemic. The amount of money owed in rental arrears is in the thousands of pounds and quickly rising. Supposedly good tenants are souring quickly and I am left wondering who I can trust."
That’s worrying, especially that this downturn doesn’t appear (yet!) to have high unemployment associated with it.
Is it a warning of unemployment to come, or is it a regulatory issue, that tenants have collectively realised they can get away for months without paying rent before they get evicted?
It's not really enough information to be useful imo, because we are not told.
We know some things from the profile. The portfolio is geographically spread countrywide, so there will be management fees on everything, which will be costing 13-15% of total income. We know that there has not been major investment in energy efficiency, because it was being written about as a challenge in 2021 by the Secret Landlord - sensible people did that when they renovated or refurbished from about 2014 on and took advantage of the wide range of schemes available throughout.
We don't know where his problems are, or what sort of tenants they are with. Or what rent levels are charged. Or how hard he drives his rents wrt market - where is his balance between long-term tenancies and maximum rents? It's a choice.
It can't be job losses, as we have full employment.
And arrears significant enough to cause eviction do not occur overnight - it would normally be several months at least. Given that there is a large portfolio, "thousands of ££" could still be quite marginal.
IMO we are not told enough.
all good points, but if we can trust him at all he has comparators going back to before 2008. And job losses are not required as an explanation if you accept that lots of jobs no longer cover the bills even with UC top up.
gonna be a tough winter
Agree with both of those paras.
It will very much depend on previous rainy day money, and how close to the edge people are running.
As it happens I did my end of May readings last night, and my bill is up on the same months last year, but I have managed some 25% reductions of usage on last year, partly because of the extra sun and turning the GFCH off 3 weeks early. But for me the gas next winter will be the expensive one.
I have succeeded in quite a substantial reduction in gas, and less so electric, and I am substantially limiting use of my car. It has reached the point where, for a single person, it can be cheaper to travel by train rather than drive.
But a lot of people seem to be blindly doing exactly what they always do. I thought people were supposed to be rational actors responding to information conveyed through prices.
One guy on breakfast news the other day said he had to turn the thermostat down. No you don't, it's May, turn it off until October.
(Obviously I accept some people can't easily reduce costs, eg needing the car for work)
This should be of huge significance. While it’s a compromise to accommodate Russia friendly Hungary, it affects two thirds or more of oil exports to the EU.
Nevertheless they will be importing oil from somewhere and the oil market is a global market. Russia can sell its oil elsewhere, just with a bit of inconvenience. An ineffective policy masquerading as 'something' for the something-must-be-done mindset. Gas is different.
One difficulty is that dislike of what Russia is doing is mostly a European and North American thing. Africa, Middle East and Latin America are more mixed in opinion, and India remains pro-Russian.
My enemy's enemy is my friend is the prevailing attitude of "anti-colonialists". They don't care about the rights and wrongs of an unprovoked invasion of a peaceful country.
I think anti-colonialists care deeply about the wrongs of an unprovoked invasion of a peaceful country, specifically their own peaceful country that was invaded without provocation by an imperial power. I think they should care more about the imperialist invasion of Ukraine by Russia, but I can understand if they have a different perspective on the topic than the West.
Maybe, but it does undercut if they should seek to claim a moral high ground on such issues in future, given the lack of overt concern showed. Take a cold practical view, as nations typically do, and dont be surprised if attempts to play the moral card later, about historical wrongs which they want present action over, dont work. Of course we face that outcome ourselves.
Many nations that were once colonies are probably receptive to the Russian argument that the boundaries are wrong.
Their own boundaries were often squiggles on a map, handed down by the former colonial powers.
So, it is not too surprising that Africa, Middle East and Latin America are more mixed in their opinion.
(I don't think boundaries should be changed by war, but it is perfectly reasonable to question whether the existing boundaries of a country are justified).
Ukraine was very happy with the boundaries just as they were in 2014.
There was no justification for Putin annexing land eight years ago, and there’s sure as hell no justification for what was a full-scale invasion of Ukraine this year.
I agree it is not a justification for the invasion.
The BBC yesterday had some report on the Donbas, in which they quoted a local who said, "About 30 per cent of the population supported Russia, 30 per cent supported Ukraine and 40 per cent just wanted the fighting to stop".
Much like N. Ireland, there is a substantial fraction of the population in the Donbas who wanted to belong to a different country.
And many ex-colonies can understand this, hence their ambivalence.
The queues we are seeing at the UK's airports currently tell you so much about how crap senior managements often are in the private sector. They took a short-term decision to save money during covid by laying off a shedload of staff and are now inflicting the inevitable long-term consequences of that on their customers. It's the British business malaise laid bear - we are incapable of seeing beyond the end of our noses. We lionise those who cut costs as people who take the hard decisions. But there is nothing tough about doing it. It's easy. Any fool can do it. But there is almost always a price to pay. As ever, the idea that the private sector knows best is revealed by real life to be a load of old pony.
Private sector: "They took a short-term decision to save money during covid by laying off a shedload of staff and are now inflicting the inevitable long-term consequences of that on their customers."
Government: "They took a short-term decision to look good in the press during covid by spraying around trillions of pounds and are now inflicting the inevitable long-term consequences of that on the country."
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
If Johnson loses both by-elections he'll have to go Full Tonto and offer a vote on fox hunting.
Our best hope there is: monarchy abolished, SF start taking seats, hold whip hand in minority government. In the meantime there's always the Emerald Isle. Begorrah.
..SF who just want to be governed by Dublin not London
Which they see as the capital city of the island or Ireland. You make it sound as though it is a foreign country.
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
If Johnson loses both by-elections he'll have to go Full Tonto and offer a vote on fox hunting.
Pritis 24 election manifesto will be led by the restoration of the death penalty, not just for cop killers but also random foxes.
Allowing fox-hunting seems morally unsound to me on two grounds, but why should I be surprised at anything this administration does?
a) Always look for any upper class/lower class differential in any 'morality'-driven regulation. Cf. divorce under the C of E of old (Scotland was a bit more sensible, not sure about Wales). In this case fox hunting is definitely toff territory, largely upper class/snobbish activity (albeit with quite a few prole followers) - but why allow nobby blood sports when banning working class ones such as cock fighting and bull baiting?
b) foxes obv don't like being hunted*, but cockerels are only too happy to have a scrap, like squaddies of different regiments in an Aldershot pub, so who's being unkind to whom?
