Howdy, Stranger!

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

The Tories still favorite to win most General Election seats – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited June 20 in General
imageThe Tories still favorite to win most General Election seats – politicalbetting.com

With everything else that is happening we have barely looked at the next general election betting and the latest position is in the chart above. The Tories are now down to a 51.55% chance for most seats with LAB not far behind.

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 44,318
    The Conservatives will win more seats at the next General Election.

    PM Mordaunt will get a 3-figure majority.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 52,205
    There are too many variables to be certain of 24 result but a hung parliament would seem likely

    However, Boris going, hopefully by the conference, would change the narrative as would Starmer and Rayner re the FPN, but I think it is most unlikely they will receive FPN's
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 52,205

    The Conservatives will win more seats at the next General Election.

    PM Mordaunt will get a 3-figure majority.

    I would really be pleased to see Penny win the succession
  • jamesdoylejamesdoyle Posts: 76

    The Conservatives will win more seats at the next General Election.

    PM Mordaunt will get a 3-figure majority.

    Anyone else remember the earliest days of pb, when Iain Dale would post about how he was going to beat Norman Lamb in North Norfolk, and that other Tory in Torbay was certain he was going to beat the LibDems? That's you, that is.
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 1,617

    The Conservatives will win more seats at the next General Election.

    PM Mordaunt will get a 3-figure majority.

    And CPI will be 2% by then (maybe) 👍
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 17,895

    The Conservatives will win more seats at the next General Election.

    PM Mordaunt will get a 3-figure majority.

    Why?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 42,827
    Jonathan said:

    The Conservatives will win more seats at the next General Election.

    PM Mordaunt will get a 3-figure majority.

    Why?
    She has impeccable credentials.

    She is not Boris Johnson.
    She is not SKS.
    ...you need more than this??
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 44,318

    The Conservatives will win more seats at the next General Election.

    PM Mordaunt will get a 3-figure majority.

    Anyone else remember the earliest days of pb, when Iain Dale would post about how he was going to beat Norman Lamb in North Norfolk, and that other Tory in Torbay was certain he was going to beat the LibDems? That's you, that is.
    Except neither of them had a track record for being right....
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 20,944
    Swiss central bank surprisingly raises interest rates by 50 basis points.
  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,526

    The Conservatives will win more seats at the next General Election.

    PM Mordaunt will get a 3-figure majority.

    In her own seat perhaps....
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,216
    I agree that PM Mordaunt could be a game changer.

    I would like to see the PB Tory view is of the "Blue Wall". The remain seats with 30%+ graduates that the LDs have been working on.

    Also there are few signs that the Tories can hold their red wall seats.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 7,843
    DavidL said:

    Jonathan said:

    The Conservatives will win more seats at the next General Election.

    PM Mordaunt will get a 3-figure majority.

    Why?
    She has impeccable credentials.

    She is not Boris Johnson.
    She is not SKS.
    ...you need more than this??
    I suspect she'd do as badly, probably much worse, than Theresa did in 2017. Both have a somewhat haughty, head-girl manner that many voters find a turn off.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 70,237
    dixiedean said:

    Swiss central bank surprisingly raises interest rates by 50 basis points.

    CHF, USD, GBP and EUR will all probably be worth the same soon enough.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 44,318
    Jonathan said:

    The Conservatives will win more seats at the next General Election.

    PM Mordaunt will get a 3-figure majority.

    Why?
    She's the candidate that could retain the Red Wall whilst bringing the ABCs back into the fold. It's a trick that Boris clearly can't perform - and why he will not lead into a General Eletion - but I believe she can. A sensible politician capable of giving a very fine speech - but with just enough showmanship to stand apart.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 22,078
    Point made here is that whichever Cabinet minister ends Boris Johnson's career will actually be empowered. 148 MPs are against him & Mishal Husain touched a nerve with Raab this morn when she said the govt doesn't have the authority to put the Rwanda policy before parliament https://twitter.com/REWearmouth/status/1537353037676675073
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 28,877

    I agree that PM Mordaunt could be a game changer.

    I would like to see the PB Tory view is of the "Blue Wall". The remain seats with 30%+ graduates that the LDs have been working on.

    Also there are few signs that the Tories can hold their red wall seats.

    I'm on her at long odds and I think she'd be a good choice for the Cons in the unlikely event they manage to summon up the will to ditch Johnson.

    Don't know about gamechanger though. The 'game' will still be asking the voters if they want yet more Tory govt after 14 years of what no-one can honestly describe as inspiring stewardship.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 42,827

    DavidL said:

    Jonathan said:

    The Conservatives will win more seats at the next General Election.

    PM Mordaunt will get a 3-figure majority.

    Why?
    She has impeccable credentials.

    She is not Boris Johnson.
    She is not SKS.
    ...you need more than this??
    I suspect she'd do as badly, probably much worse, than Theresa did in 2017. Both have a somewhat haughty, head-girl manner that many voters find a turn off.
    To be honest she has not made enough of an impression on me to have a firm view. Given that I spend many, many more times reading and commenting on political stories than the average voter that is a concern. I suspect at the moment that most would guess she was a minor character in Harry Potter with a name like that.

    But that "clean slate" is what the Tories will need post Boris and they absolutely need to be post Boris by the election.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 22,297
    FPT Northern_Al said:

    "I can't help but wonder if Lord Geidt's resignation letter to the PM contains some dynamite. Normally, such letters, and the PM's "thanks for your service" response, are published as a matter of course, but this one is clearly being sat on. Why? Hopefully, Geidt himself will be brave and honourable enough to release it."

    So far we know 3 things:-

    1. Lord Geidt was the PM's ethics advisor.
    2. According to Raab he was asked to advise on a "commercially sensitive matter".
    3. The PM has decided not to publish the resignation letter.


    There is an obvious potential explanation which screams out at me from those facts.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 28,877
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Jonathan said:

    The Conservatives will win more seats at the next General Election.

    PM Mordaunt will get a 3-figure majority.

    Why?
    She has impeccable credentials.

    She is not Boris Johnson.
    She is not SKS.
    ...you need more than this??
    I suspect she'd do as badly, probably much worse, than Theresa did in 2017. Both have a somewhat haughty, head-girl manner that many voters find a turn off.
    To be honest she has not made enough of an impression on me to have a firm view. Given that I spend many, many more times reading and commenting on political stories than the average voter that is a concern. I suspect at the moment that most would guess she was a minor character in Harry Potter with a name like that.

    But that "clean slate" is what the Tories will need post Boris and they absolutely need to be post Boris by the election.
    Her USP is being a cabinet standard leaver who didn't stand for leader last time and has since avoided proximity to Johnson. Great chance imo if Johnson is ditched before the GE (which I doubt).
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 34,892
    dixiedean said:

    Swiss central bank surprisingly raises interest rates by 50 basis points.

    Watch the BoE flunk it with no rise of just 25 points.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 20,934
    Cyclefree said:

    FPT Northern_Al said:

    "I can't help but wonder if Lord Geidt's resignation letter to the PM contains some dynamite. Normally, such letters, and the PM's "thanks for your service" response, are published as a matter of course, but this one is clearly being sat on. Why? Hopefully, Geidt himself will be brave and honourable enough to release it."

    So far we know 3 things:-

    1. Lord Geidt was the PM's ethics advisor.
    2. According to Raab he was asked to advise on a "commercially sensitive matter".
    3. The PM has decided not to publish the resignation letter.


    There is an obvious potential explanation which screams out at me from those facts.

    Go on, help those of us with less intuition/imagination...
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 98,988
    edited June 16
    At the local elections and in the by elections the biggest swings from the Tories have been to the LDs not Labour.

    While Labour gains from the Tories may be enough to produce a hung parliament therefore on current polls, it could be gains from the Tories in Remain areas of the South that end up giving Labour most seats. That would also be a key difference from 2015 when the Tories made their biggest gains from the LDs not Labour after being in coalition with them, enabling the first Tory majority in 18 years
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 2,004
    Cyclefree said:

    FPT Northern_Al said:

    "I can't help but wonder if Lord Geidt's resignation letter to the PM contains some dynamite. Normally, such letters, and the PM's "thanks for your service" response, are published as a matter of course, but this one is clearly being sat on. Why? Hopefully, Geidt himself will be brave and honourable enough to release it."

    So far we know 3 things:-

    1. Lord Geidt was the PM's ethics advisor.
    2. According to Raab he was asked to advise on a "commercially sensitive matter".
    3. The PM has decided not to publish the resignation letter.


    There is an obvious potential explanation which screams out at me from those facts.

    Yes. Let’s hope the letters contents appear. I think they will have to
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 20,944
    edited June 16
    MaxPB said:

    dixiedean said:

    Swiss central bank surprisingly raises interest rates by 50 basis points.

    Watch the BoE flunk it with no rise of just 25 points.
    Inflation in Switzerland currently roaring away at, er, 2.9%.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 22,078
    So the Tory candidate in Wakefield said that the 2016 Brexit campaign was built on lies.
    https://twitter.com/chrisbutlerpol/status/1537070044500348929
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 22,078
    Some analysis of the latest episode in the never-ending Downing Street psychodrama.