*On empirical grounds. They run away. Cf. M. S. Dawkins's 1970s/1980s research on hens, which showed that they preferred not to live in a battery cage but in the more old fashioned alternative, simply by giving them the option.
The Free Church of Scotland takes as hard a line on divorce and traditional marriage as the Roman Catholic Church, if not harder
Regardless of what the bloke in the Geneva bands said, it was markedly easier and therefore much cheaper to get a divorce in the courts in Scotland than in England till the mid-C20s reforms.
My Platinum Jubilee Medal turned up yesterday. I had one of the Ukrainians pin it on my Smiths t-shirt while I saluted a ficus plant and the other Ukrainian did a TikTok of the solemn ceremony. Then it joined the Diamond Jubilee Medal in the bin. I never got the gold one as the eligibility for that was tighter. Also never got the silver one as I was 10.
This should be of huge significance. While it’s a compromise to accommodate Russia friendly Hungary, it affects two thirds or more of oil exports to the EU.
Who could possibly have imagined that Viktor Orban - the man who destroyed Hungarian democracy, the darling of the right in the UK and the US - would turn out to be Putin's principal European ally?
You mean that Brexit Britain actually turned out to be nothing like Orban’s Hungary? Colour me shocked!
Hmmm - relentless government grift and lies, criminalising peaceful protest, taking away the Electoral Commission's independence, making it harder to vote, bypassing Parliament, reducing the power of the courts to scrutinise the executive, placemen in media oversight positions, walking away from international treaty commitments. Where could this government possibly have got those ideas from?
Top tip. Professional landlords. Solve your financial problems by simply getting a proper job.
Why is providing high quality housing services not a proper job?
Houses don't maintain or invest in themselves. Traditionally 15-20% or so of the income goes on maintenance and investment, often done in advance during a full refurbishment with a 10 year+ return period.
No but it's a business, profit is the reward for risk. You shouldn't go into it if you are not prepared to make a loss. Those with the money to invest have been feather-bedded over the last few years.
Edit: couple of questions for @Dura_Ace that said.
My *impression* from others is that anyone who knows anything about air combat thinks it's ridiculous. But fun.
My beef was the way there was zero simulator work shown. I guess that nowadays they'd spend more time in the simulator as in the air. Although that wouldn't be as much fun on film ...
My Platinum Jubilee Medal turned up yesterday. I had one of the Ukrainians pin it on my Smiths t-shirt while I saluted a ficus plant and the other Ukrainian did a TikTok of the solemn ceremony. Then it joined the Diamond Jubilee Medal in the bin. I never got the gold one as the eligibility for that was tighter. Also never got the silver one as I was 10.
So. Top Gun. From a practitioners perspective - what's your view.
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
If Johnson loses both by-elections he'll have to go Full Tonto and offer a vote on fox hunting.
Our best hope there is: monarchy abolished, SF start taking seats, hold whip hand in minority government. In the meantime there's always the Emerald Isle. Begorrah.
None of the 3 main party leaders now want to abolish the monarchy, nor is it even a priority for SF who just want to be governed by Dublin not London
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
If Johnson loses both by-elections he'll have to go Full Tonto and offer a vote on fox hunting.
Our best hope there is: monarchy abolished, SF start taking seats, hold whip hand in minority government. In the meantime there's always the Emerald Isle. Begorrah.
..SF who just want to be governed by Dublin not London
Which they see as the capital city of the island or Ireland. You make it sound as though it is a foreign country.
It is for Northern Protestants
So what. You said "SF..."
Who are not interested longer term in the future of the UK nor its government, so of course they are not going to take their seats and the whip hand in any minority government
The other issue with the DBS is that you can't apply for anything other than the very basic for yourself. If your role requires anything more by statute, you have to go via an organisation who have offered you a role. This makes recruiting quickly impossible. Unless you poach. I could go back into teaching. I'm qualified to. But not for months. Why should I wait around with no work?
If this is making recruitment difficult then employers can find ways around it. They could give someone the job, conditional on the DBS being successful, and pay them to do extra training, or other useful preparatory duties that didn't require the enhanced DBS, while waiting for it to come through.
True. Unfortunately, for schools and airports, and I believe the NHS, it is illegal to be employed on the property without one. It is difficult to train to be airside without going airside. Or without ever setting foot in a school or medical facility.
My Platinum Jubilee Medal turned up yesterday. I had one of the Ukrainians pin it on my Smiths t-shirt while I saluted a ficus plant and the other Ukrainian did a TikTok of the solemn ceremony. Then it joined the Diamond Jubilee Medal in the bin. I never got the gold one as the eligibility for that was tighter. Also never got the silver one as I was 10.
So. Top Gun. From a practitioners perspective - what's your view.
I've never even seen the first one as I was at university in France when it first came out and France was a lot less globalised in the mid 80s so there were very limited opportunities for consuming non-French media.
Everyone in the F-14 community fucking hated it though. I don't intend to see the new one as it will doubtless be fucking annoying.
Liz Truss looks like the clear frontrunner on these figures. Can she gain support from enough MPs to make the final two?
I reckon she has the best chance of remaking the political terrain and building a new election-winning coalition, but she always seems to poll really badly.
Wallace and Zahawi, both likely leadership candidates, poll above Truss in the ConHome survey as does Trevelyan
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
If Johnson loses both by-elections he'll have to go Full Tonto and offer a vote on fox hunting.
Pritis 24 election manifesto will be led by the restoration of the death penalty, not just for cop killers but also random foxes.
Allowing fox-hunting seems morally unsound to me on two grounds, but why should I be surprised at anything this administration does?
a) Always look for any upper class/lower class differential in any 'morality'-driven regulation. Cf. divorce under the C of E of old (Scotland was a bit more sensible, not sure about Wales). In this case fox hunting is definitely toff territory, largely upper class/snobbish activity (albeit with quite a few prole followers) - but why allow nobby blood sports when banning working class ones such as cock fighting and bull baiting?
b) foxes obv don't like being hunted*, but cockerels are only too happy to have a scrap, like squaddies of different regiments in an Aldershot pub, so who's being unkind to whom?
*On empirical grounds. They run away. Cf. M. S. Dawkins's 1970s/1980s research on hens, which showed that they preferred not to live in a battery cage but in the more old fashioned alternative, simply by giving them the option.
There is plenty of treatment of animals which people disagree over. Look at the cracking social media campaign that VFC is conducting right now.
One of the criteria to be applied to any activity, from riding ponies to foxhunting to keeping goldfish to having a domestic dog to having a dairy herd to zapping a fly should be - is it cruel.
And it was determined that foxhunting was not cruel.
That said, now is not the time to have a vote to bring back foxhunting. Not least because it would be defeated. Badly.
Well said. People who think fox hunting was cruel never bothered to read the burns report because they were far too consumed by their prejudice and general hatred of genuinely rural people that don't share their plastic view of the countryside.
Quality erasure of "genuinely rural people" who think fox hunting is a bag of shite.
Or are you only genuinely rural if you think fox hunting is good?
This should be of huge significance. While it’s a compromise to accommodate Russia friendly Hungary, it affects two thirds or more of oil exports to the EU.
Nevertheless they will be importing oil from somewhere and the oil market is a global market. Russia can sell its oil elsewhere, just with a bit of inconvenience. An ineffective policy masquerading as 'something' for the something-must-be-done mindset. Gas is different.
One difficulty is that dislike of what Russia is doing is mostly a European and North American thing. Africa, Middle East and Latin America are more mixed in opinion, and India remains pro-Russian.
My enemy's enemy is my friend is the prevailing attitude of "anti-colonialists". They don't care about the rights and wrongs of an unprovoked invasion of a peaceful country.
I think anti-colonialists care deeply about the wrongs of an unprovoked invasion of a peaceful country, specifically their own peaceful country that was invaded without provocation by an imperial power. I think they should care more about the imperialist invasion of Ukraine by Russia, but I can understand if they have a different perspective on the topic than the West.
Maybe, but it does undercut if they should seek to claim a moral high ground on such issues in future, given the lack of overt concern showed. Take a cold practical view, as nations typically do, and dont be surprised if attempts to play the moral card later, about historical wrongs which they want present action over, dont work. Of course we face that outcome ourselves.
Many nations that were once colonies are probably receptive to the Russian argument that the boundaries are wrong.
Their own boundaries were often squiggles on a map, handed down by the former colonial powers.
So, it is not too surprising that Africa, Middle East and Latin America are more mixed in their opinion.
(I don't think boundaries should be changed by war, but it is perfectly reasonable to question whether the existing boundaries of a country are justified).
Ukraine was very happy with the boundaries just as they were in 2014.
Indeed - so was Russia (Budapest Memorandum).
Until they weren't.
Which imo is probably the most important feature of the EU - it has stopped random wars based on random boundary disputes. Which was a merry-go-round because they had always been in 3 different places in recent memory.
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
If Johnson loses both by-elections he'll have to go Full Tonto and offer a vote on fox hunting.
Our best hope there is: monarchy abolished, SF start taking seats, hold whip hand in minority government. In the meantime there's always the Emerald Isle. Begorrah.
None of the 3 main party leaders now want to abolish the monarchy, nor is it even a priority for SF who just want to be governed by Dublin not London
Top tip. Professional landlords. Solve your financial problems by simply getting a proper job.
Why is providing high quality housing services not a proper job?
Houses don't maintain or invest in themselves. Traditionally 15-20% or so of the income goes on maintenance and investment, often done in advance during a full refurbishment with a 10 year+ return period.
No but it's a business, profit is the reward for risk. You shouldn't go into it if you are not prepared to make a loss. Those with the money to invest have been feather-bedded over the last few years.
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
If Johnson loses both by-elections he'll have to go Full Tonto and offer a vote on fox hunting.
Pritis 24 election manifesto will be led by the restoration of the death penalty, not just for cop killers but also random foxes.
Allowing fox-hunting seems morally unsound to me on two grounds, but why should I be surprised at anything this administration does?
a) Always look for any upper class/lower class differential in any 'morality'-driven regulation. Cf. divorce under the C of E of old (Scotland was a bit more sensible, not sure about Wales). In this case fox hunting is definitely toff territory, largely upper class/snobbish activity (albeit with quite a few prole followers) - but why allow nobby blood sports when banning working class ones such as cock fighting and bull baiting?
b) foxes obv don't like being hunted*, but cockerels are only too happy to have a scrap, like squaddies of different regiments in an Aldershot pub, so who's being unkind to whom?
*On empirical grounds. They run away. Cf. M. S. Dawkins's 1970s/1980s research on hens, which showed that they preferred not to live in a battery cage but in the more old fashioned alternative, simply by giving them the option.
There is plenty of treatment of animals which people disagree over. Look at the cracking social media campaign that VFC is conducting right now.
One of the criteria to be applied to any activity, from riding ponies to foxhunting to keeping goldfish to having a domestic dog to having a dairy herd to zapping a fly should be - is it cruel.
And it was determined that foxhunting was not cruel.
That said, now is not the time to have a vote to bring back foxhunting. Not least because it would be defeated. Badly.
Fair enough, though I'm afraid Reynard differs.
One further point: any attempt would, actually, be a bit of the old cringe to one's posh betters who went to posh schools and Russell Group unis and know what to tell you to do. Like the good not so old days.
Also:
1. Mrs J wouldn't wear it. 2. But could it be a way of applying pressure to the wetter Tory MPs? And more generally a new front in the anti-woke wars? Quite a few party members woiuld like foxhunting back, like Spam and Honeycomb Mould and rods, poles and perches and so on.
So I wouldn't be surprised if they try. Mr J can always blame the wokists and wets.
Boris Johnson only makes a move on foxhunting as revenge after Carrie leaves him.
Liz Truss looks like the clear frontrunner on these figures. Can she gain support from enough MPs to make the final two?
I reckon she has the best chance of remaking the political terrain and building a new election-winning coalition, but she always seems to poll really badly.
Wallace and Zahawi, both likely leadership candidates, poll above Truss in the ConHome survey as does Trevelyan
If Zahawi does get it, I hope he performs the way he did on vaccines and not the way he has at education.
Although TBF I think that has more to do with the shortcomings of the department than anything else.