    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/analysis-geidt-resignation-means-johnson-cant-move-on_uk_62aacaf5e4b0cf43c8527421
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 22,297

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT Northern_Al said:

    "I can't help but wonder if Lord Geidt's resignation letter to the PM contains some dynamite. Normally, such letters, and the PM's "thanks for your service" response, are published as a matter of course, but this one is clearly being sat on. Why? Hopefully, Geidt himself will be brave and honourable enough to release it."

    So far we know 3 things:-

    1. Lord Geidt was the PM's ethics advisor.
    2. According to Raab he was asked to advise on a "commercially sensitive matter".
    3. The PM has decided not to publish the resignation letter.


    There is an obvious potential explanation which screams out at me from those facts.

    Go on, help those of us with less intuition/imagination...
    The PM is sensitive to criticism, yes, but not that bothered about it. So a Geidt criticism along the lines of those made by his former Justice Minister or former anti-corruption Tsar etc would not be enough to be worth hiding.

    But if Geidt had been asked to advise on or opined on a commercial arrangement involving the PM either now or in the future and that this had something to do with his resignation, well, that might well be something the PM wants to keep away from the public domain.

    It is that phrase "commercially sensitive matter" and this being asked of the PM's ethics advisor which intrigues me.

    Of course Raab may well not know what he is talking about. Which is a very strong - and maybe even the likelier - possibility.
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 3,997
    edited June 16

    I agree that PM Mordaunt could be a game changer.

    I would like to see the PB Tory view is of the "Blue Wall". The remain seats with 30%+ graduates that the LDs have been working on.

    Also there are few signs that the Tories can hold their red wall seats.

    In Surrey alone, the Tories can kiss goodbye to Esher and Walton, Guildford, Woking and possibly Mole Valley. Jeremy Hunt will likely migrate to the new safer seat (assuming boundary changes happen), so should be OK but the remaining SW Surrey constituency could well fall.

    Definite losses are 3 and possibles 2
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 28,877
    Cyclefree said:

    FPT Northern_Al said:

    "I can't help but wonder if Lord Geidt's resignation letter to the PM contains some dynamite. Normally, such letters, and the PM's "thanks for your service" response, are published as a matter of course, but this one is clearly being sat on. Why? Hopefully, Geidt himself will be brave and honourable enough to release it."

    So far we know 3 things:-

    1. Lord Geidt was the PM's ethics advisor.
    2. According to Raab he was asked to advise on a "commercially sensitive matter".
    3. The PM has decided not to publish the resignation letter.

    There is an obvious potential explanation which screams out at me from those facts.

    Do we know what the matter in (2) was? As for him walking away, I'm only surprised it took this long. How can you have a job looking after standards in government when there aren't any? It's like if Camden Council put me in charge of monitoring fish on the pavement. I'd tell them to piss off and stop wasting my valuable time.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 70,237
    MaxPB said:

    dixiedean said:

    Swiss central bank surprisingly raises interest rates by 50 basis points.

    Watch the BoE flunk it with no rise of just 25 points.
    Might be best to just go for 0.75%, & take strong medicine now. Rates will probably be worse long term if they bottle it.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 98,988
    edited June 16
    JohnO said:

    I agree that PM Mordaunt could be a game changer.

    I would like to see the PB Tory view is of the "Blue Wall". The remain seats with 30%+ graduates that the LDs have been working on.

    Also there are few signs that the Tories can hold their red wall seats.

    In Surrey alone, the Tories can kiss goodbye to Esher and Walton, Guildford, Woking and possibly Mole Valley. Jeremy Hunt will likely migrate to the new safer seat (assuming boundary changes happen), so should be OK) but the remaining SW Surrey constituency could well fall.

    Definite losses are 3 and possibles 2
    Ironic that at the next general election most of Surrey, much of Buckinghamshire, Kensington and Westminster will be marginal seats whereas in 1997 they were the safest Tory seats still left.

    In 1997 though Kent and Essex for example had many marginal seats which went Labour but almost all seats there are safe Conservative now
  • Alphabet_SoupAlphabet_Soup Posts: 1,494
    Cyclefree said:

    FPT Northern_Al said:

    "I can't help but wonder if Lord Geidt's resignation letter to the PM contains some dynamite. Normally, such letters, and the PM's "thanks for your service" response, are published as a matter of course, but this one is clearly being sat on. Why? Hopefully, Geidt himself will be brave and honourable enough to release it."

    So far we know 3 things:-

    1. Lord Geidt was the PM's ethics advisor.
    2. According to Raab he was asked to advise on a "commercially sensitive matter".
    3. The PM has decided not to publish the resignation letter.


    There is an obvious potential explanation which screams out at me from those facts.

    It would have been very unsupportive of Lord Geidt to spell out the gory details in his letter instead of "I'm off. Good luck. See you around".
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 34,892
    Pulpstar said:

    MaxPB said:

    dixiedean said:

    Swiss central bank surprisingly raises interest rates by 50 basis points.

    Watch the BoE flunk it with no rise of just 25 points.
    Might be best to just go for 0.75%, & take strong medicine now. Rates will probably be worse long term if they bottle it.
    Bailey is too concerned with causing a housing market crash so rates won't go up that fast despite there clearly being a need to keep up with the Fed and restore some confidence in Sterling. A quick and easy win is to send Sterling up against USD to bring down the cost of oil and gas, putting rates up by 0.75% would accomplish that and the pound would surge. That will bring immediate relief to petrol prices and energy prices, literally within a couple of weeks petrol prices start to fall.
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 2,004
    HYUFD said:

    JohnO said:

    I agree that PM Mordaunt could be a game changer.

    I would like to see the PB Tory view is of the "Blue Wall". The remain seats with 30%+ graduates that the LDs have been working on.

    Also there are few signs that the Tories can hold their red wall seats.

    In Surrey alone, the Tories can kiss goodbye to Esher and Walton, Guildford, Woking and possibly Mole Valley. Jeremy Hunt will likely migrate to the new safer seat (assuming boundary changes happen), so should be OK) but the remaining SW Surrey constituency could well fall.

    Definite losses are 3 and possibles 2
    Ironic that at the next general election most of Surrey, much of Buckinghamshire, Kensington and Westminster will be marginal seats whereas in 1997 they were the safest Tory seats still left.

    In 1997 though Kent and Essex for example had many marginal seats which went Labour but almost all seats there are safe Conservative now
    I’d love to see Gove get squeezed in Surrey Heath. He won’t lose his seat but his majority will be slashed greatly.

    Looking forward to seeing the back of Jonathan Lord in Woking too. Useless
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 22,078
    NEW: Expecting Lord Geidt resignation letter to be published shortly

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61822998
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 20,944
    Scott_xP said:

    So the Tory candidate in Wakefield said that the 2016 Brexit campaign was built on lies.
    https://twitter.com/chrisbutlerpol/status/1537070044500348929

    Scott_xP said:

    So the Tory candidate in Wakefield said that the 2016 Brexit campaign was built on lies.
    https://twitter.com/chrisbutlerpol/status/1537070044500348929

    In other Wakefield news. The Council finally got £8.8m off developers to fund ground improvements at Trinity.
    This saga seems to have been running my entire adult life. The ground is a decrepit shambles. And I haven't been for 30 years.
    Don't know if this will affect the by-election?
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 22,297
    edited June 16
    kinabalu said:

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT Northern_Al said:

    "I can't help but wonder if Lord Geidt's resignation letter to the PM contains some dynamite. Normally, such letters, and the PM's "thanks for your service" response, are published as a matter of course, but this one is clearly being sat on. Why? Hopefully, Geidt himself will be brave and honourable enough to release it."

    So far we know 3 things:-

    1. Lord Geidt was the PM's ethics advisor.
    2. According to Raab he was asked to advise on a "commercially sensitive matter".
    3. The PM has decided not to publish the resignation letter.

    There is an obvious potential explanation which screams out at me from those facts.

    Do we know what the matter in (2) was? As for him walking away, I'm only surprised it took this long. How can you have a job looking after standards in government when there aren't any? It's like if Camden Council put me in charge of monitoring fish on the pavement. I'd tell them to piss off and stop wasting my valuable time.
    We don't. But I'd like to. A commercially sensitive matter involving the government would be advised on by the government's lawyers. So why the need to involve the PM's ethics advisor?

    The role of the ethics advisor is, in addition to advising on breaches of the Ministerial Code, to advise Ministers on managing their private interests, so as to avoid any potential or perceived conflicts of interest. He also publishes a ‘List of Ministers’ Interests’ twice a year, setting out the relevant private interests of all government ministers.

    I may be completely wrong. But if I were a journalist - rather than rehashing Partygate stories - this is where I'd be probing.

    Anyway it looks as if we will know soon. I expect as a former advisor to HMQ Lord Geidt's letter will be couched in the sort of polite language that hides more than it reveals.

  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 1,647
    kinabalu said:

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT Northern_Al said:

    "I can't help but wonder if Lord Geidt's resignation letter to the PM contains some dynamite. Normally, such letters, and the PM's "thanks for your service" response, are published as a matter of course, but this one is clearly being sat on. Why? Hopefully, Geidt himself will be brave and honourable enough to release it."