My Platinum Jubilee Medal turned up yesterday. I had one of the Ukrainians pin it on my Smiths t-shirt while I saluted a ficus plant and the other Ukrainian did a TikTok of the solemn ceremony. Then it joined the Diamond Jubilee Medal in the bin. I never got the gold one as the eligibility for that was tighter. Also never got the silver one as I was 10.
So. Top Gun. From a practitioners perspective - what's your view.
I've never even seen the first one as I was at university in France when it first came out and France was a lot less globalised in the mid 80s so there were very limited opportunities for consuming non-French media.
Everyone in the F-14 community fucking hated it though. I don't intend to see the new one as it will doubtless be fucking annoying.
Shame would have liked to know your thoughts. I was visiting the Six Counties just after it came out and it was on (video) every day in the mess. The longest ever karaoke.
The other issue with the DBS is that you can't apply for anything other than the very basic for yourself. If your role requires anything more by statute, you have to go via an organisation who have offered you a role. This makes recruiting quickly impossible. Unless you poach. I could go back into teaching. I'm qualified to. But not for months. Why should I wait around with no work?
If this is making recruitment difficult then employers can find ways around it. They could give someone the job, conditional on the DBS being successful, and pay them to do extra training, or other useful preparatory duties that didn't require the enhanced DBS, while waiting for it to come through.
True. Unfortunately, for schools and airports, and I believe the NHS, it is illegal to be employed on the property without one. It is difficult to train to be airside without going airside. Or without ever setting foot in a school or medical facility.
It's not technically illegal to be employed in a school without one, but you have to be escorted by somebody who has one at all times or restricted to areas which children cannot access.
Rachel Wearmouth @REWearmouth · 12h Labour news: Sources tell me that on the long list to be the party’s Stretford and Urmston candidate is one @paulmasonnews
"I'm not leaving until the bailiffs come". That was the latest email sent to me from a tenant. This is the third tenant this year I am evicting due to rent arrears.
In my entire landlord career of 20 years, I have never seen an environment turn so quickly and so badly – and that includes the financial crisis and pandemic. The amount of money owed in rental arrears is in the thousands of pounds and quickly rising. Supposedly good tenants are souring quickly and I am left wondering who I can trust."
That’s worrying, especially that this downturn doesn’t appear (yet!) to have high unemployment associated with it.
Is it a warning of unemployment to come, or is it a regulatory issue, that tenants have collectively realised they can get away for months without paying rent before they get evicted?
It's not really enough information to be useful imo, because we are not told.
We know some things from the profile. The portfolio is geographically spread countrywide, so there will be management fees on everything, which will be costing 13-15% of total income. We know that there has not been major investment in energy efficiency, because it was being written about as a challenge in 2021 by the Secret Landlord - sensible people did that when they renovated or refurbished from about 2014 on and took advantage of the wide range of schemes available throughout.
We don't know where his problems are, or what sort of tenants they are with. Or what rent levels are charged. Or how hard he drives his rents wrt market - where is his balance between long-term tenancies and maximum rents? It's a choice.
It can't be job losses, as we have full employment.
And arrears significant enough to cause eviction do not occur overnight - it would normally be several months at least. Given that there is a large portfolio, "thousands of ££" could still be quite marginal.
IMO we are not told enough.
all good points, but if we can trust him at all he has comparators going back to before 2008. And job losses are not required as an explanation if you accept that lots of jobs no longer cover the bills even with UC top up.
gonna be a tough winter
Agree with both of those paras.
It will very much depend on previous rainy day money, and how close to the edge people are running.
As it happens I did my end of May readings last night, and my bill is up on the same months last year, but I have managed some 25% reductions of usage on last year, partly because of the extra sun and turning the GFCH off 3 weeks early. But for me the gas next winter will be the expensive one.
I have succeeded in quite a substantial reduction in gas, and less so electric, and I am substantially limiting use of my car. It has reached the point where, for a single person, it can be cheaper to travel by train rather than drive.
But a lot of people seem to be blindly doing exactly what they always do. I thought people were supposed to be rational actors responding to information conveyed through prices.
One guy on breakfast news the other day said he had to turn the thermostat down. No you don't, it's May, turn it off until October.
(Obviously I accept some people can't easily reduce costs, eg needing the car for work)
My illustrative difference is that my bill this year (£140 for the last 2 month) with the heating turned off (ie summer bill) is the same as the year-round average from 2 years ago. Which is quite a difference even if still modest.
Current diversity in heating is interesting. Mine (newish refurb from 2009 or so) normally goes off completely for 5 months in the year.
I know plenty of people in near-passive houses (near-passive means a passive house not registered because it costs £2-3k to get the official designation) who's heating system consists of one or two 3kw electric immersion heaters in the slab sometimes used overnight and a towel radiator upstairs, or who use their central heating for about 2 months of the year. It's like the slab is a modern storage heater.
despite changes to devolved income tax rates that overall were estimated to raise an additional £500 million, the Scottish Fiscal Commission forecast in December that the revenues the Scottish Government will receive this year will be £190 million lower than if income tax had not been devolved.
Whoops. So the devolution of income tax costs £190m, even if @DavidL has to pay a marginal rate of 41% instead of 40%?
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
If Johnson loses both by-elections he'll have to go Full Tonto and offer a vote on fox hunting.
Our best hope there is: monarchy abolished, SF start taking seats, hold whip hand in minority government. In the meantime there's always the Emerald Isle. Begorrah.
None of the 3 main party leaders now want to abolish the monarchy, nor is it even a priority for SF who just want to be governed by Dublin not London
Reducing recruitment by 1,000 people is really going to make a lot of difference.
Although I've never seen particular evidence, contrary to Case's claims, that it really does recruit 'super-brightly young graduates who will challenge received wisdom.'
The people I know who went through on it tend to be bright enough but both scatterbrained and unimaginative. Which, if they are representative, might explain quite a lot about the current state of certain government departments.
The other issue with the DBS is that you can't apply for anything other than the very basic for yourself. If your role requires anything more by statute, you have to go via an organisation who have offered you a role. This makes recruiting quickly impossible. Unless you poach. I could go back into teaching. I'm qualified to. But not for months. Why should I wait around with no work?
If this is making recruitment difficult then employers can find ways around it. They could give someone the job, conditional on the DBS being successful, and pay them to do extra training, or other useful preparatory duties that didn't require the enhanced DBS, while waiting for it to come through.
True. Unfortunately, for schools and airports, and I believe the NHS, it is illegal to be employed on the property without one. It is difficult to train to be airside without going airside. Or without ever setting foot in a school or medical facility.
It's not technically illegal to be employed in a school without one, but you have to be escorted by somebody who has one at all times or restricted to areas which children cannot access.
Which makes it just a bit of a pest.
Fair point. Could be simplified by allowing folk just to apply for their own. The cost could be refunded as a signing on bonus.
Edit: couple of questions for @Dura_Ace that said.
My *impression* from others is that anyone who knows anything about air combat thinks it's ridiculous. But fun.
In general, "real" air to air combat/training is a lot more detailed, structured and planned that it appears in films. Eg, we'll approach on X heading, get them in a two circle fight at altitude Y and speed Z, etc., etc. and when the plan doesn't come together we'll all fuck off at high speed.
A notable exception was BFM training on the Hawk which always had the potential to degenerate into 4 v 4 furballs over the Irish Sea.
My Platinum Jubilee Medal turned up yesterday. I had one of the Ukrainians pin it on my Smiths t-shirt while I saluted a ficus plant and the other Ukrainian did a TikTok of the solemn ceremony. Then it joined the Diamond Jubilee Medal in the bin. I never got the gold one as the eligibility for that was tighter. Also never got the silver one as I was 10.
So. Top Gun. From a practitioners perspective - what's your view.
I've never even seen the first one as I was at university in France when it first came out and France was a lot less globalised in the mid 80s so there were very limited opportunities for consuming non-French media.
Everyone in the F-14 community fucking hated it though. I don't intend to see the new one as it will doubtless be fucking annoying.
I guess this happens when ever someones work is shown on film/TV in fiction. Its never going to that accurate, and often will downright grate.
I think someone counted 'Casualty's' survival rate from cardiac arrest and its out by about 500% or something.
"I'm not leaving until the bailiffs come". That was the latest email sent to me from a tenant. This is the third tenant this year I am evicting due to rent arrears.
In my entire landlord career of 20 years, I have never seen an environment turn so quickly and so badly – and that includes the financial crisis and pandemic. The amount of money owed in rental arrears is in the thousands of pounds and quickly rising. Supposedly good tenants are souring quickly and I am left wondering who I can trust."
That’s worrying, especially that this downturn doesn’t appear (yet!) to have high unemployment associated with it.
Is it a warning of unemployment to come, or is it a regulatory issue, that tenants have collectively realised they can get away for months without paying rent before they get evicted?
It's not really enough information to be useful imo, because we are not told.
We know some things from the profile. The portfolio is geographically spread countrywide, so there will be management fees on everything, which will be costing 13-15% of total income. We know that there has not been major investment in energy efficiency, because it was being written about as a challenge in 2021 by the Secret Landlord - sensible people did that when they renovated or refurbished from about 2014 on and took advantage of the wide range of schemes available throughout.
We don't know where his problems are, or what sort of tenants they are with. Or what rent levels are charged. Or how hard he drives his rents wrt market - where is his balance between long-term tenancies and maximum rents? It's a choice.
It can't be job losses, as we have full employment.
And arrears significant enough to cause eviction do not occur overnight - it would normally be several months at least. Given that there is a large portfolio, "thousands of ££" could still be quite marginal.
IMO we are not told enough.
all good points, but if we can trust him at all he has comparators going back to before 2008. And job losses are not required as an explanation if you accept that lots of jobs no longer cover the bills even with UC top up.
gonna be a tough winter
Agree with both of those paras.
It will very much depend on previous rainy day money, and how close to the edge people are running.
As it happens I did my end of May readings last night, and my bill is up on the same months last year, but I have managed some 25% reductions of usage on last year, partly because of the extra sun and turning the GFCH off 3 weeks early. But for me the gas next winter will be the expensive one.
I have succeeded in quite a substantial reduction in gas, and less so electric, and I am substantially limiting use of my car. It has reached the point where, for a single person, it can be cheaper to travel by train rather than drive.
But a lot of people seem to be blindly doing exactly what they always do. I thought people were supposed to be rational actors responding to information conveyed through prices.
One guy on breakfast news the other day said he had to turn the thermostat down. No you don't, it's May, turn it off until October.
(Obviously I accept some people can't easily reduce costs, eg needing the car for work)
Have you ever read the work of David Hume? Admittedly he was talking about moral philosophy but his arguments apply equally well to economics.
What strikes me is the pathetic inertia and complacency of the UEFA and FIFA officials, even when told of the horrible chaos outside the stadium, going on there and then. Shameful
My Platinum Jubilee Medal turned up yesterday. I had one of the Ukrainians pin it on my Smiths t-shirt while I saluted a ficus plant and the other Ukrainian did a TikTok of the solemn ceremony. Then it joined the Diamond Jubilee Medal in the bin. I never got the gold one as the eligibility for that was tighter. Also never got the silver one as I was 10.
So. Top Gun. From a practitioners perspective - what's your view.
I've never even seen the first one as I was at university in France when it first came out and France was a lot less globalised in the mid 80s so there were very limited opportunities for consuming non-French media.
Everyone in the F-14 community fucking hated it though. I don't intend to see the new one as it will doubtless be fucking annoying.
Shame would have liked to know your thoughts. I was visiting the Six Counties just after it came out and it was on (video) every day in the mess. The longest ever karaoke.
One lasting consequence of the original was that every F-14 nugget (except me who'd never seen TG) knew the flat spin ejection procedure on their first day in the RAG.
"I'm not leaving until the bailiffs come". That was the latest email sent to me from a tenant. This is the third tenant this year I am evicting due to rent arrears.
In my entire landlord career of 20 years, I have never seen an environment turn so quickly and so badly – and that includes the financial crisis and pandemic. The amount of money owed in rental arrears is in the thousands of pounds and quickly rising. Supposedly good tenants are souring quickly and I am left wondering who I can trust."
That’s worrying, especially that this downturn doesn’t appear (yet!) to have high unemployment associated with it.