    So far we know 3 things:-

    1. Lord Geidt was the PM's ethics advisor.
    2. According to Raab he was asked to advise on a "commercially sensitive matter".
    3. The PM has decided not to publish the resignation letter.

    There is an obvious potential explanation which screams out at me from those facts.

    Do we know what the matter in (2) was? As for him walking away, I'm only surprised it took this long. How can you have a job looking after standards in government when there aren't any? It's like if Camden Council put me in charge of monitoring fish on the pavement. I'd tell them to piss off and stop wasting my valuable time.
    I would offer to do fish monitoring at half the price of the lowest bidder, whatever that might be. If they are going to do something this ridiculous, I might as well save the good ratepayers of Camden a bit of cash in the process.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 20,944
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT Northern_Al said:

    "I can't help but wonder if Lord Geidt's resignation letter to the PM contains some dynamite. Normally, such letters, and the PM's "thanks for your service" response, are published as a matter of course, but this one is clearly being sat on. Why? Hopefully, Geidt himself will be brave and honourable enough to release it."

    So far we know 3 things:-

    1. Lord Geidt was the PM's ethics advisor.
    2. According to Raab he was asked to advise on a "commercially sensitive matter".
    3. The PM has decided not to publish the resignation letter.


    There is an obvious potential explanation which screams out at me from those facts.

    Go on, help those of us with less intuition/imagination...
    The PM is sensitive to criticism, yes, but not that bothered about it. So a Geidt criticism along the lines of those made by his former Justice Minister or former anti-corruption Tsar etc would not be enough to be worth hiding.

    But if Geidt had been asked to advise on or opined on a commercial arrangement involving the PM either now or in the future and that this had something to do with his resignation, well, that might well be something the PM wants to keep away from the public domain.

    It is that phrase "commercially sensitive matter" and this being asked of the PM's ethics advisor which intrigues me.

    Of course Raab may well not know what he is talking about. Which is a very strong - and maybe even the likelier - possibility.
    That Raab doesn't know what he's talking about is surely the only sensible default position to take.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 13,830
    Sainsbury's sitrep: no idea. Having documented the large drop in mask-wearing over the last couple of weeks, I've now caught bloody Covid so can't go shopping (or to the cinema).
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 39,634
    edited June 16

    The Conservatives will win more seats at the next General Election.

    PM Mordaunt will get a 3-figure majority.

    I expect her to do better than that in the Conservative members' vote.
    And perhaps even in her own constituency at the next election.

    The first bit sounds rather odd, though.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,216
    Cyclefree said:

    kinabalu said:

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT Northern_Al said:

    "I can't help but wonder if Lord Geidt's resignation letter to the PM contains some dynamite. Normally, such letters, and the PM's "thanks for your service" response, are published as a matter of course, but this one is clearly being sat on. Why? Hopefully, Geidt himself will be brave and honourable enough to release it."

    So far we know 3 things:-

    1. Lord Geidt was the PM's ethics advisor.
    2. According to Raab he was asked to advise on a "commercially sensitive matter".
    3. The PM has decided not to publish the resignation letter.

    There is an obvious potential explanation which screams out at me from those facts.

    Do we know what the matter in (2) was? As for him walking away, I'm only surprised it took this long. How can you have a job looking after standards in government when there aren't any? It's like if Camden Council put me in charge of monitoring fish on the pavement. I'd tell them to piss off and stop wasting my valuable time.
    We don't. But I'd like to. A commercially sensitive matter involving the government would be advised on by the government's lawyers. So why the need to involve the PM's ethics advisor?

    The role of the ethics advisor is, in addition to advising on breaches of the Ministerial Code, to advise Ministers on managing their private interests, so as to avoid any potential or perceived conflicts of interest. He also publishes a ‘List of Ministers’ Interests’ twice a year, setting out the relevant private interests of all government ministers.

    I may be completely wrong. But if I were a journalist - rather than rehashing Partygate stories - this is where I'd be probing.
    I am sure the Sunday Times is onto it and the scandal, whatever it is, will be their front page lead at he weekend.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 39,028
    dixiedean said:

    Swiss central bank surprisingly raises interest rates by 50 basis points.

    25pbs from the BoE is going to look like it’s not enough.
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 3,997
    HYUFD said:

    JohnO said:

    I agree that PM Mordaunt could be a game changer.

    I would like to see the PB Tory view is of the "Blue Wall". The remain seats with 30%+ graduates that the LDs have been working on.

    Also there are few signs that the Tories can hold their red wall seats.

    In Surrey alone, the Tories can kiss goodbye to Esher and Walton, Guildford, Woking and possibly Mole Valley. Jeremy Hunt will likely migrate to the new safer seat (assuming boundary changes happen), so should be OK) but the remaining SW Surrey constituency could well fall.

    Definite losses are 3 and possibles 2
    Ironic that at the next general election most of Surrey, much of Buckinghamshire, Kensington and Westminster will be marginal seats whereas in 1997 they were the safest Tory seats still left.

    In 1997 though Kent and Essex for example had many marginal seats which went Labour but almost all seats there are safe Conservative now
    Indeed, I completely agree. And as recently as 2015, Esher and Walton had a majority of 28,000!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 39,634
    Scott_xP said:

    Point made here is that whichever Cabinet minister ends Boris Johnson's career will actually be empowered. 148 MPs are against him & Mishal Husain touched a nerve with Raab this morn when she said the govt doesn't have the authority to put the Rwanda policy before parliament https://twitter.com/REWearmouth/status/1537353037676675073

    An under-appreciated point.
    Those fulminating about the courts frustrating democracy haven't talked much about Patel having forced the Rwanda policy through without either Parliamentary approval or proper scrutiny.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 33,475

    Sainsbury's sitrep: no idea. Having documented the large drop in mask-wearing over the last couple of weeks, I've now caught bloody Covid so can't go shopping (or to the cinema).

    Good luck. I still have a bit of a cough after 2 weeks but no signs of long Covid over and above my usual bouts of ennui. Hope it's the same or even milder for you.
  • Alphabet_SoupAlphabet_Soup Posts: 1,494
    Sandpit said:

    dixiedean said:

    Swiss central bank surprisingly raises interest rates by 50 basis points.

    25pbs from the BoE is going to look like it’s not enough.
    Black Wednesday in miniature.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 22,078
    Nigelb said:

    An under-appreciated point.
    Those fulminating about the courts frustrating democracy haven't talked much about Patel having forced the Rwanda policy through without either Parliamentary approval or proper scrutiny.


    Extraordinary video this.

    @adilray notes that there are currently no legal routes to asylum for Afghans and Tory columnist Quentin Letts has a minor meltdown, protesting that Adil is being unfair for *pointing out the facts*


    https://twitter.com/ImIncorrigible/status/1537319330047840257/video/1
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 39,028
    MaxPB said:

    Sandpit said:

    dixiedean said:

    Swiss central bank surprisingly raises interest rates by 50 basis points.

    25pbs from the BoE is going to look like it’s not enough.
    Because it isn't. Rates need to go up by 75 points today and another 50 points by the end of the summer. Firstly it gives us room for monetary easing when the recession comes and it immediately reinforces sterling and gives the BoE back some credibility. Bailey has thrown it all away over the last year or so with idiotic interventions about the economy and going beyond the Bank's inflation remit. Now we have to overcorrect a bit.
    Oh absolutely. The Fed’s 75bps rise, with expectations of 75bps more to come next month, puts everyone else on the back foot if they want their currency to avoid a slide against the Greenback - with the context of most of the inflation coming from imports of oil priced in US$.

    50bps is the minimum acceptable, but as you say they should really be matching the Fed.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 22,503
    edited June 16
    mwadams said:

    kinabalu said:

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT Northern_Al said:

    "I can't help but wonder if Lord Geidt's resignation letter to the PM contains some dynamite. Normally, such letters, and the PM's "thanks for your service" response, are published as a matter of course, but this one is clearly being sat on. Why? Hopefully, Geidt himself will be brave and honourable enough to release it."

    So far we know 3 things:-

    1. Lord Geidt was the PM's ethics advisor.
    2. According to Raab he was asked to advise on a "commercially sensitive matter".
    3. The PM has decided not to publish the resignation letter.

    There is an obvious potential explanation which screams out at me from those facts.

    Do we know what the matter in (2) was? As for him walking away, I'm only surprised it took this long. How can you have a job looking after standards in government when there aren't any? It's like if Camden Council put me in charge of monitoring fish on the pavement. I'd tell them to piss off and stop wasting my valuable time.
    I would offer to do fish monitoring at half the price of the lowest bidder, whatever that might be. If they are going to do something this ridiculous, I might as well save the good ratepayers of Camden a bit of cash in the process.
    TBF fish could well be found dumped on the pavement suspiciously close to some supermarket, fishmonger and/or fish'n'chip bar. And be stinking merrily away by now in the current weather. So your analogy might be unwittingly accurate.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 28,877
    mwadams said:

    kinabalu said:

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT Northern_Al said:

    "I can't help but wonder if Lord Geidt's resignation letter to the PM contains some dynamite. Normally, such letters, and the PM's "thanks for your service" response, are published as a matter of course, but this one is clearly being sat on. Why? Hopefully, Geidt himself will be brave and honourable enough to release it."