Is it a warning of unemployment to come, or is it a regulatory issue, that tenants have collectively realised they can get away for months without paying rent before they get evicted?
It's not really enough information to be useful imo, because we are not told.
We know some things from the profile. The portfolio is geographically spread countrywide, so there will be management fees on everything, which will be costing 13-15% of total income. We know that there has not been major investment in energy efficiency, because it was being written about as a challenge in 2021 by the Secret Landlord - sensible people did that when they renovated or refurbished from about 2014 on and took advantage of the wide range of schemes available throughout.
We don't know where his problems are, or what sort of tenants they are with. Or what rent levels are charged. Or how hard he drives his rents wrt market - where is his balance between long-term tenancies and maximum rents? It's a choice.
It can't be job losses, as we have full employment.
And arrears significant enough to cause eviction do not occur overnight - it would normally be several months at least. Given that there is a large portfolio, "thousands of ££" could still be quite marginal.
IMO we are not told enough.
all good points, but if we can trust him at all he has comparators going back to before 2008. And job losses are not required as an explanation if you accept that lots of jobs no longer cover the bills even with UC top up.
gonna be a tough winter
Agree with both of those paras.
It will very much depend on previous rainy day money, and how close to the edge people are running.
As it happens I did my end of May readings last night, and my bill is up on the same months last year, but I have managed some 25% reductions of usage on last year, partly because of the extra sun and turning the GFCH off 3 weeks early. But for me the gas next winter will be the expensive one.
I have succeeded in quite a substantial reduction in gas, and less so electric, and I am substantially limiting use of my car. It has reached the point where, for a single person, it can be cheaper to travel by train rather than drive.
But a lot of people seem to be blindly doing exactly what they always do. I thought people were supposed to be rational actors responding to information conveyed through prices.
One guy on breakfast news the other day said he had to turn the thermostat down. No you don't, it's May, turn it off until October.
(Obviously I accept some people can't easily reduce costs, eg needing the car for work)
I agree about turning heating off in May, as we have done.
But I'm wavering; it is 17.5 degrees indoors (I just checked). And it is June tomorrow.
Liz Truss looks like the clear frontrunner on these figures. Can she gain support from enough MPs to make the final two?
I reckon she has the best chance of remaking the political terrain and building a new election-winning coalition, but she always seems to poll really badly.
The Truss v Hunt in the play-off, and I reckon The Truss wins.
Then we get a government run by The Truss and Priti, and all things are possible.
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
If Johnson loses both by-elections he'll have to go Full Tonto and offer a vote on fox hunting.
Pritis 24 election manifesto will be led by the restoration of the death penalty, not just for cop killers but also random foxes.
Allowing fox-hunting seems morally unsound to me on two grounds, but why should I be surprised at anything this administration does?
a) Always look for any upper class/lower class differential in any 'morality'-driven regulation. Cf. divorce under the C of E of old (Scotland was a bit more sensible, not sure about Wales). In this case fox hunting is definitely toff territory, largely upper class/snobbish activity (albeit with quite a few prole followers) - but why allow nobby blood sports when banning working class ones such as cock fighting and bull baiting?
b) foxes obv don't like being hunted*, but cockerels are only too happy to have a scrap, like squaddies of different regiments in an Aldershot pub, so who's being unkind to whom?
*On empirical grounds. They run away. Cf. M. S. Dawkins's 1970s/1980s research on hens, which showed that they preferred not to live in a battery cage but in the more old fashioned alternative, simply by giving them the option.
There is plenty of treatment of animals which people disagree over. Look at the cracking social media campaign that VFC is conducting right now.
One of the criteria to be applied to any activity, from riding ponies to foxhunting to keeping goldfish to having a domestic dog to having a dairy herd to zapping a fly should be - is it cruel.
And it was determined that foxhunting was not cruel.
That said, now is not the time to have a vote to bring back foxhunting. Not least because it would be defeated. Badly.
Well said. People who think fox hunting was cruel never bothered to read the burns report because they were far too consumed by their prejudice and general hatred of genuinely rural people that don't share their plastic view of the countryside.
Quality erasure of "genuinely rural people" who think fox hunting is a bag of shite.
Or are you only genuinely rural if you think fox hunting is good?
The genuinely rural realise that death and suffering among foxes has rocketed since the hunting act because people used to want there to be some foxes. Now they don't farmers and pheasant shoots splat them with nightsights by the dozen. The wounded ones die of gangrene because they don't lick their wounds (only tamed canids do)
I am sure a countryman like you knows all that. But hey, increased animal suffering Vs spiting the toffs...
In with a bullet at no.2, more powerful vacuum cleaners. They’ll certainly be useful for hoovering up those wood splinters from scraping the bottom of the barrel.
"I'm not leaving until the bailiffs come". That was the latest email sent to me from a tenant. This is the third tenant this year I am evicting due to rent arrears.
In my entire landlord career of 20 years, I have never seen an environment turn so quickly and so badly – and that includes the financial crisis and pandemic. The amount of money owed in rental arrears is in the thousands of pounds and quickly rising. Supposedly good tenants are souring quickly and I am left wondering who I can trust."
That’s worrying, especially that this downturn doesn’t appear (yet!) to have high unemployment associated with it.
Is it a warning of unemployment to come, or is it a regulatory issue, that tenants have collectively realised they can get away for months without paying rent before they get evicted?
I think it’s probably rampant inflation eating away at their disposable income. Something has to give and they’ve twigged they can, as you say, fail to pay and get away with it for several months.
What they do next is a different question. Councils are going to find it really expensive housing so many evicted tenants in anything other than council houses and they’ve not got enough of those already.
Well, OK. I think it is a bit 19th century to regard the existence of tenant protection as a problem, and their relying on it as "getting away with it." But then, I am not a landlord
I think the tenants are a bit buggered if they try to do the decent thing anyway, aren't they, because the council can then label them intentionally homeless?
Yes.
"I'm not leaving until the bailiffs come" is very often a Council forcing a T to stay as long as possible so they don't have to provide accommodation. It's been a problem forever.
It also forces the T to get a CCJ plus a couple of thousand extra debt (current court costs) in order to get a priority on the Council list, which means they get no credit for the next 6 years plus the extra debt. It is an abusive policy.
And it's a game that Councils have played forever.
Another one is to go into an HMO and register each room for a Band A council tax as a separate dwelling.
I'm bowled over by all the sympathy for the poor f*cking tenant in this conversation.
My heart bleeds for landlords who have the hassle of kicking the tenant out onto the street while the tenant wilfully chooses not to rob a bank to pay the rent. Those evicted tenants should pull themselves together - loads of cardboard boxes going spare for zero rent.
Tbf to @Ish, I think his point was that it's a sign of the CoL crisis looming.
@Sandpit's suggestion that getting into debt, taking a CCJ, risking eviction and the bailiffs seizing your car are all things tenants might do because they have "have collectively realised they can get away for months without paying rent before they get evicted" is pretty obnoxious.
Edit: Apologies to @IshmaelZ - I'd misread it that he was the landlord.
My heart bleeds for such tenants who are put through the stress of a Court and eviction process, and court costs and the extra months rent on their debts, and have their financial lives wrecked for the best part of a decade, because Councils try and avoid their statutory responsibilities to provide housing for those entitled to it.
LLs have no option other than to work with the broken legal processes we are given by Politicians and the organisations they listen to.
LL organisations have been asking for 20 years for a Housing Court to make these processes work, but politicians choose to sweep it under carpet and heap the pain on tenants, and rely on populist anti-landlord rhetoric. It's immoral.
I'm only a few minutes in but these guys give it a thumbs up. Loving the handle of one of the "experts". His name is Andy Mariner, callsign "Grand" - classy as f&ck.
"It is a moment often seen in the downward trajectory of embattled prime ministers: a whirl of new policy ideas intended to appeal to voters, but which are in fact more often aimed at placating their own MPs. Boris Johnson is, some would argue, approaching this point.
In recent days Downing Street has briefed in favour of grammar schools and imperial measurements. Earlier weeks saw forays into other Conservative comfort zones, including bashing the EU and talking up fossil fuels.
Such nostalgia politics is routinely promoted by Conservative backbenchers. But it is one of the paradoxes of Tory party politics that the more secure a prime minister is in office, the less they have to indulge these ideas."
If Johnson loses both by-elections he'll have to go Full Tonto and offer a vote on fox hunting.
Our best hope there is: monarchy abolished, SF start taking seats, hold whip hand in minority government. In the meantime there's always the Emerald Isle. Begorrah.
None of the 3 main party leaders now want to abolish the monarchy, nor is it even a priority for SF who just want to be governed by Dublin not London
You do know that Davey isn't god don't you. He doesn't decide LD policy.
62% of LD voters also want to keep the monarchy, significantly higher than the 43% of Labour voters who want to keep the monarchy even if not quite as high as the 86% of Conservative voters who want to keep the monarchy
Comments
gonna be a tough winter
https://twitter.com/benrileysmith/status/1531538752266436609
The DBS, along with valid, clean driving licence, is rapidly becoming extinct as a person spec for jobs which have absolutely no bloody need of them.
It always was a way (and a discriminatory one) of lazy recruitment shortening the shortlist.
https://twitter.com/rossmccaff/status/1531531653486714882?s=21&t=OaHAK6nDnjaRbRtTicX5iQ
A fair chunk of the benefit package for school staff is not being needed during the holidays. So everyone who works in schools (receptionists, business managers, cooks, cleaners, TAs and teachers) can be at home with their children. Traditionally, that's been worth quite a lot, even if it's been unpaid. Another benefit has been that there are schools in literally every part of the country. It's been a useful gig for the trailing spouse.
Now that other employers are having to offer a lot more flexibility over where and when work is done, that doesn't apply to the same degree.
a) Always look for any upper class/lower class differential in any 'morality'-driven regulation. Cf. divorce under the C of E of old (Scotland was a bit more sensible, not sure about Wales). In this case fox hunting is definitely toff territory, largely upper class/snobbish activity (albeit with quite a few prole followers) - but why allow nobby blood sports when banning working class ones such as cock fighting and bull baiting?
b) foxes obv don't like being hunted*, but cockerels are only too happy to have a scrap, like squaddies of different regiments in an Aldershot pub, so who's being unkind to whom?
*On empirical grounds. They run away. Cf. M. S. Dawkins's 1970s/1980s research on hens, which showed that they preferred not to live in a battery cage but in the more old fashioned alternative, simply by giving them the option.
Their own boundaries are often squiggles on a map, handed down by the former colonial powers.
So, it is not too surprising that Africa, Middle East and Latin America are more mixed in their opinion.
(I don't think boundaries should be changed by war, but it is perfectly reasonable to question whether the existing boundaries of a country are justified).
Is it because Bozza is -15? If so it isn't really relevant. He is PM. Not that anyone remotely sane or sensible or not a twat would have done what he has done but in difficult times the PM takes the hit. Grass is always greener syndrome.
I see him leading the Cons (to a possible win) at the next GE.
*cue immediate vonc and ejection of current PM...*
There was no justification for Putin annexing land eight years ago, and there’s sure as hell no justification for what was a full-scale invasion of Ukraine this year.
The second catch is that every bit of paper was introduced in good faith for a good reason. It may be that the paper has exploded out of control, but I doubt that there are significant bits of buraucracy that can just be zapped without downsides. As the UK is seeing now. For example, Ofsted and the school data industry are expensive and tell us much less than we like to think about what goes on in schools. But I'm not sure that we would be better off if they didn't exist at all.
I suppose it's possible that BoJo and JRM have carefully calculated the optimum size of the Civil Service, rather than pulling a number out of their bottoms based on little more than hatred of an institution that points out that the can't have what they want...
I mean, almost anything is possible...
If your role requires anything more by statute, you have to go via an organisation who have offered you a role.
This makes recruiting quickly impossible. Unless you poach.
I could go back into teaching. I'm qualified to.
But not for months. Why should I wait around with no work?
One of the criteria to be applied to any activity, from riding ponies to foxhunting to keeping goldfish to having a domestic dog to having a dairy herd to zapping a fly should be - is it cruel.
And it was determined that foxhunting was not cruel.
That said, now is not the time to have a vote to bring back foxhunting. Not least because it would be defeated. Badly.
My heart bleeds for landlords who have the hassle of kicking the tenant out onto the street while the tenant wilfully chooses not to rob a bank to pay the rent. Those evicted tenants should pull themselves together - loads of cardboard boxes going spare for zero rent.