    So far we know 3 things:-

    1. Lord Geidt was the PM's ethics advisor.
    2. According to Raab he was asked to advise on a "commercially sensitive matter".
    3. The PM has decided not to publish the resignation letter.

    There is an obvious potential explanation which screams out at me from those facts.

    Do we know what the matter in (2) was? As for him walking away, I'm only surprised it took this long. How can you have a job looking after standards in government when there aren't any? It's like if Camden Council put me in charge of monitoring fish on the pavement. I'd tell them to piss off and stop wasting my valuable time.
    I would offer to do fish monitoring at half the price of the lowest bidder, whatever that might be. If they are going to do something this ridiculous, I might as well save the good ratepayers of Camden a bit of cash in the process.
    Fair enough - a win/win. In fact, being serious for a minute, I probably would take the job on because it'd be money for old rope. But I'm a dosser not an eminent public servant like Lord Geidt.
  • TheValiantTheValiant Posts: 1,138

    The Conservatives will win more seats at the next General Election.

    PM Mordaunt will get a 3-figure majority.

    IF Mordaunt is PM, I can see the Conservatives winning a majority. Less certain about a three figure one (that would require gaining 10 seats from 2019).

    However, the Boris brand is now tainted and becoming more tainted by the day.
    The longer he remains in post, the more his negative ratings will rub off on the rest of the Conservative party.

    There was a reason Major held on till April 1992 (rather than 1991). He thought he would lose, but also to give some clear time between Thatcher going and him allowing himself to assert himself as someone different from Thatcher.

    Johnson needs replacing by this autumn for a May 2024 election.
    Alternatively, if that doesn't work, if they can force him out next autumn (2023) then his successor could go for a January 25 election, but that smacks of desperation.

    Having said all that - I don't agree with Major's reasons - I'm of the opinion a new PM *Should* go to the country within SIX months of attaining the premiership. Since 1945, almost no PM change within a parliamentary term has led to a good result at the next election UNLESS the new PM goes to the country within six months.

    Eden - April 1955 - called a GE for May 1955 and won with an increased majority.
    Home - October 1963 - held on to October 1964 and lost.
    Callaghan - March 1976 and then lost in May 1979.
    Major - November 1990 and WON in April 1992 but still lost seats from 1987.
    Brown and May, hopefully I don't need to tell anyone about those.

    Only Macmillian bucks the trend. Taking over in January 1957 and then won in 1959 and gained seats from 1955.

    Johnson is going to lose in 2024/2025. But the Conservative can still win. They just need to realise this and get on with it.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 28,177
    edited June 16
    HYUFD said:

    JohnO said:

    I agree that PM Mordaunt could be a game changer.

    I would like to see the PB Tory view is of the "Blue Wall". The remain seats with 30%+ graduates that the LDs have been working on.

    Also there are few signs that the Tories can hold their red wall seats.

    In Surrey alone, the Tories can kiss goodbye to Esher and Walton, Guildford, Woking and possibly Mole Valley. Jeremy Hunt will likely migrate to the new safer seat (assuming boundary changes happen), so should be OK) but the remaining SW Surrey constituency could well fall.

    Definite losses are 3 and possibles 2
    Ironic that at the next general election most of Surrey, much of Buckinghamshire, Kensington and Westminster will be marginal seats whereas in 1997 they were the safest Tory seats still left.

    In 1997 though Kent and Essex for example had many marginal seats which went Labour but almost all seats there are safe Conservative now
    While I agree it looks like that, why did Conservative Central Office get their knickers in a twist when it was suggested that the Maldon seat might become a site for a by-election?

    Furthermore the ghost of Lord Tony Newton says hi.
  • It's completely indefensible for a PM to have an "independent ethics adviser" then ignore the advice (over Patel in 2020) or seek to avoid even getting advice when it is MOST needed (i.e. a matter involving the PM himself). It's banana republic territory.

    The UK is at a bit of a governance crossroads when Johnson goes. Either the new PM comes in and significantly strengthens the ethical framework and reinforces the independence of institutions, or Johnson's total disregard for conventions in this area becomes the norm, which is very worrying in terms of where it leads in 30 years.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 22,078
    NEW: Spicy Geidt letter coming shortly... understand its not a personal financial issue about any minister, but he was asked for advice on a policy decision that could break an international treaty before any decision made... but it wont spell out exactly what that was...
    https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1537370532261289986
  • RogerRoger Posts: 16,591
    Scott_xP said:

    Nigelb said:

    An under-appreciated point.
    Those fulminating about the courts frustrating democracy haven't talked much about Patel having forced the Rwanda policy through without either Parliamentary approval or proper scrutiny.


    Extraordinary video this.

    @adilray notes that there are currently no legal routes to asylum for Afghans and Tory columnist Quentin Letts has a minor meltdown, protesting that Adil is being unfair for *pointing out the facts*


    https://twitter.com/ImIncorrigible/status/1537319330047840257/video/1
    It would be extraordinary if it wasn't Quentin Letts who referred to Ed Milliband's 'Giant Conk' before castigating Jeremy Corbyn for his anti semitism.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 22,503
    Carnyx said:

    mwadams said:

    kinabalu said:

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT Northern_Al said:

    "I can't help but wonder if Lord Geidt's resignation letter to the PM contains some dynamite. Normally, such letters, and the PM's "thanks for your service" response, are published as a matter of course, but this one is clearly being sat on. Why? Hopefully, Geidt himself will be brave and honourable enough to release it."

    So far we know 3 things:-

    1. Lord Geidt was the PM's ethics advisor.
    2. According to Raab he was asked to advise on a "commercially sensitive matter".
    3. The PM has decided not to publish the resignation letter.

    There is an obvious potential explanation which screams out at me from those facts.

    Do we know what the matter in (2) was? As for him walking away, I'm only surprised it took this long. How can you have a job looking after standards in government when there aren't any? It's like if Camden Council put me in charge of monitoring fish on the pavement. I'd tell them to piss off and stop wasting my valuable time.
    I would offer to do fish monitoring at half the price of the lowest bidder, whatever that might be. If they are going to do something this ridiculous, I might as well save the good ratepayers of Camden a bit of cash in the process.
    TBF fish could well be found dumped on the pavement suspiciously close to some supermarket, fishmonger and/or fish'n'chip bar. And be stinking merrily away by now in the current weather. So your analogy might be unwittingly accurate.
    Sorry, meant Kinabalu's analogy ...
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 4,487
    edited June 16

    It's completely indefensible for a PM to have an "independent ethics adviser" then ignore the advice (over Patel in 2020) or seek to avoid even getting advice when it is MOST needed (i.e. a matter involving the PM himself). It's banana republic territory.

    The UK is at a bit of a governance crossroads when Johnson goes. Either the new PM comes in and significantly strengthens the ethical framework and reinforces the independence of institutions, or Johnson's total disregard for conventions in this area becomes the norm, which is very worrying in terms of where it leads in 30 years.

    The problem is in the title. You can't have an "independent" ethics adviser if the PM (any PM) can a) decide what s/he can investigate, and b) simply ignore the ethics adviser's findings. So that's what needs to change.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 98,988
    edited June 16

    HYUFD said:

    JohnO said:

    I agree that PM Mordaunt could be a game changer.

    I would like to see the PB Tory view is of the "Blue Wall". The remain seats with 30%+ graduates that the LDs have been working on.

    Also there are few signs that the Tories can hold their red wall seats.

    In Surrey alone, the Tories can kiss goodbye to Esher and Walton, Guildford, Woking and possibly Mole Valley. Jeremy Hunt will likely migrate to the new safer seat (assuming boundary changes happen), so should be OK) but the remaining SW Surrey constituency could well fall.

    Definite losses are 3 and possibles 2
    Ironic that at the next general election most of Surrey, much of Buckinghamshire, Kensington and Westminster will be marginal seats whereas in 1997 they were the safest Tory seats still left.

    In 1997 though Kent and Essex for example had many marginal seats which went Labour but almost all seats there are safe Conservative now
    While I agree it looks like that, why did Conservative Central Office get their knickers in a twist when it was suggested that the Maldon seat might become a site for a by-election?

    Furthermore the ghost of Lord Tony Newton says hi.
    Any government held seat is vulnerable in a by election.

    Braintree was Labour in 1997 but has a 24,673 Conservative majority now, even bigger than the 17,494 Conservative majority in 1992.

    So that does not really dispute what I said
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 1,647
    edited June 16
    Scott_xP said:

    NEW: Spicy Geidt letter coming shortly... understand its not a personal financial issue about any minister, but he was asked for advice on a policy decision that could break an international treaty before any decision made... but it wont spell out exactly what that was...
    https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1537370532261289986

    And yet they used the phrase "commercially sensitive"? Were they just trying to smear a bit of mud around and imply that Geidt was somehow financially motivated by his decision? If so, that didn't work.
  • HYUFD said:

    JohnO said:

    I agree that PM Mordaunt could be a game changer.