Tbf to @Ish, I think his point was that it's a sign of the CoL crisis looming.
@Sandpit's suggestion that getting into debt, taking a CCJ, risking eviction and the bailiffs seizing your car are all things tenants might do because they have "have collectively realised they can get away for months without paying rent before they get evicted" is pretty obnoxious.
Edit: Apologies to @IshmaelZ - I'd misread it that he was the landlord.
It will very much depend on previous rainy day money, and how close to the edge people are running.
As it happens I did my end of May readings last night, and my bill is up on the same months last year, but I have managed some 25% reductions of usage on last year, partly because of the extra sun and turning the GFCH off 3 weeks early. But for me the gas next winter will be the expensive one.
I reckon she has the best chance of remaking the political terrain and building a new election-winning coalition, but she always seems to poll really badly.
Professional landlords. Solve your financial problems by simply getting a proper job.
But she would be a frigging disaster at the helm of the tory party. If they choose her, then a landslide Labour victory really is on the cards.
https://ifs.org.uk/publications/16067
despite changes to devolved income tax rates that overall were estimated to raise an additional £500 million, the Scottish Fiscal Commission forecast in December that the revenues the Scottish Government will receive this year will be £190 million lower than if income tax had not been devolved.
And not only 'coz I'd win it.
Houses don't maintain or invest in themselves. Traditionally 15-20% or so of the income goes on maintenance and investment, often done in advance during a full refurbishment with a 10 year+ return period.
One further point: any attempt would, actually, be a bit of the old cringe to one's posh betters who went to posh schools and Russell Group unis and know what to tell you to do. Like the good not so old days.
Also:
1. Mrs J wouldn't wear it.
2. But could it be a way of applying pressure to the wetter Tory MPs? And more generally a new front in the anti-woke wars? Quite a few party members woiuld like foxhunting back, like Spam and Honeycomb Mould and rods, poles and perches and so on.
So I wouldn't be surprised if they try. Mr J can always blame the wokists and wets.
But a lot of people seem to be blindly doing exactly what they always do. I thought people were supposed to be rational actors responding to information conveyed through prices.
One guy on breakfast news the other day said he had to turn the thermostat down. No you don't, it's May, turn it off until October.
(Obviously I accept some people can't easily reduce costs, eg needing the car for work)
The BBC yesterday had some report on the Donbas, in which they quoted a local who said, "About 30 per cent of the population supported Russia, 30 per cent supported Ukraine and 40 per cent just wanted the fighting to stop".
Much like N. Ireland, there is a substantial fraction of the population in the Donbas who wanted to belong to a different country.
And many ex-colonies can understand this, hence their ambivalence.
Pure class.
Edit: couple of questions for @Dura_Ace that said.
Government: "They took a short-term decision to look good in the press during covid by spraying around trillions of pounds and are now inflicting the inevitable long-term consequences of that on the country."
My beef was the way there was zero simulator work shown. I guess that nowadays they'd spend more time in the simulator as in the air. Although that wouldn't be as much fun on film ...
Unfortunately, for schools and airports, and I believe the NHS, it is illegal to be employed on the property without one.
It is difficult to train to be airside without going airside. Or without ever setting foot in a school or medical facility.
Everyone in the F-14 community fucking hated it though. I don't intend to see the new one as it will doubtless be fucking annoying.
Or are you only genuinely rural if you think fox hunting is good?
Until they weren't.
Which imo is probably the most important feature of the EU - it has stopped random wars based on random boundary disputes. Which was a merry-go-round because they had always been in 3 different places in recent memory.
But running a business is a proper job.
Although TBF I think that has more to do with the shortcomings of the department than anything else.
Which makes it just a bit of a pest.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61641930
@REWearmouth
·
12h
Labour news: Sources tell me that on the long list to be the party’s Stretford and Urmston candidate is one
@paulmasonnews
Current diversity in heating is interesting. Mine (newish refurb from 2009 or so) normally goes off completely for 5 months in the year.
I know plenty of people in near-passive houses (near-passive means a passive house not registered because it costs £2-3k to get the official designation) who's heating system consists of one or two 3kw electric immersion heaters in the slab sometimes used overnight and a towel radiator upstairs, or who use their central heating for about 2 months of the year. It's like the slab is a modern storage heater.
In my experience he is not that effective. My guess is the vaccine rollout was running well and he didn't interfere and fuck it up.
https://twitter.com/AasmahMir/status/1531550760714002433
Although I've never seen particular evidence, contrary to Case's claims, that it really does recruit 'super-brightly young graduates who will challenge received wisdom.'
The people I know who went through on it tend to be bright enough but both scatterbrained and unimaginative. Which, if they are representative, might explain quite a lot about the current state of certain government departments.
Could be simplified by allowing folk just to apply for their own. The cost could be refunded as a signing on bonus.
A notable exception was BFM training on the Hawk which always had the potential to degenerate into 4 v 4 furballs over the Irish Sea.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1618395/Brexit-news-Boris-Johnson-2000-ideas-Jacob-Rees-Mogg-suggestions-EU-rules-update
I think someone counted 'Casualty's' survival rate from cardiac arrest and its out by about 500% or something.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hume/#SelIntTheCriPhaEnq
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/may/31/champions-league-paris-final-fiasco-triggers-hillsborough-survivor-trauma?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
What strikes me is the pathetic inertia and complacency of the UEFA and FIFA officials, even when told of the horrible chaos outside the stadium, going on there and then. Shameful
But I'm wavering; it is 17.5 degrees indoors (I just checked). And it is June tomorrow.
Then we get a government run by The Truss and Priti, and all things are possible.
I am sure a countryman like you knows all that. But hey, increased animal suffering Vs spiting the toffs...
They’ll certainly be useful for hoovering up those wood splinters from scraping the bottom of the barrel.
LLs have no option other than to work with the broken legal processes we are given by Politicians and the organisations they listen to.
LL organisations have been asking for 20 years for a Housing Court to make these processes work, but politicians choose to sweep it under carpet and heap the pain on tenants, and rely on populist anti-landlord rhetoric. It's immoral.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5tJA9pluxY
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/05/21/young-britons-are-turning-their-backs-monarchy