    I would like to see the PB Tory view is of the "Blue Wall". The remain seats with 30%+ graduates that the LDs have been working on.

    Also there are few signs that the Tories can hold their red wall seats.

    In Surrey alone, the Tories can kiss goodbye to Esher and Walton, Guildford, Woking and possibly Mole Valley. Jeremy Hunt will likely migrate to the new safer seat (assuming boundary changes happen), so should be OK) but the remaining SW Surrey constituency could well fall.

    Definite losses are 3 and possibles 2
    Ironic that at the next general election most of Surrey, much of Buckinghamshire, Kensington and Westminster will be marginal seats whereas in 1997 they were the safest Tory seats still left.

    In 1997 though Kent and Essex for example had many marginal seats which went Labour but almost all seats there are safe Conservative now
    While I agree it looks like that, why did Conservative Central Office get their knickers in a twist when it was suggested that the Maldon seat might become a site for a by-election?

    Furthermore the ghost of Lord Tony Newton says hi.
    I'm sure they had worries about a Maldon by-election. However, I also think it's true that nobody rates John Whittingdale as highly as he rates himself. There is an extent to which I suspect Downing Street just didn't want him as Ofcom Chairman, and for once I'm not sure they were wrong.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 52,205
    edited June 16
    Geidt's letter may be the trigger that sees Boris gone

    We can live in hope and to see PM our next PM
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 22,078

    Geidt's letter may be the trigger that sees Boris gone

    We can live in hope and to see PM or next PM


    Ooh real hint there from Ellis he knows what's in the letter
    Says those "looking for scandal under every stone" may well "be disappointed".

    https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1537372706789904385
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 22,078
    Model Q from Diana Johnson, Lab: “What is it about the PM that causes him to have such rotten luck in retaining ethics and anti-corruption advisers?” https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1537372831792734208/photo/1
  • ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,065
    JohnO said:

    HYUFD said:

    JohnO said:

    I agree that PM Mordaunt could be a game changer.

    I would like to see the PB Tory view is of the "Blue Wall". The remain seats with 30%+ graduates that the LDs have been working on.

    Also there are few signs that the Tories can hold their red wall seats.

    In Surrey alone, the Tories can kiss goodbye to Esher and Walton, Guildford, Woking and possibly Mole Valley. Jeremy Hunt will likely migrate to the new safer seat (assuming boundary changes happen), so should be OK) but the remaining SW Surrey constituency could well fall.

    Definite losses are 3 and possibles 2
    Ironic that at the next general election most of Surrey, much of Buckinghamshire, Kensington and Westminster will be marginal seats whereas in 1997 they were the safest Tory seats still left.

    In 1997 though Kent and Essex for example had many marginal seats which went Labour but almost all seats there are safe Conservative now
    Indeed, I completely agree. And as recently as 2015, Esher and Walton had a majority of 28,000!
    It just goes to show that "safe seats" are only safe for as long as their voters want them to be.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 39,028

    Sandpit said:

    dixiedean said:

    Swiss central bank surprisingly raises interest rates by 50 basis points.

    25pbs from the BoE is going to look like it’s not enough.
    Black Wednesday in miniature.
    It won’t be that bad, but central banks do seem all rather surprised that the massive amounts of money-printing that went on during the pandemic, have led to inflation down the line.

    The next few years are going to be a long ride.
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 1,647
    Carnyx said:

    mwadams said:

    kinabalu said:

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT Northern_Al said:

    "I can't help but wonder if Lord Geidt's resignation letter to the PM contains some dynamite. Normally, such letters, and the PM's "thanks for your service" response, are published as a matter of course, but this one is clearly being sat on. Why? Hopefully, Geidt himself will be brave and honourable enough to release it."

    So far we know 3 things:-

    1. Lord Geidt was the PM's ethics advisor.
    2. According to Raab he was asked to advise on a "commercially sensitive matter".
    3. The PM has decided not to publish the resignation letter.

    There is an obvious potential explanation which screams out at me from those facts.

    Do we know what the matter in (2) was? As for him walking away, I'm only surprised it took this long. How can you have a job looking after standards in government when there aren't any? It's like if Camden Council put me in charge of monitoring fish on the pavement. I'd tell them to piss off and stop wasting my valuable time.
    I would offer to do fish monitoring at half the price of the lowest bidder, whatever that might be. If they are going to do something this ridiculous, I might as well save the good ratepayers of Camden a bit of cash in the process.
    TBF fish could well be found dumped on the pavement suspiciously close to some supermarket, fishmonger and/or fish'n'chip bar. And be stinking merrily away by now in the current weather. So your analogy might be unwittingly accurate.
    I would set up a web-based "fish hotline" for members of the public to report issues, and publish the logs. Because I am not a government body advised by McKinsey, with implementation by ATOS or whoever, this would cost me about a fiver and an hour of my time.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 28,177
    edited June 16
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    JohnO said:

    I agree that PM Mordaunt could be a game changer.

    I would like to see the PB Tory view is of the "Blue Wall". The remain seats with 30%+ graduates that the LDs have been working on.

    Also there are few signs that the Tories can hold their red wall seats.

    In Surrey alone, the Tories can kiss goodbye to Esher and Walton, Guildford, Woking and possibly Mole Valley. Jeremy Hunt will likely migrate to the new safer seat (assuming boundary changes happen), so should be OK) but the remaining SW Surrey constituency could well fall.

    Definite losses are 3 and possibles 2
    Ironic that at the next general election most of Surrey, much of Buckinghamshire, Kensington and Westminster will be marginal seats whereas in 1997 they were the safest Tory seats still left.

    In 1997 though Kent and Essex for example had many marginal seats which went Labour but almost all seats there are safe Conservative now
    While I agree it looks like that, why did Conservative Central Office get their knickers in a twist when it was suggested that the Maldon seat might become a site for a by-election?

    Furthermore the ghost of Lord Tony Newton says hi.
    Any government held seat is vulnerable in a by election.

    Braintree was Labour in 1997 but has a 24,673 Conservative majority now, even bigger than the 17,494 Conservative majority in 1992.

    So that does not really dispute what I said
    I'm not really 'disputing'; I'm pointing out that big shifts do happen. And Braintree is a significantly different seat now from 1992 or 1997.
  • ChelyabinskChelyabinsk Posts: 407

    It's completely indefensible for a PM to have an "independent ethics adviser" then ignore the advice (over Patel in 2020) or seek to avoid even getting advice when it is MOST needed (i.e. a matter involving the PM himself). It's banana republic territory.

    The UK is at a bit of a governance crossroads when Johnson goes. Either the new PM comes in and significantly strengthens the ethical framework and reinforces the independence of institutions, or Johnson's total disregard for conventions in this area becomes the norm, which is very worrying in terms of where it leads in 30 years.

    The problem is in the title. You can't have an "independent" ethics adviser if the PM (any PM) can a) decide what s/he can investigate, and b) simply ignore the ethics adviser's findings. So that's what needs to change.
    If you have to do what someone says, they're not an "adviser". Except in the sense of "British advisor to the Sultan of Johor", of course.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 34,732
    On the train to Ascot. We Brits are an extraordinary people. We Brits with Prosecco moreso.

    I can see why Marx's I'm a Socialist not because I love the poor but because I hate them is so popular.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 39,028
    Scott_xP said:

    Geidt's letter may be the trigger that sees Boris gone

    We can live in hope and to see PM or next PM


    Ooh real hint there from Ellis he knows what's in the letter
    Says those "looking for scandal under every stone" may well "be disappointed".

    https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1537372706789904385
    What a shame for all the retweet-wanking blue ticks of the Lobby then, who have spent the last six hours getting themselves into a frenzy about this being the next big scandal.

    How’s about they start reporting the news for once, rather than trying to create it?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 28,877
    Carnyx said:

    mwadams said:

    kinabalu said:

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT Northern_Al said:

    "I can't help but wonder if Lord Geidt's resignation letter to the PM contains some dynamite. Normally, such letters, and the PM's "thanks for your service" response, are published as a matter of course, but this one is clearly being sat on. Why? Hopefully, Geidt himself will be brave and honourable enough to release it."

    So far we know 3 things:-

    1. Lord Geidt was the PM's ethics advisor.
    2. According to Raab he was asked to advise on a "commercially sensitive matter".
    3. The PM has decided not to publish the resignation letter.

    There is an obvious potential explanation which screams out at me from those facts.

    Do we know what the matter in (2) was? As for him walking away, I'm only surprised it took this long. How can you have a job looking after standards in government when there aren't any? It's like if Camden Council put me in charge of monitoring fish on the pavement. I'd tell them to piss off and stop wasting my valuable time.
    I would offer to do fish monitoring at half the price of the lowest bidder, whatever that might be. If they are going to do something this ridiculous, I might as well save the good ratepayers of Camden a bit of cash in the process.
    TBF fish could well be found dumped on the pavement suspiciously close to some supermarket, fishmonger and/or fish'n'chip bar. And be stinking merrily away by now in the current weather. So your analogy might be unwittingly accurate.
    Yes, I see what you mean. That's a proper job and needs doing. I more meant LIVE ones. Camden Czar for the preservation of fish swimming on the pavement. That was the Lord Geidt job, effectively, and he has quite understandably decided he has better things to do.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 22,503

    mwadams said:

    Carnyx said:

    mwadams said:

    kinabalu said:

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT Northern_Al said:

    "I can't help but wonder if Lord Geidt's resignation letter to the PM contains some dynamite. Normally, such letters, and the PM's "thanks for your service" response, are published as a matter of course, but this one is clearly being sat on. Why? Hopefully, Geidt himself will be brave and honourable enough to release it."

    So far we know 3 things:-

    1. Lord Geidt was the PM's ethics advisor.
    2. According to Raab he was asked to advise on a "commercially sensitive matter".
    3. The PM has decided not to publish the resignation letter.

    There is an obvious potential explanation which screams out at me from those facts.

    Do we know what the matter in (2) was? As for him walking away, I'm only surprised it took this long. How can you have a job looking after standards in government when there aren't any? It's like if Camden Council put me in charge of monitoring fish on the pavement. I'd tell them to piss off and stop wasting my valuable time.
    I would offer to do fish monitoring at half the price of the lowest bidder, whatever that might be. If they are going to do something this ridiculous, I might as well save the good ratepayers of Camden a bit of cash in the process.
    TBF fish could well be found dumped on the pavement suspiciously close to some supermarket, fishmonger and/or fish'n'chip bar. And be stinking merrily away by now in the current weather. So your analogy might be unwittingly accurate.
    I would set up a web-based "fish hotline" for members of the public to report issues, and publish the logs. Because I am not a government body advised by McKinsey, with implementation by ATOS or whoever, this would cost me about a fiver and an hour of my time.
    Surely a net-based fish line would more appropriate.
    Trolling, are we, chum?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 2,939
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    dixiedean said:

    Swiss central bank surprisingly raises interest rates by 50 basis points.

    25pbs from the BoE is going to look like it’s not enough.
    Black Wednesday in miniature.
    It won’t be that bad, but central banks do seem all rather surprised that the massive amounts of money-printing that went on during the pandemic, have led to inflation down the line.

    The next few years are going to be a long ride.
    Who knew that keeping interest rates at stupidly low crisis levels for 13 years whilst printing money like they were playing monopoly could be problematic?
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 1,647
    mwadams said:

    Carnyx said:

    mwadams said:

    kinabalu said:

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT Northern_Al said:

    "I can't help but wonder if Lord Geidt's resignation letter to the PM contains some dynamite. Normally, such letters, and the PM's "thanks for your service" response, are published as a matter of course, but this one is clearly being sat on. Why? Hopefully, Geidt himself will be brave and honourable enough to release it."

    So far we know 3 things:-

    1. Lord Geidt was the PM's ethics advisor.
    2. According to Raab he was asked to advise on a "commercially sensitive matter".
    3. The PM has decided not to publish the resignation letter.

    There is an obvious potential explanation which screams out at me from those facts.

    Do we know what the matter in (2) was? As for him walking away, I'm only surprised it took this long. How can you have a job looking after standards in government when there aren't any? It's like if Camden Council put me in charge of monitoring fish on the pavement. I'd tell them to piss off and stop wasting my valuable time.
    I would offer to do fish monitoring at half the price of the lowest bidder, whatever that might be. If they are going to do something this ridiculous, I might as well save the good ratepayers of Camden a bit of cash in the process.
    TBF fish could well be found dumped on the pavement suspiciously close to some supermarket, fishmonger and/or fish'n'chip bar. And be stinking merrily away by now in the current weather. So your analogy might be unwittingly accurate.
    I would set up a web-based "fish hotline" for members of the public to report issues, and publish the logs. Because I am not a government body advised by McKinsey, with implementation by ATOS or whoever, this would cost me about a fiver and an hour of my time.
    (The reports would not be published publicly, of course; they would go to the responsible councillor, who would have to take charge of removing any profanities and libels that passed the basic filtering; before anyone suggests that I open myself up to some kind of responsibility for the content published; I'm wise to those wrinkles.)
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 1,647
    mwadams said:

    mwadams said:

    Carnyx said:

    mwadams said:

    kinabalu said:

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT Northern_Al said:

    "I can't help but wonder if Lord Geidt's resignation letter to the PM contains some dynamite. Normally, such letters, and the PM's "thanks for your service" response, are published as a matter of course, but this one is clearly being sat on. Why? Hopefully, Geidt himself will be brave and honourable enough to release it."

    So far we know 3 things:-

    1. Lord Geidt was the PM's ethics advisor.
    2. According to Raab he was asked to advise on a "commercially sensitive matter".
    3. The PM has decided not to publish the resignation letter.

    There is an obvious potential explanation which screams out at me from those facts.

    Do we know what the matter in (2) was? As for him walking away, I'm only surprised it took this long. How can you have a job looking after standards in government when there aren't any? It's like if Camden Council put me in charge of monitoring fish on the pavement. I'd tell them to piss off and stop wasting my valuable time.
    I would offer to do fish monitoring at half the price of the lowest bidder, whatever that might be. If they are going to do something this ridiculous, I might as well save the good ratepayers of Camden a bit of cash in the process.
    TBF fish could well be found dumped on the pavement suspiciously close to some supermarket, fishmonger and/or fish'n'chip bar. And be stinking merrily away by now in the current weather. So your analogy might be unwittingly accurate.
    I would set up a web-based "fish hotline" for members of the public to report issues, and publish the logs. Because I am not a government body advised by McKinsey, with implementation by ATOS or whoever, this would cost me about a fiver and an hour of my time.
    (The reports would not be published publicly, of course; they would go to the responsible councillor, who would have to take charge of removing any profanities and libels that passed the basic filtering; before anyone suggests that I open myself up to some kind of responsibility for the content published; I'm wise to those wrinkles.)
    Is there an RFP for the Camden Fish Monitoring job? I quite fancy it now. :)
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 34,732
    TOPPING said:

    On the train to Ascot. We Brits are an extraordinary people. We Brits with Prosecco moreso.

    I can see why Marx's I'm a Socialist not because I love the poor but because I hate them is so popular.

    Actually bollocks. People are really nice. And I'm sober.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 39,634

    It's completely indefensible for a PM to have an "independent ethics adviser" then ignore the advice (over Patel in 2020) or seek to avoid even getting advice when it is MOST needed (i.e. a matter involving the PM himself). It's banana republic territory.

    The UK is at a bit of a governance crossroads when Johnson goes. Either the new PM comes in and significantly strengthens the ethical framework and reinforces the independence of institutions, or Johnson's total disregard for conventions in this area becomes the norm, which is very worrying in terms of where it leads in 30 years.

    As Geidt made very clear before the select committee, his role was not really independent at all, since the PM was ultimate arbiter on whether he could even investigate anything, as well as whether anyone is in breach of the ministerial code.

    He was given a polite but thorough monstering by everyone on the committee, Tories included. If it didn't cause the resignation, it surely encouraged it.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 98,988

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    JohnO said:

    I agree that PM Mordaunt could be a game changer.

    I would like to see the PB Tory view is of the "Blue Wall". The remain seats with 30%+ graduates that the LDs have been working on.

    Also there are few signs that the Tories can hold their red wall seats.

    In Surrey alone, the Tories can kiss goodbye to Esher and Walton, Guildford, Woking and possibly Mole Valley. Jeremy Hunt will likely migrate to the new safer seat (assuming boundary changes happen), so should be OK) but the remaining SW Surrey constituency could well fall.

    Definite losses are 3 and possibles 2
    Ironic that at the next general election most of Surrey, much of Buckinghamshire, Kensington and Westminster will be marginal seats whereas in 1997 they were the safest Tory seats still left.

    In 1997 though Kent and Essex for example had many marginal seats which went Labour but almost all seats there are safe Conservative now
    While I agree it looks like that, why did Conservative Central Office get their knickers in a twist when it was suggested that the Maldon seat might become a site for a by-election?

    Furthermore the ghost of Lord Tony Newton says hi.
    Any government held seat is vulnerable in a by election.

    Braintree was Labour in 1997 but has a 24,673 Conservative majority now, even bigger than the 17,494 Conservative majority in 1992.

    So that does not really dispute what I said
    I'm not really 'disputing'; I'm pointing out that big shifts do happen. And Braintree is a significantly different seat now from 1992 or 1997.
    It isn't demographically that much different.

    It is more the fact that the upper middle class are voting increasingly more for liberal parties, while the core vote for conservatives is now the skilled working class.

    A trend across the western world
  • SirNorfolkPassmoreSirNorfolkPassmore Posts: 3,770
    edited June 16
    mwadams said:

    Scott_xP said:

    NEW: Spicy Geidt letter coming shortly... understand its not a personal financial issue about any minister, but he was asked for advice on a policy decision that could break an international treaty before any decision made... but it wont spell out exactly what that was...
    https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1537370532261289986

    And yet they used the phrase "commercially sensitive"? Were they just trying to smear a bit of mud around and imply that Geidt was somehow financially motivated by his decision? If so, that didn't work.
    I don't think that the implication was a smear on Geidt, to be fair.

    It was a poor interview by Raab. He was floundering and speculated that the letter may touch on matters that are confidential for commercial reasons (e.g. relating to a current government contract negotiation) or even for personal reasons (e.g. relating to Geidt's own health). That was unhelpful as he was both saying he didn't know, and tossing out various reasons why you might not publish a letter, thus increasing interest in the real reason and inviting further speculation on points. But I don't actually think it implied any misconduct by Geidt.

    The reality is presumably that the letter is embarrassing, and Number 10 were seeking legal advice that may justify not disclosing, but didn't get the answer they wanted in the end and decided to publish rather than draw it out and then publish.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 28,177
    Carnyx said:

    mwadams said:

    Carnyx said:

    mwadams said:

    kinabalu said:

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT Northern_Al said:

    "I can't help but wonder if Lord Geidt's resignation letter to the PM contains some dynamite. Normally, such letters, and the PM's "thanks for your service" response, are published as a matter of course, but this one is clearly being sat on. Why? Hopefully, Geidt himself will be brave and honourable enough to release it."

    So far we know 3 things:-

    1. Lord Geidt was the PM's ethics advisor.
    2. According to Raab he was asked to advise on a "commercially sensitive matter".
    3. The PM has decided not to publish the resignation letter.

    There is an obvious potential explanation which screams out at me from those facts.

    Do we know what the matter in (2) was? As for him walking away, I'm only surprised it took this long. How can you have a job looking after standards in government when there aren't any? It's like if Camden Council put me in charge of monitoring fish on the pavement. I'd tell them to piss off and stop wasting my valuable time.
    I would offer to do fish monitoring at half the price of the lowest bidder, whatever that might be. If they are going to do something this ridiculous, I might as well save the good ratepayers of Camden a bit of cash in the process.
    TBF fish could well be found dumped on the pavement suspiciously close to some supermarket, fishmonger and/or fish'n'chip bar. And be stinking merrily away by now in the current weather. So your analogy might be unwittingly accurate.
    I would set up a web-based "fish hotline" for members of the public to report issues, and publish the logs. Because I am not a government body advised by McKinsey, with implementation by ATOS or whoever, this would cost me about a fiver and an hour of my time.
    Surely a net-based fish line would more appropriate.
    Trolling, are we, chum?
    Trawling, surely. But chum isn''t needed then.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 39,028

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    dixiedean said:

    Swiss central bank surprisingly raises interest rates by 50 basis points.

    25pbs from the BoE is going to look like it’s not enough.
    Black Wednesday in miniature.
    It won’t be that bad, but central banks do seem all rather surprised that the massive amounts of money-printing that went on during the pandemic, have led to inflation down the line.

    The next few years are going to be a long ride.
    Who knew that keeping interest rates at stupidly low crisis levels for 13 years whilst printing money like they were playing monopoly could be problematic?
    I know. Amazing, isn’t it, that going so far away from any economics textbooks results in a wildly unstable situation?

    They’d all convinced themselves that the status quo of the past decade was now the new normal, that globalisation and just-in-time manufacturing would continue to grow forever - then a big shock happened, followed by another.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 22,078
    Sounds like the letters might be redacted
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 22,503
    mwadams said:

    mwadams said:

    mwadams said:

    Carnyx said:

    mwadams said:

    kinabalu said:

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT Northern_Al said:

    "I can't help but wonder if Lord Geidt's resignation letter to the PM contains some dynamite. Normally, such letters, and the PM's "thanks for your service" response, are published as a matter of course, but this one is clearly being sat on. Why? Hopefully, Geidt himself will be brave and honourable enough to release it."

    So far we know 3 things:-

    1. Lord Geidt was the PM's ethics advisor.
    2. According to Raab he was asked to advise on a "commercially sensitive matter".
    3. The PM has decided not to publish the resignation letter.

    There is an obvious potential explanation which screams out at me from those facts.

    Do we know what the matter in (2) was? As for him walking away, I'm only surprised it took this long. How can you have a job looking after standards in government when there aren't any? It's like if Camden Council put me in charge of monitoring fish on the pavement. I'd tell them to piss off and stop wasting my valuable time.
    I would offer to do fish monitoring at half the price of the lowest bidder, whatever that might be. If they are going to do something this ridiculous, I might as well save the good ratepayers of Camden a bit of cash in the process.
    TBF fish could well be found dumped on the pavement suspiciously close to some supermarket, fishmonger and/or fish'n'chip bar. And be stinking merrily away by now in the current weather. So your analogy might be unwittingly accurate.
    I would set up a web-based "fish hotline" for members of the public to report issues, and publish the logs. Because I am not a government body advised by McKinsey, with implementation by ATOS or whoever, this would cost me about a fiver and an hour of my time.
    (The reports would not be published publicly, of course; they would go to the responsible councillor, who would have to take charge of removing any profanities and libels that passed the basic filtering; before anyone suggests that I open myself up to some kind of responsibility for the content published; I'm wise to those wrinkles.)
    Is there an RFP for the Camden Fish Monitoring job? I quite fancy it now. :)
    This reminds me it's a real thing in Edinburgh, with the rise in the use of Old Red Sandstone paving resulting in fossil fish visible here and there. But safely ex-fish and unsmelly.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 28,877
    Scott_xP said:

    Sounds like the letters might be redacted

    That's not going to look good.
  • Nigelb said:

    It's completely indefensible for a PM to have an "independent ethics adviser" then ignore the advice (over Patel in 2020) or seek to avoid even getting advice when it is MOST needed (i.e. a matter involving the PM himself). It's banana republic territory.

    The UK is at a bit of a governance crossroads when Johnson goes. Either the new PM comes in and significantly strengthens the ethical framework and reinforces the independence of institutions, or Johnson's total disregard for conventions in this area becomes the norm, which is very worrying in terms of where it leads in 30 years.

    As Geidt made very clear before the select committee, his role was not really independent at all, since the PM was ultimate arbiter on whether he could even investigate anything, as well as whether anyone is in breach of the ministerial code.

    He was given a polite but thorough monstering by everyone on the committee, Tories included. If it didn't cause the resignation, it surely encouraged it.
    I suppose the argument would be that it is independent in the sense that his advice is his alone. But, as you say, if it's either ignored or you're in a position of trying not to think about an issue because you've not been asked to advise and are desperately trying not to form a view, you look impotent, not to say idiotic. The Committee probably did clarify matters for Geidt in that respect - it didn't look a pleasant experience.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 22,503

    Carnyx said:

    mwadams said:

    Carnyx said:

    mwadams said:

    kinabalu said:

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT Northern_Al said:

    "I can't help but wonder if Lord Geidt's resignation letter to the PM contains some dynamite. Normally, such letters, and the PM's "thanks for your service" response, are published as a matter of course, but this one is clearly being sat on. Why? Hopefully, Geidt himself will be brave and honourable enough to release it."

    So far we know 3 things:-

    1. Lord Geidt was the PM's ethics advisor.
    2. According to Raab he was asked to advise on a "commercially sensitive matter".
    3. The PM has decided not to publish the resignation letter.

    There is an obvious potential explanation which screams out at me from those facts.

    Do we know what the matter in (2) was? As for him walking away, I'm only surprised it took this long. How can you have a job looking after standards in government when there aren't any? It's like if Camden Council put me in charge of monitoring fish on the pavement. I'd tell them to piss off and stop wasting my valuable time.
    I would offer to do fish monitoring at half the price of the lowest bidder, whatever that might be. If they are going to do something this ridiculous, I might as well save the good ratepayers of Camden a bit of cash in the process.
    TBF fish could well be found dumped on the pavement suspiciously close to some supermarket, fishmonger and/or fish'n'chip bar. And be stinking merrily away by now in the current weather. So your analogy might be unwittingly accurate.
    I would set up a web-based "fish hotline" for members of the public to report issues, and publish the logs. Because I am not a government body advised by McKinsey, with implementation by ATOS or whoever, this would cost me about a fiver and an hour of my time.
    Surely a net-based fish line would more appropriate.
    Trolling, are we, chum?
    Trawling, surely. But chum isn''t needed then.
    Oh, trolling is also a thing in the piscatorial world (but on reflection chum is probably not used either!):

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolling_(fishing)
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 28,177
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    JohnO said:

    I agree that PM Mordaunt could be a game changer.

    I would like to see the PB Tory view is of the "Blue Wall". The remain seats with 30%+ graduates that the LDs have been working on.

    Also there are few signs that the Tories can hold their red wall seats.

    In Surrey alone, the Tories can kiss goodbye to Esher and Walton, Guildford, Woking and possibly Mole Valley. Jeremy Hunt will likely migrate to the new safer seat (assuming boundary changes happen), so should be OK) but the remaining SW Surrey constituency could well fall.

    Definite losses are 3 and possibles 2
    Ironic that at the next general election most of Surrey, much of Buckinghamshire, Kensington and Westminster will be marginal seats whereas in 1997 they were the safest Tory seats still left.

    In 1997 though Kent and Essex for example had many marginal seats which went Labour but almost all seats there are safe Conservative now
    While I agree it looks like that, why did Conservative Central Office get their knickers in a twist when it was suggested that the Maldon seat might become a site for a by-election?

    Furthermore the ghost of Lord Tony Newton says hi.
    Any government held seat is vulnerable in a by election.

    Braintree was Labour in 1997 but has a 24,673 Conservative majority now, even bigger than the 17,494 Conservative majority in 1992.

    So that does not really dispute what I said
    I'm not really 'disputing'; I'm pointing out that big shifts do happen. And Braintree is a significantly different seat now from 1992 or 1997.
    It isn't demographically that much different.

    It is more the fact that the upper middle class are voting increasingly more for liberal parties, while the core vote for conservatives is now the skilled working class.

    A trend across the western world
    While I agree with you, I would suggest that the new Braintree is significantly more rural than the old. It's lost the semi industrial Witham area to which your comments apply.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 28,177
    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    mwadams said:

    Carnyx said:

    mwadams said:

    kinabalu said:

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT Northern_Al said:

    "I can't help but wonder if Lord Geidt's resignation letter to the PM contains some dynamite. Normally, such letters, and the PM's "thanks for your service" response, are published as a matter of course, but this one is clearly being sat on. Why? Hopefully, Geidt himself will be brave and honourable enough to release it."

    So far we know 3 things:-

    1. Lord Geidt was the PM's ethics advisor.
    2. According to Raab he was asked to advise on a "commercially sensitive matter".
    3. The PM has decided not to publish the resignation letter.

    There is an obvious potential explanation which screams out at me from those facts.

    Do we know what the matter in (2) was? As for him walking away, I'm only surprised it took this long. How can you have a job looking after standards in government when there aren't any? It's like if Camden Council put me in charge of monitoring fish on the pavement. I'd tell them to piss off and stop wasting my valuable time.
    I would offer to do fish monitoring at half the price of the lowest bidder, whatever that might be. If they are going to do something this ridiculous, I might as well save the good ratepayers of Camden a bit of cash in the process.
    TBF fish could well be found dumped on the pavement suspiciously close to some supermarket, fishmonger and/or fish'n'chip bar. And be stinking merrily away by now in the current weather. So your analogy might be unwittingly accurate.
    I would set up a web-based "fish hotline" for members of the public to report issues, and publish the logs. Because I am not a government body advised by McKinsey, with implementation by ATOS or whoever, this would cost me about a fiver and an hour of my time.
    Surely a net-based fish line would more appropriate.
    Trolling, are we, chum?
    Trawling, surely. But chum isn''t needed then.
    Oh, trolling is also a thing in the piscatorial world (but on reflection chum is probably not used either!):

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolling_(fishing)
    Touché!
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 4,476
    edited June 16
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    dixiedean said:

    Swiss central bank surprisingly raises interest rates by 50 basis points.

    25pbs from the BoE is going to look like it’s not enough.
    Black Wednesday in miniature.
    It won’t be that bad, but central banks do seem all rather surprised that the massive amounts of money-printing that went on during the pandemic, have led to inflation down the line.

    The next few years are going to be a long ride.
    Who knew that keeping interest rates at stupidly low crisis levels for 13 years whilst printing money like they were playing monopoly could be problematic?
    I know. Amazing, isn’t it, that going so far away from any economics textbooks results in a wildly unstable situation?

    They’d all convinced themselves that the status quo of the past decade was now the new normal, that globalisation and just-in-time manufacturing would continue to grow forever - then a big shock happened, followed by another.
    didnt fix the roof while the sun shined - The tories used that once as a justified jibe to Gordon Brown - (another on was a tax on jobs ) - the tories now are even more guilty of these jibes than Brown was - idiots and cowards for just always taking the media easy way out of fiscal problems so much so that we are now at a ridiculous situation of the highest tax take since WW2 yet the highest debt and still a structural deficit and inflation at near 10% .Sunak has to be the worst chancellor in modern history
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 98,988
    edited June 16

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    JohnO said:

    I agree that PM Mordaunt could be a game changer.

    I would like to see the PB Tory view is of the "Blue Wall". The remain seats with 30%+ graduates that the LDs have been working on.

    Also there are few signs that the Tories can hold their red wall seats.

    In Surrey alone, the Tories can kiss goodbye to Esher and Walton, Guildford, Woking and possibly Mole Valley. Jeremy Hunt will likely migrate to the new safer seat (assuming boundary changes happen), so should be OK) but the remaining SW Surrey constituency could well fall.

    Definite losses are 3 and possibles 2
    Ironic that at the next general election most of Surrey, much of Buckinghamshire, Kensington and Westminster will be marginal seats whereas in 1997 they were the safest Tory seats still left.

    In 1997 though Kent and Essex for example had many marginal seats which went Labour but almost all seats there are safe Conservative now
    While I agree it looks like that, why did Conservative Central Office get their knickers in a twist when it was suggested that the Maldon seat might become a site for a by-election?

    Furthermore the ghost of Lord Tony Newton says hi.
    Any government held seat is vulnerable in a by election.

    Braintree was Labour in 1997 but has a 24,673 Conservative majority now, even bigger than the 17,494 Conservative majority in 1992.

    So that does not really dispute what I said
    I'm not really 'disputing'; I'm pointing out that big shifts do happen. And Braintree is a significantly different seat now from 1992 or 1997.
    It isn't demographically that much different.

    It is more the fact that the upper middle class are voting increasingly more for liberal parties, while the core vote for conservatives is now the skilled working class.

    A trend across the western world
    While I agree with you, I would suggest that the new Braintree is significantly more rural than the old. It's lost the semi industrial Witham area to which your comments apply.
    I would also add rural areas and areas with lots of pensioners to the Conservative core vote yes, as well as those which are mainly skilled working class
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 2,939
    edited June 16

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    JohnO said:

    I agree that PM Mordaunt could be a game changer.

    I would like to see the PB Tory view is of the "Blue Wall". The remain seats with 30%+ graduates that the LDs have been working on.

    Also there are few signs that the Tories can hold their red wall seats.

    In Surrey alone, the Tories can kiss goodbye to Esher and Walton, Guildford, Woking and possibly Mole Valley. Jeremy Hunt will likely migrate to the new safer seat (assuming boundary changes happen), so should be OK) but the remaining SW Surrey constituency could well fall.

    Definite losses are 3 and possibles 2
    Ironic that at the next general election most of Surrey, much of Buckinghamshire, Kensington and Westminster will be marginal seats whereas in 1997 they were the safest Tory seats still left.

    In 1997 though Kent and Essex for example had many marginal seats which went Labour but almost all seats there are safe Conservative now
    While I agree it looks like that, why did Conservative Central Office get their knickers in a twist when it was suggested that the Maldon seat might become a site for a by-election?

    Furthermore the ghost of Lord Tony Newton says hi.
    Any government held seat is vulnerable in a by election.

    Braintree was Labour in 1997 but has a 24,673 Conservative majority now, even bigger than the 17,494 Conservative majority in 1992.

    So that does not really dispute what I said
    I'm not really 'disputing'; I'm pointing out that big shifts do happen. And Braintree is a significantly different seat now from 1992 or 1997.
    It isn't demographically that much different.

    It is more the fact that the upper middle class are voting increasingly more for liberal parties, while the core vote for conservatives is now the skilled working class.

    A trend across the western world
    While I agree with you, I would suggest that the new Braintree is significantly more rural than the old. It's lost the semi industrial Witham area to which your comments apply.
    Witham is the 18th safest Tory seat, one behind Braintree.
    The entire area is as safe Tory as anywhere apart from parts of Lincolnshire
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 28,877

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    dixiedean said:

    Swiss central bank surprisingly raises interest rates by 50 basis points.

    25pbs from the BoE is going to look like it’s not enough.
    Black Wednesday in miniature.
    It won’t be that bad, but central banks do seem all rather surprised that the massive amounts of money-printing that went on during the pandemic, have led to inflation down the line.

    The next few years are going to be a long ride.
    Who knew that keeping interest rates at stupidly low crisis levels for 13 years whilst printing money like they were playing monopoly could be problematic?
    Looked at this way - we've been propped up artificially for 15 years and can do it no longer - a big crash is inevitable quite soon.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 13,840

    Cyclefree said:

    I can't help but wonder if Lord Geidt's resignation letter to the PM contains some dynamite. Normally, such letters, and the PM's "thanks for your service" response, are published as a matter of course, but this one is clearly being sat on. Why? Hopefully, Geidt himself will be brave and honourable enough to release it.

    So far we know 3 things:-

    1. Lord Geidt was the PM's ethics advisor.
    2. According to Raab he was asked to advise on a "commercially sensitive matter".
    3. The PM has decided not to publish the resignation letter.


    There is an obvious potential explanation which screams out at me from those facts.
    For the thick, please continue.
    Can official resignation letters by Public Officials be FOI-d?
This discussion has been closed.